- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, Maximum:10000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 3162 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply [Last 50 posts][ Reply ]
1551 posts omitted. Last 50 posts shown.
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 15041
>Drag queens banned from performing at Free Pride Glasgow event over fears acts will offend trans people
>The organisation said in a statement that it hopes to create a safe space for all members of the LGBTQIA+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, intersex, asexual) community, and that while the decision may "disappoint" some people "the needs of the most marginalised groups within our community come first."
>Free Pride Glasgow said: “It was felt that it [drag performance] would make some of those who were transgender or questioning their gender uncomfortable. It was felt by the group within the Trans/Non Binary Caucus that some drag performance, particularly cis drag, hinges on the social view of gender and making it into a joke, however transgender individuals do not feel as though their gender identity is a joke.”
Life rarely takes the piss out of itself like this. It almost sounds like the plot of a South Park episode.
|>>|| No. 38901
You cannot change your biological sex, lad. That's what she was tweeting about.
|>>|| No. 38902
Biological sex is a floating signifier and a boring one at that.
|>>|| No. 38904
She didn't lose her job for tweeting that biological sex is a thing. Anyone who tells you that is trying to deliberately mislead you.
She lost her job because she tweeted that she would, in front of them, refer to a trans woman as "he", and similar dehumanising things. It's no different from referring to a work colleague as n*gg*er or p*k* to their face. That shit cannot fly in a modern workplace.
|>>|| No. 38905
>That shit cannot fly in a modern workplace.
According to at least one judge, it can. I don't know if this means that chucking racial slurs about should also be tolerated in a pluralist society.
|>>|| No. 38906
Well, perhaps I see things differently because working in healthcare, a person's biological sex actually matters more often than you'd think, so a clear delineation between biological sex and identified gender has to be consciously considered. There are plenty of situations where it affects a patient's needs if they are a trans woman or a cis woman.
But it seems to me your post attempts to conflate the issue- I didn't say anything about anyone wearing dresses or identifying anything, I said that it's an objective fact you can't change your biological sex. Because it is. Saying that sentence should nit be at all controversial.
It might be inconsiderate to just go up to a tranno and say it to their face for no reason, like it would be impolite to go up to a furry and say "you will never have a tail" or a Leeds fan and say "you will never win the Premiership", but it's still true and factual and therefore should not be something you can be persecuted for merely saying. If you say it in the context of bullying someone for being trans that's a different matter, but on its own it's cut and dry.
|>>|| No. 38907
>If you say it in the context of bullying someone for being trans that's a different matter
I like how you pretend that this isn't the context in which most people are saying it.
|>>|| No. 38908
I can't even be arsed checking what type of logical fallacy you're invoking here but you know it's not an argument.
This is exactly why it's such a powerful mind virus to slip into politics. From either side, it's so easily weaponised into a kind of intellectual flashbang that shuts down any rational critical evaluation of what you're hearing or reading, and pitting people into purely emotional, ideological perspectives. Think lad.
|>>|| No. 38909
>I can't even be arsed checking what type of logical fallacy you're invoking here but you know it's not an argument.
Except you know that this is nonsense and yet you still posted it here. See? Two can play at that game.
Nobody disputes that there are contexts, such as healthcare, where biology matters, and I'm pretty sure that trans folk are more acutely aware of this than the rest of us.
The people obsessed with "biological sex" are taking it out of that context and repeating it barely. We know there are contexts where the biological differences between black and white people matter, but merely stating that fact does nothing to diminish that most people who just make the bare statement are just trying to the "scientific racism" thing.
|>>|| No. 38910
>She lost her job because she tweeted that she would, in front of them, refer to a trans woman as "he", and similar dehumanising things. It's no different from referring to a work colleague as n*gg*er or p*k* to their face. That shit cannot fly in a modern workplace.
No it's about tweets. Read the news.
The fuck is driving everyone to overuse 'folk' these days? It's like I'm at a Nuremberg rally.
|>>|| No. 38911
If you tweeted that you'd refer to a black colleague as "that filthy nig-nog" in front of them, and your employer found out about that, it's highly likely they'd get rid of you on that basis alone rather than wait to see whether or not you actually did it.
|>>|| No. 38913
To put this on another angle as you seem to have now moved from the claim that she said something - Why are you equating black people and their experience of centuries of outright slavery with transsexual pronouns?
|>>|| No. 38914
>Why are you equating black people and their experience of centuries of outright slavery with transsexual pronouns?
I'm not, unless you're equating calling someone a "filthy nig-nog" to outright slavery.
|>>|| No. 38915
The reason it has an offensive connotation is it's illusion to being owned as property.
|>>|| No. 38916
So you're suggesting that degrading people is okay if it doesn't centuries of baggage attached to it?
|>>|| No. 38918
Ah, so actually if it was never properly tolerated it's okay to continue to use it to degrade people? Got it.
|>>|| No. 38919
It's not the same angle as scientific racism' to perceive see gender and sex as inextricably linked.
I don't recall ever being taught about a difference between sex and gender at school, and my own empirical observations were that gender didn't actually determine anything about you, it's just basically the informal version of sex. And for 30 years no-one particularly cared about that view or contradicted it. But then it became bigotry to think that.
Despite the rallying cry of "language changes" which would completely justify the above if applied universally. If "they" can be used to refer to a single person whose gender is known as opposed to either unknown gender or plural, why can't we use "it" as the singular? Why can't "gender" be an extension of sex? Language moves on, after all.
No you numpty, they're saying that one is much worse than the other. If someone says that theft is worse than rape, it doesn't mean they think theft is okay. That's moronic.
The only reason this seems to come up as an argument is because there are so many white trans people who don't realise how utterly idiotic it is to compare being deadnamed, or having the wrong pronoun applied to them, to the en word. If you can find a black trans community that says "yes it's the same to us" then I'll withdraw this point, but until that time it seems much more likely that the trans activists who make that connection are just unaware of their own racism in doing so.
|>>|| No. 38920
See, the mistake you're making here is that you're making shit up to justify your own bigotry, and then treating said made-up shit as some kind of objective truth. And that's moronic.
|>>|| No. 38921
I don't treat trans people any differently than anyone else. See how you're now saying your definition of 'bigot' includes people who see sex and gender as the same thing. Which is the case as far as other people agree it is, because that's how language works.
My understanding of gender only being a useful term if linked with sex is a semantic or linguistic position, not an ideological one. Can you understand how that differs and how conflating me with people who see trans people as subhuman or not deserving of human rights is utterly pointless?
You appear to have sidestepped the point about redefining words, though you've espoused it by stretching the term bigot to mean 'people I don't like' - which is just an agreement that words can mean anything you want them to if enough people agree, so if I'm a bigot because you say so and others agree, then gender and sex are functionally the same thing if enough people agree they are.
|>>|| No. 38922
You seem to be getting awfully upset about having your bullshit called out. Maybe have a nice cup of tea and lay down for a bit.
|>>|| No. 38923
Using the words speed and velocity interchangeably is fine in casual conversation, because while they're not quite the same, they're close enough and people can intuit what you meant. In a scientific or aeronautical context there's valid reason to discern the two.
Using the words sex and gender interchangeably is fine in casual conversation, because while they're not quite the same, they're close enough and people can intuit what you meant. In a scientific or medical context there's valid reason to discern the two.
Prove me wrong.
|>>|| No. 38924
I'm sorry you've misinterpreted my attempt at a thorough explanation of my thought process as being upset. Would you like to reread it with the correct framing?
I'll take a proper response that addresses the discussion without resorting to name-calling and evasion.
|>>|| No. 39011
>Alarming video footage seen by PinkNews shows 25 protesters storming Reading Central Library on Monday morning (25 July) and hurling homophobic slurs at Dee, a 27-year-old author known off-stage as Sab Samuel, as well as parents, guardians and children.
>As part of Drag Queen Story Hour UK’s programming, Samuel and other drag performers read to children and their families in libraries, bookstores and schools to promote diversity, inclusivity and kindness.
>But at the first stop of his summer tour, in which he’ll visit 69 libraries up and down the country until September, protesters met Samuel with placards reading “carpet-bagger upon a time” and barked insults into megaphones so they could be heard through the library windows.
My main issue with people taking their kids to these events is that I don't believe kids want to watch a bloke dressed as a woman telling stories. I liked robots and Action Man and Nintendo, I would be upset if my mum took me to watch a drag act.
|>>|| No. 39012
I will kill these people if I ever see one in person. I will stab them in the head and neck and stomp on their throats until they cease all signs of life, and I will be happy.
|>>|| No. 39013
>with placards reading “carpet-bagger upon a time”
That actually made me laugh.
Anyway, I can see this going over pretty much all of the kid's heads. I can't recall panto dames having any impact on how I viewed the world.
|>>|| No. 39014
Most kids love drag queens. They're sparkly and flamboyant and fun.
Drag has been an intrinsic part of British culture since time immemorial. Shakespeare's plays were originally performed with an all-male cast, but drag in the modern sense was a key part of most mumming, guising and morris traditions. Blokes larking about in dresses is more British than fish and chips.
|>>|| No. 39015
Never mind the dames in children's panto. It's a very American thing, thinking it's new or unusual.
|>>|| No. 39016
Interesting to find out what the tipping point is from harmless japes to sexualised grooming carpet-baggers. Like obviously Widow Twanky is good old British humour, but Aida H Dee is a bridge too far and therefore they are a groomer. Surely we can find harmony somewhere in the middle.
On a related note, Drag Race UK Season 2 winner Laurence Chaney is featured in the advertising for upcoming management sim Two Point Campus. It strikes me as a weird choice, what do drag queens have to do with managing a wacky uni campus? They should have had Professor Brian Cox or the cast of Fresh Meat or Adrian Edmondson as Vyvyan.
|>>|| No. 39017
>obviously Widow Twanky is good old British humour, but Aida H Dee is a bridge too far
I don't think it's about a "tipping point". Drag acts reading to kids have been similarly targeted in the US previously, so they're just doing the same thing here. Panto is rare in the US, so there's no precedent for that.
|>>|| No. 39018
Somebody please convince gammony types to picket pantos because Widow Twanky is a groomer. I want to see local news report on this.
|>>|| No. 39020
When I was involved with a fisherperson group I asked if panto dames were problematic, and the general consensus was that they're transphobic but they're not really important so energy shouldn't be expended protesting them.
|>>|| No. 39021
Drag acts you get these days like the ones on Drag Race are so heavily made up to the point of not looking human. This element on its own is a far cry from the tamer drag of old I think - Lily Savage types. The snark is still there, but my god that make up is bizarre. Less is more I think.
Though on reflection Drag Race is a competition so they probably are trying to outdo each other. But surely they don't need to put on so much make up to read stories to kids in a library.
|>>|| No. 39022
The entire culture is being promoted by society as a way to sell cosmetic products and expensive women's clothing to men. Women already buy as much as they're going to; the only way to keep feeding the capitalist behemoth is to uncover mew markets. So they sell drag queens to men, and they sell the most expensive type. This is also why women's football is so hyped. Men watching football has been maxed out as a revenue stream; we need to sell football to women or everything will go Mad Max for UEFA.
No, YOU'RE a conspiracy theorist.
|>>|| No. 39023
You're not far off though. You don't have to be particularly observant to notice practically everything that comes under the umbrella of the "woke agenda" or whatever you want to call it goes hand in hand with the ability to sell shit.
That's all it is at the end of the day. We're heading for a future where there's no such thing as male or female, black or white, gay or straight. We'll all be the same beige omnisexual androgynous blobs, a fertile market for maximum consumption, so that everything can be marketed to everyone.
It's like that film where Christian Bale kills Sean Bean because he's secretly an art collector. The existence of anger and hatred is a necessary aspect of the human condition, and in eliminating it we will forfeit our very humanity.
|>>|| No. 39024
I don't think that anyone is suggesting that we all become drag queens.
There's undoubtedly a capitalist edge, but I wouldn't underestimate the effect of YouTube. Every hobby or interest is being pushed to the nth degree by the easy, instantaneous sharing of information. An ambitious teenager isn't limited by their local environment but has access to vast global networks of information and support.
Everything that isn't overtly mainstream is getting more ambitious and weirder and more inaccessible, because people with an interest in something have much better access to information and so are much more sophisticated in their understanding.
|>>|| No. 39028
Yeah, a lot of the prizes on Drag Race are stuff like $20 000 of [brand] cosmetics. And my faghag gf falls for it, and spends £60 on some pallette shilled by a drag artist, that she'll only use once every two years. Tickets for the live shows go for £50+, to watch a bunch of blokes dress as women and lipsync. It's all a massive swizz, designed to shaft faghags.
I predict the downfall of Drag Race sometime soon, there's no longer a break between series. USA series finished, now it's All Stars then Canada then UK then Thailand then Spain or whatever. They know they've had lightning in a bottle, and in a few years we'll all be sick of it, so they just have a constant stream of shows being shat out while it's still lucrative.
|>>|| No. 39029
>You're not far off though. You don't have to be particularly observant to notice practically everything that comes under the umbrella of the "woke agenda" or whatever you want to call it goes hand in hand with the ability to sell shit.
A fairly large part of the queer community is largely communist/socialist leaning and absolutely loathes this type of shit, and hatred of corporate "wokeism" is something a lot of wokes and queers have in common with Christian nutcase right-wingers. Places like Etsy are thriving mostly thanks to the woke people who want to support independent creators not corporations.
|>>|| No. 39030
>A fairly large part of the queer community is largely communist/socialist leaning
Well, it says it is, at least. But I used to knock about in those circles and they're all essentially just contrarian hipsters. They hang out at the "anarchist" trans-friendly bar (which is totally sticking it to the man cheekily skirting licence laws by making you sign a two quid "membership" to drink there), but they all work in web design and marketing and have a LinkedIn.
They're the type of people who put political stickers up in their bathroom, so guests can't miss the fact they're a vegan when they go for a piss.
|>>|| No. 39062
You fucking pseuds. You all sound like David Starkey on black people - just whittering on about something you don't really understand but feel qualified to make broad sweeping statements on. "Yeah, it's actually about this hidden agenda." Shut up.
|>>|| No. 39065
Yeah, nothing ever displays broad trends or has philosophical or cultural underpinnings to be explored, stuff just happens innit.
|>>|| No. 39067
Purpz, I'll buy you a new video card if you make sure this thread is kiboshed and buried under flagstones.
|>>|| No. 39068
You just have to make a new gender bender megathread and they'll lock the old one. Then we can go round in the same circles over and over again.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]