Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)
Options
Comments
-
Frankie Machine wrote: »I think we have a right to expect that people make some effort to follow the thread, especially here given there are only a handful of posts to consider.
You should have seen that the person I was responding to was making reference to your post, for who else could 'LL' be a reference to here ? -
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115431090&postcount=1463
This was careless
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115430554&postcount=1458
This was moving the goalposts
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115430918&postcount=1461
This was evasive
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115432781&postcount=1471
And you just won't admit seeing the double standard in a thousand years anyway, no matter what anyone says.
I truly have no patience for people who can't/won't perform the basic courtesy of reading though a thread.
Likewise, patent obfuscation.
It's just bad manners, so I'll leave it there.
I agree with you that LL is stretching saying "many" women who might look masculine enough to be mistaken for a trans person will start being accosted in toilets, and that it's "the TERF approach" - I see how this statement has problems, particularly when people feel the bar for what constitutes a TERF is set incredibly low.
At the same time, can't really see the double standard or inconsistency you're referring to. Lux said she's not bothered with sharing spaces with trans women and that she probably doesn't notice half of the time.Lux then said she saw a masculine looking woman being teased. LL says they think this will become a big problem going forward for any woman that looks manly. Overstatement/bad argument? Sure. Evasive/obfuscation/double standard? I didn't see any of that in the replies.
I've seen more accusations of bad faith argument in the threads on this subject than any other topic. I've accused people of it myself, and I've decided I'm not gonna do it anymore. If we're gonna talk about it I think we should trust eachother a bit more and try to be more calm with it. Afaik that's why we were given another thread.
I think this topic is getting way too heated and people are forming "tribes", even with people they don't necessarily agree on a lot with. A while ago on twitter I saw a top trending hashtag for #IStandWithSashaWhite - I checked it out and saw "Woman fired for saying biological sex is real" type posts. I thought "****, awful for her, and certainly doesn't help the trans community either".Well, I had a look into it and....
Yeah. A transwoman getting physically assaulted in a toilet - and this woman "feels a bit bad" but is "glad that there are women who will stand their ground". Condoning a violent hate-crime. And people were "standing" with her? From your reply to me I know you don't condone that and I think the vast majority on this thread would agree that's ****ed up. But I think we should all chill out with the bad faith accusations and angry-posting. It doesn't lead anywhere good.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
This is very harsh. And veering towards schadenfreude.
Your damn right its schadenfreude, this chancers have being throwing anyone who questions their victim narrative under the bus for decades so its deeply satisfying to see the Frankensteins Monster they created give them a taste of their own medicine.
filleann an feall ar an bhfeallaire
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Suzanne Moore, JK Rowling, etc can easily be summed up as -
They were pushing what was then the “progressive” narrative, competing in the Oppression Olympics, etc, for their generation. They laid the foundations for the current generation of women whose views they don’t share. They campaigned for women to have a voice. Now they don’t like what women are saying and they are attempting to portray themselves as “victims”, “outcasts”, when confronted with the reality that they’re no longer “with it” or “brave” because their views are no longer considered progressive, but rather the opposite of everything they’ve spent their lives rallying against, and they’re having to look for support from the very people they once condemned as the gate-keepers and authoritarians of society.
It’s an embarrassing climbdown for them, nothing more. It’s pretty disingenuous to claim from their positions of enormous influence that they are somehow being “suppressed” or any of the rest of it. They’re clearly not, as evidenced by the fact that they still imagine they represent the views of the majority of women and their voices still appear in mainstream media. Their “plight” reminds me of this rather acute observation from a while back -
https://images.app.goo.gl/Laiu4SyFrQXecNVN6
It’s difficult to take their claims about wanting to protect women seriously when it’s painfully obvious from the way they talk about “protecting women”, what they mean is “protecting women like meeee”, and trying to disguise their efforts in “concern” for women they previously would never have given a second thought to, such as women in shelters, women in prisons, etc. The women who are represented by their caricatures aren’t there by chance, they are there because of the circumstances which led to their being housed in shelters and prisons. Their conditions were pretty shìt before they were being used in arguments against recognising that people who are transgender have equal rights as everyone else in society. Protection from discrimination on the grounds of sex is just ONE of the nine grounds of discrimination. Were it not for their being protected from discrimination it’s a certainty that women like Suzanne and JK wouldn’t have the platforms they do now to take a dump from a height on the people below them.
Suzanne Moore and JK Rowling assume these women would agree with them, but the reality is a far cry from their idealistic Ivory Tower perspective where Suzanne Moore and JK are quite literally sticking their heads above the parapet, and appealing to the peasants at the gates below to “be reasonable, let’s talk about this”.
People who are trying to make a thing out of pointing out the fact that there are circumstances where women’s rights are in conflict with the rights of people who are transgender appear to be of the belief that this is anything new. At the “women’s march” there were plenty of women who were excluded and condemned on the basis that they did not share the views of the prevailing majority present at the march.
The most memorable for all the wrong reasons moment though was when the President of Planned Parenthood (second largest provider in the US of hormone treatments for people who are transgender on an informed consent basis), urged an audience of predominantly white middle class women that they had to “do better”. It’s pretty shìt to be told you need to “do better” when you’re attending a rally which aims to highlight ways in which you perceive you are being oppressed. One of the ways in which one PP NY have chosen to “do better” I suppose, is to disavow acknowledgement of the founder of the organisation from their history (I guess she was on the right side of history, now she’s on the wrong side of history, but that position has always been dependent upon who’s driving the narrative). In any case it was a smart business decision for PP when they broadened the services they offer. It had nothing to do with the narrative of abortion being portrayed very differently among the black community and everything to do with the fact that if PP want to keep bringing in Government funding of over $500m ANNUALLY, they would have to diversify and appeal to a different market.
This is no different than any of the “journalists” or people who are claiming they “lost their jobs” or they were “fired”, or they were “cancelled”, for merely “expressing an opinion” or “standing up for women’s rights”, or “just thinking we should have a debate”. Because they always perceived themselves as “the oppressed”, they’re struggling to convince anyone they are still oppressed in a society where they are among it’s elites. They’re clutching at straws and invoking all sorts of stereotypes they clearly haven’t had to think about before, in order to claim that they still belong to the oppressed and underrepresented in society.
I’m not going to gloat about it as I would never take pleasure in someone else’s misfortune, but Bambi does have a point that the very people who set the rules of the game are now being beaten at their own game by the people they taught how to play their game of playing the victim.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »
People who are trying to make a thing out of pointing out the fact that there are circumstances where women’s rights are in conflict with the rights of people who are transgender
Well we have women's rights and mens rights , human rights.
Women's rights are just that women's rights not Men who self identify
Why the need for special trans rights
0 -
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement