Dublin Pride ends media partnership with RTE over Liveline's Gender Identity discussion
Comments
-
Of course it was a gotcha. You literally spent the last 3 pages asking it in every post.
you’re misunderstanding me. I don’t support the proposition that there are ONLY 2 genders. I’m agnostic on the proposition. I do support the proposition that men and women are genders and that trans men are men and trans women are women. Zero inconsistency.
earlier I Googled list of sexualities and found there are at least 10. Is it inconsistent that some people believe that sexualities exist but only deal with straight, gay and bi? While others believe that there are 10? Does this mean that’s sexuality as a concept is flawed?
2 -
A few weeks in the bog cutting turf would sort a lot of these issues,
3 -
I think that the concept of having more than 3 sexualities is absolutely flawed.
If there were 100 sexualities, i can't think of one that couldn't be categorised into straight, gay or bi.
Not sure why you are bringing a sexual preference into a thread about gender though. They are not related.
And again, no. It was not a gotcha. If people believe that a person's self identification of gender trumps their biological reality, then it's be nice to know how far that delusion goes.
You only believe that men and women can be interchangeable but are open to the concept that people may be astral pangendered two spirits and that could be valid.
My premise is much simpler.
Men are men and women are women.
8 -
Missed the point. You believe there are 3 sexualities. Others believe there are 10. Does this indicate the concept of sexuality is flawed? Just to very clear: I am not asking if the concept of 10 sexualities is flawed. Is am asking if the fact that some people believe in 3 and others believe in 10 means the concept of sexuality itself is flawed.
Since your position is that there are 3 sexualities your position must be that sexuality as a concept is not flawed.
so then why does it matter if some people believe In 2 genders while others believe in 200. Why is this an issue for gender and not for sexuality?
0 -
I think it might be you that missed the point.
Sexuality can be put into three categories that encapsulate everyone.
Gay: attracted to your own sex
Straight: attracted to the opposite sex
Bi: attracted to both sexes.
Sex/Gender (barring genetic abnormalities) can be put into two.
Man: an adult biological male
Woman: an adult biological female
It is impossible to a biologically male woman, unless you are willing to do some exceptional mental gymnastics.
I've said it countless times, if people stop conflating sex with gender, then have at it. You can have pointless and indefinable words that mean everything an nothing simultaneously.
What do you think the difference is between gender and sex?
What is different between men and women on a gender level, and on a biological level. Because you say that men and women are genders and sexes.
4 -
Advertisement
-
Not sure why you are bringing a sexual preference into a thread about gender though. They are not related.
You’re having a laugh, surely? 😁
However, on the off-chance that you’re actually serious -
For some individuals, to be a transgender male (someone who is assigned female at birth and identifies as male) in this time is hard enough. But when you add in identifying as gay (attracted to men and identifying as male), it can make life even more difficult. As a transgender gay male, I know this first hand. As a therapist who has worked with many transgender men who also identify as gay, I know that it is common for gay trans men to experience a flooding of thoughts when being out in the gay male community. Some of these involve anxiety and fear, especially when going to bars and clubs. Most of these clients share the fear that not having a penis could put them in a precarious situation.
https://affirmativecouch.com/how-the-gay-trans-male-community-is-redefining-penis-envy/
0 -
No. Not having a laugh. Gender/sex and sexual preference are very different.
2 -
I understand that the above is your position. You’ve stated it countless times. However it has nothing to do with the questions I asked you about your own gotcha question. I am trying to get at why you heavily imply (though you seem reluctant to come out and say it) that someone who doesn’t believe in 200 genders is some some kind of inconsistent hypocrite for referring to 2 when they talk about trans issues.
anyway I think it’s pretty clear that your gotcha question isn’t going to work so hopefully you can stop asking about it in every second post.
1 -
I've answered it.
If you believe in gender is a social construct, it's inconsistent to say that you only believe in two and yet berate others for not believing in the ones you believe in.
Your belief that men can be women is inconsistent with biological fact. Yet you still believe it. It's very like religion.
It's demonstrably true that men and women are biologically different. It's a fact. That's what I believe in.
I find it mad to see people like you being "agnostic" to other transgenderism. If you are willing to believe a man can be a woman, what is the tipping point where you say, "I can't support that, that's obviously not true".
Perhaps it's best to sit on the fence when it comes to other genders because they might not be valid enough to support.
Agnostic.
So yes. Believing in 200 genders is absurd. But it's just as absurd if:
You believe that a woman can have a penis.
You believe that a man can give birth.
4 -
Aye, and that’s very different from what you said originally -
Not sure why you are bringing a sexual preference into a thread about gender though. They are not related.
Clearly, they are concepts that are related to each other. You’ve been around these threads long enough now to know they’re related, no need to try and be smart about it.
1 -
Advertisement
-
I don’t berate people for their beliefs about gender. Can you show a quote where i have done so.
so again there is no inconsistency. Believing in 2 genders does not commit me to believing (or disbelieving) in 200. Any more than believing in 3 sexualities commits you to believing in 10.
and your final point just says that you think two unrelated things are both crazy. So why bring up 200 genders if you believe my position on 2 genders is crazy. They’re unrelated.
obviously it’s because you originally thought you could trip me up with the 200 genders thing and since it failed are rowing back to calling my actual position crazy.
0 -
Not very different at all jack.
This is a thread about gender identity which has nothing to do with sexual preference.
Not related at all
4 -
No. Not at all.
So you don't think people who deny the legitimacy of trans identity are bigots? Fine.. I got the impression you did. If that's not true then I will happily stand corrected.
There is an inconsistency. You either are unable to grasp it or are purposely being obtuse.
I assume you are aware and agree that there are biological differences between a man and a woman. That's the sexes.
What you believe is that a man and a woman are also a gender, which is something made up and not biologically correct. If you legitimise something that you know is made up, it seems a little inconsistent to not extend that to others.
Again mdear, there was never a gotcha. Its unnecessary when your argument is based on something you can't define.
4 -
No I think those who deny trans rights are bigots. I don’t care if they believe in gender identity or not.
firstly you are misrepresenting me as agreeing with your statement that gender identity is made up. I don’t think it’s any more made up than sexuality. Similarly to sexuality we cannot see it. I can claim sexuality is made up since I cannot see it. Therefore since you’ve “legitimsed” 3 made up things it’s inconsistent not to extend it to others.
obviously I don’t believe the above about sexuality just as I don’t believe it about gender. but what holds for one holds for the other.
and it’s very telling that you have to twist what I believe in order to find an inconsistency. That suggests that my actual beliefs (not the ones you make up) are perfectly consistent.
1 -
They’re three different concepts, which are all related to each other, and I gave you an example of how they’re related - what you would call “biological females”, they refer to themselves as men, as gay men, who don’t have a penis. According to themselves, this makes them fearful that when they go out clubbing in gay male bars, they could be in a precarious situation. Now why might you think that is?
Their sexual orientation and their sex is very much a part of a person’s gender identity. It’s not any different if a person is transgender -
In my own experience working with the transgender gay male population, a lot of time in therapy is spent revolving around self-love and exploration. This is achieved by providing a safe enough space to have an open and honest dialogue about what it means to be a gay male who was assigned female at birth. One of the key aspects to providing this safe enough space is being as educated as you possibly can about transgender individuals while still being able to leave all of that information outside of the therapy room when needed. This means having the knowledge to understand the fundamentals around transgender identity while also acknowledging that those fundamentals do not apply to everyone’s personal journey. For example, we are taught as clinicians that in order to be diagnosed with gender dysphoria one must have a “strong dislike of their sexual anatomy.” However, there are plenty of transgender men, gay or not, who love their vaginas. They love how it looks and how it makes them feel.
It’s from the same article. The language is a bit fluffy for my taste, but you get the idea.
1 -
"I think the only way forward is to know exactly what transgender is, what is it's nature. Only then can we make progress and agreement. We are certainly nowhere near that as it is."
What’s all that about, if it’s not trying to hold people back? People have been progressing since long before homosexuality in Ireland was decriminalised, so the idea that anyone is piggybacking off gay rights is just something which you heard which you’ve adopted yourself. It’s simply not true.
In respect of 'pigggbcking' I'm referring to the well known development that once gay people got their rights, then the rights trans people wanted or is it the progressive left wanted just followed without much ado. Is it not the PL who in the UK lobbbied for GRA certs to be given by just applying for one without any prior medical assessment. If they had got that than anyone could just rock up and have one. Sure, the PL would say if I was in a position to vote against that then "I'm holding people back" but that kind of rhetoric is just that, rhetoric
Remember Julia Grant, whom you referred to before?
Grant was propelled into the limelight in 1979 when she starred in the BBC series A Change of Sex, believed to be the first British documentary film about trans issues.
https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2019/jan/03/transgender-activist-julia-grant-dies-aged-64
1979, over 40 years ago. Progress was being made then, and has been made since then. Throughout the 90’s and 00’s, every time Lydia Foy had to initiate legal proceedings against the State, it was covered in the national media.
Of course I do yes. I thought Julia Grant to be an extremely likeable person and I thought It was exceptionally brave of her to participant in that BBC documentary. To be frank I thought the transition surgery (which you might call going forward ) did nothing for her whatsoever and ultimately caused here untimely death. I thought Julia was more a homosexual than trans and that was at the root of her particular psychology. She tried to have a relationship with a cis-gender heterosexual but he did a runner, and she ended up living her life in work and socially on the gay scene in a relationship with a homosexual man.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Grant_(transgender_activist)
Grant told people wanting gender reassignment that changing sex "would not solve all their problems", and some members of the trans community found her views controversial. This largely related to her disagreement with young children transitioning using surgery, hormones, or what is known today as the "social gender role transition", in which they live in their preferred gender identity full time. Grant spent time in America counselling young people who were thinking about the process.[3]
Watched this earlier
Clearly even within the trans community there is no agreement on what 'the best way forward' is.
Personally I think that all that transition, physical surgery and puberty blockers is not the best way forward. It doesn't work, is costly and physically and mentally traumatic.
In the ‘10’s, there were a few posters on Boards who are transgender, the reaction to their presence on Boards was..: ‘mixed’, to put it politely. Anyone who was around at the time, remembers the Feedback thread on the request to have the T acknowledged as part of the LGB forum, as it was then. Eventually a sub-forum was created, gone now, and so are the posters.
No I wasn't around here at the time. The LGBT forum as it is isn't fit for purpose. It's a ghost town. And anyway what LGBT means to me nowadays is it basically means Trans. It means gay trans, lesbian trans, bi trans. Like the RTE pride promo I've linked a few times, the whole vibe of it is trans. What happens to cis gendered gay men? They seem to me to have been irradiated. That is why I would never describe myself as LGBT. I recall listening to a talk radio show some time back and old gay guy said that way back T referred to Transsexual, meaning a homosexual men 'presenting' as female, not by transitioning but by wearing stereotypical female clothing. Not a dress down to the ground mind, more sexually provocative lets say.
This idea that we have to stop making progress because we have to pretend we don’t understand, well, it doesn’t amount to much of an argument tbh, not least because of the idea that you’re against the idea of educating children in schools about the children who are sitting beside them in class, and their parents and families. You’re free to pretend they don’t exist of course, and you’re free to pretend you don’t understand them, but all I’m seeing is your dislike of political and social views which don’t align with your own, and your annoyance that those views are given any kind of an airing.
You talk about me misrepresenting you but you've extrapolated from the view I expressed about teaching young kids about homosexuality in school to all that.
If you must know, I'm sick and tired of all this Leftist inspired 'platforming' of minorities. You cant turn on the radio the TV the internet without seeing something LGBT every single day. I find it nauseating personally, but more importantly, totally unnecessary. I can't bear this idea that the proles are so thick that they have be constantly educated by the superior beings who know better. I think this constant barrage of platforming does gay people more harm that good. And as I've said before the meida almost always portray gay men as the feminine sort. I can't recall the last time I seen a masculine gay man on TV but they love that flamboyant Johnny Monahan guy. You would think when Letists who rail against 'stereotypes' they would try to do something about it.
I didn’t say that you’re participating in these debates for no other reason than to hold people back. You asked me did I think that was your motivation, and I answered that I do, and I still do, because that’s precisely what you’re arguing for, even I were only to use the post above and pretend I wasn’t familiar with all the rest of your posts on the topic and the many threads you’ve started, motivated by what appears to be nothing more than your disdain for political and social views which are not in alignment with your own.
I've opened up screw all threads. Would you be referring to the thread I opened against that odious Cork based NGO who used public money to tell the world how racist Irish gays are because they 'won't date Asians'. I wouldn't take it as a criticism rather a compliment that I have disdain for that kind of stuff. That one was personal, not just giving my view on general social politics.
I unsubscribed from the woke thread precisely because it’s not an irreverent poking fun at the extremes of progressive politics in the style of Father Ted was an irreverent take on the shenanigans of the Catholic Church. It’s at times as bitter and vitriolic as Graham Linehan himself has become, towards people who don’t share his political and social views. He just goes right for the jugular and doesn’t stop, like he has no consideration for the consequences of his actions or his behaviour or his attitude towards other people, and the effects that his behaving like an asshole has on other people. They don’t have the same capacity I do to tell people who hold those views, to fcuk right off. Those people don’t want a civilised discussion, they want a platform from which they can take a dump on other people from a height. Being denied that platform, is not denying anyone their right to freedom of speech or freedom of expression.
That is an exaggeration and you know it.
Is anyone seriously suggesting that there should be a debate on recognising that everyone is entitled to be regarded as being of equal status in law, or is it just the few sneery fcuks who are “calling for a debate” so they can mock and sneer at people who they appear desperate to portray as a threat or a danger to society? We’ve been here before y’know, many, many times in the past already.
And that's another one. How many issues are there in relation to trans? There's the sports thing, the puberty blockers, the transition surgery, the push for no questions asked gender id certs, the pronoun laws (in Canada at least), the promotion of a 100 genders, the educating of same to children. You're basically saying that anyone who desires to discuss these issues are motivated out of pure hatred. Some of these things have noting to do with rights per se anyway.
3 -
Wow. You actually though pangendered dragons were legally recognised in Ireland and you expect to be taken seriously in these discussions. 🤣
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Terry Pratchet
1 -
That is an exaggeration and you know it.
It's not an exaggeration at all. You even admitted in that thread that people who's views you don't like are not welcome by you on this site.
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Terry Pratchet
1 -
I did indeed. I had no idea that a GENDER recognition certificate would only cover the two sexes.
Seems even more strange.
I like the way you scoff at pangendered dragons yet find it completely plausible that someone is the opposite sex than that of their biology.
Transgenderism is transgenderism. Regardless of what gender you are talking about.
It is eye opening that when people who claim to be allies for the trans movement, they only seem to believe in two more than I do.
For someone who is pangendered, you are every bit as much a bigot to them as you would consider me.
Tell me Anna, how many genders do you yourself recognise and consider as valid as transwoman or transmen? Or, like the other poster, are you only concerned with transmen and transwoman.
If so, why did the movement move away from the term transexual?
5 -
Why are we misusing the word assigned
1 -
Advertisement
-
Are you saying you thought people could change their gender to dragon? Does dragon mean something other than what I think it means?
0 -
I though non-binary people were entitled to change their gender to their preferred one.
Hold my hands up to that. It does make a mockery of the gender/ self id discussion if it only means male and female.
Dragon can mean anything I suppose considering man also means woman.
0 -
But you actually thought a person could identify their gender as a dragon 😐
It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
Terry Pratchet
0 -
If there are infinite amount of genders, I can't see why someone identifying as a dragon is any more preposterous as identifying as the opposite biological sex.
You seem to believe in a hierarchy of gender, where some are more valid than others.
That's not very inclusive.
I don't believe that a person's gender (ever since transGENDER folk told us there is a clear distinction between sex and gender) should even be a consideration.
The only "genders" that is accepted, even by advocates, are the ones related to the two sexes.
How curious.
It's almost as if you don't believe in the gender thing yourself and are just advocating that a man or a woman can change their sex, which is patently untrue. So you call it gender. Because gender means absolute **** all.
5 -
One thing I don’t really understand. If gender is a construct, why do trans people tend to emulate the very traditional man/woman dress and looks of their preferred gender? If we should be aiming to free ourselves of the confines of woman = girly, makeup, dresses, and man = manly, short hair, beards etc- why do trans people seek to perpetuate these notions of man/womanhood in the way they dress? It’s a genuine question, I’m not trying to be smart or cause offence.
I do agree that the traditional stereotypes of “girliness” and “manliness” are restrictive and hold us back a lot of the time. Why do trans woman want to wear makeup dresses and have long hair, if these are things that have been forced on us by the patriarchy?
Similarly, I wonder how many trans men really want to be men, rather than just not have to deal with the pressures of being the conventional notion of “womanly”. I’m thinking of young people and teenagers in particular, who are at a vulnerable age.
People should be able to dress however they want, do whatever jobs they want, show emotion, play whatever sports they want regardless of whether it’s one their gender usually participates in, sleep with whoever they want, etc etc. If we truly broke down all barriers relating to expectations of men/women, would that have any impact on the number of people undergoing a surgical transition?
I apologise if it sounds like I’m saying being trans is a problem to be solved, I really don’t mean that. It’s just- if there is no “definition” of man or woman, isn’t there less of an urgency to transition? How much of a desire to transition is purely physical, and how much is led by societal expectations unfairly placed on your sex?
4 -
Today I learned that there are 100s of genders. When I was a kid growing up in the 90s there were about 2.
- Name(s): stargender
- Has several meanings. A: "a person whose gender is otherworldly and beyond comprehension using earthly terms", B. "a person whose gender cannot be defined no matter how many other terms are created", C. "a person whose gender is that of a star"
- Name(s): pringender, princessgender, princegender
- "A soft but grandiose gender; The individual with this gender feels that their identity feels majestic, imposing and grand, but also prim, cute and ethereal", or a gender simply related to princes/princesses/prins.
- Name(s): faegender
- "When an individual’s gender changes with the seasons, equinoxes, and moon phases."
- Name(s): cadensgender
- "A gender that's easily influenced by music.
- Name(s): Astralgender.
- A gender that feels connected to space.
- Name(s): anonbinary
- A gender that isn't binary, but is even outside of nonbinaryness.
- Name(s): Aliengender.
- A gender that is an interpretation of a gender or genders, from a nonhuman perspective. may or may not like to fit into a gender and adopt a gender, but in a sort of ‘alien trying out foreign species’s gender’ way. Can be combined with relevant genders."[
2 -
Ah I guess I need to do some more reading up on this subject because honestly your posts are making no sense to me.
0 -
I'm surprised that they're not arguing that the GRA is discriminatory on the basis that non-binary people cannot self-identify legally in the same way. You'd have to wonder why they're unwilling to admit this. But as you say, it seems to them that some genders are more important than others. But thankfully that's not a contradiction that I need to iron out.
What matters more is that there have been admissions that debates on matters, such as the maternity legislation, are legitimate debates to be had; which contradicts the rationale that Dublin Pride came up with to try and silence debate on this question. I'd like to think that's progress.
2 -
You do understand that some non-binary identities include references to robots, a marsh bog, and TV static?
I understand why you are casually dismissing the dragon identity, because it comes across as ridiculous - and it is.
But there are far more illogical ones out there, and are included in what are known as xenogenders.
- Robogender - a gendered feeling that relates to robots
- Boggender - an affiliation with the common marsh bog
- Dryagender - a feeling that one has a connection to empty forests
- Staticgender - an inner identity that relates to TV static
Now I know why this is inconvenient for you that I bring this up. But these non-binary identities exist.
And if we're to have a debate on transgender issues, we must paint the whole picture - and not the tiny corner of the picture that you want us to focus on.
Because if we focus on basing so-called "rights" on transgender issues, the debate must include non-binary identities and not solely focus on male to female and vice versa.
And when the above is inconveniently brought up, trans activists understand perfectly well that the majority of the population will not go along with this kind of thing. Male to female and vice versa issues, yes, but the above - no, not a chance.
This stuff is quite frankly ridiculous and embarrassing.
What sort of a mature adult goes around saying they have a inner relationship to TV static?
Seriously? What the hell is going on.
2 -
Advertisement
-
Acceptance of one, means acceptance of all. That's been my problem with the Trans debate from day one. At least with LGBQ there was some attempt to keep certain issues separate (and yet, they're very connected due to sexuality), but the difference between most Trans issues is huge... and yet, it's about Trans. Not one subgroup gaining rights that the others don't gain access to.. one for all and all for one.
2
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
