[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
news

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 15041)
Message
File  []
close
dragqueens_0.jpg
150411504115041
>> No. 15041 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 5:43 pm
15041 spacer
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/drag-queens-banned-from-performing-at-free-pride-glasgow-event-over-fears-acts-will-offend-trans-10405214.html

>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.
Expand all images.
>> No. 15042 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 6:25 pm
15042 spacer
>>15041
I wondered how one is reliably supposed to sort men in drag from trans birds and of course they've thought of this and found a solution that makes complete sense.

>It went on to stress that attendees can wear "what they want" and "express their gender how they please", but that "self-described drag acts" would not be allowed to perform.
>> No. 15044 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 6:34 pm
15044 spacer
This is very odd. I know a few people who are in to drag acts and from them I can tell it's a very inclusive sort of thing. As I understand it, it's a very specific form of expression for gay men and it seems daft to think it's in any way antagonistic or mocking of gender identity. There's a very big difference between drag acts and blokes wearing dresses for their stag do, and the difference primarily is tolerance.

Drag queens are just as much a part of LGBT culture as anyone else. It also seems illogical that a trans person would see a gay man dressing and acting as (a theatrical version of) a woman would be anything other than empowering or reassuring? If this bloke can do it then so can I, sort of thing?

People these days will argue their own communities apart with po faced righteousness. So much for solidarity.
>> No. 15046 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 6:41 pm
15046 spacer
>>15044
I have heard of petitions to ban certain drag acts from Canal Street in Manchester on the basis that their act is transphobic when in reality it's nothing of the sort.

We're living in strange times:

>A sexuality expert has said parents should ask babies for their permission before changing their nappies in order to set up a culture of consent from birth.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/im-going-change-your-nappy-12511101
>> No. 15048 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 6:43 pm
15048 spacer
>>15042

It's that snowflake thing...

"You can have any opinion you want, as long as it's my opinion or one that I deem suitable."
>> No. 15049 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 6:46 pm
15049 spacer
>>15046
So what are you supposed to do when affirmed consent is not forthcoming? Leave them to wallow in their own shit? Or teach them instead that the powerful can override consent?
>> No. 15050 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 6:50 pm
15050 spacer
>>15046

My hope is that within a generation or two LGBTetc will be normalised in a broad enough way that this bizarre "who is more hard done by" culture can stop. I suspect it won't as it's a great way to control people, but here we are.

A friend of mine made a great point that these sorts of social justice people annoy the piss out of him, as he's gay, and they treat him with an odd sort of reverence and sensitivity that they wouldn't a straight bloke - thus still treating him unequally. He can never be sure if he's really friends with these marple haired women or if he's merely part of a social proof of their righteousness. By being hyper aware of his sexuality at all times, they make him feel even less normalised - like their relentless crusade makes him feel like a freak who should be swaddled in bubblewrap, rather than just a bloke who happens to like blokes.

This is only one chap's opinion but I reckon he's not alone in feeling that way. I certainly would if I were gay.
>> No. 15052 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 7:05 pm
15052 spacer
>>15049

>Leave them to wallow in their own shit?

Exactly this, I would guess.

In its own strange way, that would then revive a parenting concept that has been falling out of fashion for fear of hurting your precious little snowflakes, and that is to learn from your own mistakes.

For example, I once fell into a knee deep ditch with water and mud, belly first and with my face then covered in dirt all over, while I was out in the woods with my parents on a Sunday afternoon walk. I started crying and screaming, but my dad just said "You're going to have to be more careful next time, if you want to keep this from happening". That was it. I knew from that point on that roadside ditches were treacherous, and it never happened to me again. Compare that to today's parents, who are even afraid to let their kids out of their walled up back gardens without all manner of protective devices.

We are raising a generation of eternal five-year-olds, with no appropriate sense of danger and no ability to look after themselves, and who will all be needing therapy by age 30.

But there is hope that not all countries are like that. Not every culture raises its children to remain children for life.
I travelled to Turkey a few years ago, and one night on the beach, I saw two weelads who couldn't have been older than about ten, and they were going out spear fishing at dusk, just wearing swimming trunks and children's diving goggles. And with daylight fading fast, they were hunting squid in the gloom of the coastal waters, as they later told me (and showed me their catch). Two completely unsupervised 10-year-olds, spear fishing for squid in the dark and without lights while the wind was picking up and the seas were getting slightly rough. I don't know any parents here in Britain who wouldn't be having kittens at the thought of letting their 10-year-olds do anything like that. But in Turkey, apparently this isn't out of the ordinary.
>> No. 15058 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 7:16 pm
15058 spacer
>>15052


You're not wrong. My mum told me she had to have words with my grandma, as when she looked after me she was deathly afraid of anything that might even come close to hurting me - she managed to make me afraid of bees for a few years because she'd freak the fuck out whenever one came in the garden and usher me inside as if we were in the middle of an air raid.

I don't doubt that she meant well, but I daresay if I'd been raised by her, I'd be a massive fucking fanny. Now that I'm thinking about it - my dad is a giant man baby who can't function without a woman to look after him. Hmm.
>> No. 15060 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 7:26 pm
15060 spacer
>>15050
As a bi-lad I'd say it's a mixed bag.

Most of this nonsense passes me by as I tend to view myself as a person first and foremost who just happens to be attracted to men and women rather than letting my sexuality define me.

I know some people who fully get wrapped up a bubble where they're obsessed with finding things 'problematic' or perceiving 'micro-aggressions' everywhere they go. They'll read blogs within their little echo chambers and convince themselves that something which has passed most people by, or if they're aware of it they just shrug and move on, is a really big fucking deal.

What I'm saying is that you find twats in all walks of life, regardless of sexuality.
>> No. 15063 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 7:39 pm
15063 spacer
>>15050

Some people just want something to be offended about, some cause that makes them a righteous warrior for good and everyone else an evil oppressor.

The QUILTBAG lot are absolutely tedious. They spend endless amounts of time bickering about labels and microaggressions, but they say and do nothing about the real issues facing gay and trans* people and MSMs. I've had numerous conversations with studenty social justice types who claim to be QUILTBAG "advocates" but have never heard of chemsex, Scruff, Birchplace or PrEP.
>> No. 15068 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 8:54 pm
15068 spacer
>>15063

>Some people just want something to be offended about, some cause that makes them a righteous warrior for good and everyone else an evil oppressor.

The SJW movement in a nutshell.
>> No. 15072 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 9:11 pm
15072 spacer
Christ this site has become like fucking YouTube comments.
>> No. 15073 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 9:13 pm
15073 spacer
>>15068
It's all been down hill since we acquiesced to the demands of the suffragette daft militant wog group.
>> No. 15074 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 9:14 pm
15074 spacer
>>15063
I'm gay and have never heard of Scruff or Birchplace. Am I not gay enough for you, gay police?
>> No. 15076 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 9:46 pm
15076 spacer
>>15074

Birchplace is a web site where you can meet GLBT people and reply to profile ads.

I'm straight and I know Birchplace.
>> No. 15077 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 10:03 pm
15077 spacer
>>15076
>I'm straight and I know Birchplace.
So? Again, does that make you more gay than me, or more pro-gay, or some other ridiculous contention? Why do you need to be aware of some dating site in order to support LGBT people? It's just nonsense.
>> No. 15080 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 11:29 pm
15080 spacer
>>15077
M8 you just lost in a gay-off to a straight lad.
>> No. 15081 Anonymous
10th May 2018
Thursday 11:42 pm
15081 spacer
>>15074

>Am I not gay enough for you, gay police?

I wouldn't expect any gay or trans* person to have a broad knowledge of the scene as a whole. Most people are just getting on with their lives, which is absolutely fine. I would expect a self-described activist or advocate to know that stuff. My grievance is with people who seem to spend most of their free time banging on about what society should and shouldn't be doing with respect to LGBT issues, despite being very ignorant about many of the people they purport to represent.

Birchplace is important because it's the main hub for trans* dating and sex work. If you don't know that it exists, you're highly unlikely to be aware of the extent to which many young trans* people engage in sex work in order to survive, or the huge number of foreign trans* sex workers who are living and working in the UK without legal residency status. These people are incredibly vulnerable, but they're not getting the support they need from the health service and the third sector.

Scruff is a masc-only version of Grindr. It represents a hugely significant issue in the gay scene, namely the stigmatisation of femme behaviour. It's also the venue for a lot of the highest-risk behaviour on the hookup and party scene. I should also mention Jack'd, an app predominantly used by BME gay men, because it highlights the remarkable amount of overt racism in some corners of the scene and the unique difficulties faced by many BME LGBT people.
>> No. 15082 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 12:27 am
15082 spacer
>>15080

He did it to himself basically, when he misinterpreted that statement as an attack on his gayness.

I always thought they teach you in gay school very early on that gayer-than-thou cunt offs lead nowhere.
>> No. 15084 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 7:17 am
15084 spacer
>>15081
>the remarkable amount of overt racism

This is a rather problematic statement to make.

Firstly, there's the rather patronising assumption that being gay automatically means you're more tolerant than other people. Some of the most intolerant people I know are gay. There's a good reason black and Asian people tend to be viewed with suspicion and that's simply because these groups tend to be more homophobic in general. Far more homophobic. The last few occasions I've experienced homophobia have all been by Asian men. Many gays are concerned about the demographic changes happening within this country as it is seeing an increase of people with more backwards views coming here; it's been noted in Germany that there has been a marked rise in anti-semitism since Merkel invited over millions of Arabs.

Secondly, not being attracted to other ethnicities doesn't make you racist. I'm generally more attracted to white people than black people. That's not racism.
>> No. 15085 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 9:37 am
15085 spacer
>>15084
Thanks for proving his point.
>> No. 15087 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 12:28 pm
15087 spacer
>>15084

>Secondly, not being attracted to other ethnicities doesn't make you racist. I'm generally more attracted to white people than black people.

I had this conversation with a Persian friend of mine once, who accused me of being slightly racist because I said I am attracted mainly to white British girls, and that blonde girls tickle my fancy the most. He wouldn't let it stand that this isn't racism, but simply a sexual preference.

But it makes no more sense to me than saying you're homophobic as a lad because you find yourself only sexually attracted to women.
>> No. 15088 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 4:15 pm
15088 spacer
>>15087

You're completely within your rights to sleep with whoever you fancy, but we can't ignore the political and cultural aspects of desire. We're socialised from a very early age to conform and aspire to a particular ideal.

The obvious example is fat women - there are loads of blokes who would happily sleep with a fat woman, but wouldn't want their mates to catch them. In gay culture, I think there's a clear undercurrent of internalised homophobia; most of the guys you see in porn are hyper-masculine stereotypes and often presented as "straight". There's a clear stigma against twinks and effeminate or camp men; being obviously gay is a huge turn-off for a lot of gay guys. Before his death, Dale Winton often spoke about being a persona non grata on the gay scene, because he was "too gay" - he represented a kind of out-and-proud mincing poofter stereotype that many gay men are deeply ashamed to be associated with.
>> No. 15089 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 4:18 pm
15089 spacer
>>15087
It's a bit of both, I think. There's certainly no inherent reason for you to find white women more attractive than people of other races - in fact from an genetic diversity perspective shouldn't you be finding exotic women more attractive? - so it boils down to the traits that society push as being desirable. To a certain extent you have been conditioned, as we all have, to desire whiteness.

People will also couple off because of strong cultural reasons within their own racial groupings, which affects people of all ethnicities. E.g. people are more likely to socialise, or feel safer, with their own ethnicity.

>>15088 is a bastard for posting while I was halfway through writing this.

In the end though you shouldn't really be blamed for your own sexual preferences, but you should question and acknowledge where those preferences may arise from, and assist in dismantling the systems that favour white people, even when it comes to personal relationships.
>> No. 15090 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 5:03 pm
15090 spacer
>>15087
Alternatively, it is racist or homophobic, and okay with the fact that there's nothing wrong with that.
>> No. 15091 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 5:49 pm
15091 spacer
>>15088

> I think there's a clear undercurrent of internalised homophobia; most of the guys you see in porn are hyper-masculine stereotypes and often presented as "straight". There's a clear stigma against twinks and effeminate or camp men; being obviously gay is a huge turn-off for a lot of gay guys.


My guess, as a straight guy, would be that gay men prefer blokey blokes just the same way as straight women do. It's masculinity that is attractive, and I could imagine that an effeminate, camp outward appearance and demeanor take away from that. In that sense, gays will probably much rather have a shag with Ricky Martin than with Julian Clary.

>>15089

>There's certainly no inherent reason for you to find white women more attractive than people of other races - in fact from an genetic diversity perspective shouldn't you be finding exotic women more attractive?

All I can say is, I've felt drawn the most to blonde white girls for as long as I can remember, certainly since early youth when I developed an actual sexual interest in them. What I can say is that in my family on both sides, we're all the dark haired light skinned Norman types, so my predilection for blonde white women could actually be a desire for somebody who is genetically different from me, if just barely.

>In the end though you shouldn't really be blamed for your own sexual preferences, but you should question and acknowledge where those preferences may arise from, and assist in dismantling the systems that favour white people, even when it comes to personal relationships.

I don't know, that sounds a bit too borrowed from 1970s feminism for me, where the personal was declared political.
>> No. 15100 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 8:28 pm
15100 spacer
Hello lads. There's no such thing as black and gay. You're either one or the other because straight and white are defaults. Btw you're the real racist if you ever challenge this. Also blacks are a low percentage of the population and so are gays, that means they're both minorities and therefore in competition with each other for straight, white approval. How could they be working together unless they were LYING?
>> No. 15101 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 8:32 pm
15101 spacer

65075245150d45e1a2dc837a955a8c8d_400x400.png
151011510115101
>>15100
>> No. 15102 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 8:39 pm
15102 spacer
>>15100
Is this what that intersectionality thing is, again?
>> No. 15103 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 9:02 pm
15103 spacer
>>15100

>You're either one or the other because straight and white are defaults.

Mirth.

I vaguely remember seeing an old sketch on TV a few years ago where one of the two people was a black woman in a wheelchair. She was applying for government benefits of some kind and when she was asked about her marital status, she said she was also a lesbian. And the person behind the desk gave her a John Cleese/Monty Python kind of look and said, "You just had to tick all the boxes while you were at it, didn't you".

Poor racial stereotype jokes aside, I had a few friends in the black Afro-Caribbean community while I was still living in London, and my perception was that homophobia was indeed very pronounced among them. When I was hanging out in the clubs together with them, they would react quite strongly when we came across a gay couple here and there, in a way that you wouldn't normally expect nowadays from white British people.
>> No. 15104 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 9:10 pm
15104 spacer
>>15103
>Poor racial stereotype jokes aside, I had a few friends in the black Afro-Caribbean community while I was still living in London, and my perception was that homophobia was indeed very pronounced among them. When I was hanging out in the clubs together with them, they would react quite strongly when we came across a gay couple here and there, in a way that you wouldn't normally expect nowadays from white British people.

I'd say it's their macho culture, which is why they're all shooting/stabbing/throwing acid at each other because they've been dissing rival gangs on YouTube to show that they're Billy Big Bollocks, but the women are just as bad for it, if not worse.
>> No. 15105 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 9:21 pm
15105 spacer
>>15104

> which is why they're all shooting/stabbing/throwing acid at each other

Let's stick with one assortment of racial sterotypes for now, before we open another can of worms.

If you lived in North London, you knew to be more afraid of mean looking white lads than blacks. In my part of North London, luckily things were a bit more quiet than elsewhere, but when there was talk of a knife fight locally and all that sort of thing, very often the perpetrators were white teenlad dolescum. That isn't to say most black younglads there were model citizens, just that there was a very noticeable share of petty and small-scale violent crime committed by white (unemployed) younglads.
>> No. 15106 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 9:51 pm
15106 spacer
>>15105

RACE THAT MAKES UP 90% OF THE POPULATION RESPONSIBLE FOR 50%+ OF THE CRIME SHOCKER.
>> No. 15107 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 10:43 pm
15107 spacer
>>15105
It's definitely not exclusively a race thing, Glasgow used to have similar problems with knife crime, but the issue specifically in London seems to be perpetuated by certain cultures. To state otherwise is to ignore the rather large pachyderm in the room.
>> No. 15108 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 10:48 pm
15108 spacer
>>15107

Again, I wasn't saying there was no crime committed by blacks. All I meant was, it was striking that there were many white (juvenile) delinquents in the area of North London where I lived.
>> No. 15109 Anonymous
11th May 2018
Friday 11:01 pm
15109 spacer
>>15108
#notallmen.
>> No. 15185 Anonymous
15th May 2018
Tuesday 8:50 pm
15185 spacer
It's official: a bisexual singer isn't allowed to write a song about her own sexuality because her own personal experiences of being bisexual are harmful to the LGBT community.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/commentisfree/2018/may/15/rita-ora-girls-got-bisexual-women-all-wrong
>> No. 15186 Anonymous
15th May 2018
Tuesday 8:57 pm
15186 spacer
>>15185
You could have given me a trigger warning that the linked article unironically contains the phrase "male gaze", you inconsiderate prick.
>> No. 15187 Anonymous
15th May 2018
Tuesday 9:06 pm
15187 spacer
>>15185
>>15186

I think we're at a point now where the whole gender malarkey has just been so muddled up that not even the proponents of LGBT rights know anymore which way is up.

But what really irks me these days is that you can't say anything without somebody blaring over the whole Internet how much the thing you had the audacity to say offends them.

People say things you will not agree with it. All the time. Some of those things you will find just daft, other things will feel genuinely upsetting. Deal with it, and don't fall into your conditioned knee jerk response at every turn of taking to your usual online echo chambers and moaning about it.

That's what's really wrong with Millennials. Their sense of entitlement, and that it does not compute to them that somebody else should get to say things that will upset or offend their own world view. No matter how greatly.
>> No. 15196 Anonymous
15th May 2018
Tuesday 11:07 pm
15196 spacer
>>15187

>That's what's really wrong with Millennials

I was with you up til this point and now I'm not sure if you're taking the piss or not.

These millennials are quite in vogue as the new acceptable target for discrimination these days, but it's about as vague as you can get. A millennial could be anybody, they just happen to fit into this age bracket.

At least black people all have a tendency towards violent crime in common when you make sweeping generalisations about their entire race, but the millennial thing is like discriminating against air breathers.
>> No. 15209 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 1:59 am
15209 spacer
>>15185
>>15187
Only someone who has an inherent bias against a group could look at reasonable discussions taking place within it and declare them to be evidence that their entire standpoints are bankrupt.

If someone came to .gs and read some of our regular cunt-offs and then said 'This is yet more proof that white men are hysterical and irrational creatures that are unable to agree on anything', you'd think they were mental.

So for the love of Christ why can't you let the bisexual community decide what's best for the bisexual community?
>> No. 15210 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 2:27 am
15210 spacer
>>15209

>So for the love of Christ why can't you let the bisexual community decide what's best for the bisexual community?

Because they're not a council, and telling someone who is bisexual that they 'got bisexuals wrong' is like me telling you that you're a rubbish white man (if you are). It means nothing. There's no metric to being white aside from that you have that colour skin. To dictate who or what is a valid bisexual or bisexual statement is mind-numbingly stupid, particularly if your platform is that bisexuals should be able to express themselves freely.

To say that it's wrong of a bisexual to talk about the sexual side of who they are instead of the romantic one is unfair. It's also short sighted considering we're talking about a pop song.
>> No. 15211 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 2:53 am
15211 spacer
>>15210
Again, I think it's up to LGBTIQ people how they want their community to be represented. If you have a hundred people of that background telling you that you're being harmful to them, then you're probably being harmful to them.

You're being disingenuous with your idea that the song is merely talking "about the sexual side of who they are instead of the romantic one". The very real issues involved are of bisexual erasure and illegitimacy and how the song perpetuates these old tropes.

If you insist on bringing it back to the race analogy, it's like a black guy writing a novel about a black society founded on violent crime. Do you really think the black community would give that a pass because it's by a black author and therefore there is no "wrong" way to express blackness? And if they didn't, would you tell them it's "unfair" of them not to celebrate this novel?
>> No. 15212 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 3:58 am
15212 spacer
>>15211

>would you tell them it's "unfair" of them not to celebrate this novel?

I wouldn't say they have to celebrate it, but I'd still disagree if they called it problematic. It's a novel, not a manifesto.

I don't get annoyed when people write novels about evil white men. Or is that somehow different?
>> No. 15213 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 5:33 am
15213 spacer
>>15211

I can find a much larger community of Christians who will say gay marriage is harmful to them then gay people who want to get married. The fact that millions of people believe something doesn't make them any more correct, no matter how passionate they are about it.
>> No. 15214 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 6:24 am
15214 spacer
>>15209
>Only someone who has an inherent bias against a group could look at reasonable discussions taking place within it and declare them to be evidence that their entire standpoints are bankrupt.

I'm bisexual. People do not need to have their personal identity and experiences vetted by the Ministry of Truth to ensure that they are thinking in the correct manner.
>> No. 15215 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 8:26 am
15215 spacer
>>15211
> Do you really think the black community would give that a pass
Where would such a pass be obtained? Does the black community have regular meetings where all black people can get together and discuss the latest developments in blackness, and discuss new releases from black literature.

Does the white community have a similar meet-up? I'm a bit unsociable and perhaps never got invited.
>> No. 15216 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 8:57 am
15216 spacer
>>15211

>Do you really think the black community would give that a pass

Why do you insist on speaking about minorities as if they're a collective? By allowing one, or several bisexuals to speak as the authority on bisexuals, you rob them of their individuality, and suddenly their sexuality is their defining factor. You actually promote segregation by implying that all bisexuals must think and act alike, or even consider 'bisexual' to be a separate community.

How about they're just people, who all have different opinions and thoughts on Rita Ora's new fucking song? Some may be offended, some may support her, but to suggest in any way that someone should be allowed to tell her she's doing bisexuality wrong is abhorrent, and promotes the very prejudices you're supposed to want to see conquered.

There are two types of people who try to put minority races and sexualities into segregated bubbles, who put a great amount of effort into reminding everyone that they're different and don't fit in. Those two groups are bigots, and social justice bemoaners.

Maybe if the discussion stopped being "gay people are not the same as you and you need to be aware of that at all times in case you upset them" and started being "gay people are just normal fucking people" everyone would be better off?
>> No. 15224 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 12:28 pm
15224 spacer
>>15212
Yes it is different. White people haven't been subject to centuries-old prejudice that can be perpetuated in cultural artifacts. White people are considered default.

>>15213
Nice fallacy lad. If you think Christians have a right to a voice on same-sex marriage then I can see why you might also think everyone else can tell the bisexual community what to do.

>>15214
No-one is suggesting a Ministry of Truth. Collective reactions by a community of people are easily observed. You can be an outlier on this song issue if you like but if hundreds of others consider it harmful then they need to be listened to. You don't get to be David Brent saying it's OK to tell racist jokes because one black guy in the office didn't mind them.

>>15215
Yes they do, you just don't hear about the secret meeting times and places because they are communicated through energy waves of black power. Also Meetup.com, e.g.: https://www.meetup.com/afrocaribbeanbookclub/

>>15216
>Why do you insist on speaking about minorities as if they're a collective?
Because no minority in history has ever gained rights through the actions of a single individual.

>How about they're just people, who all have different opinions and thoughts on Rita Ora's new fucking song?
That's correct.

>that someone should be allowed to tell her she's doing bisexuality wrong is abhorrent, and promotes the very prejudices you're supposed to want to see conquered.
Could you explain this statement? What prejudices are promoted by the song being considered harmful to bisexuality?
>> No. 15226 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 2:07 pm
15226 spacer
>>15224
>What prejudices are promoted by the song being considered harmful to bisexuality?
The perception of the minority being insular and isolated rather than an integral part of wider society.
>> No. 15227 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 2:34 pm
15227 spacer
>>15226
That's just concern trolling. On the contrary, if these issues are taken seriously rather than dismissed on the grounds of 'free speech it's just a joke' etc., which is essentially what this is, the minority's place in wider society is made more secure.

To be more specific, the issue being taken with the song is that it portrays bisexuality as being a straight woman who does sexual things with women for a bit of a laugh. Bisexual people have long had to struggle against this perception that are just 'faking' their sexuality. If this isn't addressed, then to use your terms they become isolated rather than an accepted part of society.
>> No. 15228 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 2:40 pm
15228 spacer
>>15227

>That's just concern trolling

Not if I'm bisexual.
>> No. 15230 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 3:08 pm
15230 spacer
>>15227
>That's just concern trolling.
Yeah, no. Fuck off, mate.

>To be more specific, the issue being taken with the song is that it portrays bisexuality as being a straight woman who does sexual things with women for a bit of a laugh.
It's her identity. How she establishes and expresses her own identity is a matter for her and her alone. It's not for the Professionally Offended Brigade to decide for her what expressions of her identity are acceptable or not by bringing pressure to bear like this. The whiners have effectively forced her to apologise for who she is, and if you support that you're no better than the homophobes in the Free Presbyterian who consider the whole thing sinful.
>> No. 15232 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 6:24 pm
15232 spacer
>>15230
>the Professionally Offended Brigade
I think you need to have a good fuqué offo yourself, lad.

Gosh is it her identity I didn't realise. But unfortunately in the real world how you express yourself has certain ramifications by virtue of impacting on how other people are treated. That's the way it is chum, and she seems to understand that better than you do: "I would never intentionally cause harm to other LBGTQ+ people or anyone".
>> No. 15233 Anonymous
16th May 2018
Wednesday 7:15 pm
15233 spacer
>>15232
Precisely what part of "it's none of your fucking business" are you struggling with here?
>> No. 15612 Anonymous
8th July 2018
Sunday 11:30 pm
15612 spacer
A Get The L Out spokeswoman said: "We protested to protect our rights and on behalf of all the lesbians intimidated, threatened and silenced by the GBT community everywhere.

"The GBT community today, by supporting the rights of males who "identify as lesbians" (also called "transwomen") over the rights of lesbians to choose their sexual partners (on the basis of their sex, not how they "identify") is in fact enforcing heterosexuality on lesbians.

"This is a misogynistic and anti-lesbian manifestation of the rape culture we live in."


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-44757403

Sometimes it feels like people are trying to string along sentences using as many buzzwords as possible.
>> No. 15613 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 12:16 am
15613 spacer
>>15612
TERFs gonna TERF. Nothing to see here, except why the fuck London Pride thought it was OK to let openly anti-trans people lead a march to support trans people.
>> No. 15614 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 1:13 am
15614 spacer
I wish trannies didn't exist.
>> No. 15615 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 1:21 am
15615 spacer
>>15613
They didn't. It was supposed to be NHS LGBT+ Staff Network leading the march. Get The L Out (all eight of them) forced their way to the front.
>> No. 15616 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 1:23 am
15616 spacer
>>15614
Just use your phone m7.
>> No. 15617 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 6:48 am
15617 spacer

Dhf_FkzWkAAINJN.jpg
156171561715617
>>15613
They look like such reasonable people, too.
>> No. 15618 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 8:39 am
15618 spacer
>>15617

Can someone explain what they're even on about? What do they actually want?
>> No. 15619 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 9:00 am
15619 spacer
>>15618 If your entire life revolves about fighting for rights for those-born-female-of-which-you-happen-to-be-one, and transgender folk rock up saying 'look, I'm a woman now, gimme
those rights', there's a tension. Doubly so if it's a self identifying bloke in a frock. Triply so if it's a hypothetical perv bloke who says 'am girl, am coming into your changing room / battered womens' hostel / whatever'.
Rights clashing against rights. Not going to be any winners here, just a lot of acrimony.
>> No. 15620 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 9:20 am
15620 spacer
>>15619

>a hypothetical perv bloke who says 'am girl, am coming into your changing room / battered womens' hostel / whatever'.

The thing is, that's an almost entirely hypothetical scenario. If pervs were claiming to be trans women to do pervy things, it'd be all over the front page of the Daily Mail. TERFs are equally annoyed about trans men, who they see as lesbians who have been bamboozled by the patriarchy.

IMO, there's a generation of radical lesbian activists who have found themselves marginalised in the LGBT movement. The likes of Andrea Dworkin and Valerie Solanas were once these scary revolutionaries who threatened the fabric of patriarchal society, but these days they're just a punchline to a very old joke.

Back in the late 70s and early 80s, it was quite common to encounter radical feminists who thought that women should completely separate from the patriarchy and build lesbian-only communities. A lot of radical feminists really did believe that all (heterosexual) sex is rape and all men are rapists. Those people didn't go away, but subsequent generations of feminists and lesbians see their views as so absurd that they scarcely believe that they were ever sincere.

TERFs aren't all that bothered about trans people, they've just chosen that issue as the hill to die on. It's the ideological shibboleth that separates the old radical ideology from the a younger generation of LGBT people who just want to get on with their lives. Bizarre as it might seem, they see the acceptance of LGBT people and the family-friendly vibe of modern Pride marches as a failure; they don't want to be accepted and don't want to integrate. They want to go back to war, which requires an enemy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_lesbianism
>> No. 15621 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 9:42 am
15621 spacer
Oh good grief, this rabbit hole is deep.
https://www.autostraddle.com/how-to-have-trans-woman-lesbian-sex-with-a-penis-414839/
>> No. 15622 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 2:37 pm
15622 spacer
>>15620

>Valerie Solanas were once these scary revolutionaries who threatened the fabric of patriarchal society

That's a very polite way of saying she was a nutter who tried to murder Andy Warhol.
>> No. 15623 Anonymous
9th July 2018
Monday 3:25 pm
15623 spacer
>>15622
He was terribly hack and deserved a winging, in my opinion.
>> No. 15624 Anonymous
15th July 2018
Sunday 10:46 pm
15624 spacer
>>15620

>Those people didn't go away, but subsequent generations of feminists and lesbians see their views as so absurd that they scarcely believe that they were ever sincere.

In truth, feminism at its core really hasn't come a long way since those days though. I dare you to spend one evening with a die hard feminist who eats, sleeps, breathes and shits feminism. You will be right to point out that every movement has its crackpots, but it is scary what some feminist women still think of men today. It's not about a fairer, more equal world for everybody. No, to them, masculinity is still the enemy. And you are a patriarchist arsehole if you don't agree with them.

You will never find me denying that women and men should have equal rights and opportunity, as well as equal responsibilities. Everybody deserves to get somewhere in life in accordance with how hard they try. But that is where it ends with me. Men aren't by default arseholes, nor do we by default support patriarchy or keep women down. Also, not everything that doesn't work out in your life as a woman, feminist or not, is the fault of men or patriarchy. Women, same as men, can simply fail. And if you don't accept that, then I cannot take you seriously as a feminist.
>> No. 15625 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 1:04 am
15625 spacer
>>15624
Something I've seen in Hollywood is the idea of Feminism coming full circle and women saying "let us play characters who are flawed, these bland Mary Sues are shit!"

3rd wave extremist don't acknowledge that as a problem though, they are still dying on the hill of women being exploited and addressing issues about women hating the Characters they are forced to play is problematic for a number of reasons, at least to the people who write the scripts.

It makes no fucking sense to me. Harping on about women getting better roles and then those same women writing shit characters for women, who then complain and get called problematic for not supporting women in the Writers Guild or something. Then, men calling these women toxic like they have a fucking oar in the race.

Julie Bindel was the last loon to get a platform in printed media and she used it to call Transgender people dangerous to the Lesbian community, when most of them are attracted to men asfaik. Rationality is checked at the end of the aisle of the feminist literature section of the library and not regained until they become pensioners, if Germaine Greer is anything to go by. She is even considered problematic these days, for her views about Men's role in society.
>> No. 15626 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 11:19 am
15626 spacer
>>15625

You can't win with these types.

If you portray successful career women who somehow juggle being a mum of two and a darling wife with a 60 hours a week career at the top of their field, then you will get flak for putting pressure to perform on women because it's "unrealistic". But when you write a part of a stay at home mum who raises the kids while her husband is at work and makes him dinner every night, then that's a depiction of no longer desired antiquated gender roles. And thirdly, if you show women who are just about doing alright, you will be accused of attempting to deter women from striving for more.

The real problem, I've said it many times, is that women are just too impressionable. They are far too susceptible to believing verbatim the things they see on TV and read in the gossip rags about celebrities, career women, and other perfect pictures of uber successful other women that are simply not attainable for the average person and should serve as no standard to measure your own success as a human being in life.

I think men are much more prepared to go their own way in life and not pay attention to all of that. Men have always been expected to fend for themselves out there and make the best of what they are dealt. You are allowed to have your role models, but you won't see men all absorbed in a made-for-TV drama envying the main character because he is a CEO, drives a Porsche and has a five-bedroom house in Chelsea. Men are much more prepared to see it for what it is and to realise that that's fiction, that it's a fantasy world that they have little chance of turning into reality for themselves. And men are by and large fine with it.

Also, it isn't all just men who are hindrances to women being successful. Not all of it is the fault of the old boys clubs and what have you. Women tend to do a lot of it to each other, with the way they scheme, gossip, and exclude other women they don't like. With the same fierceness with which they compete for the most desirable men, they will also compete for everything else in life, and they will use unfair means against members of their own gender and they will put each other down left, right, and centre.

But what's really disturbing is that feminists blame even that on men not giving women enough opportunity. All I can say from decades of experience being with women is that a lot of women simply have that in them. It doesn't matter if there really are only few opportunities for them at their job or if they even have special workplace programmes for women. Women, if they reach a critical mass in a workplace, will turn almost every office into a reenactment of Dynasty.
>> No. 15627 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 5:18 pm
15627 spacer
>>15626
Britfa just wouldn't be Britfa without the casual chauvinism.
>> No. 15628 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 5:35 pm
15628 spacer
>>15627
Women can be as shit as men can, pooflad.
>> No. 15630 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 6:07 pm
15630 spacer
>>15628
Of course they can. However, if a gender is being bashed on here then there's a 99.99% chance it's female.
>> No. 15631 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 6:14 pm
15631 spacer
>>15630
Oh how terrible.
>> No. 15635 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 7:18 pm
15635 spacer
>>15628
Gay men are notorious chauvinist cunts.
>> No. 15636 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 7:55 pm
15636 spacer
>>15630

SLA.GS BEFORE FA.GS!
>> No. 15638 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 8:28 pm
15638 spacer
>>15630

> However, if a gender is being bashed on here then there's a 99.99% chance it's female

And you are basing that finding on what exactly? Solid empirical testing?

But for argument's sake, it comes with the territory of image boards. I would say a good 90 percent on .gs and probably even more than that on 4chan are men. And not just any old (or young) men, but men who tend to not have the best chances with women, an experience which often leaves them frustrated, so they vent.

You don't need to wander far to experience quite nearly the exact opposite. If you look around some web forums of women's magazines, you will read endless litanies by women moaning and complaining about either the shit male partner they are with, or that men in general are shit. That's where women go to vent, and it often ain't pretty.

Everybody, men same as women, has had their share of frustration with the other gender. To accuse .gs, which is, again, almost all male, of women bashing kind of turns the issue on its head.

And if that creates a "hostile environment of gender based verbal violence", as some gender scientists would have you believe, so what. As a bloke, nobody greets you with open arms on women's forums either.
>> No. 15639 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 8:38 pm
15639 spacer
>>15638
>To accuse .gs, which is, again, almost all male, of women bashing kind of turns the issue on its head.

Well it would be nice if women could get discussed once in a while without them being either belittled or objectified. Some times this board is quiet as fuck and then the opportunity for woman-bashing arises and you're like dogs with a bone, creeping out of the woodwork to chip in.
>> No. 15641 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 8:42 pm
15641 spacer
>>15639

>like dogs with a bone, creeping out of the woodwork

I'm enjoying that mixed metaphor.
>> No. 15642 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 8:47 pm
15642 spacer
>>15641
Like a tramp on chips.
>> No. 15643 Anonymous
16th July 2018
Monday 8:55 pm
15643 spacer
>>15639

>Some times this board is quiet as fuck and then the opportunity for woman-bashing arises and you're like dogs with a bone

I don't really see that being the case on here.

I've been coming here since 2013, and usually when threads get quiet, it's because somebody was either being a cunt in the last post or because some aspie shat up a thread with some entirely unrelatable drivel.

And not all complaints about women are woman bashing. If somebody has a legitimate complaint about a particular woman and wants to vent on here, then I see no reason to tell them not to. Particularly not because some delicate little snowflake flower of a woman might take offence reading it.

If you can't tolerate other people criticising members of your gender, then the Internet just isn't for you. To paraphrase Richard Dawkins, go home and suck on your thumb until you are mature enough to come back.
>> No. 15645 Anonymous
17th July 2018
Tuesday 6:20 pm
15645 spacer
>>15643

>usually when threads get quiet, it's because somebody was either being a cunt in the last post or because some aspie shat up a thread with some entirely unrelatable drivel. 


Ah, the irony.
>> No. 15646 Anonymous
17th July 2018
Tuesday 7:29 pm
15646 spacer
>>15641
Yeah, how small exactly are these dogs? Tiny dogs? Microscopic dogs? I'm intrigued
>> No. 15647 Anonymous
17th July 2018
Tuesday 7:35 pm
15647 spacer

shaihulud.jpg
156471564715647
>>15646
Oh, alternatively: absolutely fuckoff massive worms

I think I like this interpretation better

They will call me Muad'Dib
>> No. 15648 Anonymous
17th July 2018
Tuesday 9:55 pm
15648 spacer
>>15642
I like that more than I should.
>> No. 15649 Anonymous
18th July 2018
Wednesday 3:09 pm
15649 spacer
>>15639

I remember only once a thread about "being a man" here and it was quickly shat on by the "what about women?" Question, and treating any discussion of men's virtues like it was some sort of weird indirect attack on women.
>> No. 15650 Anonymous
18th July 2018
Wednesday 4:09 pm
15650 spacer
>>15649

>and treating any discussion of men's virtues like it was some sort of weird indirect attack on women.


Worse even, the notion that men can very well be strong and bold is dismissed by some third wave feminists as antiquated gender stereotypes that do no favours to sensitive, emotional men who are not like that. It is seen as part of the (pseudo) phaenomenon of "toxic masculinity".

In reality, it's a dismantling of classic male virtues. You are not allowed to be bold and strong as a bloke, because it puts pressure on manlets who never will be either of those.

The irony is that in real life, women still want bold and strong men as partners, both romantic and sexual. Classic masculinity always wins, and women don't favour wimps. Because it is hardwired in them, the same way that men are hardwired, by and large, to seek out particularly feminine women, no matter if they have a chance with them or not.
>> No. 15661 Anonymous
19th July 2018
Thursday 8:17 am
15661 spacer
>>15650
Yeah alright Sargon. Enough of the pseudointellectual anti-feminism, we aren't going to buy your testosterone cream.
>> No. 15663 Anonymous
19th July 2018
Thursday 12:06 pm
15663 spacer
>>15661
He's not wrong, his post reminded me of a Guardian (of course) article that explicitly said women are as physically strong as men before proceeding to talk about why our definition of 'strong' is wrong.

Nutters the lot of them.
>> No. 15664 Anonymous
19th July 2018
Thursday 12:19 pm
15664 spacer
>>15663

Obviously it's rather daft to say women on average are better at deadlifts than men or anything like that, but there's plenty of merit to pointing out that women live longer, suffer pain and illness less harshly and can do childbirth and that. I'd say that's all 'physical strength'.

We could just go back to saying humans are strong in general, like. We did manage to fight everything else on the planet.
>> No. 15665 Anonymous
19th July 2018
Thursday 12:23 pm
15665 spacer
>>15663
Gaurdian news article or Gaurdian opinion bin? The distinction is paramount.
>> No. 15666 Anonymous
19th July 2018
Thursday 12:46 pm
15666 spacer
>>15664

This isn't to detract from any biological qualities women do have, but I suspect that the greater longevity in lifespan statistics of women versus men owes at least in part to the smaller chance, on average, of death or injury at work, less chance of violent assault or suicide, and less risky behaviour generally.

It irks me a bit when people take stats at face value. Even my favourite economists come out with phrases like "the hardier constitution of women". Fair enough, it may be true, but you can't just take lifespan alone.

I would be interested to read about the illness and pain comparisons you mention, though.
>> No. 15667 Anonymous
19th July 2018
Thursday 1:02 pm
15667 spacer
>>15666

A 65 year old woman would expect to live about three years longer than a 65 year old man, so the difference in life expectancy isn't just young men doing daft things. The gap has been narrowing, partly due to a reduction in workplace deaths, partly because of the decline in smoking and partly due to the increase in female obesity.

Weird as it may seem, loneliness may be one of the biggest factors explaining the gap - it has a drastic effect on your life expectancy and older men are far more likely to be lonely than older women.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223190/life_expectancy.pdf
>> No. 15669 Anonymous
19th July 2018
Thursday 1:19 pm
15669 spacer
>>15667
>A 65 year old woman would expect to live about three years longer than a 65 year old man, so the difference in life expectancy isn't just young men doing daft things.

Good point on loneliness, but this does presume that none of the daft stuff men do in their youth have physical or mental effects going into their sixties.
>> No. 15674 Anonymous
19th July 2018
Thursday 2:05 pm
15674 spacer
>>15666

I think the biggest impact on longevity is your lifestyle. Men tend to not look after themselves as well as women, by and large. In general, women go to the NHS-recommended regular health check ups more than men, and they also go to see a doctor sooner when something seems to actually be wrong.

Also, men are more drawn to savoury foods and saturated fats in their diets than women, who generally prefer lighter and vegetarian dishes. Men also drink loads more beer and alcohol than women and also smoke more.

What also has an effect is that it is usually men who work physically demanding jobs such as builders or technicians. That kind of work puts loads of stress on your body as well over the decades.

You can see that in men who reach very old age, i.e. 80 or 90 or even beyond. Most of them looked after themselves well their whole lives, and they were generally educated knowledge workers in the widest sense with quiet desk jobs during their professional lives.

So even if you were born male, there is a lot you can do to influence your individual life expectancy.

On the other hand, genes also play a role in your resilience. There are people who smoked their entire lives - in moderation - and drank a pint or two every night and still lived to be 90. It is thought that they simply carry more robust genes than most people and are thus able to withstand environmental stress better.

What you shouldn't do is assume that you will be one of those people, and smoke and drink your whole life hoping that it's not going to have an effect on you.
>> No. 15675 Anonymous
19th July 2018
Thursday 2:16 pm
15675 spacer
>>15674

I'm convinced in the world of medical marvel we live in, that the main difference between someone who lives to 80 or 90 Vs someone who dies earlier is mostly luck. Obviously being healthy will help, but if the NHS can keep someone like my grandad going, a career fireman who smoked 40 a day until he was 65, then I'm convinced a couple of cheeseburgers isn't going to be what stops me from hitting that age.

Physical jobs definitely knack you up though. Most head chefs look about twenty years older than they are. Ramsey's barely 50 ffs.
>> No. 15676 Anonymous
19th July 2018
Thursday 2:36 pm
15676 spacer
>>15675

> Most head chefs

Ah, cheflad. Good to see you again.


Gordon Ramsay looks as old as he does because he's a fucking choleric who will jump in your face if your eggs are 30 seconds underboiled. That's a kind of disposition that ages you pretty fast.

At one of my old jobs, my boss was a bit like that. He was an uber demanding A-person who expected you to give 120 percent all the time, and yelled at you as a matter of principle if someting you did wasn't to his satisfaction. He was the main reason I quit. Because I didn't like getting shouted at for every minor slip up that I didn't manage to hide from him. The last I heard from that company was that he apparently had a near fatal heart attack on the job last year, at age 47.

At the other end of the spectrum, one of my good friends has a granddad who is 82 and worked his whole life as a higher-level public service employee. He is just one of the most relaxed, laid back and balanced people you will ever meet, and according to my friend, he has always been that way. And he is in very good health for his age, and until recently still rode his bicycle everywhere.
>> No. 15680 Anonymous
20th July 2018
Friday 6:23 pm
15680 spacer
>>15676
What a load of shite - Gordon Ramsay is fit a fiddle. You can tell just by looking at him. He's a black belt in karate and an MMA cage fighter. Just cos he's got some lines on his face doesn't mean he has heart disease.
>> No. 15681 Anonymous
20th July 2018
Friday 6:46 pm
15681 spacer
>>15680

His face tells the entire story. He looks at least 60. The only reason he's still sprightly is because he got out from actual cheffing about fifteen years ago, and has the money and time to do the training.

You'll never get a look at how destructive it is from the celebrities, because they're rich and not chefs any more. The rest of us are all buckled over, twisted gargoyles by about 35.
>> No. 15682 Anonymous
20th July 2018
Friday 7:00 pm
15682 spacer
>>15674

There's not a huge gender difference in lifestyles. Men and women have similar obesity rates. Men are very slightly more likely to smoke (19% vs 17%) but it's not hugely significant. Men drink more, but they can tolerate it better - there's a legitimate justification in the gender difference for recommended units.

>>15675

Luck plays a role, but the effects of lifestyle are massive on a population level. The difference in healthy life expectancy between the poorest 10% and the richest 10% is nearly seventeen years. In some parts of the country, life expectancy changes by ten years in the space of half a mile. You might get hit by a bus or die of ball cancer in your thirties, but you're stacking the odds in your favour by looking after yourself.
>> No. 15683 Anonymous
20th July 2018
Friday 7:26 pm
15683 spacer
>>15681

I was chatting to a lad at the weekend in a pub as I waited for my mtb wheels to be mended. He told me he was a runner, I said I prefer bikes as he gave me concern regarding his 10k fitness. I asked him how old he was, he told me 25 so I said he's still got many miles left in him, once you get to my age things start to slow down. He asked 'how old are you, 30?'. My reply of 45 in a couple of months was met with a 'fuucking nooo way, really?'. I do get a lot of people doing a double take when they realise my age.
>> No. 15686 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 12:47 am
15686 spacer
>>15681

>You'll never get a look at how destructive it is from the celebrities, because they're rich and not chefs any more.

True. Just look at Jamie Oliver, who is well into his early 40s by now but still has that boyish air about him. He turned his back on all the hard kitchen graft about fifteen years ago, and his royalties from books, TV shows and everything else pretty much mean he can spend most of his time being a posh overweening annoying cunt, who expects average joe viewers to make 30 minute meals from salmon, truffles and lemongrass (which me may or may not use all in one recipe).


>>15683

I'm nearly your age, and I also still look improbably young. I started colouring my hair a few years ago because I am a vain enough git that my grey hair started bothering me. But other than that, I was lucky enough that I didn't have to spend the last 20 years working some tough as nails 12 hours a day office job, like some of my friends from uni. Things just went at a more leisurely pace in my life. And it shows. When I think back to one of my first bosses out of uni, he was 42, had his own business, and he just looked old. His hair was all white, his face wrinkled, and he just had an air about him like a spent middle aged human being. I kind of swore to myself I would never end up that way, and by and large, I think I have kept that promise to myself.
>> No. 15687 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 12:56 am
15687 spacer
>>15686

>True. Just look at Jamie Oliver, who is well into his early 40s by now but still has that boyish air about him. He turned his back on all the hard kitchen graft about fifteen years ago

From what I've heard on the Industry Insider Gossip Grapevine, he was a lazy, bad Sous chef at the River Cafe and it was a relief when he was discovered by the Beeb. That could just be jealous mumblings, mind. I can't particularly imagine a michelin place keeping dead weight around. But I'd like to believe it as he's so loathsome I'd like to believe I'm better than him.

where the fuck is my TV show
>> No. 15688 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 1:53 am
15688 spacer
>>15687

>From what I've heard on the Industry Insider Gossip Grapevine, he was a lazy, bad Sous chef

Those qualities aren't particularly relevant when you hang up the cooking spoon and become a TV chef though. What counts on TV is screen appeal. I still think he is being an overweening posh cunt most of the time, but I guess a critical mass of people have liked him enough over the years to have enjoyed watching him.

It's also typically not the most capable people who get promoted and/or discovered. I used to work in politics, and that included breathing the same air as a handful of well-known figures of national politics. People whose names you really actually hear on the news almost every night. I could tell you about two or three of them who were really useless as fuck as (typically local) politicians before they got promoted to do greater things. Politics in particular is an area where the only thing that really counts is to forge alliances to the people who hold positions of power, who will then take you under their wing and help you up through thre ranks. And I think that also goes for many things, including becoming a TV personality. If you know the right people, and if they see something in you, even if it's just the fact that you know how to suck up to them, then there is a good chance you will have it made. However shit you really actually may have been at the job you were doing up to that point.
>> No. 15689 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 11:44 am
15689 spacer
>>15688

It's true that being a good chef has little to do with being a TV chef, and I can't deny his popularity, my mum loves him.

I fully understand why the big hitters like Ramsey, MPW and Tom Kerridge move off into TV land, but I'd much rather them still be helming a three star restaurant somewhere, it's the equivalent of Picasso giving up painting to go do Art Attack.

I suppose it's truly a young man's game though. I'm not even thirty and I don't think I could do full time on the line anymore.The problem is most people in the industry certainly aren't lucky enough to get TV or book deals, or even just move up into ops/development/management like myself. They're stuck in that sweaty horrible life until they retire, but to be honest I've NEVER seen a 60 year old chef, let alone 75. I don't know what happens to these lads, but they just can't keep up at a certain point, especially when they've been crippled by 40 years of kitchen work already.
>> No. 15690 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 12:20 pm
15690 spacer
>>15688

This makes me feel quite stupid for leaving a job in which I had an unofficial mentor who unilaterally hired me and promised me training, future career, etc..

Still, have to forge your own path I suppose.
>> No. 15691 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 12:29 pm
15691 spacer

James-Martin-on-a-motorbike-404701.jpg
156911569115691
>>15688
>What counts on TV is screen appeal
>> No. 15692 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 2:35 pm
15692 spacer
>>15690

>a job in which I had an unofficial mentor who unilaterally hired me and promised me training, future career, etc..

That may have been just a carrot that was dangled in front of your face. Loads of employers promise you great things if you put your back into your job and what-have-you. Quite often, very little of it comes true. And then when you ask, where is my promotion or my raise now that I have put in all the extra effort, you are told that business is slow at the moment and they can't afford to give you any of that right now. And so the charade continues. It's one of the oldest tricks in the book.


>>15689

>The problem is most people in the industry certainly aren't lucky enough to get TV or book deals, or even just move up into ops/development/management like myself. They're stuck in that sweaty horrible life until they retire

Also, if what a friend who is also a trained chef told me is true, incomes vary widely in the restaurant industry. He said if you are lucky enough to be hired by a reputable five-star restaurant or hotel, you will earn a decent amount of money. But if you work in an unremarkable country inn, you will make barely enough to support yourself.
>> No. 15693 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 7:28 pm
15693 spacer
>>15689

>I fully understand why the big hitters like Ramsey, MPW and Tom Kerridge move off into TV land

I'm no chef and will probably never cook food for a living, but to be honest, I think working under somebody like Ramsay doesn't seem such a scary thought. He's straightforward and outspoken, with him, you always know what is expected of you. He runs a tight ship, but he's not just a choleric cunt, but somebody with a warm side as well. He cares. The only thing you probably have to do under him is to keep giving 110 percent all the time. But these days, if you can't do that, in your respective field, then the job world may not be for you as a whole.
>> No. 15694 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 9:25 pm
15694 spacer
>>15693

Dunno mate. I work in the public sector, people ask me if I'm feeling alright if I so much as make it in on time.
>> No. 15695 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 9:33 pm
15695 spacer
>>15694

So... that's your 110 percent then? Showing up for work every morning on time?
>> No. 15696 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 9:34 pm
15696 spacer
>>15695

Once or twice a week if I'm feeling extra motivated.
>> No. 15699 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 9:38 pm
15699 spacer
>>15696

Definition of socialism there, lad
>> No. 15703 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 10:56 pm
15703 spacer
>>15699

No. Reality in about 70 percent of all workplaces in the UK.
>> No. 15704 Anonymous
21st July 2018
Saturday 11:34 pm
15704 spacer

anmige.jpg
157041570415704
>>15703
>> No. 15705 Anonymous
22nd July 2018
Sunday 12:15 am
15705 spacer

IMG-20160630-WA0003.jpg
157051570515705
>>15692

>Also, if what a friend who is also a trained chef told me is true, incomes vary widely in the restaurant industry.

True enough. There's a lot of variation. 8 quid an hour is fairly typical for a CDP (line cook) of an unexceptional restaurant, but usually you'll also get a share of tips, and in a busy restaurant that can work out to be two or three pounds extra per hour. Also consider that many chefs are doing 60 hour weeks, and it adds up, though it's still hugely unfair considering the amount of work they're doing.

The industry is shooting itself in the foot, as underpaying your general staff leads very quickly to staff shortages, which means you need to hire an agency chef, and they get paid 12-15 quid an hour at the very least, plus agency fees. So, all the disgruntled chefs at Carluccios or Zizzi or wherever tell them to shove their zero hour minimum wage contract up their arse and go work for the agencies. When I was agency I was sold as a head chef, and I was making 25-35 an hour depending on how desperate they were for someone competent.

Probably the smartest thing any competent British chef can do is fuck off to Dubai. I have friends there pulling silly money, 100k+ running their hotels, and the teams are so huge you get to spend a lot of your time on the fun stuff.

>>15693

I've certainly worked with much cuntier people than him. Like you say, he's an incredibly chef and most of the team who have worked under him in his heyday are industry leaders in their own right, most with at least their own restaurant under their belt. So a bit of screaming is absolutely worth it for working with one of the most talented and knowledgeable men in the industry.

It's impossible to be a good chef without being passionate, and in a hot, cramped, stressful, noisy environment, this passion is most easily manifested as aggression. There's not really time during service in a place like that to gently prod someone or talk them through their mistakes, you just have to shout at them to fix it, and if they're not capable of fixing it, then they have to fuck off. The risks are too great at that level - lose a michelin star and you lose a couple of million in revenue that year.

Many chefs insist it's impossible to run a kitchen at any level without this aggressive demeanour, but that's really not true, I don't even think it's the easiest way - but you chuck 8 blokes in a 35C metal box for 14 hours and the natural response is a bit of shouting, so that Ramsay style is found all over. I happen to think it's much easier and less fatiguing to run a kitchen calmly. You can still apply pressure without calling someone a donkey, you can still bark orders without sounding like you want to kill someone. I find it makes for a more efficient team, and you're much less likely to have anyone walk out mid shift on you - a frequent occurrence in the industry.

Rene Redzepi doesn't allow shouting or swearing at all at Noma, yet that managed to be literally the best restaurant in the world, so it's definitely not necessary.
>> No. 15706 Anonymous
22nd July 2018
Sunday 12:24 am
15706 spacer
>>15705

I should probably also say that a lot of chefs truly love what they do and that's worth a lot when it comes to thinking about your salary. I earn an embarrassing amount doing consulting and ops work now, but honestly I was a lot happier in the tiny seafood gastropub that paid me 22 grand and let me experiment with my menu and put out proper quality food.
>> No. 15709 Anonymous
22nd July 2018
Sunday 1:07 pm
15709 spacer
>>15705

The British version of Kitchen Nightmares makes it clear that Ramsay isn't a cunt, he just has standards. Whenever he encountered a chef who really wanted to do a good job, he was supportive and encouraging; he reserved his ire for people who clearly didn't give a shit.
>> No. 15710 Anonymous
22nd July 2018
Sunday 1:23 pm
15710 spacer
>>15709

He can be a cunt with standards.
>> No. 15711 Anonymous
22nd July 2018
Sunday 3:43 pm
15711 spacer
>>15710
He wasn't a cunt to the lad who couldn't move past not having a star anymore, he really helped him sort his priorities out and showed him resting on his laurels had resulted in his partner moving past him as he had forgot how to prepare fish.
>> No. 15712 Anonymous
22nd July 2018
Sunday 3:55 pm
15712 spacer
>>15711



500 pounds to think about a fucking cheeseboard you fat bastard
>> No. 15713 Anonymous
22nd July 2018
Sunday 3:58 pm
15713 spacer
>>15712

(I'm not trying to call him a cunt here, to be honest. He's pretty much on the money throughout)
>> No. 15724 Anonymous
23rd July 2018
Monday 12:37 pm
15724 spacer
>>15709
>>15711

I think it's pretty easy to get on Gordon Ramsay's good side. Even if your restaurant is in deep shit, the thing he expects from you is to take responsibility for it and give it your all to try to turn it around.

I think that's really what aggravates him. People not taking responsibility for their own failures and making excuses, blaming others and not wanting to admit they've screwed up. He's always ready to meet you halfway, and if you accept his help and are ready to change your ways, you're golden with him.

Also, he has a particular disgust for minging storage freezers.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9xQWYsOnDc

The latter with good reason. One of my parents' friends worked 20 years for the council as a restaurant food safety inspector. She had discretion to shut down restaurants and forbid them from serving any more food until their food hygiene issues were sorted out. Gordon Ramsay isn't taking the piss on Kitchen Nightmares when he tells them he's shutting them down for the evening. Poorly stored food ingredients really can develop pathogens that can make you spend a few days puking and shitting your guts out, and much worse.
>> No. 15725 Anonymous
23rd July 2018
Monday 3:46 pm
15725 spacer
>>15724

I'll never understand how people let kitchens get in these sorts of states. I've seen them myself and it's the only time I've not felt an ounce of guilt for firing them.

Three people died last year from restaurant hygiene or cross contamination related issues, and a lot of people involved got prison time for it - rightly so.
>> No. 15727 Anonymous
23rd July 2018
Monday 4:04 pm
15727 spacer
>>15725

The sad thing is, most people would never allow their fridges at home to deteriorate into a state like that.

I'm a bachelor and my fridge looks a little gross now and then, so I adopted a habit a few years ago of clearing it out completely every two to three months, scrubbing all its removable shelves in the kitchen sink with chlorine bleach, and then proceeding to the inside of the fridge and spraying and wiping it, too, with bleach. Well and then wiping it down throughly with warm tap water in a bucket afterwards, so the chlorine smell won't seep into the food that much.

I sometimes discover things in the back of my fridge like a mummified courgette or a lemon covered in blue mold. That isn't ideal, but I don't think it's really a health hazard as such. From what you see on Kitchen Nightmares, on the other hand, some restaurant kitchen staff apparently don't give their storage freezers a good clean for two or three years, or even longer.

But maybe it's because I am the only person who has access to my fridge at home. If I don't clean it, nobody on this wide Earth will. I guess if you've got eight or nine people working in a restaurant kitchen, it's difficult to instill a sense of responsibility into each and every one of them that a storage freezer simply must not be allowed to get that way.

But in the end, that's a universal problem in many workplaces. Nobody feels responsible, so things go to shit.
>> No. 15728 Anonymous
23rd July 2018
Monday 4:16 pm
15728 spacer
>>15727

Cleaning all the ram packed freezers, fridges and walk ins is a daunting task once you've let it get on top of you, so I understand how it happens in understaffed kitchens, but cleanliness should be priority #1 and it's distressing to me that professionals don't understand that. I've never questioned any head chef under me who went over his labour if the reason was cleaning.

>But in the end, that's a universal problem in many workplaces. Nobody feels responsible, so things go to shit

This is basically it, though you'd hope the head and sous would feel responsible enough to make sure it's sorted, but plenty of them are simply not good managers.

What I've always done is assign one fridge or freezer as the responsibility of one person - every week he pulls everything out, sorts and cleans it, and keeps an eye on it throughout the week. There's usually six or seven fridges and freezers in a kitchen so it's easy to do, and usually it's enough to instil that responsibility in them, and very quickly you get them bollocking others for messing up THEIR freezer, which is great to see and ends up pushing everyone's standards up.
>> No. 15729 Anonymous
24th July 2018
Tuesday 11:55 am
15729 spacer
>>15728

>What I've always done is assign one fridge or freezer as the responsibility of one person - every week he pulls everything out, sorts and cleans it, and keeps an eye on it throughout the week.

That's a bit like you see in some restrooms at service stations. Some have a chart at the restroom entrance with a list of the last times the bathroom was cleaned, with the time and date and the signature of the person who cleaned it. That way, not only will management (and also customers) see that the toilets are cleaned regularly, but there will be no mucking about because you stand for the cleaning job you did on those toilets with your name.

A lack of a feeling of responsibility comes from being able to blame others. If you know that nobody can blame you for your laziness, then most people will assume they will always get away with it. But as soon as something can be traced back to you and you only, most people will know that their reputation, maybe even their job as a whole hangs in the balance.

Another example are luxury carmakers like Rolls-Royce and others. The name of the mechanic who oversaw the assembly and mounting of a particular engine is put on a small little brass plaque on the engine itself. Not only does it instill a sense of pride in those mechanics, because what mechanic wouldn't want their name on a Rolls-Roye engine, but it also means they know that their reputation as an employee is at stake if they don't deliver top quality.
>> No. 15856 Anonymous
3rd September 2018
Monday 10:46 pm
15856 spacer
A blue plaque celebrating a woman described as “the first modern lesbian” is to be changed after complaints it “erased” her sexuality. The tribute to 19th-century diarist Anne Lister described her as “gender-nonconforming” but did not explicitly say she was a lesbian.

The plaque was unveiled on 24 July at Holy Trinity church in York, marking the location where Lister received communion with her girlfriend after exchanging rings at home almost 200 years ago. A draft of the new wording will be proposed and opened for public comment in the coming weeks.

The original plaque read: “Gender-nonconforming entrepreneur. Celebrated marital commitment, without legal recognition, to Ann Walker in this church. Easter, 1834.”

An online petition calling on York Civic Trust to change the wording attracted more than 2,500 signatures. The petition said: “Anne Lister was, most definitely, gender non-conforming all her life. She was also however, a lesbian. Don’t let them erase this iconic woman from our history.”

Julie Furlong, who started the petition, told the BBC she was pleased the wording was to change: “I am very happy that they have realised that lesbian erasure is not acceptable, but I will wait to hear on the final wording before expressing opinion as to that.”


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/03/plaque-for-first-modern-lesbian-to-be-reworded-after-complaints

I'd have thought the fact the plaque had a rainbow outline and mentioned marital commitment to another woman would have been a massive hint about her but apparently it's lesbian erasure.
>> No. 15857 Anonymous
3rd September 2018
Monday 10:57 pm
15857 spacer
>>15856

>Julie Furlong

I wonder if she's a TERF.

https://radlesfemsurvivor.wordpress.com/2018/07/12/open-letter-to-stonewall-2/

Yep, she's a TERF.
>> No. 15858 Anonymous
3rd September 2018
Monday 11:11 pm
15858 spacer
>>15856

I have the strongest feeling that if they'd used the word lesbian instead, there'd still have been someone asking why they didn't mention her gender nonconformity.
>> No. 15860 Anonymous
4th September 2018
Tuesday 3:18 am
15860 spacer
>>15857
Does being sane require its own acronym now?
>> No. 15861 Anonymous
4th September 2018
Tuesday 3:36 am
15861 spacer
>>15860

Julie, I just want to say, I loved Sugar Rush, but you're really annoying.
>> No. 15862 Anonymous
4th September 2018
Tuesday 3:44 am
15862 spacer
>>15860
We could call ourselves Non-Radicalised Moderate Adult Laiety. NORMALs for short.
>> No. 15918 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 12:35 pm
15918 spacer
>“I’ve had people saying to me, ‘You just want to fuck about!’” says 29-year-old Calum James, who identifies as a heteroflexible pansexual solo polyamorous relationship anarchist.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/sep/25/truth-about-polyamory-monogamy-open-relationships
>> No. 15919 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 1:20 pm
15919 spacer
>>15918

When I read about non-monogamy from people like those in the article it sounds like a profound bore of endless conversations about how people feel, how they feel about what you do, and what they want and avoiding doing the things they don't want. It would suck out any of the interest I had in the fucking, I couldn't imagine a worse way to spend my existence.
>> No. 15920 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 2:20 pm
15920 spacer
From that article - "Ninety per cent of polyamory is talking. Sometimes I think, I want to watch a movie! I don’t want to talk about our relationship again. But it’s important to be able to express your fears, rather than waiting for the worst thing to happen."

That really doesn't sound attractive, no matter how many nutters I can line up for a good talking to.

Fair play though, if it floats their collective boats.
>> No. 15921 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 2:27 pm
15921 spacer

E7r43.png
159211592115921
>>15918

>heteroflexible pansexual solo polyamorous relationship anarchist

You see, I'm from a generation where you were either straight or a 'moe. Bisexual maybe, but rarely.

All of that just blows my mind and kind of doesn't compute with me.

I'm not saying don't do whatever floats your boat, but it's just an alien way of thinking to many people who grew up when I did.
>> No. 15922 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 2:36 pm
15922 spacer
>>15920

I personally have more invested interest being non-monogamous myself so I don't quite accept the 'what ever floats your boat angle'. This model of thinking is suckling all of the joy out of it. I don't want to have to have endless conversations about feelings and have to swear allegiance to intersectionality, but that seems to be what most of the culture thinks they need to do.
>> No. 15923 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 2:44 pm
15923 spacer
>>15921

A lot of the string of definitions is really people with too much time on their hands, it's kind of the difference between saying you like rock music and saying you like a very specific subgenre that most people haven't heard of, you are at some level doing it for attention.
>> No. 15924 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 2:47 pm
15924 spacer
Is it just that the people who talk endlessly about it are the ones who end up in articles in the Graun, and the ones where it's a simple n-way group getting on with things how they like, fly under the radar?
I imagine shouty gaym8 will be along to say that it's important that people stand up and be counted and proud. And he's probably right. But dammit, heteroflex pan solo(tm), soon to appear in a desneyfied movie near you, sounds like a fuckwad.
>> No. 15925 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 3:13 pm
15925 spacer
>>15924

>Is it just that the people who talk endlessly about it are the ones who end up in articles in the Graun, and the ones where it's a simple n-way group getting on with things how they like, fly under the radar?

Exactly. A majority of young people identify as "not entirely heterosexual", but most of them don't feel the need to concoct an extremely specific set of labels for what gets them off. A tiny minority of sexual trainspotters have turned the whole thing into a nerdy subculture, which The Guardian is only too happy to publicise because it gets loads of rageclicks.

This shouty gaym8 does think that it's important for people to stand up and be counted and proud, but you don't need a massive string of sub-sub-sub-categories to do that. If anything, that hyperspecific sexual categorisation is much more stigmatising than a simple taxonomy of "gay", "straight", "bi", "heteroflexible" and "not too picky after four pints".
>> No. 15926 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 3:28 pm
15926 spacer
>>15921
It's the sort of person who lets a label define them rather than defining themselves as a person first and foremost who also happens to be x.

Twats, in other words.
>> No. 15927 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 5:17 pm
15927 spacer
>>15923

I agree.

Or if you like chicken, you probably won't blurt out to everybody when they ask you if you do, whether they care or not, that it needs to be organic, farm raised, free range, organic grain fed chicken, and that you need your chicken breast to be done five minutes on either side and with a very specific marinade and side dishes of mashed potato and green beans.

And if you do, you're probably just a pompous toff who thinks his taste in chicken is far superior to everybody else's. Which I assume to be true also for people who overspecify their sexual preferences. You don't become a superior bell end nosher just because you can throw around half a dozen sub catergories of gay sexual preferences.

Just to be clear - this is not a post against gays. Really not. It's simply about people who think that they're better than everybody else in this respect.
>> No. 15928 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 5:35 pm
15928 spacer
>>15918
>heteroflexible pansexual solo polyamorous relationship anarchist
I don't think there's been a more appropriate trigger for "you're just saying words now".
>> No. 15929 Anonymous
25th September 2018
Tuesday 8:19 pm
15929 spacer
>>15928

>you're just saying words now

People like that very often don't do much else, frankly.
>> No. 16010 Anonymous
7th October 2018
Sunday 6:37 pm
16010 spacer
Graham Linehan, the co-writer of the sitcom Father Ted, has been given a verbal harassment warning by police after a complaint by a transgender activist.

Linehan was told by West Yorkshire police not to contact the activist Stephanie Hayden, after a row on Twitter. Hayden reported him for transphobia after he referred to her as “he” and for “deadnaming” her by referring to her by names used before she transitioned.

Hayden has previously accused Sussex University of being a “temple of transgender hate” and supported the campaign to oust female academics if they challenged transgender orthodoxy. She was also among the activists who pressurised a billboard company to remove a poster in Liverpool, which said the dictionary definition of “woman” was an “adult human female” because it was offensive.


https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2018/oct/07/graham-linehan-police-warning-complaint-by-stephanie-hayden-transgender-activist-twitter
>> No. 16011 Anonymous
7th October 2018
Sunday 6:54 pm
16011 spacer
>>16010
I was observing Lineham's decent into TERFdom and his subsequent Twitter freak out, although in fairness he's been in a perpetual state of Twitter freak out for years now, just the other day. There's no excuse for deadnaming or calling a transwoman "he", even if I do think getting the coppers involved is a bit much. This is just another example of how grossly unproductive most "debate" on Twitter is, whether it's Mary Beard making herself cry by way of an apology or my poor, naive, mum watching a music video because some band told her to, the whole thing has gone to hell in a handbasket.

And while that poster's supposed to sound innoculous, it's a bit like if a bunch of white nationalists put up posters saying "aren't little white babies beautiful?", which yeah, they are, sort of, but there's obviously a further implication that non-white kiddies aren't. Not that I'm saying TERFs are as bad as white nationalists, I'm just making a point about the posters' true meaning. It's essentially a troll poster, likely conceived, where else? On Twitter.
>> No. 16012 Anonymous
7th October 2018
Sunday 7:11 pm
16012 spacer

4838548-6249719-image-a-58_1538926626659.jpg
160121601216012
>>16011
>There's no excuse for deadnaming or calling a transwoman "he", even if I do think getting the coppers involved is a bit much

It doesn't seem that unreasonable in this instance. However, I've definitely had to mentally separate Graham Lineham the Father Ted creator from Graham Lineham the Twitter drama queen; don't meet your idols and all that.
>> No. 16014 Anonymous
7th October 2018
Sunday 10:04 pm
16014 spacer
>>16011

A large part of me believes that the shenanigans of gender identity politics are one insurmountable reason why the human species does not deserve to survive in the future.
>> No. 16015 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 9:25 am
16015 spacer
>>16012
It doesn't look understandable at all to me, he's clearly just trying to get under her skin by being a cunt, unnecessarily so. But yeah, whatever happened to him when he found Twitter has long rendered Linehan* a confirmed div.

*Honestly thought he was "Lineham" all this time until I saw his cropped tweet there, which means I was on his Twitter, reading his tweets and still didn't notice, just days ago.

>>16014
Two points, firstly stop being so melodramic, you great, bloody, baby. Second, the "shenanigans of gender identity politics" is a phrase that makes very little sense. You've smushed "gender identity" and "identity politics" into one and thought it still carried meaning, which it doesn't really rather doesn't. The first bit is about how people express themselves with regards to the present definitions of gender we have, and the second is a right wing slur for when black Americans don't want to bathe in lead polluted water or women are all "hey, quit raping me". I suppose you could say that "gender identity politics" is the advocacy and awareness side of talking about transsexual people, but it's a very cynical way to frame it, especially when trans men and women are all "hey, quit beating me up and raping me" about it. Oh, and don't misgender them just because it makes your six-hundred-and-seventy-two-thousand Twitter followers feel like they got one over on Stephanie Hayden and her twelve-hundred followers.
>> No. 16016 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 9:29 am
16016 spacer
>>16012
>It doesn't seem that unreasonable in this instance.

I don't know why you'd say that. The screenshot you've posted is Linehan lying that trans women have multiple identities. Stephanie Hayden wishes to be known as a woman named Stephanie Hayden; not respecting that is transphobic. And Linehan says he only respects the names and pronouns of trans women who agree with him, which is hilarious.
>> No. 16017 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 11:12 am
16017 spacer
>>16015

And next thing I'll know, you are probably going to tell me that gender science is an actual science.
>> No. 16018 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 11:51 am
16018 spacer
>>16017
I don't think I've ever heard the term "gender science" before now, but well done finding fault with something entirely unknown to me and not anything I actually said, it shows impressive intellectually cowardice on your part.
>> No. 16019 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 12:44 pm
16019 spacer
>>16018

Fine, so the broadly accepted term is gender studies. Which I assume you are indeed familiar with.

The problem though is that gender studies, despite claims to the contrary by its proponents, does not employ methods that conform with what the scientific academic community would accept as indeed scientific. It is largely a pseudoscience which attempts to justify sometimes quite bold and daring claims by attempting to corroborate those claims with skewed methods of data gathering or by outright ignoring well-established and peer reviewed scientific fact if it goes against the ideas that gender science holds to be true.

In that sense, gender studies has more in common with organised religion than with social or even natural science as such. This is especially true when you look at the sometimes quite extreme and fanatic reactions of its followers when you doubt the overall scientific legitimacy of gender studies.
>> No. 16020 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 2:37 pm
16020 spacer
>>16014
Not all the war, genocide, man-made famine, extinctions of fellow species and climate change. No, a non-issue fed to me by some YouTube stars is the reason our species no longer deserves to exist.

This post was brought to you by LOGIC and REASON.
>> No. 16021 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 3:27 pm
16021 spacer
>>16020

You present no reason why you should be spared from the coming extinction of our species.
>> No. 16022 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 3:44 pm
16022 spacer
>>16021
I'm pretty sure no one can escape the extinction of their species.

Besides, >>16020 doesn't exactly read as a "Application to Defy the Laws of Nature".
>> No. 16023 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 3:46 pm
16023 spacer
>>16021
I'm from Buenos Aires, and I say kill 'em all!
>> No. 16024 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 3:56 pm
16024 spacer

Its-when-you-start-to-become-really-afraid-of-deat.jpg
160241602416024
>>16023
>> No. 16025 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 5:28 pm
16025 spacer
>>16019

Except medically diagnosible transexualism is just that, medically diagnosible. Doctors and nurses in the health service aren't spreading the post-modernist view of gender, they're treating people with gender dysphoria. Gender studies is the study of the philosophical and social aspects of gender, not the medical treatment of transgender people. Given that and the amount of TERFs who would fall under the perview of those studying gender, your assumption that it's a field entirely pro-trans and has anything to do with the medical aspects of being transgender leaves me thinking you're terribly confused.

I mean, you wouldn't ask Decartes to show you his sums after he told you "I think therefore I am"; it's just not how philosphy works. Again, I think you've confused being trangender with "why do girls like pink and boys like blue?"
>> No. 16026 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 5:51 pm
16026 spacer
>>16011
I think his argument is predatory men will pretend to identify as female, to sexually assault women in toilets. There is a little evidence for this. This can be solved with gender neutral toilets.

As to my own interaction with the tranny community, I saw some back guy in a dress with a beard, which made me want to retch, on TV (a la Conchita Wurst). I tweeted about it fairly innocuously and received a tirade of abuse from said tranny and the para-tranny militants. Broken and about to rebut the insults, I decided to report the abuse and twitter locked xe's account. The system works.
>> No. 16027 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 6:04 pm
16027 spacer
>>16026
>There is a little evidence for this

It was in the news recently that a sex offender, I think he'd raped a few women and diddled a child, claimed to be trans despite not having reassignment surgery so they could get placed in a female prison. He sexually assaulted four women whilst he was there. His ex-girlfriend said he wasn't really trans but was trying it on.
>> No. 16028 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 6:15 pm
16028 spacer
>>16026

>I saw some back guy in a dress with a beard, which made me want to retch

>I tweeted about it fairly innocuously

I find the innocuous part hard to believe, frankly.
>> No. 16029 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 7:14 pm
16029 spacer
>>16027
Yeah that was what I remember. Though I don't have figures for the number of transgender people using toilets and the number of assaults to make any meaningful conclusions.

>>16028
It was "Why is there a black tranny on [TV programme]?"
>> No. 16031 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 7:58 pm
16031 spacer
>>16025

Are you deliberately being daft?

The issue isn't if somebody will be diagnosed as transsexual. Nor is the issue if transsexuality as such exists. Modern psychology, from empirical scientific studies, says it does very much exist. The problem is that gender studies says gender is all a construct that is ultimately entirely arbitrary. But when you look at the world around you, that is hardly the case. People aren't forced into "stereotypical" gender roles, but the majority assume them freely, which means that most girls will indeed enjoy playing with dolls or wearing pink skirts, whereas boys will largely prefer cars and mechanical toys and they will want to assert their masculinity as they grow into juveniles and young adults. Nobody twists their arm, they tend to fall into those modes all on their own. And now gender studies tries to tell us that boys should discover their fondness for dolls or assume what is typically considered more feminine behaviour, and masculinity as such is branded as "toxic".

And that is why I will never take gender studies seriously. In essence, it is another covert attempt by feminism to "overcome patriarchy" by deconstructing and destroying masculinity.

The bitter truth though is that the vast majority of women will always prefer a "lad's lad" who exudes all the markings of traditional masculinity. Women by and large don't give a fuck about soft, understanding, in touch with their feminine side types. They want manly men, even if they tell themselves they don't, and no matter how fervently gender studies advocates try to deconstruct masculinity.
>> No. 16032 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 8:10 pm
16032 spacer
>>16031
Daft bollocks like this is why I choose the blue pill every time. Now I always win the pissing contest.
>> No. 16033 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 8:54 pm
16033 spacer
>>16031
I'm being consistantly smarter than you.

Almost all that first paragraph of your's does is reiterate the point about gender studies having little to do with people actually being transgender or not, only the philosophic thought around it. You seem to think I'm taking a stance on the "blue v pink" thing, but I very much haven't no matter how hard you try to spark a cunt off about it. As for your wilful conflation of what feminists mean when they say "toxic masculinity", the very prefix of "toxic" is there to distinguish it from regular, non-harmful, masculine behaviour. IE, the difference between wanting to physically exert ones self by climbing a tree to rescue a cat (good, okay, keep it up, lads) and wanting to physically exert yourself by getting pissed and starting a fight because you can't talk to your dad (bad, stop it, cut it out, mate).

Mainstream feminism is making no effort to stop you from going to the gym, becoming a tree surgeon or shagging loads of birds, and doing so by showing off your lovely, big muscles. I think what mainstream feminism is more concerned with is all the sexual violence and entitlement, wage inequality and empowering women. Whatever your take on those select issues, none of them can reasonably be seen as an attack on masculinity, unless you're so far gone as to think rape, gender based pay gaps and disenfranchising young girls are positive things for men.

One thing I woud just add, and I think it's highly pertenant, is what the name of fuck does any of that have to do with transgender people? You know, that thing I was talking about before you made up this other thing called "gender science".
>> No. 16034 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 9:44 pm
16034 spacer
>>16033

Learn to spell, for fucks sake.
>> No. 16035 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 9:59 pm
16035 spacer
>>16031
>The bitter truth though is that the vast majority of women will always prefer a "lad's lad" who exudes all the markings of traditional masculinity. Women by and large don't give a fuck about soft, understanding, in touch with their feminine side types. They want manly men, even if they tell themselves they don't, and no matter how fervently gender studies advocates try to deconstruct masculinity.

This isn't true. In my anecdotal experience the kind of birds who are worth bothering with want someone who is both. Kind of like how (stereotypically at least) a lot of men want a virginal, homely wife who is still a filthy slag in the bedroom for him and only for him.

Also why should we be factoring sex-appeal in later life into how we socialise and educate our children? How do you even know a lad will want girls to fancy him when he's older?
>> No. 16036 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 10:08 pm
16036 spacer
>>16031
>>16033

>People aren't forced into "stereotypical" gender roles, but the majority assume them freely, which means that most girls will indeed enjoy playing with dolls or wearing pink skirts

Unless I'm wrong, pink was very much for boys (and blue for girls) until 100 years ago. I don't really think there's a particular reason for girls = pink (possibly boys = cars) aside from everyone insisting that that is the case.

>The bitter truth though is that the vast majority of women will always prefer a "lad's lad" who exudes all the markings of traditional masculinity. Women by and large don't give a fuck about soft, understanding, in touch with their feminine side types. They want manly men, even if they tell themselves they don't, and no matter how fervently gender studies advocates try to deconstruct masculinity.

I really feel like you're trying to write a homoerotic novel here.

The problem here is that you're polarising the argument into two opposing types of men and then asserting that people want A but pretend to want B. The issue is a lot more complicated than that, but if I may- yeah, women do like a lot of masculine traits and they are important, however if us lad m8s could be a bit more open about our feelings it would do both us and them a favour.

As >>16035 has just written; most girls just want a decent bloke that's alright with talking about his feelings.

General feminism doesn't want us all in chastity getting cucked and knitting, it just wants us to be a bit more open about our feelings and to stop having high suicide rates. We do have a bit of a shit time, and if you're not dense about it- it is an invitation to tell your story.

Or you could just conflate sexuality, gender studies, feminism, etc in to one ball.
>> No. 16037 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 10:26 pm
16037 spacer
>>16036

I'm interested to know where feminism has shown serious concern about male suicide rates. Ideally specific writers or researchers.
>> No. 16038 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 10:42 pm
16038 spacer
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2018/10/dog-rape-and-mein-kampf-feminist-text-why-we-hoaxed-journals-terrible
>> No. 16039 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 10:42 pm
16039 spacer
>>16036
I can't think of any evidence at all that would suggest feminism gives a shit about anything so irrelevant to them as male suicide.
>> No. 16040 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 10:45 pm
16040 spacer
>>16036
>Unless I'm wrong, pink was very much for boys (and blue for girls) until 100 years ago.
You're wrong. I don't have the source to hand, but it's an urban myth. The current order is only around 100 years old, but it wasn't a straight flip.
>> No. 16041 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 10:53 pm
16041 spacer
>>16037
Oh, clear off ShowYourWorkingLad, this is a shedpub, not A Level trigonometry.
>> No. 16042 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 11:06 pm
16042 spacer
>>16041

PEOPLE ARE MAKING INTERESTING CLAIMS BUT NOBODYS ALLOWED TO ASK FOR FURTHER INFORMATION.GS
>> No. 16043 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 11:07 pm
16043 spacer
>>16041

Actually I am genuinely interested, because I've been honestly losing faith that anyone beyond a few very specific groups gives a shit about it.
>> No. 16044 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 11:11 pm
16044 spacer
I feel like there is a conflagration with performed and performative gender blue and pink is quite irrelevant (baby blue is far more a woman's colour then a mans).

Where as boys like cars girls like dolls seems far more rooted in biology. Girls will develop more sophisticated social/people skills then boys and much earlier (dolls tend to be about role playing this for girls) and boys will develop practical, fighting and mechanical skills much earlier. And as far as I am aware this will happen without promoting in controlled conditions. (I've met people who were quite determined to prove this is conditioning and we're somewhat disappointed with their results when they found them but objective enough scientists to acknowledge their results).

Academia has something of a circle jerk at the moment where the conclusions about gender have already been made and only the evidence and research that reaches this conclusion is acknowledged or even funded in the first place.
>> No. 16045 Anonymous
8th October 2018
Monday 11:31 pm
16045 spacer
>>16044
How can boys be biologically predisposed to be interested in something invented in the late 19th century?
>> No. 16046 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 12:02 am
16046 spacer
>>16045

It did seem like he explained that already.
>> No. 16047 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 1:15 am
16047 spacer
>>16045
Time travel lad.
>> No. 16048 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 3:00 am
16048 spacer
>>16045

How do cats know to use the litter tray but don't bother to learn to use the loo?

Something else for you to ponder whilst you consider the idea of how instincts for tool use might lead to favour play with mechanical objects over social reenactment.
>> No. 16049 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 4:11 am
16049 spacer
>>16048
>How do cats know to use the litter tray
Conditioning.

>but don't bother to learn to use the loo
They tend to have trouble with flushing, the lid and (in case of single males) the seat.

>instincts for tool use
In primates we've observed tool use in the wild by females.
>> No. 16051 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 7:09 am
16051 spacer
>>16048
>How do cats know to use the litter tray but don't bother to learn to use the loo?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vNpujPhs_U
>> No. 16052 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 10:23 am
16052 spacer
>>16044

>Girls will develop more sophisticated social/people skills then boys and much earlier (dolls tend to be about role playing this for girls) and boys will develop practical, fighting and mechanical skills much earlier. And as far as I am aware this will happen without promoting in controlled conditions.


It just seems to be hardwired, and it both has its purpose and has made us a successful species, from an evolutionary standpoint. As a very generalised statement, boys tend to grow up to be the toolmakers, the ones who drive technology and are more mechanically inclined, and have probably done so since cavepersons first started fashioning hand axes from lumps of flintstone. While girls and women seem to have more of a knack for shaping and influencing social structures in a tribe or group of people, and they also seem to be more drawn to the task of rearing and looking after the children.

Gender studies sees this as a so-called biologism at best, but more generally as forced gender roles that should be abolished. While at the same time ignoring that it just very much seems to be the way our hardwired biology functions in the majority of human specimens.

That isn't to say girls should not strive to be engineers. They absolutely should, if they have that kind of talent and want to make a career out of it. More power to them. And also, there are boys and men with quite sophisticated social skills who are more tuned into the subtleties of human interaction, and good social skills often actually make you appear attractive as a potential mate to women as well (still talking from the evolution biology standpoint here).

Also, it's all well and good that people nowadays get to say they're gender fluid, or that they are one of a dozen genders that gender studies appears to have found out about. But the scientific fallacy of gender studies again is that it projects the concept of gender fluidity which around five to ten percent of the population will agree with and project it onto the remaining 90 percent of the population, who, if you ask them, will invariably identify as wholely male or female, and maybe even give you a funny look for even bringing up such a non-issue. And it is then not the fault of their ignorance that they adhere to fixed genders, but it is the fault of gender studies for not realising that gender for the majority of people really isn't fluid at all.
>> No. 16053 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 2:02 pm
16053 spacer
>>16049

>>How do cats know to use the litter tray
>Conditioning.

Except it isn't otherwise it would be equally easy to teach them to use the loo and we would have never bothered with litter trays, there is something in cats programing that litter trays appeal to.

>instincts for tool use
>In primates we've observed tool use in the wild by females.
I never implied we didn't, or that they were incapiable, just that the early development of males is more focused towards it than females. If I said black men can run the hundred meters faster than white men it doesn't mean that white men can't run the 100m and every white man is slower than every black man.


>>16051 I was aware of this, and the fact that you first have to make the toilet a litter tray to get them to make the association demonstrates my point, there is something hardwired into cats that litter trays play upon (like boys with mechanical toys), even though the litter tray is a relatively modern concept (like the toy car) it is designed in a way that appeals to the 'instict' for lack of a better term.
>> No. 16054 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 3:00 pm
16054 spacer
A TRANNY
IS A TRANNY
DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY'VE GOT A FANNY
STOP BEING SO UNCANNY
OR I'LL REPORT YOU TO YOUR GRANNY
YOU PATHETIC LITTLE MANNY
DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY'RE IRANI
IF THEY WANT TO CALL THEMSELVES ANNIE
OR EVEN DANNY
A TRANNY IS A TRANNY
THATS THE PLANNY
>> No. 16055 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 5:52 pm
16055 spacer
>>16053
>it would be equally easy to teach them to use the loo[citation needed]

>I never implied we didn't
Yes, you did. See, you can't really have your idea that males are biologically wired for tool use without the inherent implication that females are not biologically wired for it, because it would otherwise be a completely empty statement. If males are indeed biologically wired for tool use, then in the wild we would see mainly male primates using tools, but what we've actually observed is mainly females.

>the fact that you first have to make the toilet a litter tray to get them to make the association demonstrates my point
No, it doesn't. It demonstrates the exact opposite. It's a fairly straightforward example of conditioning.
>> No. 16057 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 7:31 pm
16057 spacer
You have to either pick

that cats only use litter trays because we 'condition' them to and therefore we could' condition' them to use the loo without using a litter tray first just as easily. given both are completely unnatural concepts to them.

OR

cats have a better understanding of litter trays because of instict and it is therefore harder to train them to use the loo.

you can't have both.
>> No. 16059 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 7:38 pm
16059 spacer
>>16057
One behaviour is easier to condition because it's closer to natural instincts, but it's still conditioning.
>> No. 16061 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 7:54 pm
16061 spacer
>>16055

>Yes, you did. See, you can't really have your idea that males are biologically wired for tool use without the inherent implication that females are not biologically wired for it,because it would otherwise be a completely empty statement.


>without the inherent implication that females are not biologically wired for it

Where is that written? female lions are better hunters than male lions that doesn't mean the male can't hunt.


> If males are indeed biologically wired for tool use, then in the wild we would see mainly male primates using tools, but what we've actually observed is mainly females.

That might be relivant if there wasn't 4-13 million years of genetic drift from our closest common ancestor with them that is more than enough time for social roles to change..
>> No. 16062 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 7:56 pm
16062 spacer
>>16059

Good now take that sentance and apply it to everything that has been said about male and female developmental differances.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 16063 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 8:06 pm
16063 spacer

DnP3TIUW4AAnxLG.jpg
160631606316063
Finally, moaning about cats, we're back on topic.
>> No. 16068 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 10:04 pm
16068 spacer
>>16061
It's getting late, lad. You can stop making shit up now.
>> No. 16069 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 10:21 pm
16069 spacer
>>16061
>Where is that written?
In the definitions of the words "more" and "less". Surely you aren't stupid enough not to realise this. If boys are more inclined to mechanical stuff than girls, then by definition girls are less inclined towards it than boys.

>genetic drift
>social roles
2/10 SEE ME
>> No. 16070 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 10:28 pm
16070 spacer
>>16069

Less isn't the same as not.
>> No. 16071 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 10:44 pm
16071 spacer
>>16070
Do you want to argue substance or semantics?
>> No. 16072 Anonymous
9th October 2018
Tuesday 11:59 pm
16072 spacer
>>16071
Don't ask questions you're not ready to hear the answer to.
>> No. 16073 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 12:07 am
16073 spacer
>>16072
I'll take that as "semantics", and direct you to kindly fuck off and leave the grown-ups to it.
>> No. 16074 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 12:16 am
16074 spacer
>>16073
I'm not him, you horrible little sod.

And even if I was, stop calling people names and telling them to "fuck off" like you're some kind of hardcase. You're Anonymous not Achilles.
>> No. 16076 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 12:40 am
16076 spacer
>>16074
>I'm not him, you horrible little sod.
I'm not entirely sure what difference you think that makes. If you don't have anything constructive to add, I would refer the honourable member to the answer I gave some moments ago.
>> No. 16077 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 12:57 am
16077 spacer
>>16076
I don't even know what you pair were talking about, I just made an off-hand comment and got your melodramitic, smug reply chucked at me and thought you might benefit from having it pointed out that you're taking yourself far too seriously and you're beginning to look silly.

Maybe your little sparring partner is as well, but he hasn't proudly declared himself one of the "grown-ups" while telling people to fuck off on an imageboard in the middle of the night.
>> No. 16078 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 8:11 pm
16078 spacer
>>16077

>telling people to fuck off on an imageboard in the middle of the night

A low point in anybody's life.
>> No. 16359 Anonymous
6th November 2018
Tuesday 5:33 pm
16359 spacer
>The notion of racial fluidity, or transracialism, first hit the headlines when Rachel Dolezal, the white woman posing as an African American, was exposed in 2015 and used it in her defence. The terms apply to any person identifying with a race or ethnic group that differs from their biological reality or heritage. Being transracial is not the same as simply “feeling” black, or Asian, or white. It is the complex situation of being split between cultures and denied knowledge of one’s heritage’. Lennon has been identifying as a mixed-black man for large portion of his life, both on and off stage, and some believe he has a legitimate claim to blackness. Unlike Dolezal, Lennon hasn’t had to alter his appearance to be seen as black, stating in 2012 that he went through “the struggles of a black man, a black actor” when it came to landing roles. In 1990, he starred in a BBC docu-drama about his experiences and the show’s publicity declared that Lennon’s parents “both come from Ireland and are both indisputably white”.

>I know that racial fluidity can be a very real, very unsettling experience, but I’m not convinced that Lennon’s story relates to this concept. I was born to white parents, one of whom is Irish, with no real explanation for my obvious blackness. I looked mixed race, but found that well-meaning whiteness scrubbed out a large part of who I was. We didn’t discuss race within my family, and anxieties around whether I was really related to my parents disrupted an otherwise happy childhood, until a DNA test later proved my mother had an affair. Since writing about this, many others have shared with me strikingly similar battles of belonging: black adoptees who have been raised in white spaces; those who have been lied to about their heritage; others who have had their identities rocked to the core with DNA test revelations.

>We don’t know whether difficult truths about Lennon have yet to emerge. The black-Irish “throwback gene” story that some say applies to him was also repeated to me to justify my family narrative. Lennon hasn’t spoken about any genetic evidence of his heritage, so who knows if there’s something he doesn’t know, as there was for me. I can relate to his description of flirting with multiple identities – and in psychological terms, there has been much written about how the ways others view you can contribute to your overall sense of self.

>However, I’m concerned that the conversation around racial fluidity continues to be hijacked by a privileged minority, white or white-passing people opting for a performative, monolithic type of blackness that fails to acknowledge the complexities of being a real-life person of colour. Lennon’s new racial identity was apparently born after he failed to achieve success in the acting world as a white man. But this means he may have prevented talented ethnic-minority actors from accessing an already very limited pool of funding in the creative industries. One therefore can’t help but compare this maddeningly entitled approach to Dolezal who, as a white woman, unsuccessfully tried to sue Howard University in 2002 for discriminating against her because of her race, before deciding that co-opting blackness would improve her career chances.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/06/black-anthony-lennon-theatre-director-white-mixed-race

Is race fluidity a thing now?
>> No. 16360 Anonymous
6th November 2018
Tuesday 5:39 pm
16360 spacer
>>16359
You know you're not supposed to take anything on CiF seriously, right?
>> No. 16361 Anonymous
6th November 2018
Tuesday 5:42 pm
16361 spacer
>>16359
No. No it isn't.

Poor trans people, all they want to do is take hormones and feel sad and we can't even let them do that in peace, instead they get lumped in with these chancers and forced to explain their existence every fifteen minutes.
>> No. 16362 Anonymous
6th November 2018
Tuesday 5:55 pm
16362 spacer
>>16359

>the conversation around racial fluidity continues to be hijacked by a privileged minority

That's the kind of sentence that just crashes my brain, like a paradox does with robots in Futurama.

I mean I want to react with indignation but honestly, it's not a big logical leap that if you an be the wrong gender, you can be the wrong race. Or the wrong species. Or hell, the wrong time period, why not.
>> No. 16363 Anonymous
6th November 2018
Tuesday 10:23 pm
16363 spacer

blacksimpsons.jpg
163631636316363
>>16359
>Being transracial is not the same as simply “feeling” black, or Asian, or white.

Why not? That sort of "feeling" is precisely how Gender Identity Disorder is defined, and even that's facing calls to be depathologised anyway. The biological differences between ethnic groups are miniscule compared to those between genders, deciding that you can change yours based on a feeling is a far less ridiculous conceit.
>> No. 16364 Anonymous
6th November 2018
Tuesday 10:59 pm
16364 spacer
I remember when the Dolezal story first hit the headlines and I somehow found myself discussing it with a couple of liberal North London type white girls at a party somewhere. At the time, basically just to amuse myself, I pretended to agree with the principle of being able to choose your own race because I knew they would pretend to agree with me or at least be too polite and right-on to challenge my perspective.

No regrets. It was really funny at the time.
>> No. 16365 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 12:32 am
16365 spacer
>>16363

It is not the same in the way that being religious isn't just being superstitious; your manager is being is assertive, not just being an arsehole; and that it is gardening tool primarily for digging, comprising a blade and a long handle, not a spade
>> No. 16366 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 1:58 am
16366 spacer
>>16365

So in lieu of explaining why it's different, you're just going to say "it's different"? If you're going to take the view that all transracial people are chancers or disturbed, how are you any different from someone who dismissively says the same about transgenders? If a black friend of mine told me he'd always identified with white people and considered himself to be transracial then I'd find it bloody weird but I wouldn't laugh in his face or say "no, biologically you're not nor can you ever be". I've never had to sit down and consider this before, but it ultimately makes no more or less sense than transgenderism. If anything it's a more naturally fluid area of human identity.
>> No. 16367 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 2:49 am
16367 spacer
>>16366
>So in lieu of explaining why it's different, you're just going to say "it's different"?

I explained why you just failed to understand.
>> No. 16369 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 3:00 am
16369 spacer
>>16367

Could you explain it better or more simply for the unwashed masses, then?

You seem to have just said 'it's not the same because these other things aren't the same' which isn't helpful to someone as thick as I am. Please help.
>> No. 16370 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 10:17 am
16370 spacer
>>16369

Sorry I only state my opinion in vague statements. What is the difference between being religious and being superstitious?
>> No. 16372 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 10:19 am
16372 spacer
>>16370

>What is the difference between being religious and being superstitious?

That society traditionally assigns more value and legitimacy to one than the other.

HMMM
>> No. 16373 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 10:25 am
16373 spacer
>>16370

1. A larger network of followers
2. Government recognition
3. Viewed with more weight simply because more people believe it
4. Arguably religion is just superstition with more arbitrary respect behind it

I'm struggling to see how this makes thinking you're black any different to thinking you're a woman.

You should have gone with brain chemistry or something.
>> No. 16374 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 10:54 am
16374 spacer
>>16373

Good. One more step. Compare and contrast.
>> No. 16375 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 11:12 am
16375 spacer
>>16360
They're having a pop at Attenborough today, fucking hell.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/07/david-attenborough-world-environment-bbc-films
>> No. 16376 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 11:17 am
16376 spacer
>>16375
*Gasp*

How dare someone voice disagreement with somone else?
>> No. 16377 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 11:20 am
16377 spacer
>>16375

that article was pure clickbait, why did you post a link? I could have not given them the satisfaction.
>> No. 16378 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 11:23 am
16378 spacer
>>16376

it isn't is disagreement (they are just moaning that the good work he has done isn't perfect), it is raw character assassination for attention.
>> No. 16379 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 11:30 am
16379 spacer

serveimage.jpg
163791637916379
>>16366

Gender really is complicated and ambiguous.

Look at the athletes Caster Semenya and Dutee Chand. They both have XX chromosomes, but the IAAF and the IOC aren't entirely sure that they count as female and you can see their point. If a committee of scientists can spend eight months trying to figure out whether someone is male or female and come back with an answer that includes the word "probably", then you know you're dealing with something pretty bloody complicated.

All foetuses start out as completely undifferentiated by gender. It may or may not have a Y chromosome, but it doesn't start developing any sex-specific characteristics until about 10 weeks. By default you develop into a female. If you do have a Y chromosome, the SRY gene usually causes you to develop male traits - you develop testes rather than ovaries, those testes produce androgens, the androgen receptors in your cells respond to those androgens and you become male.

The thing is, there are at least 400 known mutations of the androgen receptor gene. Those mutations can cause your androgen receptors to be partially or completely insensitive to androgen; you develop testes as a foetus, they're pumping out signals to the rest of your body telling it to develop male traits, but your body either struggles to hear or completely ignores those signals. The prevalence of these mutations is a lot higher than you might imagine - at least 8% of people with a Y chromosome have one or more mutations.

If you've got XX chromosomes, your development in the womb can be significantly affected by your mother's androgen levels. People without testes still produce androgens, albeit in much lower levels. There's fairly good evidence to suggest a link between prenatal androgen exposure and transsexualism, homosexuality and autism-spectrum disorders. We know that people on the autism spectrum are drastically more likely to be transsexual or homosexual, supporting the plausibility of this link. On a population level, there have been some fairly significant changes to prenatal androgen levels due to environmental exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals.

Human biology is unfathomably complicated and there are myriad ways that the development of sex characteristics can go a bit wonky. I'm willing to extend the benefit of the doubt to most people who say "you got it wrong, I'm not the gender you thought I was at birth".
>> No. 16380 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 11:40 am
16380 spacer
>>16378

Firstly "they"? It isn't "they" it's George Monbiot, it says so at the top of the thing you didn't bother reading. Secondly, proper grown ups can have big massive disagreements that aren't "character assassinations". Highlighting Attenborough's gently gently approach to protecting the enviroment, and expressing frustration with it, doesn't come close to "character assassination" and to claim it does is hysterical guff. Stop being such a whinging, mardy, baby and learn how to disagree with people instead having a teary because someone was mean to dear old Grandpa gorilla whisperer. I doubt David Attenborough, being an intelligent, passionate, adult of quite some vintage, is feeling especially devestated this morning.
>> No. 16381 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 12:04 pm
16381 spacer
>>16380

The only person having a teary here is you.

The guardian knows exactly what it is doing, it is like printing an article by Morrissey about eating meat being the same as the holocaust, or by Sean Penn about how Britain should give the Falklands to Argentina. It is the incoherent ramblings of a famous person for the sake of being contrarian and get attention disguised as giving balance.
>> No. 16382 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 12:06 pm
16382 spacer
>>16381
Morrissey is actually a cunt though.
>> No. 16384 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 12:32 pm
16384 spacer
Oxygen of publicity, lads.
>> No. 16385 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 12:37 pm
16385 spacer
>>16379
>Look at the athletes Caster Semenya and Dutee Chand. They both have XX chromosomes, but the IAAF and the IOC aren't entirely sure that they count as female and you can see their point.

If they stopped gendering athletics, you could solve the problem over night, if you phrase it right buzz feed would feel obligated to support the movement.

>The thing is, there are at least 400 known mutations of the androgen receptor gene. Those mutations can cause your androgen receptors to be partially or completely insensitive to androgen; you develop testes as a foetus, they're pumping out signals to the rest of your body telling it to develop male traits, but your body either struggles to hear or completely ignores those signals.

If a TV has no antenna is it still a TV or is it just a monitor?

If a male has a no willy, Are they a woman?


>at least 8% of people with a Y chromosome have one or more mutations
I'm not quite sure what point you are making here, 100% of people have mutations we still consider them human even if they have 6 fingers or 3 kidneys, why would that 8% not just be male.
I think a lot of these things are over complicated for the sake of feelings, peoples obsession with genitals and corner cases.
>> No. 16386 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 1:01 pm
16386 spacer
>>16385

>I'm not quite sure what point you are making here

At least 8% of people with a Y chromosome have one or more mutations of the gene that determines whether you have male or female characteristics. When you raise the issue of intersex conditions, a common retort is "ah, but they're very rare exceptions to the gender binary". There is concrete scientific evidence to support the idea that sex and gender are a spectrum with a meaningful grey area.

The crux of my argument is that any effort to establish a gender binary is in fact massively overcomplicating things. "Some people are male, some people are female, some people are a bit ambiguous" is fully supported by science and perfectly straightforward. "Everyone is either male or female, no exceptions, no swapsies" means you have to explain a whole bunch of weird and complicated stuff that doesn't fit into a neat either/or.

Essentially, I think we should all just fucking relax about it. The gender binary is stupid, having 47 different gender identities is stupid, but it's perfectly reasonable to acknowledge that lots of people switch teams at some point in their life or just aren't sure which side they're on. It's only a big deal if you choose to make it a big deal.
>> No. 16388 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 1:07 pm
16388 spacer
>>16366

>it ultimately makes no more or less sense than transgenderism

I think what it boils down to is that there's a lot of people on that spectrum who have a vested interest in the whole biological argument for transgenderism. Those who want it legitimised as a real life medical thing, and not just a fantasy everyone collectively allows you to indulge for the sake of making you happy. If they let the slope become slippery enough to allow transracialism or transpeciesism, their position becomes blatantly and transparently absurd, and that's the issue. It really does make no difference, from an ethical viewpoint, whether it's a "real" biological thing or not.

I'm the bitter furfag from the last time we talked about this sort of thing. I think they're a bunch of fucking hypocrites really.
>> No. 16389 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 1:44 pm
16389 spacer
>>16388

You're not a fox m8, get over it.
>> No. 16391 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 2:28 pm
16391 spacer
>>16386

>At least 8% of people with a Y chromosome have one or more mutations of the gene that determines whether you have male or female characteristics.

A mutation of the Y chromosome is not the same as being intersex, the majority are benign and meaningless. Intersex really covers 2 key areas an unusual arrangement of sexual phenotype chromosomes (typically caused by unusual cell division), or an atypical development (typically because of a resistance to developmental hormones) or if feeling really generous with your definition the majority are just the failure for the urethra to properly form in a bloke.
None of that has anything to do with mutation of the y chromosome.
>When you raise the issue of intersex conditions, a common retort is "ah, but they're very rare exceptions to the gender binary". There is concrete scientific evidence to support the idea that sex and gender are a spectrum with a meaningful grey area.

They are a very rare exceptions to the gender binary, it isn't a spectrum for more than 99% of the population there is really very little grey area, you are more likely to be born with only one kidney then to be intersex we don't re-write text books to include every single exception to the rule it all points to an obsession with genitalia to me.

>The crux of my argument is that any effort to establish a gender binary is in fact massively overcomplicating things. "Some people are male, some people are female, some people are a bit ambiguous" is fully supported by science and perfectly straightforward. "Everyone is either male or female, no exceptions, no swapsies" means you have to explain a whole bunch of weird and complicated stuff that doesn't fit into a neat either/or.

Vague non-committed statements are always supported by science but not terribly useful or meaningful, particularly as you seem to be suggesting that there is a more broad quantity of 'a bit ambiguous' then actually exists, and ignore the very obvious point that intersex people are the result of a malfunction in process of churning out one or the other which although not very nice is the truth of the matter. If we had stable human hermaphrodites passing on human hermaphrodite genes with regular frequency or your mother's line always gave birth to six worker children who were infertile for every fertile one who look after her and you, you might have a point but we don't.
>> No. 16392 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 4:35 pm
16392 spacer
>>16388
>Those who want it legitimised as a real life medical thing
It is legitimised, though. It's treated as a physiological condition as there is sufficient evidence to support the theory that is a brain abnormailty and sufficient evidence to support transition being the only recourse.

Gender dysphoria is a symptom, not the condition, the condition is Gender Dysmorphia. Gender dysphoria can present itself in patients with mental health issues. It's the gender clinics job to weed them out.

You don't just get to say you're a woman and then they give you hormones, in the UK at least, so it is different from whatever being a furry is (A fetish? Who the fuck knows). Auto-gynephilia is what I suspect you're conflating with trangenderism to come to the conclusion trannies are hypocrites, which again is different.
>> No. 16393 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 5:23 pm
16393 spacer
>>16374

So because loads of people say religion is different to superstition, it just is?

Got it, thanks. This means if I get enough people to sign my petition I'm legally black. Cheers pal
>> No. 16394 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 5:40 pm
16394 spacer
>>16393
Is it possible to legally even be a particular ethnicity? I mean, I'm White British but am I legally White British?
>> No. 16395 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 5:53 pm
16395 spacer
>>16394

I'm some countries it goes down on your birth certificate and you can use it get places at university despite having scores in the 70% range instead of the 90% range.

And that was your pointless factoid of the week
>> No. 16396 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 5:56 pm
16396 spacer
Pensioner, 69, 'who identifies as a 45-year-old' begins legal action to have his age reduced so he can attract more women on Tinder

A 69-year-old Dutchman is battling to legally reduce his age by 20 years so he can get more work and attract more women on Tinder.

Emile Ratelband argues that if transgender people are allowed to change sex, he should be allowed to change his date of birth because doctors said he has the body of a 45-year-old. The motivational speaker, a media personality in the Netherlands, is suing his local authority after they refused to amend his age on official documents.

Mr Ratelband's case has now gone to a court in the city of Arnhmen in the eastern Dutch province of Gelderland. He was born on 11 March, 1949, but says he feels at least 20 years younger and wants to change his birth date to 11 March, 1969.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6363439/Pensioner-69-identifies-45-year-old-tries-change-age.html
>> No. 16397 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 6:00 pm
16397 spacer
>>16392

Isn't generalised body dysmorphia/dysphoria also a thing?

>You don't just get to say you're a woman and then they give you hormones

Of course not, but you pretty much do (and should) get to just say you're a woman and have people treat you as such.

>It really does make no difference, from an ethical viewpoint, whether it's a "real" biological thing or not.

Was my main point. There's trannies, there's people who are half way between, there's people who feel like one on Monday and the other on a Tuesday. The scientific evidence is irrelevant in the face of all that, it's a philosophical question about whether you're willing to accommodate people's self image.

>>16389

I am and I've yiffed your mum.
>> No. 16400 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 6:27 pm
16400 spacer
>>16396
I don't know what's worse, that this cunt thinks he's funny or that not a single person in comments seems to realise he's just taking the piss. I'm getting those "get me off this fucking planet" feelings again.
>> No. 16410 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 7:26 pm
16410 spacer
>>16400
Plenty of people in the comments realised it.
>> No. 16414 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 7:47 pm
16414 spacer
>>16400
You don't know he's taking the piss.
>> No. 16416 Anonymous
7th November 2018
Wednesday 8:24 pm
16416 spacer
>>16397

>The scientific evidence is irrelevant in the face of all that

It really is though. The NHS doesn't offer treatment to people who just fancy a penis enlargement. The Disability Discrimination Act doesn't require employers to make reasonable adjustments for lazy bastards. The scientific basis for transsexuality is very much relevant to the social and legal status of transgender people.

>I am and I've yiffed your mum.

Joke's on you mate, my mum is dead.
>> No. 16442 Anonymous
10th November 2018
Saturday 7:52 am
16442 spacer

offspring-pretty-fly.png
164421644216442
The transracialist gives his side.

>I have never made any secret of the fact that I was born to Irish parents, and that my parents and grandparents are white. But my identity is different. It’s there for all to see in Chilling Out, a documentary I took part in back in 1990. As I said then: “When I’m alone in my bedroom looking in the mirror, thinking about stuff I’ve written down, thinking about my past … I think I’m a black man.”

>I am the eldest of three brothers, but during early childhood, when there were only two of us, to neighbours on our west London estate, we looked as if we weren’t our parents’ children. There was an old saying: “Mother’s baby, father’s maybe” – only the mother knows. When I was born, my dad wasn’t sure if I was his son, and this was heartbreaking for my mum, to say the least. Two years later another little boy came along with the same physical characteristics, which must have been another bombshell.

>Both of us had a sense of this not being our home, or our parents. People would arrive on the doorstep to gawp at us. In primary school, when I was seven or eight, people would ask me where I came from and would conclude that I must be adopted. So, at an age where I didn’t know what race or identity was, I became the subject of whispering and conversation. My best friend was black, and he gave me an afro comb because my mum couldn’t manage my hair.

>After my parents divorced when I was 12, we moved into a flat with a Rastafarian couple living upstairs, and the woman would take me up to their flat and I would feel at home. There was a salon where I got my hair canerowed. It was like being adopted or fostered by people who “got” you, or knew what you needed. It was at about that time that I heard the word “throwback”. I wasn’t sure what they were talking about. But in my mind there is no doubt that I have some African ancestry.

>In our early teens, both my brother and I developed nervous tics as a result of our experiences, so somebody suggested we did out-of-school activities to build up our confidence. My brother got into sport and I started doing youth theatre, where there was a black youth leader who would spend time with me. When rap and hip-hop hit the UK I got really intoxicated by it, and began to develop a sense of ownership of who I was through music and other aspects of black cultural expression. There was a local all-black body-popping crew, and at 18 I asked if I could join it. I strolled up and showed them my “robot”. (They later said they didn’t know if I was simple or just really confident, because nobody just asked to join a crew like that). The leader of the crew was of mixed parentage, and he reflected me back to myself.

>By 1995 I was living in Manchester, and got heavily involved in African-centred studies. This had a major impact on what I was bringing through as a mixed-heritage actor. As my interests developed, I began working as an assistant director around the country. I had been doing so for many years when this opportunity came up to apply for the two-year artistic development leadership programme bursary through Talawa Theatre Company, and I went for it. It isn’t about training to be a director but about developing leadership skills. Then, suddenly, a year into it, all these accusations start flying around about my white background – something I’ve never hidden.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/10/white-parents-african-ancestry-anthony-ekundayo-lennon

His mum's shagged a black man.
>> No. 16444 Anonymous
10th November 2018
Saturday 10:42 am
16444 spacer
>>16442

Excellent use of the "Message too long. Click here to view the full text."

I wish they had a family photo.
>> No. 16445 Anonymous
10th November 2018
Saturday 11:23 am
16445 spacer

6003092-6373927-Anthony_Lennon_on_the_left_and_bro.jpg
164451644516445
>>16444
The Mail article has pictures of his parents and he certainly seems to have similar facial features to his Dad.

>Even more curiously, it emerges that Anthony is not the only family member to have been born looking as if he has black heritage. A cousin on his father’s side was also known for his dark skin and hair — so much so that he was, in the Fifties, given the racist nickname ‘Wamba Womba’ by neighbours in reference to the fact he looked almost black.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6373927/He-took-grant-black-actors-parents-white-read-bizarre-story.html

His Grandma shagged a black man.
>> No. 16446 Anonymous
10th November 2018
Saturday 12:57 pm
16446 spacer
>>16445

I think his apperance is probably a phenomena known as 'black irish' that is mostly anecdotal and therefore not well understood or documented, but has been reported as happening for hundreds of years.
>> No. 16447 Anonymous
10th November 2018
Saturday 5:07 pm
16447 spacer
>>16445
I guess it's just a genetic mutation or recessive genes.

His story is a bit bollocks though. Oh he loves hip-hop because he's black, of course. No white Irish fans of rap exist I guess.
>> No. 16448 Anonymous
10th November 2018
Saturday 6:46 pm
16448 spacer
>>16447
I've always found white boys who predominantly listen to rap music to be a little odd.
>> No. 16450 Anonymous
10th November 2018
Saturday 7:27 pm
16450 spacer
>>16448

I know what you mean, though I don't think it's a bad kind of odd. They're usually quite self-aware, particularly if they're involved in making/writing the music too.

The weirdest white boys I've met are the ones who are very into IDM and ambient type stuff. No, I don't want to talk about your monome.
>> No. 16454 Anonymous
10th November 2018
Saturday 8:30 pm
16454 spacer

51SS6kreEQL.jpg
164541645416454
>>16450

>No, I don't want to talk about your monome.
>> No. 16456 Anonymous
10th November 2018
Saturday 9:14 pm
16456 spacer
>>16454

Ptolomy's wine
>> No. 16457 Anonymous
10th November 2018
Saturday 9:29 pm
16457 spacer

>> No. 16458 Anonymous
11th November 2018
Sunday 2:11 pm
16458 spacer
>>16450

What about the white boys who quite like rap and electronic music?
>> No. 16459 Anonymous
11th November 2018
Sunday 3:01 pm
16459 spacer
>>16458

That describes myself, and I'm weird as fuck, but I like to think I get away with it.
>> No. 16460 Anonymous
11th November 2018
Sunday 6:03 pm
16460 spacer
>>16458
They'll catch a jpeg to the head!
>> No. 16510 Anonymous
17th November 2018
Saturday 11:10 pm
16510 spacer

>> No. 16513 Anonymous
17th November 2018
Saturday 11:40 pm
16513 spacer

>> No. 17226 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 9:14 am
17226 spacer

8170404-6561259-image-m-69_1546734455873.jpg
172261722617226
You might have thought it was the most innocuous item someone could wear: a simple black T-shirt bearing the dictionary definition of woman as ‘human female’. Rebekah Wershbale said she was ‘stunned’ when a barwoman at the pub informed her she was banned because of the definition.

Ms Wershbale said: ‘She told me that the T-shirt I was wearing was upsetting people because it was transphobic and not inclusive so I was barred. What she meant was that I was somehow offending men who say they are women because my T-shirt did not include them in the definition of a woman. There aren’t even any transgender staff or patrons at the pub. It’s crackers.

Ms Wershbale is a member of feminist group Fair Play For Women, which opposed a Government’s consultation to reform the Gender Recognition Act (GRA). This proposed legal change would allow people to self-identify as the gender they believe they are without any medical diagnosis. Feminists and transgender campaigners have been locked in an increasingly heated battle with leading feminists fearing the change will harm the safety and privacy of women.

Ms Wershbale, a mother-of-one, had gone last Sunday with her girlfriend to play board games at the pub where she has been a regular for three years. But the 34-year-old was surprised to be approached by a member of staff with a complaint. Nothing out of the ordinary had happened that evening, except when she spoke to another drinker at the pub, a gay man called Mika Johnson.

‘I sat down next to him and asked him how he was,’ Ms Wershbale said. ‘He said, “I don’t want to talk to you to be honest – please leave me alone.” ‘So I said OK and left it.’

Thirty minutes later a member of the bar staff named Heather came to Ms Wershbale’s table to tell her she was no longer welcome at the pub. ‘Heather said I’d been upsetting people and Mika was crying,’ Ms Wershbale said. ‘She told me that the way I talk about radical feminism was a problem and said: “The T-shirt you’re wearing is upsetting and not inclusive.” I replied that it simply said the dictionary definition of being a woman – how can it be offensive? She mumbled a bit about it being transphobic and that I had been transphobic previously. She then said I was barred and that she had been nominated by the other bar staff to come to tell me that. I asked if she thought it was troubling that I was being removed from my own local because I was wearing a feminist T-shirt that had upset a gay man. But she just repeated I wasn’t being inclusive.’

On the same day Mr Johnson – the pub goer Ms Wershbale had offended – took to Twitter to talk about his distress. He wrote: ‘When you’re trying to relax in your fave pub and there is a TERF [trans exclusionary radical feminist] wearing an anti-trans T-shirt… it’s disgusting and I’m so upset by it.’ The owner of Five Clouds Tap and Bottle Brewery Tom Lewis confirmed Ms Wershbale had been ordered to leave after the complaint. But he said there had been a series of incidents where she had upset staff and customers by challenging them about their views on men identifying as female.

Tory MP David Davies said: ‘Terrifyingly this insidious creep of open debate no longer being tolerated and freedom of speech being suppressed is now spreading from our university campuses to the streets of our historic market towns. It is a very sad day when a woman is barred from her pub for wearing a T-shirt that states the obvious because it might offend transgender people.’


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6561259/Young-mother-barred-pub-wearing-T-shirt-saying-Woman-human-female.html

Lads. I think we've been infiltrated by a Tory MP. Also, I don't get how people can invest so much time and effort into this level of petty drama.
>> No. 17227 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 10:33 am
17227 spacer
>>17226

>The owner of Five Clouds Tap and Bottle Brewery Tom Lewis confirmed Ms Wershbale had been ordered to leave after the complaint. But he said there had been a series of incidents where she had upset staff and customers by challenging them about their views on men identifying as female.

The Daily Mail, burying the lede as per bloody usual. "Pub bars customer for being a persistent nuisance" isn't much of a story.
>> No. 17230 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 11:49 am
17230 spacer
>>17226
Just look at that smug look on face, the wearing of a graphic t-shirt as an adult, going to some shitty converted bar to play boardgames and bother gay men. I wonder if she knows why people are so rough with her in the bedroom.

>Rebekah

And learn to spell your own name.
>> No. 17233 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 12:16 pm
17233 spacer
>>17227

It's upsetting that Daily Mail readers will skip over this part. It seems like she wore that shirt specifically to annoy the people she'd been blathering on to in the pub.

I really don't understand this TERF shit anyway, it seems counter-intuitive, though I suppose it's just that some people found a way to be both a Tory and a feminist.
>> No. 17238 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 3:20 pm
17238 spacer
>>17233
Proper TERFism is basically "No, this is my oppression, get your filthy man-hands off it!"
>> No. 17239 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 3:25 pm
17239 spacer

cb28e56f944f546887f565e09fbdfc23.jpg
172391723917239
>>17230
>Just look at that smug look on face, the wearing of a graphic t-shirt as an adult, going to some shitty converted bar to play boardgames and bother gay men

A lot of well off and insufferably righteous women seem to have almost the exact same face. Lily Allen, Jack Monroe, Phoebe Waller-Bridge, etc.
>> No. 17240 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 3:37 pm
17240 spacer
>>17239

Lily Allen and Jack Monroe are a pain in the cock, but Phoebe Waller-Bridge is absolutely piss funny and proper dirty to boot. I won't have a word said against her.
>> No. 17241 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 5:32 pm
17241 spacer
>>17233
I find it pretty easy to grasp actually, if men and women are truly perfectly equal then there isn't space in-between for transgenderism because things like the gendered brain don't exist. If gender is a social construct then a bloke flipping the otherside is just an exercise of patriarchy rather than mental illness. It's not exactly helped that MtF is a culture that seems to take femininity to an over-sexualised parody form.

Although obviously I imagine the majority do it either because it offends people or they've ended up in a world they no longer recognise.
>> No. 17242 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 6:08 pm
17242 spacer
>>17241
>It's not exactly helped that MtF is a culture that seems to take femininity to an over-sexualised parody form.

None of the MtF people I've met do that. Are you thinking about things like Ru Paul's drag race?
>> No. 17243 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 6:40 pm
17243 spacer
>>17239
>"Girls make me nervous so I want them to not speak."

Okay, retardlad.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 17244 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 6:44 pm
17244 spacer
>>17243

Where on earth did you get that from? I thought the lad was talking about how those women look. If you want to be offended by the insidious creep then at least get it right.
>> No. 17245 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 6:53 pm
17245 spacer
>>17244
Don't respond to cuntofflad. He's off his meds again.
>> No. 17246 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 7:02 pm
17246 spacer

jack-monroe-microwave-guide-image_1.jpg
172461724617246
>>17244
I was talking about how they look. They've all got the same haughty "I'm a massive pain in the arse" face.
>> No. 17247 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 7:59 pm
17247 spacer
>>17239
>>17246
Wait wait wait hang on. Jack Monroe? Well-off? So you evidently know fuck all about them?
>> No. 17248 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 8:15 pm
17248 spacer
>>17247

Do you think they didn't get paid for those books and columns, or what? The blog alone will generate enough revenue to describe Jack as 'comfortably off'.

I can't think of a more short sighted statement than yours.
>> No. 17249 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 8:17 pm
17249 spacer
>>17247
Jack Monroe's father, MBE, is a station manager in the fire service and owns a number of rental properties under the company name Marine Villas. Jack Monroe's mother was a nurse until she gave it up because she could afford not to work.

Jack Monroe had a relatively well-off upbringing. She slummed it for a year or so after giving up work, a job a dad got her at the fire service, which would give her enough material to go to The Guardian with as she knew they'd be hooked on tales of giving her crying son mashed Weetabix with water. Did you think The Guardian would employ an actual poor person?
>> No. 17250 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 9:03 pm
17250 spacer
>>17249
I was right, then.
>> No. 17251 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 9:12 pm
17251 spacer
>>17250

Do you feel like explaining yourself instead of being an obstinate twunt?
>> No. 17253 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 9:31 pm
17253 spacer
>>17251
>twunt
I know this isn't a /101/ thread, but made up insults are always crap. Bumder and gunt might be the only two exceptions and gunt isn't inherently an insult.
>> No. 17254 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 9:34 pm
17254 spacer
>>17253
What makes an insult not made up?
>> No. 17255 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 9:36 pm
17255 spacer
>>17253

All insults are made up, mate.

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/1230684--to-hate-the-use-of-the-word-TWUNT
>> No. 17256 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 9:37 pm
17256 spacer
>>17254

What makes any word not made up?
>> No. 17258 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 9:44 pm
17258 spacer
>>17254
Has it made it insto the Big Book of Insult Cannon.

>>17255
vmcd28 makes a fine point, but they also don't land the same.
>> No. 17259 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 9:46 pm
17259 spacer
>>17258
Twunt has been around since 2000, I think it's generally acceptable as part of the language canon now. Canon.
>> No. 17260 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 9:54 pm
17260 spacer
>>17251
They don't have a point. The fact stands that Jack Monroe has been popular with the chattering classes exactly because she is the right sort. She looks like them. She acts like them. She talks like them. Her face fits. If she was named Courtney and grew up on a council estate, with the vernacular and mannerisms that entails, then they wouldn't have given her the time of day. Monroe may have been temporarily poor, assuming her seriously minted parents actually left their early twentysomething daughter and grandson to starve, but she was only slumming it and is quite clearly comfortably middle class.

>>17253
>made up insults

If you blend two words into one then it's known as a portmanteau.
>> No. 17261 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 10:10 pm
17261 spacer
If it's in here it's allowed as an insult. http://viz.co.uk/category/rogers-profanisaurus/
>> No. 17262 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 10:14 pm
17262 spacer
>>17260

Check who people are replying to before you reply to them, I was talking to otherlad.
>> No. 17263 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 10:20 pm
17263 spacer
>>17260
>quite clearly
Mmm, OK. Continue spouting off your assumptions, lad.
>> No. 17264 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 10:21 pm
17264 spacer
>>17263

You still haven't managed to explain your point.

Do you think Jack Monroe is poor, right now?
>> No. 17265 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 10:39 pm
17265 spacer
>>17262
I know you were.

>>17263
If, when you were growing up, your parents had a combined income of c. £60/70k excluding rental income from their property portfolio and money from fostering then it's fairly safe to assume you had a comfortable middle class upbringing.

If you're a successful blogger with a number of cookery books, newspaper columns, advertising campaigns and TV appearances under your belt then it's fairly safe to assume you're doing well for yourself.
>> No. 17266 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 11:07 pm
17266 spacer

>> No. 17267 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 11:17 pm
17267 spacer
>>17265
Why is it safe to assume any of that? Is everything you mention always well-paid?

Fact is, you have no idea about the state of Monroe's finances.
>> No. 17268 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 11:22 pm
17268 spacer
>>17267
>Is everything you mention always well-paid?
Not him, but if they weren't people wouldn't be doing them instead of just getting a proper job.
>> No. 17269 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 11:29 pm
17269 spacer

judge rinder.jpg
172691726917269
>>17261
I have just consulted my 2005 edition of the Profanisaurus Rex

>twunt n. Useful, satisfying yet inoffensive combination of two very rude words which can safely be spoken in the primmest and properest of company.

I believe that settles the matter as to the terms validity, as to its correct usage, I must agree with my learned colleague that poster >>17250 has demonstrated qualities of both a twat and a cunt in this, and other messages we can reasonably conclude to be theirs, and therefore the description of twunt is appropriate in this instance.
>> No. 17270 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 11:37 pm
17270 spacer
>>17267

>Is everything you mention always well-paid?

How do you think the job market works? Do you reckon there's one specific sort of newspaper columnist/nationally published author that only gets 50p an hour?

You're accusing someone of making assumptions about Monroe's finances, while intimating that you think Monroe's finances are poor, which, unless you two are well acquainted, is also an assumption you're making.

So either explain why you think Monroe is poor (without assuming anything) or fuck the fuck off.
>> No. 17271 Anonymous
6th January 2019
Sunday 11:41 pm
17271 spacer
>>17270

Calling it now, poster IS Monroe and was recommended the site by ARE LAUIRE.
>> No. 17272 Anonymous
7th January 2019
Monday 12:34 am
17272 spacer
>>17271
Given that Taylor Swift posts on the other place it wouldn't be the strangest thing that's happened.
>> No. 17450 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 6:01 pm
17450 spacer

MAIN-Martina-Big.jpg
174501745017450
Back to the transracialism...

>A white woman whose skin turned dark after tanning injections has claimed she's 'changed race' and will give birth to black children - leaving Holly Willoughby stunned.

>Martina Big, a white model from Germany, appeared on today's This Morning claiming her doctors have told her any children she conceives with her white husband Michael will be black.

>The model, who recently spent seven weeks in Kenya to learn about 'tribal culture', told Holly and her temporary co-star John Barrowman that she now identifies as a black woman after two years of melanin injections.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/white-model-martina-big-claims-13886666
>> No. 17451 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 6:16 pm
17451 spacer

martina martinez.png
174511745117451
>>17450

So yous a buncha white boys, riiiight?
>> No. 17452 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 6:47 pm
17452 spacer
>>17450
Let's get this out the way now: Shame - I would've treated her to 'spoons before all the work. Maybe even gone Harvester.

But she's always trotting herself out for attention and doesn't even recognise that Africa is a continent not a race. God help any children she has.
>> No. 17453 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 7:13 pm
17453 spacer

0_This-Morning.jpg
174531745317453
>>17451
I'd say she looks more like Madge from Benidorm than Sweet Dee.
>> No. 17454 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 7:43 pm
17454 spacer
>>17450

She looks like a right Geordie slag in the left picture.

Is that REALLY her in the right picture, or did she change bodies as well while she was at it?
>> No. 17455 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 7:48 pm
17455 spacer
>>17454

Funny, my first thought was she looked very Wakey/Leeds slaglike.

If she'd just gotten the comical tits and the colour, I'd have still been interested. Her face is knackered, though.
>> No. 17456 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 7:49 pm
17456 spacer

d0c7536a395581f20cbbf31cfe57a0f1.jpg
174561745617456
>>17454
She had the massive plastic tits before she did a reverse Michael Jackson.
>> No. 17457 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 8:18 pm
17457 spacer
>>17456

Yeah, I'd smash that.

She must have right trouble with those things, mind, assuming silicone is as heavy as real boob. My missus only has double D's but she still has back problems from that.
>> No. 17458 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 9:01 pm
17458 spacer
>>17453>>17456
Why do people do this to themselves. Ridiculous look.
>> No. 17459 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 9:05 pm
17459 spacer
>>17458
This is a very interesting question and I'd like to see someone explore it, rather than tabloid media giving it exposure for exposure's sake.
>> No. 17460 Anonymous
21st January 2019
Monday 9:26 pm
17460 spacer
>>17458

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_dysmorphic_disorder
>> No. 17464 Anonymous
22nd January 2019
Tuesday 12:43 pm
17464 spacer

Bad Donatella Versace Before Plastic Surgery Pictu.jpg
174641746417464
>>17459

Agreed. I can understand when a woman has naturally very small breasts and is deeply unhappy about them. That's a valid reason for breast augmentation, within reason, i.e. maybe a B or C cup.

But I, for one, find nothing attractive or aesthetic about cartoonishly inflated breasts like the ones in >>17456. I know that there are some boobfetishlads who probably start dripping with precum at the mere thought of basketball sized knockers, but the reality of it is, not only will they be hugely cumbersome for the woman that has them, but they will also be in the way most of the time during sex. She could probably beat your head in with them while she is sitting on top of you.

Breasts aside though, her face is nothing to write home about either, as she bears the classic markings of excessive plastic surgery on it as well. And I don't mean the obvious silicone injected lips, but also the whole appearance. She's pretty much gone all Donatella Versace.
>> No. 17471 Anonymous
22nd January 2019
Tuesday 1:51 pm
17471 spacer
>>17464
Who do women think they are, not catering to a majority of men?
>> No. 17473 Anonymous
22nd January 2019
Tuesday 2:57 pm
17473 spacer
>>17471

You poor fool.
>> No. 17633 Anonymous
30th January 2019
Wednesday 11:19 pm
17633 spacer

essex-survey_640x345_acf_cropped.jpg
176331763317633
>A council has been accused of "institutionalised bigotry" after using a picture of a person removing a wig to depict transgender people.

>The image was published in an "easy read" online version of an Essex County Council consultation document on library cuts, but has now been removed.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-47064138
>> No. 17634 Anonymous
30th January 2019
Wednesday 11:41 pm
17634 spacer
>>17633
>Another said: "The depiction is not only awful but 'man, woman or transgender' is an extremely ignorant choice of genders."

I hate to say it but I agree with this lazily copied tweet on a non-story. Having a transgender option when the choices are man/woman is nonsensical because they're all about identification. Surely people with learning difficulties would still have a concept of male/female they could've used, like with animals and that?

It would make much more sense to just have an 'other' for all that gender-queer stuff pictured as a snowflake. Or possibly not asked because it's irrelevant in the vast majority of surveys that ask this question.
>> No. 17635 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 12:13 am
17635 spacer
>>17633

I'm laughing like a drain at the thought of a middle-aged council employee wracking their brains about how to illustrate transgenderism in a survey asking the semi-literate about library cuts. It's 2019 in a nutshell.

Also loving the two thumbs up from our "special" friends. It's like they're really enthusiastic about having a gender.
>> No. 17643 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 1:41 pm
17643 spacer
>>17634

>Surely people with learning difficulties would still have a concept of male/female they could've used, like with animals and that?

That is sex, that apparently has nothing to do with gender, for reasons that I don't pretend to understand that seem self contradictory to me.
>> No. 17646 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 3:49 pm
17646 spacer
>>17643

Sex is in the genitals, gender is in the brain
>> No. 17650 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 4:07 pm
17650 spacer
>>17646

Biological sex is still really complicated and confusing, with the obvious example being Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome; some people are born with a fanny, go through female puberty, but have a Y chromosome and no ovaries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
>> No. 17655 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 5:06 pm
17655 spacer
>>17650
These are niche examples, not obvious ones, in the same way that smarties sometimes come out the wrong colour. They're defective, not new smarties.
>> No. 17660 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 5:23 pm
17660 spacer
>>17655

If one in fifty Smarties were white, would you say that there's no such thing as white Smarties?
>> No. 17661 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 5:27 pm
17661 spacer
>>17650
So you could smash her knowing there won't be a kid? Fantastic.
>> No. 17662 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 5:31 pm
17662 spacer
>>17650
I was born with one kidney a phenomenon more common than every form of intersex put together and entirely benign. I demand you change any representation of anatomy for teaching to mention it. I consider it offensive that we are being ignored and the standard representation of anatomy. If you mentioning us as just being a fluke or an exception I would find that normative language degrading, proper teaching must qualify, "that people are born with two kidney or one or lose some and gain some over their lifetime or are even born with no kidneys or half a kidney or one and a half or even 3 kidneys, therefore we must not presume people have two kidneys and that is the only natural and normal mode;" we must tear down the prejudice institution of the Human body diagrams. And not just for us, but for every other group who is marginalised by medical science in some capacity.

Society will not be fixed until the tail wags the dog on every possible subject, and it is impossible to make an abstract generalisation of anything.
>> No. 17664 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 5:46 pm
17664 spacer
There are two genders; tops and bottoms.
>> No. 17665 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 5:48 pm
17665 spacer
>>17664

what about power bottoms and switches?
>> No. 17666 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 5:58 pm
17666 spacer
>>17662
Do people with just one kidney often get murdered because of it?
>> No. 17667 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 6:15 pm
17667 spacer
>>17666

Why do you require human sacrifices to deem someone sufficiently marginalised?
>> No. 17668 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 6:16 pm
17668 spacer
>>17655
Transgenderism, or Gender Dysmorphia, is a physiological condition though. Lots of trannies have this diagnosis, but not the vast majority. I think the push to legitimise trannies who have no intention of living as a woman and instead identifies as trans is retarded. My missus has a cock and she ticks female on forms like these because she can, she has a GRC.
>> No. 17669 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 6:48 pm
17669 spacer
>>17665
If you insist on teaching this pseudo-scientific nonsense to my children I will be forced to remove them from this imageboard for the duration.
>> No. 17670 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 6:55 pm
17670 spacer
>>17667
It helps if you're actually marginalised to claim marginalisation.
>> No. 17671 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 7:05 pm
17671 spacer
>>17666

Well no one else can see my kidneys, If you keep walking around town with your micro penis hanging out for all to see there might be other motives.

People with more obvious variations from the typical get kicked to death and spat on all the time but every time we make mention of the human form we don't make a song and dance of qualify and respecting people with the infinite posible deviations from the norm no matter how unrepresentative they are at the risk of offending them.
>> No. 17672 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 7:06 pm
17672 spacer
>>17670

Trans women earn more than cis women.
>> No. 17673 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 9:03 pm
17673 spacer
>>17668
>My missus has a cock

hahahahahahaha
>> No. 17674 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 9:12 pm
17674 spacer
>>17673

Some blokes have all the luck. Strap on just isn't the same.
>> No. 17675 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 9:17 pm
17675 spacer
>>17668
>she
He's got a cock, he's a bloke. Sorry m7, youse a bumder.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 17676 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 9:59 pm
17676 spacer
>>17675
That's not how it works lad, it's a bit more sophisticated than what you learnt behind the sheds when you were five.
>> No. 17677 Anonymous
31st January 2019
Thursday 11:19 pm
17677 spacer
>>17675
>youse a bumder
Yes, I am.
>> No. 17678 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 9:49 am
17678 spacer
>>17676 Yeah, but everything is more complicated than you first learn. Maths, physics, history, geography, languages, cooking. All are approximations, good-enough-to-start-with, correct enough in most cases to get on with life. In all those fields, it's seemingly acceptable to only pay attention to the edge cases when they're relevant, rather than them dominating the more common cases.
Not so for gender stuff, though. Why fight it?
>> No. 17679 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 10:53 am
17679 spacer
>>17676

Weasel words.

You sound like a vicar when a child confronts them with 'if god is good and all powerful why are there starving and sick children'.
>> No. 17680 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 11:19 am
17680 spacer
>>17679

Could say that about >>17678 too.
>> No. 17681 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 12:28 pm
17681 spacer
I don't mean this post to sound like I'm saying "stop talking about things I don't care about", so I'll put that up front so there's no abiguity.

However, I already had these discussions and realisations about trans issues four or five years ago on different platforms, but now all you middle aged lot like Otherlad and Glinner are arriving late to the party and hammering it out all over again. For me it's like having another discussion about why Jeremy Clarkson got the sack or bringing up the Star Wars prequels and how rubbish they are, although of greater societal import, of course.
>> No. 17682 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 1:34 pm
17682 spacer
>>17681

I think transgender rights have made progress though especially in the last five years or so, and that is something that is worth mentioning. Trans persons have become both more visible and more respected as members of society, at least that is my subjective opinion.


>For me it's like having another discussion about why Jeremy Clarkson got the sack

Nobody can want that.
>> No. 17683 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 1:36 pm
17683 spacer
>>17681
We've discussed this to death before as well, but some tit always brings it up assuming because we aren't discussing it right now and calling them freaks, we never have and need educating.

We had an NHS lad explain how diagnosis works and what hoops people need to jump through before they even get medication, etc, as far back as 2014. We've got a gay lad who had their BF transition and explain what that was like (she hates other trannies, apparently the ones who pass hate the ones who don't) and we've had a lass rage about trans people in women's sport making women feel marginalised because trans people dominate.

We don't really have much more ground to cover on the subject. Even the NHS lad and the gay lad with the hung wife agree that people shouldn't get to self diagnose and that it's a physiological condition which requires treatment, but equally we have at least two lads who had their perspective changed by these accounts because, if I remember right, "Who the fuck would choose this if they had another option?" The answer being, idiots following a trend and legitimate Gender Dysmorphia patients who we largely agreed are fine as long as they identify as women and not trans.
>> No. 17684 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 1:50 pm
17684 spacer
>>17683
So in conclusion, trans people are "idiots following a trend". Discussion is now closed.
>> No. 17685 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 2:07 pm
17685 spacer
>>17682
>Nobody can want that.

IIRC, Clarkson getting the sack was the only time /v/ was active over the past five years.
>> No. 17686 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 2:32 pm
17686 spacer
>>17683

>(she hates other trannies, apparently the ones who pass hate the ones who don't)

I've heard it the other way round. Especially now that teenagers as young as twelve get to take female hormones, you've got a generation of young trans women growing up who are virtually indistinguishable from genetic women as far as their outward appearance in daily life.

And if I am not entirely mistaken, I think there is a kind of vibe in the trans community of older trans women who didn't have the same opportunities for transition when they were young envying young trans kids of today. Because the latter get to avoid male puberty altogether, unlike older trans women who are in their 40s or 50s now, who more often than not only began physical transition when they were well into adulthood and thus had to reverse the effects of male puberty and virilisation of their body, often with somewhat limited success.
>> No. 17688 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 3:09 pm
17688 spacer
>>17686
>often with somewhat limited success

THEY LOOK LIKE A BLOKE IN A WIG. THAT'S WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE. IT SHOULD BE OUTLAWED.
>> No. 17689 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 3:25 pm
17689 spacer
>>17688
I know we link to the Daily Mail all too often, but when did they start linking here?
>> No. 17690 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 3:48 pm
17690 spacer

0q9jvav_afdu.png
176901769017690
>>17688

>THEY LOOK LIKE A BLOKE IN A WIG.

It's still a matter of degree.
>> No. 17691 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 4:12 pm
17691 spacer
>>17689
Is 'stating the obvious' now classed as being Daily Mail?

Middle aged man who transition always look like a bloke in a wig and a dress. It's as clear as day.
>> No. 17692 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 5:10 pm
17692 spacer
>>17685
Excuse me but my Farscape thread was a bloody triumph.
>> No. 17693 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 5:13 pm
17693 spacer
>>17690
BAN THIS SICK FILTH
>> No. 17701 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 11:25 pm
17701 spacer
>>17693

Go on, touch the old chap's rubber tits.

You know you want to.
>> No. 17702 Anonymous
1st February 2019
Friday 11:44 pm
17702 spacer
>>17684
Don't strawman me, you cunt. Some undoubtedly are. A lot of people regret fully transitioning and they are overwhelmingly people who never got a formal diagnosis of Gender Dysmorphia. I've witnessed it twice, first hand, and there are thousands of other accounts which corroborate this.

In my experience one was a man, the other a woman, so both are susceptible. They're actually friends and they both think they should have "jumped through the hoops" the NHS has in place as they would have had to go to intensive psychotherapy and whatever psychological issue was causing the Gender Dysphoria (this is the symptom, not the condition; important distinction) would have neen identified and saved them years of heartache.

What I'm saying is some "trans" people are idiots chasing a trend, you'd have to be incredibly niave to assume high profile trans people in the media doesn't influence impressionable and vulnerable people. However, the people who play by the NHS's rules and get a diagnosis via a multi-discipline case review based on a year of intensive psychological and physiological assessment are not, as that tends to weed out the crazies. At that point, transition is the only thing that alleviates their symptoms and becomes medically necessary.

Now that anyone who is new to .gs and has missed the previous cunt offs has seen this, the topic can be closed.
>> No. 17703 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 12:51 am
17703 spacer
>>17702

>What I'm saying is some "trans" people are idiots chasing a trend, you'd have to be incredibly niave to assume high profile trans people in the media doesn't influence impressionable and vulnerable people.

I'm not sure somebody would actually want to change their gender unless they are indeed unhappy about what they were born as. I don't think there are tourists in transsexuality, if that is what you are implying. I'm not counting drag queens or gender benders here who push the boundaries of gender identity either for laughs or because that is how they channel their feminine side. The question is why do people take on efforts to actually transition into a different gender than the one they were born as.

This has nothing to do with impressionability. You are very likely not going to get a young boy to wear a skirt just because he saw some "cool" trans people on TV. This will without exception only happen if that young boy already has transgender tendencies.

I'm sure you don't necessarily mean it that way, but you need to tread very carefully here, because what you are saying could be misconstrued as suggesting that well-known trans people turn our children trans. And from that it's not a big leap to what some moral and/or religious conservatives are saying about gays turning children gay.

Nobody doubts that you should get proper treatment for gender dysphoria. And the goal of such treatment isn't to have your knob cut off, but to find out what causes your dysphoria, and what is right for you in order to treat it. But again, some conservatives are using the fact that some people in fact do regret transitioning as proof that transsexuality as a medical or psychiatric condition is a figment of the imagination of those godless politically correct liberals. There are even web sites where so called transition regretters become mouthpieces of conservative anti-LGBT propaganda.

I would agree with you that proper thorough evaluation and treatment of gender dysphoria in accordance with NHS standards of care is always the right way to go. But don't dismiss people who for whatever reason don't go that route as "idiots following a trend".
>> No. 17704 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 1:25 am
17704 spacer
>>17703
High profile gay people hasn't increased the amount of gay people, because it's a genetically corrolated phenomenon. It's literally in your DNA. Mental health is far and away more complex than who makes your pee pee hard.

Kids don't have any concept of what is girl clothes and what is boy clothes, we imprint that on them. A boy wearing a dress is, in and of itself, harmless. What is harmful is one or both of the parents reading too much into it when if the kid is trans, it'll already know. It isn't until puberty that Dysphoria as a symptom begins though, so they don't need influenced and if the symptoms don't present they don't need to transition; If they are trans, there will be signs.

High profile trans people, people who identify as trans and just don't live their life in their chosen gender, influence parents. They also ifluence mentally ill people suffering from Gender Dysphoria for unrelated mental health reasons and instead of going to the doctor, they buy hormones online because "No, I have what the women/man on TV has too." That's an issue I'm not going to walk on eggshells over because invariably they never get treatment for what was causing their mental health problems in the first place and start speed running Sonic games and get involved in Twitter activism (I jest, but why are so many speed runners trans?). Every single fucking committee in the land has someone on it advocating for the whims of people with undiagnosed mental health problems because they are the loudest and the people who are quitely living stealth and refuse to acknowledge they were ever anything else are lumped into the same bracket and by defending them we look mental by association. Self diagnosis is damaging trans equality more than it is helping it. If conservatives could meet stealth FTMs and MTFs and talk to them, they would be questioning (like me) if the people who identify as trans even have the same condition.
>> No. 17705 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 4:02 am
17705 spacer
Probably not contributing much of value but I don't think high profile trans people turn people impressionable people without gender dysphoria "trans*", at least not in the traditional MtF/FtM way. Perhaps high profile gender-nonconforming people increase the number of people who consider themselves genderqueer, agender, etc, but surely if anything my impression is that if the high profile of anyone leads impressionable people to the idea of transitioning it's people of the opposite gender and the image of how those people live their lives. If a woman without GD wants to transition as living as a man, it's probably because being a man seems appealing rather than because being a trans* man seems appealing. It's just that you've got to go through being a trans* man to get to living as a man. And then in the social-media age, odds are you're going to broadcast that process as part of your life rather than try to keep it a secret.

I mean my sample size isn't great - some weird thoughts I had as a teenlad (before this was a widespread thing in the public imagination) about the role and perception of women in society versus the perception of men which were alleviated by overthinking how women are shown in movies, and some weirdos on the internet who tend to be furries - but i'm not making a generalised statement here. It's probably a vanishingly small and surprisingly overrepresented percentage. (I can't imagine this thought leads to any practical action. I'm definitely not saying everyone's like that, or that people not like that should be prevented from transitioning just in case. I'm not in any way qualified to speak.)
>> No. 17707 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 8:39 am
17707 spacer
Are we just going around in circles?
>> No. 17708 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 12:19 pm
17708 spacer
>>17704
>(I jest, but why are so many speed runners trans?)
"Why do I only see trans people on the Internet where there is no hierarchy of expectations to fulfill before being rewarded status and exposure"
>> No. 17709 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 12:37 pm
17709 spacer
>>17708
Stop being a passive aggressive coward and explain what the fuck your problem is.
>> No. 17710 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 12:50 pm
17710 spacer
>>17704
Except not every trans person can be stealth, either because they've already got an entire life that it would be preposterous to ask them to chuck away as if they'd been selected for witness protection, or they just don't look that good. And that guff about "high profile gays don't make people gay but transgender people make people trans" is so thin on logic and credibility and I'm flabbergasted you felt confident enough to post it.

>>17709
Ha! Did what he said confuse you so much you just went all "internet tough guy"? Sort yourself out, lad.
>> No. 17711 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 1:14 pm
17711 spacer
>>17704

>High profile trans people, people who identify as trans and just don't live their life in their chosen gender, influence parents. They also ifluence mentally ill people suffering from Gender Dysphoria for unrelated mental health reasons and instead of going to the doctor, they buy hormones online because "No, I have what the women/man on TV has too."


Are you deliberately being thick as pig shit, lad?

First of all, at least here in the UK, I seriously doubt that many people get their hormones on the black market and import them illegally, which is pretty much the only way you will be able to obtain them outside of NHS approved treatment. Customs are also on their toes these days to intercept such shipments from abroad. Secondly, there is a very low threshold for people in this country to begin treatment in accordance with professionally approved NHS standards. Doctor's appointments, counselling as well as hormones and even surgery are almost entirely free of charge to anybody seeking treatment for gender dysphoria. Coupled with an increased openness in society about these issues, I am not sure how exactly somebody in the UK is going to transition today without proper medical and psychological help and assistance, even at a young age. Which then enables medical professionals with a great degree of certainty to tell you as somebody who may only have some sort of mild dysphoria from somebody who will really only be happy after full-on transition and surgery.

Also, gender dysphoria quite clearly describes being unhappy with one's birth gender and wanting to be the opposite gender. For your point to have any logic at all, gender dysphoria would have to be a condition where people would rather not have any gender at all instead of their birth gender, and then miraculously a famous trans person on TV would one day give them the wild idea that hey, maybe they'd rather be a woman.

Your point may have some scant validity in third world countries like Brasil or Thailand, where gender dysphoric kids are often abandoned by their parents or otherwise live in squalid economic conditions and therefore have to score estrogen on the black market with the money they earn turning tricks, without ever getting to see a doctor who would be able to evaluate professionally if that person really wants to be the opposite gender or if other factors are at play. But again, gender dysphoria by and large means not being happy with your gender and at least to some degree wanting to be the opposite gender.

But in general, I really don't know what you are on about here. Are you trying to "teach the controversy" or something?
>> No. 17713 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 2:27 pm
17713 spacer
>>17711
>gender is just a social construct

>changing gender requires a lifetime of dedication, and if not physical alteration the intention to.

Pick one, you can't have both.
>> No. 17714 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 2:49 pm
17714 spacer
>>17713
It can be pretty difficult to change social constructs.
>> No. 17715 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 2:58 pm
17715 spacer
>>17713

While I agree with you that gender simply being a social construct is an idea that has been led ad absurdum by such things as gender studies, I'm not sure that your way of putting it that

>changing gender requires a lifetime of dedication, and if not physical alteration the intention to.

is a description that is fair and respectful to trans persons. This isn't some sport that you become good at after a "lifetime of dedication". There is no Transsexual Premier League. "Denise here started out small just taking weekly estrogen shots, and now look at her, after a trans career going on fifteen years, she's out-transing all the rest of them."

And it has nothing to do with dedication, but with the fact that you are more or less unhappy with your birth gender and would be happier in the opposite gender. You can't honestly call it being "dedicated", instead it is your persistent unhappiness with your gender that will lead you in that direction.

Also,

>if not physical alteration the intention to.

Says who? There are trans people who decide they are happy living as a woman, which they do in everyday life, but keep their male genitals because they feel no need to go that far with it in order to be happy.

Also, if you look at Eddie Izzard, he said he came out trans over 30 years ago, and to this day, apart from wearing tacky old woman clothing lately, seems to feel no need to transition physically.

Lad, I am honestly not sure where you are really coming from with all your nonsense. Have you actually spent time informing yourself about the condition and coming to a fair and unbiased conclusion about it, or are you just willfully parroting right-wing revisionist propaganda?
>> No. 17716 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 3:31 pm
17716 spacer
>>17713
"the police" are a social construct
"poverty" is a social construct
"social construct" doesn't mean "not real"
>> No. 17717 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 3:37 pm
17717 spacer
>>17716

Fuckssake lad, really.

>"the police" are a social construct

Just go on and tell the coppers that on the way to the station when they nick you.
>> No. 17718 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 3:45 pm
17718 spacer
>>17713
Gender dysphoria wouldn't exist without gender.

Imagine if you will that humans are born and not classified according to their genitalia - that what is between your legs makes as much difference to your life as the colour of your eyes. A trans woman, then, would be indistinguishable from a cis man - they would just both be people who happen to have willies. And in not being treated any differently by society as a result, would mean there would be no need for the trans individual to be unhappy with their body.

This is just a thought experiment, and may not even be one hundred percent accurate as there is still a lot about gender we are still exploring, but it's generally where I come from with regards to the matter.
>> No. 17719 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 3:46 pm
17719 spacer
>>17717
You're a moron.
>> No. 17720 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 4:00 pm
17720 spacer
>>17718

You're still insinuating that trans persons transition in order to conform with whay may, or many not exist as social constructs. And that's just nonsense. You are not going to cure somebody of gender dysphoria and their transsexuality by abolishing gender.

Gender dysphoria and transsexuality do not mean you are unhappy with the social construct of the gender that you live in and were born as. It means you are unhappy about the physical and sexual characteristics of your body and that you feel deep within that would like to be a woman instead of a man, or vice versa.

Really, lads, do we really need to discuss over and over again things that have been firmly established?
>> No. 17721 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 4:53 pm
17721 spacer
>>17720

If society didn't distinguish between genders as it does, if you still had people who felt like they had the wrong genitals, it wouldn't be seen the same way, would it? It would just be another flavour of body integrity dysphoria, and nobody encourages anyone to cut off their own arm because they feel like they were born as a one-armed person, do they?

Gender is everything to do with society. I don't think that means we shouldn't support trans people, in fact, the opposite.
>> No. 17722 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 5:51 pm
17722 spacer
>>17721
I don't think we should support trans people. They're a fucking abomination we'd be better off without.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 17723 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 6:02 pm
17723 spacer
>>17722


Any reason for your thinking other than that you're scared of stuff you don't understand?
>> No. 17724 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 6:10 pm
17724 spacer

Elvis-impersonator.jpg
177241772417724
I hate it when people call me Trans Elvis, I really am an Elvis.
>> No. 17725 Anonymous
2nd February 2019
Saturday 11:46 pm
17725 spacer
>>17711
>I seriously doubt that many people get their hormones on the black market and import them illegally
They aren't. You can import them from Canada perfectly legally, you just need to pay a customs charge and I know this happens because I mingle with trans people and the reason they do it is because they don't want to wait a year before the NHS prescribes them as you need to undergo an assessment and live in your chosen gender for a year before they'll even consider giving you hormones.
>> No. 17729 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 5:00 pm
17729 spacer
Can we at least agree that self-diagnosed trannies are mental cases that don't need their delusions enabling?
>> No. 17730 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 5:04 pm
17730 spacer
>>17729
No.
>> No. 17731 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 5:06 pm
17731 spacer
>>17730
Nobody asked you. Just everyone else.
>> No. 17732 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 6:24 pm
17732 spacer
>>17729
Not all of them are, just some of them and it is unfortunately those people that encourage others to circumvent medical diagnosis because they're loud and proud about it and claim Doctors are biased gatekeepers.

It's not even a trans specific issue, entitlement without merit is endemic in Gen Z and being asked to justify yourself is tantamount to bigotry. It's exactly the same as the kind of anti-intellectualism and science hating which goes on in far-right circles.

I'd be willing to agree self-diagnosed trans people are irrational about medical diagnosis and unwilling to accept they might have Gender Dysphoria for another reason that isn't being transgender, but only if we can agree to stop calling them trannies and that legit trans people deserve to be supported and ultimately left alone to live their lives.
>> No. 17733 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 6:41 pm
17733 spacer
>>17732
>entitlement without merit is endemic in Gen Z
I don't think it's unreasonable for them to expect the same things previous generations received without merit.
>> No. 17734 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 6:43 pm
17734 spacer
>>17732
I had a headache the other day, so I took some ibuprofen I bought without prescription.

Because I'm an irrational, anti-intellectual science-hater, I didn't bother to see a doctor about the cause, which could have been any number of conditions.
>> No. 17735 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 6:44 pm
17735 spacer
>>17734

Did you just compare popping an ibuprofen with years of gender reassignment drugs and surgery?
>> No. 17736 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 6:51 pm
17736 spacer
>>17734
You're not making a diagnosis. You're treating a symptom, using the means available to you without prescription. Hopefully you asked the pharmacist's advice and followed their instructions otherwise your stomach will be fucked.
>> No. 17737 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 6:55 pm
17737 spacer
Can you just give it a rest? I've no truck in this fight, but it's really, really, really tedious.
>> No. 17738 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 6:58 pm
17738 spacer
>>17734
Why didn't you by Diclofenac or Celebrex? Quit while your behind, m8.
>> No. 17739 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 6:59 pm
17739 spacer
>>17737
We're making fun of a guy for comparing gender reassignment to a headache now. Keep up.
>> No. 17740 Anonymous
3rd February 2019
Sunday 7:00 pm
17740 spacer
>>17735
Yes. Come at me bro.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 17741 Anonymous
4th February 2019
Monday 10:34 am
17741 spacer
>>17740

Looks like somebody did.
>> No. 17993 Anonymous
9th February 2019
Saturday 10:24 pm
17993 spacer
>A leading British surgeon has called for transgender women to be entitled to womb transplants so they can have their own babies.

>Late late year doctors in Brazil celebrated the birth of the world’s first baby born using a womb transplanted from a deceased donor to a woman. The healthy girl, weighing 5.6lbs, is a major breakthrough in fertility medicine. It comes just four years after the world’s first womb transplant baby from a live donor was born in Sweden in 2014.

>Surgeon Christopher Inglefield, founder of the London Transgender Clinic , says a successful uterus implant into a trans-female is achievable today.

>Mr Inglefield, a specialist in gender confirmation surgery as well as facial and body feminisation, said: “This pioneering birth is extremely important for any trans female who would like to carry her own child. Because once the medical community accept this as a treatment for cis-women with uterine infertility, such as congenital absence of a womb, then it would be illegal to deny a trans-female who has completed her transition. There are clearly anatomical boundaries when it comes to trans women but these are problems that I believe can be surmounted and the transplant into a trans-female is essentially identical to that of a cis-female.”

>The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) confirm there are no regulations in place to prevent a trans woman who has received a uterus transplant from having IVF treatment.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/transgender-women-should-entitled-womb-13972102

I guess logical progression is MtF trannies getting womb implants and FtM trannies having fully functioning testes attached.
>> No. 17999 Anonymous
9th February 2019
Saturday 11:12 pm
17999 spacer
>>17993

>Because once the medical community accept this as a treatment for cis-women with uterine infertility, such as congenital absence of a womb, then it would be illegal to deny a trans-female who has completed her transition.


"Illegal" is quite a strong word here. A transgender woman does not morph into a genetic woman sans uterus as the result of transition. There would be a great many things to consider here, and a lot of unknowns would have to be found out by sheer experiment on the real thing, which could endanger the fetus's wellbeing, and lead to disfigurement and miscarriage. It's one thing to implant a uterus into a genetic woman who was born without one, but the abdominal cavity of a post-op male to female transsexual looks quite a bit different from that of a woman without a uterus.

Best to start off with a batch of embryos that didn't ask to be born, I would reckon.
>> No. 18000 Anonymous
10th February 2019
Sunday 1:53 am
18000 spacer
>>17999
In ten years it will be the norm. Welcome to the future.
>> No. 18001 Anonymous
10th February 2019
Sunday 1:33 pm
18001 spacer
>>18000

I'm all for transgender rights, but I think this is just kind of a step too far.
>> No. 18349 Anonymous
24th February 2019
Sunday 9:57 pm
18349 spacer
I've ended up down a bit of a rabbit hole after reading that the chief executive of Stonewall has resigned due to her alleged militant trans agenda and this article caught my eye...

Modern trans politics — and Stonewall’s trans policies — are centred on the concept of ‘gender identity’. Gender identity is the belief that we all have an innate sense of our own gender — that being a man or a woman is somehow deeply felt and part of our irreducible core. Trans people, according to this doctrine, have a gender identity which does not match their sex — a male who claims to have a female gender identity is a woman, and vice versa.

But there is a problem with this understanding of gender and many people (including me) reject it. To understand why, it’s helpful to remember that when we talk about gender we’re simply talking about sex stereotypes. Conventional binary gender divides us unto men and women, based on our biological sex. The categories ‘man’ and ‘woman’ are each attached to a series of social expectations, with ‘man’ hierarchically atop ‘woman’. ‘Masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ are the names we give to each collection of stereotypical characteristics. Men are aggressive, women submissive. Men build, women nurture. Men dress one way, women another. Gender’s strangulating tentacles get everywhere, restricting lives and twisting relationships. Gender, as it exists today, is not a good thing.

‘Gender identity’ takes these sex stereotypes and turns them inwards. Rather than seeing gender as something external to us, influencing and shaping us against our will, a gender identity is, its proponents argue, within us. What this means in practice is this: I’m a man not because of my biological sex, but because I identify with the sex stereotypes associated with being a man. A woman is a woman not because of her sex but because she identifies with the sex stereotypes associated with ‘woman’. It’s not hard to see why so many people (and not only feminists) refute the concept of gender identity as sexist and regressive.

Of course, those who believe in the concept of gender identity have a right to their view and to pursue a politics which arises from it. The problem with Stonewall’s trans policies is that they do not respect the freedom to reject belief in gender identity. In fact, modern transgenderism — as practiced by Stonewall — demands we all understand ourselves in line with trans ideology and pursues legislative change predicated on the existence of gender identity.

The root of Stonewall’s failure over the last five years is its endorsement of gender identity and its attempt to coerce society into accepting it. In order to see clearly the line that Stonewall has crossed, compare its definitions of homophobia and transphobia:

Homophobia is:

The fear or dislike of someone, based on prejudice or negative attitudes, beliefs or views about lesbian, gay or bi people.

Transphobia is:

The fear or dislike of someone based on the fact they are trans, including the denial/refusal to accept their gender identity.

Stonewall has written and promoted a definition of ‘transphobia’ which categorises anybody who resists belief in an idea as transphobic. Feminists who wish to uphold their understanding of gender as an oppressive, hierarchical system of sex stereotyping are labelled transphobic. At a stroke, every second wave feminist is a bigot — as Germaine Greer and Jenni Murray have both discovered. This is not a progressive or even a constructive politics.

Stonewall’s new found enthusiasm for gender is all-encompassing. The Stonewall glossary redefines homosexuality as:

…someone who has an emotional romantic and/or sexual orientation towards someone of the same gender.

Did you see what happened there? Same-sex attraction has become same-gender attraction.

This might seem academic, but take a moment to reflect on what it means in the context of Stonewall’s affirmation of gender identity. Stonewall is asserting that lesbians are attracted to anyone with a female gender identity, whether that person is biologically male or female.

This turns gay and lesbian desire into transphobia. I’m a gay man — I’m attracted to male bodies — not people performing male gender roles. And, yes, that means I like male genitalia. (I really like it). Trans activists argue that my sex-focused homosexuality is transphobic. I’ve seen trans activists compare non-trans inclusive gay desire to racism and describe gay sexuality as ‘genital hang-ups’.

If you’re a reasonable person who is at all new to this you’ll probably be thinking, ‘hang on — that all sounds a bit unlikely.’ Yes, it does. But it’s true. Many lesbians have found themselves under pressure to accept male-bodied trans women as sexual partners. If you doubt me, Google ‘cotton ceiling’ and prepare for a trip down the rabbit hole of gender madness…

I do not know whether the LGBT alliance can be saved. More and more people — especially lesbians — are giving up on it. But I do know that if it is to be saved, Stonewall’s role will be vital. The issues which complicate the relationships between lesbian and gay people and trans people need to be examined and discussed, free from accusations of transphobia. Stonewall’s trans inclusivity cannot be at the cost of delegitimising lesbian and gay sexualities or ignoring the safety and specific needs of women and girls. An LGBT alliance which demands ideological submission is not worth preserving.


https://medium.com/@JonnnyBest/whats-gone-wrong-with-stonewall-1be30cffba9f

I always thought TERFs were a load of stuck in the mud moonbats, but if their hang up is about this completely unscientific and absurd notion of gender identity then they've got a point.
>> No. 18350 Anonymous
24th February 2019
Sunday 10:12 pm
18350 spacer
>>18349

Anyone trying to force someone to hook up with someone they're not attracted to is obviously bonkers. The idea that someone might think they should do being used to undermine trans rights however is equally bonkers and smacks of the whole "I was born after the 80s so obviously I'm a feminist despite my otherwise utterly regressive opinions" thing.
>> No. 18351 Anonymous
24th February 2019
Sunday 11:41 pm
18351 spacer
>>18349

>I always thought TERFs were a load of stuck in the mud moonbats, but if their hang up is about this completely unscientific and absurd notion of gender identity then they've got a point.

If they're genuinely just concerned about the issue of gender identity, then they've picked the worst possible way to fight it.

There are a million different ways to fight against societal expectations of gender. There are any number of things that push us towards stereotypes and societal expectations of gender. Why choose to make your main enemy trans* people? Why choose to attack one of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged groups in society, instead of any number of other targets?

When I think about how the gender binary affects the people in my life, I worry about the vapid narcissists that my nieces watch on YouTube. I worry about the people who tell my nephews to "grow up and act like a man" whenever they express a real emotion. I worry about my female cousins who are getting breast implants and having their eyebrows tattooed on, I worry about my male cousins who are going on steroids. The very last thing I worry about is that some poor fucker who feels repulsed by their own genitalia might be reinforcing the patriarchal gender binary.

Frankly, I think that a bunch of old-school radical feminists have chosen this hill to die on, in the full knowledge that their views are massively offensive to most liberal-minded people. I think they see a generation of young feminists who don't see men as the enemy, but want to work with them to create a fairer society. I think they've built their identity around being valiant warriors, but they've run out of battles to fight; they've chosen this battle not because it's truly meaningful to them, but because it's the last thing they can think of that is a) vaguely compatible with a radical feminist agenda and b) still has the power to shock.

In 1967, Valerie Solanas caused a sensation by publishing the SCUM Manifesto, which argued that men are the root of all evil and the only logical response was to eradicate the male race. Throughout the 1970s, radical lesbians argued that all heterosexual sex was rape, that a woman couldn't truly call herself emancipated unless she was a lesbian and that the only path out of patriarchy was to separate entirely from male society and create women-only communities. Today, that kind of rhetoric is the punchline to a joke involving dungarees, Doc Martens and angry lesbians; an entire generation of young people wouldn't even get that joke.

Trans-exclusionary radical feminism isn't an ideology, it's the last gasp of a dying culture. It's a desperate attempt to be noticed by a society that has simply lost interest in what they have to say. It's the kid who gets their tongue split or their eyeballs tattooed, because that's the only thing left that has any chance of genuinely shocking their parents.
>> No. 18352 Anonymous
24th February 2019
Sunday 11:54 pm
18352 spacer
>>18349
>reading that the chief executive of Stonewall has resigned due to her alleged militant trans agenda
Literally the only place you will read this is The Times, which for some reason of late has been trying to drive an anti-trans moral panic. To them it seems everything is about trans people.
>> No. 18357 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 6:49 am
18357 spacer
>>18350>>18351
Thanks, lads. If we ignore the whole crazy feminist side of thing and whether they've got ulterior motives, is gender identity objectively a crock of shite?
>> No. 18358 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 7:47 am
18358 spacer
>>18357
"Objectively"?
>> No. 18359 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 7:50 am
18359 spacer
>>18358
Yes, objectively. What is the scientific consensus on gender identity?
>> No. 18361 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 1:43 pm
18361 spacer
>>18357
It's a social construct. It's both a crock of shite in that it's not really forced by any physical laws, and utterly real in the sense that it's a big part of our society and social lives which changes over time. A lot of people seem to think a social construct is just a fancy way of saying something isn't real. It's not that. It's like debt, the law, or countries. Take away human society and those things disappear, but that doesn't mean they aren't real. They're something we made up and now enforce.
(but let's not start an argument about social construction please, if anyone disagrees just accept that's a contextual definition for the purpose of illustrating this post.)
>> No. 18362 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 2:07 pm
18362 spacer
>>18361

>It's a social construct.

But it's a social construct, if we accept that it is, that the overwhelming majority have no problem considering valid and never quite question because it works for them. What we've got nowadays is a very vocal minority, who are very well entitled to their opinion, but who attempt to push their monirity views onto the majority.

I really do not care what you "identify" as in terms of gender. Whatever floats your boat. Suit yourself, I have no problem with it. What do I take issue with, however, is the fact that gender diversity has turned into a dogma noawadays, according to which you are almost not allowed anymore to be an ordinary, average, mainstream man, or even a woman of that description.

The ideas about gender that are being put forward, in that respect, cannot deny their roots in hardcore feminism, which (still) seeks to destroy patriarchy by declaring masculinity an invalid concept. Or declaring it toxic, or whatever words and labels are hip that week.
>> No. 18363 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 2:17 pm
18363 spacer
>>18362
Calm down, Milo.
>> No. 18368 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 5:13 pm
18368 spacer
>>18362

>according to which you are almost not allowed anymore to be an ordinary, average, mainstream man, or even a woman of that description.

I know what you mean m8. Just the other week I got an £80 fine from the Social Justice Police for wearing gender-conforming clothing in a safe space. I thought I might get away with it because I had a rainbow flag badge on my lapel, but they spotted that my blazer buttons left-over-right and stung me with a Notice of phlegmatic Behaviour.

I might contest the fine at the Court of Public Opinion, but I've got previous - I did community service last year for a whole string of microaggressions, which the Nonjudgemental Adjudicator of Wokeness won't look kindly upon. I can't afford to push my luck and get called out again, because I'm already close to being cancelled. My dad got cancelled a couple of years ago and he hasn't been seen since, but I'm not sure if that makes me more or less privileged.
>> No. 18369 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 5:19 pm
18369 spacer
>>18368

>Just the other week I got an £80 fine from the Social Justice Police for wearing gender-conforming clothing in a safe space.

You got off light, no doubt. They could have deplatformed you altogether.
>> No. 18372 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 5:56 pm
18372 spacer
>>18362

>What we've got nowadays is a very vocal minority, who are very fucking annoying and that's about the end of it.

Fixed that for you mate. Let's be honest, nobody is forcing all this nonsense on you are they? It can grate but you don't have to lose your rage over it.

Stuff like "toxic masculinity" and what have you is a perfectly valid concept when you look at it, but I think it's pretty fair to say it's pretty much just a back-bending way of absorbing all that "but what about (example of male-exclusive sexism)" counter opinion, and re-dressing it in a context of "yeah we already thought about that, that's your fault too, and we already thought of the solution for you" in order to maintain the feminist perspective as the most important one.

It's essentially the equivalent of how when you argued with someone in primary school and you tried to trick them out by switching sides to argue their point and getting them to accidentally disagree with themselves.
>> No. 18373 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 6:02 pm
18373 spacer
>>18372
>toxic masculinity

Is there an actual consensus on what toxic masculinity is? Perhaps I read too much Grauniad, but the definition of it seems to vary wildly depending on the point someone is trying to make.
>> No. 18375 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 6:17 pm
18375 spacer
>>18372

>Stuff like "toxic masculinity" and what have you is a perfectly valid concept when you look at it


I think it's mainly bullshit, front to back.

But oh, don't mind me.
>> No. 18376 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 7:49 pm
18376 spacer
>>18373
>>18375

It's the argument that a lot of the negative things affecting men is mainly because masculinity itself is defined by traits that are harmful to men's wellbeing. Men are tough, don't show emotion, all that stuff, and men are disparaged if they don't live up to that idea of manliness.

Which is fair enough, you can see how there might be some merit to de-stigmatising men showing their feelings and suchlike. it's just funny how we don't call the things feminists moan about holding women back toxic femininity. To me, that betrays the bias of most people who use that kind of terminology; that femininity is good and masculinity is bad.

The reassuring part is that most people in real life are sane enough to realise that men and women are equally capable of being cunts, for varying different reasons, but cunts nonetheless. We only hear so much about this kind of shit nowadays because of the twitter hate mob.
>> No. 18377 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 8:28 pm
18377 spacer
>>18373
I always thought it was a subset of traits considered "masculine" that make you a cunt. i.e. going fishing with your dad is typical masculinity - but trying to start fights to prove you're hard is toxic masculinity. that would generally seem to fit with the list of examples given here: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Toxic_masculinity (though it doesn't actually give a definition of masculinity itself.)
>> No. 18378 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 8:45 pm
18378 spacer
>>18376
>it's just funny how we don't call the things feminists moan about holding women back toxic femininity

Not really, a perfectly serviceable term for this already exists in "misogyny", which is perpetuated by women in the same way men chastising little boys for crying is perpetuating toxic masculinity.
>> No. 18379 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 8:59 pm
18379 spacer
>>18376
>Men are tough, don't show emotion, all that stuff, and men are disparaged if they don't live up to that idea of manliness.

Isn't that just stoicism? I mean I've got my bones to pick with the philosophy but I've not heard any coherent argument about that out of people using 'toxic masculinity'. To me it seems like a stereotype of intimidating rugby lads projected by people who hate fun and can't just say "those people are dickheads" because that would be all too rational.
>> No. 18380 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 9:05 pm
18380 spacer
>>18376

I think what is also being missed is that no matter how you look at it, life is one big competition. You compete for jobs, careers, money, status, influence, appreciation, the opposite sex's interest and affection, you name it. And in every competitive environment, people get left behind. The unfortunate thing about competition is that not everybody is competitive enough to be a winnner. People who show too much weakness don't get a piece of the pie and are left to live off the crumbs.

It would be all too easy to just call it "toxic masculinity", but what you are really branding as undesirable is competition itself. Although I still maintain that toxic masculinity as a concept is a big, steaming crock of bullshit, women really are no better. Anybody who has ever worked together with a bunch of women in close proximity can attest to the fact that that is an environment that can be many times more toxic than some make male competition out to be.

What's so disingenuous about the strand of feminism that has brought about the non-concept of toxic masculinity is that it's really just yet another way that these feminists manage to channel their hatred against men in general. As I said earlier, it's another permutation of the old feminist dogma that patriarchy must be destroyed. This time around, they are going about it by declaring men as a whole to be latently toxic, and masculinity as an entirely arbitrary concept. While at the same time not even remotely acknowledging that there might be such a thing as toxic femininity. Worse even, I've read about some feminists who say fierce competition among women is just another facet of toxic masculinity.


>>18377

>but trying to start fights to prove you're hard is toxic masculinity

To a certain extent, this has always been accepted boyish behaviour. Schoolboy fights in the school playground were always frowned upon even when I was a younglad in the 80s and 90s, at least if they got out of hand, but in the end, the implicit understanding was always that it is just something that boys do to establish hierarchies and order among themselves. Nowadays, a lad who even so much as shoves another lad lightly can very likely have the entire school and social workers on his arse. Typical boyish behaviour is declared toxic, and modern-day school environments are leaving boys behind because boys are effectively expected to act like girls who will just sit still and pay attention. Feminine social skills and social behaviour are not only fostered but declared the desired standard. But this is just not something that boys are genetically programmed to do at that age.

And I'm not talking about the antisocial 20something lout who gets off his tits and then starts picking random fights. That is a whole different problem because it simply isn't accepted adult behaviour, and rightly so and with good reason, as you should expect adults to have learned enough self restraint to not smash another person's head in.
>> No. 18381 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 9:05 pm
18381 spacer
>>18378

That's not what misogyny means though. It certainly isn't an equivalent term to toxic masculinity.

Part of the problem is not the concept itself, but how loaded equivalent terms like misandry are and how you'll instantly be assumed to be an MGTOW incel Reddit shitposter if you use it instead. You have to accept the feminist dogma, use their terminology, or else you'll be dismissed entirely because you're clearly a shitlord.

Something something George Orwell.
>> No. 18382 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 9:23 pm
18382 spacer
>>18380

Fundamentally, in order to understand their perspective, you need to be the sort of person who looks at the sociological principle of nature vs nurture and comfortably accept that nurture is the only part that matters. You need to view people as blank slates upon whom only received knowledge is imprinted- Completely ignore hormones, puberty, instincts, all of it.

From that viewpoint, expecting "boys to act like girls" simply isn't the case- You're merely expecting children to behave well. You are striving for an ideal society in which there simply is no difference between men and women beyond the dangly bits on each of your body. It follows logically that boys are only being left behind because of things like toxic masculinity- Social constructs that only exist because we keep perpetuating them and are slowly phasing out. Once the symmetrical, grey, amorphous ideal of unisex morality and behaviour has become the norm, boys and girls will perform the same. They will effectively be the same.

It's hard to argue from the position that you are entirely comfortable with distinct genders being a thing, that you believe they are a very real and biological fact of life, and all the implications that may or not come with that, because it's essentially the same thing as arguing with a zealous Christian about why you're an atheist.

Personally, I am all in favour of helping women achieve equitable pay, respectful treatment and everything. It's not a popular opinion, but I feel the modern feminist worldview is misguided, and sometimes actively unhelpful in that aim- It is more often interested in propagating a moral ideology than achieving meaningful equality.
>> No. 18383 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 9:24 pm
18383 spacer
>>18381

>You have to accept the feminist dogma, use their terminology,

The first step towards negating it should therefore be to both refuse to use their terminology, and to show how absurd that terminology is in the first place.

"You're an incel shitlord because you are using words not approved by feminists, and only incel shitlords do that" is not a valid argument. Ideally, your vocabulary should be more eloquent than that of actual incels, if just to avoid being called one. Well, and also because incels are complete fucking idiots. But that's beside the point. The real issue is, if somebody assumes they can both define the desired terminology and denunciate those who don't use it, then they are effectively attempting to control and manipulate any discourse in their favour, without the possibility of actual open debate that might even rightly debunk certain terminology as invalid.

Example: to many feminists, women can very well be sexist. But sexist behaviour in women is held by them to be sexist against other women, meaning that sexist women as it were only make themselves accessories to sexism originating from men and directed against women. The idea that women can be genuinely sexist against men is rejected by these feminists as non-existent. So if you then argue with them over female sexism, it will lead nowhere because their implied meaning, which you are expected to adhere to as well, will always be that female sexism cannot be directed against men, but only against other women and is merely a result of male sexism.
>> No. 18384 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 9:30 pm
18384 spacer
>>18383
From my experience, a lot of them don't even understand their own terminology. At uni I went to a presentation by the feminist society, who started with a long diatribe criticising the patriarchy. Someone in the audience asked what the patriarchy was, a reasonable question as they'd just listened to someone criticising it for 10 minutes. The feminist society presenter looked fucking baffled, and ended up describing it as "a secret group of white straight men who control everything behind the scenes".
>> No. 18385 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 9:35 pm
18385 spacer
>>18383

That was, indeed, largely my point. That is how the discourse is controlled.

But I mean that's how women always win arguments, innit. Twisting it and deflecting everything until you just can't be arsed any more. Typical.
>> No. 18386 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 9:42 pm
18386 spacer
For people who think feminists and social justice warriors are a load of whingers, Christ you lot love to whinge about them don't you.
>> No. 18387 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 9:46 pm
18387 spacer
>>18384

Good on you. A good way to throw people off their game, and really not just feminists ranting on about patriarchy but anybody, is to throw them a curve ball by asking them definitions of some very basic things. Like, things that are both central to their argument that they are on about the whole time, and seldom really explained in depth by providing a definition.

Also, a lot of social science at uni works that way. They are true masters of throwing around fancy abstract vocabulary, but when you quiz them on it, they all too often draw a blank. I am an economist and economics is often lumped together with social sciences, but the difference is that in economics, you learn hard facts and definitions that you then have to take exams on where you are quizzed about them. In social sciences as such, you have much fewer actual exams where that kind of knowlege is tested.
>> No. 18388 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 9:52 pm
18388 spacer
>>18386
Careful, lad. People get their knickers in a twist when you point out the unlicensed trawlers of the alt-right on this site.
>> No. 18390 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 10:15 pm
18390 spacer
>>18386

That's another one ticked of my .gs bingo this week.

People get annoyed by annoying things, more at 11.
>> No. 18391 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 10:17 pm
18391 spacer
>>18390

>People get annoyed by annoying things


You're right.

And it annoys me to no end.
>> No. 18392 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 11:19 pm
18392 spacer
>>18387
>you learn hard facts and definitions that you then have to take exams on where you are quizzed about them
That's the easy part, the hard part is when you have to explain why the things you've learned don't align with the real world. *Ba Dum Tss*
>> No. 18393 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 11:22 pm
18393 spacer
>>18386
>Christ you lot love to whinge

Who could possibly say no to a good moan? Where would I even begin. For starters we can talk about old Mr Sunshine strutting across the sky like he owns the place. I mean it's February for fucks sake, give me freezing rain and a bit of thunder to shut that bright gobshite out. World's gone mad.
>> No. 18394 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 11:36 pm
18394 spacer
>>18392

> the hard part is when you have to explain why the things you've learned don't align with the real world.


In most economics exams, you have to do that as well. There will be questions as to what the standard criticism of a particular model or definition is.
>> No. 18395 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 11:38 pm
18395 spacer
>>18393

>For starters we can talk about old Mr Sunshine strutting across the sky like he owns the place.

For us here in the Heliosphere, it is actually pretty much astronomically correct to say that he does own the place.
>> No. 18396 Anonymous
25th February 2019
Monday 11:41 pm
18396 spacer
>>18381

Indeed the point of the terms misogyny and toxic masculinity is to shift the burden of blame onto men through the very language it self. I'd go as far as to call it a deliberate attempt to engineer the paradigm of any debate through newspeak.

Talking about for example grown women choosing to read fashion magazines that lower their self esteem is really no one's fault but their own if it makes them feel bad and they keep doing it. I'd call that toxic femininity.

But if you call it misogyny it becomes the fault of the advertisers and publishers promoting those values rather than the fault of the reader for choosing to buy it each week

I've heard it argued that feminism seeks to remove womens responsibility for their own actions. And I think their is a truth to that. As long as feminism is built up from social Marxist theory it will by definition treat women as incapable of being empowered and having agency. It is inherent in the thought pattern that they are always oppressed.
>> No. 18397 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 7:15 am
18397 spacer
>>18396
Alright Sargon.
>> No. 18398 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 10:21 am
18398 spacer
>>18397

Okay Tahani, we get it you can name drop famous people. The question is, what point if any does it make, and what does it do to advance discussion.

Sage because of the completely derailed nature of this comment.
>> No. 18399 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 11:27 am
18399 spacer
>>18396

>Talking about for example grown women choosing to read fashion magazines that lower their self esteem is really no one's fault but their own if it makes them feel bad and they keep doing it.

In days of old, staff at women's magazines used to be predominantly male. And although it borders on conspiracy theory, you could say that maybe the men who created those magazines for women used it as a way of showing women their place in society, i.e. as obedient wives and mothers and domestic goddesses, who only needed to know about such things as cooking a decent meal for their husband or how to mend their children's clothes. But at least since the earliest beginnings of 1970s feminism, women's magazines have been quite firmly in the hands of female journalists. And quite rightly so, because who better to write about things that interest women than women themselves.

But therein now lies the problem. If we take modern women's magazines to mirror what women want, then that means a great many of women indeed still mostly care about clothing, fashion, makeup, beauty, home decoration, relationships, parenting advice, and horoscopes. Modern-day feminism has long given women the opportunity to pursue quite different goals and interests in life, and yet, women's magazines that follow the mentioned formula still seem to be going as strong as ever. So then when women now complain about pressure to conform to ideals and images of physical attractiveness that women's magazines still propagate, this is something that you cannot pin on patriarchy or masculinity, toxic or not, anymore. Many highly educated, liberated women at the helm of those women's magazines would have real power to take a lot of the pressure off women, and yet, they choose not to, and just regurgitate the same old beauty and fashion advice over and over.


>I've heard it argued that feminism seeks to remove womens responsibility for their own actions

I think they tend to twist it as it suits them in a given situation. When it comes to patriarchy, women are portrayed as powerless, defenceless little flowers that need protection from anything and everybody. And then at the other end when it comes to female empowerment, they make women out to be actually much more capable of fending for themselves and going their own way in life than men.

I think one fundamental problem that feminism has today is that most of its battles have been fought and won. Women are completely equal before the law in most civilised countries, certainly in the UK, women have the same rights as men, and you can argue that in some areas, they actually have more support than men. A movement which has always defined itself as an entity fighting for women's rights and against male oppression therefore now struggles to overcome its identity crisis. And a small, yet very vocal minority of feminists now set their sights on the old enemy all over again, which is masculinity itself. Just to stay relevant and to not lose its purpose. And it has nothing more to do with equal rights for women, which has never ceased to be a laudable cause, but it has everything to do with hating men as such.
>> No. 18400 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 12:13 pm
18400 spacer
>>18399
>So then when women now complain about pressure to conform to ideals and images of physical attractiveness that women's magazines still propagate, this is something that you cannot pin on patriarchy or masculinity, toxic or not, anymore.
This isn't really true. If women are expected to conform to a social ideal - which they are, as are men - then even if you give women control of the magazine, it's still going to tell women how to conform to that ideal because it's in their interest even if they don't like it. This isn't a question about individuals, but about social norms. The source of those social norms is not primarily from women's interest magazines, so the minor role they play in propagating them is irrelevant, while the marketplace pressures them to continue to provide that advice because women are anxious to have it due to outside pressure.

In general you seem to want to individualise (or otherwise lower the scope to a single magazine, company, etc.) this rather than look at society as a whole, which is an ineffective way of analysing the situation. I'm not even a raving feminist, I'm drawing most of this from inference from the way nearly every other social norm works. There's definitely an element of cynical social climbing at play as usually happens with something that can be moralised about, but that doesn't invalidate the analysis itself. Indeed I'd say the big problem internet feminism has is that it, too, individualises rather than going for serious structural analysis. There's a lot of levying the charge of promoting patriarchy against powerless twitter weirdos rather than looking again at the gigantic monster that is modern society, looking at all the competing and conflicting pressures at play and figuring out a way to cut out the bad parts.
>> No. 18401 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 12:23 pm
18401 spacer
>>18400

>The source of those social norms is not primarily from women's interest magazines, so the minor role they play in propagating them is irrelevant

Clearly, they aren't the source. But their role also isn't irrelevant. Editors of women's magazines would still be able to play a key role in putting a stop to this kind of pressure. It's no use complaining about society as a whole, when you don't provide ideas and solutions concerning the part that certain institutions of society would be able to play in eliminating the pressure to conform to beauty ideals. The things women's magazines write about are read by large audiences, and therefore those magazines would be in a unique position to contribute to changing society for the better. And yet, they choose not to.

You can't just shrug your shoulders at this kind of chicken and egg problem and say that it's the fault of society at large. And even if it is, as I said, the key to change is to target specific areas of society where you can hope to break the cycle.
>> No. 18403 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 1:53 pm
18403 spacer
>>18400

>In general you seem to want to individualise (or otherwise lower the scope to a single magazine, company, etc.) this rather than look at society as a whole, which is an ineffective way of analysing the situation.
not them but (>>18396)
I do believe that, but why would it be ineffectual? If I have an insecurity about anything at all it is much easier for me to adapt to treat it as a non issue rather than try change the world. I've always treated the politicising of the personal with caution as I think it becomes an exercise in narcissism and externalising responsibility.

And let’s be honest there are no strict mechanism for power of these things it is only the individual themselves caring that makes them relevant, if your validation comes from within such forces stop having power over you. No one cares what Madam Curie looked like they admire her anyway. It is only people own vanity and lack of self-assurance that gives any of these things relevance.
>> No. 18404 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 2:42 pm
18404 spacer
>>18401
Editors can do very little. If you believe women's magazines as a whole have power, you need a mechanism to ensure all women's magazines play by the rules and not publish that content. You don't have to change literally everything, but you have to go above and beyond the individual. That could be through a government regulation, or some kind of publishing arrangement or private regulator, or a temporary conspiracy amongst all the editors - but it can't just be one editor or magazine team playing holier-than-thou with individual morality, because all that's going to do is cause a drop-off in sales for their magazine as market forces do their thing and the others move to conform to one another.
>> No. 18405 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 2:50 pm
18405 spacer
>>18404

Correct me if you think I am mischaracterized your statement. But isn't that an argument that the reason women's magazines are like that is because the audience wants them to be like that. If women did not want them to be like that they would not buy them. So the responsibility at the moment is with the individual who buys them not with the editor.

Would not banning or regulating would be a declaration that women don't know what is best for them and need someone to decide on their behalf.
>> No. 18406 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 2:50 pm
18406 spacer
>>18403

> If I have an insecurity about anything at all it is much easier for me to adapt to treat it as a non issue rather than try change the world.

That is true. In the end, a large part of overcoming unrealistic images of physical beauty is to condition people to ignore them. And that starts with yourself, with your own thinking. So the focus must not be on banning idealised depictions of physical attractiveness, but on recipients of these messages being able to put them in a healthy kind of perspective.

Kind of a bit like (adult consensual) pornography, really. There is no point in banning it, and it has so far withstood every attempt that has ever been to ban or outlaw it. And naturally in today's world, an abundance of it is freely accessible online for anybody. So there is consensus now that youngsters in particular need to be educated not to avoid pornography altogether, which few will from a certain age onward, but to be able to put in perspective what they see and understand that it is a distorted image of human sexuality as such. And if we take that kind of approach seriously, as we seem to, then there is no reason that the same approach could not be applied to depictions of physical beauty.
>> No. 18407 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 3:07 pm
18407 spacer
>>18405

> But isn't that an argument that the reason women's magazines are like that is because the audience wants them to be like that. If women did not want them to be like that they would not buy them.

It's a bit similar to some feminists getting in a huff about the fact that girls' toys tend to be in pink or pastel colours. To the point that they have even started their own protest movement called Pink Stinks. And of course it comes with the usual rhethoric that pink toys are used to condition girls from when they are toddlers to conform to society's norms of femininity and womanhood. The problem with that approach is that a great majority of girls just really seem to be naturally drawn to pastel colours like pink, peach, aqua, or mint. Even from the youngest age of 12 to 24 months when they can't possibly have been conditioned yet to fall into traditional gender roles, they just really seem to have a fondness for those colours. And this fondness then seems to persist throughout their childhood and youth.

So when feminists then say that "pink stinks", they are placing poorly corroborated ideology above tendencies and preferences that a lot of female young children just really seem to have naturally.

One of my friends has a little girl, I think she's about three or four years old now, and he told me that she gets really upset when it's nice weather outside and she isn't allowed to wear a dress, often because my friend and his wife might think that she'll catch a cold. Even at that tender age, she absolutely loves dresses - and Barbie dolls - and says she wants to be "as pretty as mommy" when she grows up. Now I ask you, is this the result of patriarchy claiming another oppressed young victim, or could it be that she is just simply a "girly girl" who likes doing girly things including wearing dresses?
>> No. 18408 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 3:13 pm
18408 spacer
>>18407

Ah yes, the theory that of all cultures throughout history, ours just happened to be the one where children just do exactly what's natural. Did you know the Japanese used to force their young boys to wear kimonos? How disgusting of them to force such backwards ways of dressing when those boys would have been far happier if they were allowed to wear nothing but blue and camouflage to play army men in the woods as is natural.
>> No. 18409 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 3:21 pm
18409 spacer
>>18407
>The problem with that approach is <insert pseudoscience here>
How very original of you, m7.
>> No. 18410 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 3:25 pm
18410 spacer
>>18409

More original than your post just now.
>> No. 18411 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 3:43 pm
18411 spacer
>>18407
>the problem with that approach is that a great majority of girls just really seem to be naturally drawn to pastel colours like pink, peach, aqua, or mint
As recently as 100 years ago in Britain, Pink was considered a bold, attention-drawing, boy's colour while blue was considered more placid and feminine. It's only really since the 1950s that Pink = Female, Blue = Male was solidified as the norm.
>she wants to be "as pretty as mommy" when she grows up. Now I ask you, is this the result of patriarchy claiming another oppressed young victim, or could it be that she is just simply a "girly girl" who likes doing girly things including wearing dresses?
Your own post contains a possible answer if you'd think about it: she wants to be like mommy. The question is, if mommy went about with short hair and army fatigues, what would she want to wear then?
>> No. 18412 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 4:15 pm
18412 spacer
>>18410
n2 m7
>> No. 18413 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 4:39 pm
18413 spacer
>>18411
This is sort of but not quite true. The trend was to dress children in white, but young girls in blue. Pink was considered a bold colour, but was commonly worn by both sides. One of the big factors behind the movement to reclaim pink is that the move in the 1950s for women to wear pink was led by strong female figures. Jayne Mansfield famously declared that she wanted everything in pink, and she was no wallflower.
>> No. 18414 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 4:50 pm
18414 spacer
>>18413

So what you are saying is women made the choice to wear pink as a form of empowerment, but now they shoulldn't because it turns out men tricked them into liking it as a form of oppression.
>> No. 18415 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 5:29 pm
18415 spacer
>>18414

>So what you are saying is women made the choice to wear pink as a form of empowerment, but now they shoulldn't because it turns out men tricked them into liking it as a form of oppression.

Not him, but in a nutshell, that would appear to be his argument.

So then the consequence would be that girls must not choose whatever colours symbolise femininity in the culture that they grow up in, because if they do, that culture will declare them to be girls.

Compelling logic. Unassailable.
>> No. 18416 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 5:47 pm
18416 spacer
>>18414
Whatever it is you're on, can you hook me up?
>> No. 18418 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 6:16 pm
18418 spacer
>>18400

>There's a lot of levying the charge of promoting patriarchy against powerless twitter weirdos rather than looking again at the gigantic monster that is modern society, looking at all the competing and conflicting pressures at play and figuring out a way to cut out the bad parts.

This is the argument I've been making for a good few years now. Weirdly enough I've still never managed to win any friends with it; because again, for a lot of these people it doesn't actually matter who's right or wrong. It doesn't even matter whether you broadly support their goals. It's more like an indoctrination cult than genuine ethical belief system, and they're not happy unless you conform.

But I digress.

The way I see it is that the problems are not because of the white cisgendered patriarchal bogeyman, but fundamentally the system of free market, neo-liberal capitalism. Of course, I would say that as a dyed in the wool red-blooded Northern socialist, but in my eyes I think it would do far more to tackle the underlying, fundamental economic inequalities between the rich and the poor than it will ever do to sit there moaning in the opinion columns about how we don't have enough female CEOs or how there aren't enough female protagonists in videogames or whatever shite they think matters this week.

I feel like most feminists are under the same spell of manufactured consent as your most hardcore conservatives and right wingers- So long as nobody recognises the real enemy, which is economic inequality and class divide, we will keep bickering about gender equality, race equality, and all these issues that can not be solved. And that's exactly what the bourgeoisie oppressor really wants.
>> No. 18419 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 7:09 pm
18419 spacer
>>18418

The intersectionalists know the rhetoric well enough of the left yet they choose to ignore the greatest defining factor of power, wealth. The answer is simple; This is not empowerment for the masses but for the elite, the most telling factor is the obsession with CEOs a group so niche and powerful anyway that the idea I should weep for the female CEO that she isn't paid as much as the male should be laughably insulting, and yet this is the obsession. I dont know how everyone became brainwashed to take up their mantle, yet here we are.
>> No. 18420 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 8:03 pm
18420 spacer
>>18419

A female CEO who earns £10 million a year while a man in a similar position gets £15m is hardly below the poverty line. It's all a mater of perspective, as I think we are agreeing upon here.

Also, we have to ask ourselves whether it is really such a fundamental mark of equality of society that there exists such a thing as gender parity in boardrooms. What is true enough is that women should have the same opportunities as men. A woman who wants to assume a leadership role within a company should get to do so if she is qualified and puts in enough hard work to get there. Just as any man. But in the end, when you look at surveys, being at the top of a company or corporation just isn't a career goal that is as widespread among women as it is among men. A lot of women say they will be just as happy with a career that either doesn't demand quite as much of them, or where they have more time to spend with their family and all that kind of thing. So in essence the problem then isn't that there are too few women in top executive positions, but that it just isn't what as many women want for themselves as men tend to do.

The Norwegians were among the first countries to mandate gender parity in top executive positions, but the problem is that there just aren't enough qualified and ambitious women to fill all those positions, at least not up to actual parity. So the Norwegians have now coined the term "golden skirts", which means that women get to go to the top simply because otherwise there just wouldn't be enough women to fill the required quota.

But that's a problem you see on a lot of social political issues. The idea of equal opportunity gets confused with the idea of equal results. And having gender parity in boardrooms is not the same as equal opportunity. You've got equal results, but that doesn't mean everything's peachy. And if I remember correctly, the actual economic performance as a company or corporation has proved to not really be significantly better just because there are more women at the helm. At least there is no strong correlation indicating that companies with boardroom gender parity are doing better than others.
>> No. 18421 Anonymous
26th February 2019
Tuesday 11:09 pm
18421 spacer
>>18420

You've made three paragraphs trying to discredit an idea that really should be simpler to tackle to that. After all, when was the last time you heard of an executive, male or female, who wasn't a sleazy weasel bastard who back-stabbed and arse-licked their way to the top? These are the same people who drive companies bankrupt and run off with the pensions, it's hardly a laudable ideal in life.

Modern feminism isn't about equality at all. It's not even about feminism. It's just another tool of division and manufactured consent.
>> No. 18422 Anonymous
27th February 2019
Wednesday 12:58 am
18422 spacer
>>18421
Yes! And the solution to this problem is to continue discouraging women from corporate careers whilst doing nothing to tackle corporate dominance in society. That'll show em.
>> No. 18423 Anonymous
27th February 2019
Wednesday 10:11 am
18423 spacer
>>18422

>And the solution to this problem is to continue discouraging women from corporate careers whilst doing nothing to tackle corporate dominance in society.

Are you deliberately being thick?
>> No. 18815 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 7:59 pm
18815 spacer
Can someone please explain to me how Ace Ventura is transphobic? I was watching it the other day and I don't see what the issue is. Is it because the villain is trans?
>> No. 18816 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 8:36 pm
18816 spacer
>>18815

>> No. 18817 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 8:48 pm
18817 spacer
>>18816
So it's transphobic because of this scene:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4j8m8L8B7pM

I always assumed that the main joke is that everyone is spitting and trying to clean their mouths because they've all made out with her. Is it really transphobic for a man to feel grossed out upon realising they've kissed a transperson rather than a woman?
>> No. 18818 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 8:59 pm
18818 spacer
>>18817
>Is it really transphobic for a man to feel grossed out upon realising they've kissed a transperson rather than a woman?
Erm, yes, obviously.
>> No. 18819 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 9:02 pm
18819 spacer
>>18817
Haha this is weird, this was on TV the other day and there's twice it's referenced. To be fair I did think it's a bit over the top by todays standard.
>> No. 18820 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 9:07 pm
18820 spacer
>>18818
Why? People cannot help who they are and aren't attracted to. I'm far from racist, but I generally find white women more attractive than black women. I'm bisexual and I'd be quite happy if it turned out a woman had a massive cock between her legs but I can understand why that would not be a pleasant surprise for everyone.
>> No. 18821 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 9:13 pm
18821 spacer
>>18820

It implies that there's something repulsive or dirty about trans* women. Imagine a scene where a woman is "revealed" to be half-Asian and everyone starts spitting and retching; such a scene would obviously be horrifyingly racist. We're all entitled to our preferences, but being repelled by an entire category of person veers dangerously close to bigotry. "I prefer white women" is a bit iffy, but "I would never date a black woman under any circumstances, even if she was beautiful and charming" is fairly obviously racist.
>> No. 18822 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 9:16 pm
18822 spacer
>>18820

People can't help who they're attracted to, but what you can help is filming an extended scene in which a crowd of people vomit violently and profusely at the thought of kissing a trans person. Surely you can see the difference. They're taking the piss out of women with cocks, which is not the same as merely highlighting the sexual preferences of the characters in the scene.
>> No. 18824 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 9:51 pm
18824 spacer
>>18821
Childish 'because it is yucky' arguments you want people to be secretly making aside.

Imagine being blindfolded by your lover only to have a stand in appear and perform the rest of the act. Is it rape if you found out later and you were disgusted? after all you seemed quite happy to go along with it at the time.

Concealing being trans from someone gives them a sense they were violated because they were deceived. Whether you like it or not people don't see them the same as a cis person. And it is one thing to identify someone as transphobic because they are provocatively target and being hostile to them. It is another when you violate that persons personal trust by withholding information from them because you know it would change their decision and claim they are just bigoted. It is a lie by omission and a violation of their personal space and autonomy.
>> No. 18825 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 10:05 pm
18825 spacer
>>18821
It's because they thought they'd kissed a woman when actually they'd kissed a bloke. Remember that episode of Red Dwarf where Rimmer uses Kochansky's hologram to seduce Lister away from his chef's exam? And Lister exclaims 'But it's you in there! Ugh!'?

Well, it's like that. Because under the thin, cosmetic veneer of female resemblance, there lies a biological male. And to be presented with that fact during or after intimacy would be an unpleasant surprise for most heterosexual men.
>> No. 18826 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 10:08 pm
18826 spacer
>>18824
>Childish 'because it is yucky' arguments you want people to be secretly making aside.
But the scene is saying exactly that, explicitly and not secretly.
>> No. 18827 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 10:19 pm
18827 spacer
>>18825
Now that's being transphobic and homophobic.
>> No. 18828 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 10:22 pm
18828 spacer
>>18824>>18825

You do still understand that while it's fine to acknowledge or portray that a straight man would not be happy being tranny tricked, that acknowledging it by having thirty odd people (and a dolphin) be physically ill at the prospect of it is offensive, right?
>> No. 18829 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 10:23 pm
18829 spacer
>>18827
It's homophobic for a heterosexual man to find the prospect of kissing a man unpleasant?
>> No. 18830 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 10:27 pm
18830 spacer
>>18825

I think that's more to do with it being Rimmer than it being a bloke.
>> No. 18831 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 10:29 pm
18831 spacer
>>18828
It's an over-the-top gesture certainly, but it's an Ace Ventura film. Subtlety is not the watchword here. I wouldn't feel offended if some lesbian comedy featured a scene where they all vomited because they realised they'd all kissed a bloke, I'd just think I was watching a crap film. Which is what Ace Ventura is anyway.
>> No. 18833 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 10:39 pm
18833 spacer
>>18829
Why shouldn't it be neutral rather than unpleasant or pleasant? Would you be repulsed by kissing a rock?
>> No. 18834 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 10:51 pm
18834 spacer
>>18833
Kissing a human being you don't find attractive is unpleasant for presumably neurological reasons that are beyond my expertise. If Rachel Riley blindfolded you and snogged you, only to inform you afterwards that Fat Bastard from Austin Powers had administered the kiss, I'd expect a heterosexual man's reaction to be one of disgust, not neutrality. And for reasons beyond the act of deception itself. I wasn't aware we'd reached a point where we are held accountable for our instinctive emotions.
>> No. 18835 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 10:55 pm
18835 spacer
>>18834

I think you doth protest too much, mate. Get out the closet, it's 2019.
>> No. 18836 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 11:02 pm
18836 spacer
>>18834
>Kissing a human being you don't find attractive is unpleasant
Do you find your mother attractive? Your kids?
>Rachel Riley ... Fat Bastard from Austin Powers
Now there's a reasonable comparison.
The whole "being deceived into kissing someone with a penis" thing sort of goes out the window when you bring up the fact that you're okay with kissing someone who's attractive to you. You'd only be kissing them because they were attractive to you. If you have a problem with people wearing make-up then that applies to nigh all women.
You wouldn't be acting the same if you found out they were like a Barbie doll down there, and you'd be hurt if you took someone home who then vomited at the sight of your genitals.
>for presumably neurological reasons that are beyond my expertise
Seems pretty obvious that revulsion over neutrality in this context is something learned. In your case learned in part through watching Red Dwarf as a child.
>> No. 18837 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 11:37 pm
18837 spacer
>>18836
I was very obviously referring to passionate kissing, not friendly or familial kissing. You know this and are deliberately trying to create diversionary lines of argument. Are you a child, or perhaps a barrister?

I'll concede the Riley/Fat Bastard comparison isn't particularly apt since one of them is designed specifically to be repulsive. Replace him with Christian Bale. It would still be unfair to criticise a completely heterosexual man for finding the situation unpleasant.

My biological prerogative is to seek intimacy with the opposite sex. Being deceived into intimacy by someone that is superficially female, but biologically male, would instill negative emotions in me, as it would in most men. If you want to assume this is entirely a learned behaviour then by all means do, but know you're wrong on the Red Dwarf front. Even 9 year-old me, blissfully ignorant of sexual matters, knew the joke was that nasty old Rimmer was in there, not just any bloke. Though I doubt Lister would have reacted much differently if Peterson had been pulling the same schtick.
>> No. 18838 Anonymous
1st April 2019
Monday 11:40 pm
18838 spacer
>>18837

>Being deceived into intimacy by someone that is superficially female, but biologically male, would instill negative emotions in me

How much vomit do you reckon you'd produce?
>> No. 18839 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 6:54 am
18839 spacer
>>18838
Are any of them actually vomiting? It looks more like spitting to clear their mouths, you know, after realising there's been tranny tongue inside it.
>> No. 18841 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 12:40 pm
18841 spacer
>>18836

>The whole "being deceived into kissing someone with a penis" thing sort of goes out the window when you bring up the fact that you're okay with kissing someone who's attractive to you. You'd only be kissing them because they were attractive to you.


I would really love to see how you'd react in the actual situation of finding out during an intense passionate snog that the woman you are doing the snogging with has a big juicy cock and two hairy dangly testicles between her (or his) legs.

The world is full of soap box utopians like you. Most of them, when put to the test, won't practice what they preach.
>> No. 18842 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 12:49 pm
18842 spacer
>>18841

I'd probably question why they didn't tell me beforehand and be a bit annoyed by that, but I'd still suck their cock. Get over yourself, if a woman's attractive to you she shouldn't suddenly become unattractive just because she has a juicy cock.
>> No. 18843 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 1:04 pm
18843 spacer
>>18841

I bet you would but you'd still lie to anyone who asked why and call it "research".
>> No. 18844 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 1:42 pm
18844 spacer
>>18842
>Get over yourself

I can't believe that we have become so philosophically divorced from nature that the idea that 'I am only sexually attracted to people who I can procreating with' is being treated as conceited.
>> No. 18846 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 1:53 pm
18846 spacer

1bbcc0c4822a8c35cef2fb61a6b89668.jpg
188461884618846
>>18844

It's more that apparently you can find someone incredibly attractive right up until you find out they have different bits. It seems odd to me, attractiveness is attractiveness. I'm not into men but I'd fuck a dude if he looked enough like a woman, because that's what I find attractive.

And if you think that only being attracted to people you can procreate with is something we're only just moving away from in these modern times, don't forget the ancient greeks used to love it up em. You're only limiting yourself.

Not to mention 'someone I can procreate with' is a silly line to draw for attractiveness - would you feel disgust if you got off with a woman and then found out she'd had a hysterectomy? Or is it just the knob you don't like - in which case, what about post op trans?
>> No. 18847 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 2:27 pm
18847 spacer
>>18844

Nature is shit m8. It's full of parasitic diseases and the mobile reception is terrible.

Also there are loads of gay animals. Also we're the only species that can voluntarily become infertile, because sex is great but babies are boring.
>> No. 18848 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 2:32 pm
18848 spacer
>>18847
>Also we're the only species that can voluntarily become infertile
I bet there are loads of animals that can bite their own nuts off if they put their mind to it.
>> No. 18849 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 2:44 pm
18849 spacer
>>18846

>Not to mention 'someone I can procreate with' is a silly line to draw for attractiveness - would you feel disgust if you got off with a woman and then found out she'd had a hysterectomy

Yes. It seriously undermined a relationship when it turned out my ex was infertile. I wasn't disgusted with her, because I didn't consider there to be a deception on her part, but it definitely affected my attraction towards her. When your needs stretch further than immediate gratification these things affect you.

>don't forget the ancient greeks used to love it up

And who exactly did they love it up with? Are you sure you want to make that argument they have registers for people who do that kind of thing now.
>> No. 18850 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 2:51 pm
18850 spacer
>>18846
>It's more that apparently you can find someone incredibly attractive right up until you find out they have different bits. It seems odd to me, attractiveness is attractiveness.

It's really quite simple.

I like a nice face, tits, good arse, and vagina.

After a few pints the first three can perhaps be overlooked, but I don't find cocks attracive so the last one is always an absolute dealbreaker.

I'm amazed you can't understand this.
>> No. 18851 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 3:07 pm
18851 spacer
>>18850

>I'm amazed you can't understand this.

Did you miss the part of my post where I asked a question which addressed this, or did you just ignore it out of convenience?

If you like fannies, how do you feel about post op trannies?
>> No. 18852 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 3:09 pm
18852 spacer
>>18849

>When your needs stretch further than immediate gratification these things affect you.

Typical breeder. Stop having kids, we don't need nearly as many as we have, you're killing the planet. Suck a cock, save a tree.
>> No. 18853 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 3:51 pm
18853 spacer
>>18851
>Did you miss the part of my post where I asked a question which addressed this, or did you just ignore it out of convenience?
It was scrolling past on /*/ so I only saw the last five posts in the thread. I didn't fancy reading the previous 400 odd ones.

Still doesn't make your statement any less silly.

>If you like fannies, how do you feel about post op trannies?
Unenthusiastic.
>> No. 18854 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 4:22 pm
18854 spacer
>>18853

>It was scrolling past on /*/ so I only saw the last five posts in the thread

Eh? It was in the same post you replied to.
>> No. 18855 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 4:36 pm
18855 spacer
>>18852

Eh? We already have a sub replacement fertility rate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-replacement_fertility. It is only that old bastard refuse to die that you haven't noticed.

If you like trees so much maybe you should be sucking them off instead.
>> No. 18856 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 4:52 pm
18856 spacer
>>18855

>We already have a sub replacement fertility rate

Which is good because there's too many of us.
>> No. 18857 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 5:18 pm
18857 spacer
>>18856
Don't let us stop you -1'ing the population.
>> No. 18858 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 5:39 pm
18858 spacer
>>18842

>I'd probably question why they didn't tell me beforehand and be a bit annoyed by that, but I'd still suck their cock. Get over yourself, if a woman's attractive to you she shouldn't suddenly become unattractive just because she has a juicy cock.

I can't fucking believe that all of a sudden I have to defend myself for expecting a woman that I have a snog with to have a vagina, and then being turned off upon discovering that she has the opposite set of genitals between her legs.

Precisely one of the reasons why I prefer women, actual women, to men is that I can not see myself intimately touching another person's penis.

And just to make sure, please let's not get into an argument over what constitutes an "actual" woman. I call it the way I see it.
>> No. 18859 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 5:55 pm
18859 spacer
>>18858

It's odd that you're so angry about it.

I still don't understand why a penis is what you draw the line at in an attractive woman. What if your missus wore a strap on?
>> No. 18861 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 6:07 pm
18861 spacer
>>18858
>I call it the way I see it.
Call a spade a spade and all that?
>> No. 18862 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 6:10 pm
18862 spacer
>>18859

>I still don't understand why a penis is what you draw the line at in an attractive woman

You're kind of accusing me of intolerance here, but you don't seem to tolerate my view point that I don't want to be intimate with a woman, as it were, who has a penis.

Jesus Christ, lad. I'm old but not that old. I grew up as a weelad with images of gender benders like Boy George or Pete Bums, and one of my old teachers had a full sex change a few years after I left that school. So it's not that the concept itself is foreign to me or arouses any sort of disgust in me. All I am saying is, I don't find penises sexually attractive, I can't see myself handling another person's penis, even if it's on a transsexual woman who looks improbably feminine.

So why, all of a sudden, does this make me look bad? If you go outside and ask 50 men in the street, very probably some 40 to 45 men will give you near enough the same answer.

Get your heads out of the clouds, you daft Millennials. We may be the older generation, if really not by much, but if it's now unacceptable to expect a woman that you will have sex with to have a vagina between her legs, then I can't say I sympathise with your lot. Not in that respect anyway.
>> No. 18863 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 6:11 pm
18863 spacer
>>18861
It's such a weird racist term.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iZZg0CayB0
>> No. 18864 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 6:12 pm
18864 spacer
>>18859
>I still don't understand why a penis is what you draw the line at in an attractive woman.

What's .gs policy on trolling?
>> No. 18865 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 6:26 pm
18865 spacer
>>18862

>You're kind of accusing me of intolerance here

I'm really not. I'm trying to understand something I don't, I said as much, didn't I?

>So it's not that the concept itself is foreign to me or arouses any sort of disgust in me

Then you've missed the point of the entire fucking conversation, haven't you? This was supposed to be an argument about why Ace Ventura was or wasn't offensive. I don't really care if you don't like cock or not, I thought we were on about being disgusted to the point of gagging if you got off with a pretty tranny.

>Get your heads out of the clouds, you daft Millennials

I'm probably older than you. Plus, if what I've seen in Thailand is accurate, the older lads love a bit of ladycock.
>> No. 18866 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 6:27 pm
18866 spacer
>>18864

It's fine as long as it's funny to at least two of us.
>> No. 18867 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 6:29 pm
18867 spacer
>>18863

It's a term I've had trouble internalising as offensive, as I'd never heard it growing up and it just sounds so ridiculous. I understand it's highly offensive and wouldn't ever use it, but for some reason it doesn't make me go "oh dear, don't say that" like most other slurs would. I suppose it's just because it sounds so odd.


>> No. 18868 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 6:41 pm
18868 spacer
>>18867
I don't think I could ever use it because it just sounds so poncey. Apparently it originates from the phrase "black as the ace of spades" and has only been used as a racial pejorative for the past hundred years or so.
>> No. 18869 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 7:03 pm
18869 spacer
>>18868
It's quite obscure outside America. By contrast, we've been calling spades spades for around 500 years, and even then that was because someone got confused between the ancient Greek over "digging a hole".
>> No. 18870 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 7:12 pm
18870 spacer
>>18868

>Apparently it originates from the phrase "black as the ace of spades" and has only been used as a racial pejorative for the past hundred years or so.


That one was actually new to me.

Plus, you can start censoring language any way you please any time an idiom or turn of phrase uses words that are racist under really somewhat entirely different circumstances.

What about sayings like "the pot calling the kettle black" or things like "black humour".

I'm all for keeping language non-racist in casual everyday life, believe me, but there is a limit.
>> No. 18871 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 7:29 pm
18871 spacer
>>18870
What about "niggardly"?
>> No. 18872 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 7:31 pm
18872 spacer
>>18870

>What about sayings like "the pot calling the kettle black" or things like "black humour".

Neither of those phrases turned into a pejorative term for black people. If we had instead started calling black people "kettles" then we'd be on about that instead of spades.

I don't think anyone in their right might is suggesting that using the word 'spade' to mean, well, a spade, is anything other than fine. Apart from that one lad up there, but I think he was taking the piss.
>> No. 18873 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 7:33 pm
18873 spacer
>>18871

I get the impression anyone who uses that word is either 97, or trying to be clever by 'getting away' with using a word that sounds offensive. Either way, I don't think it has much of a place in modern English, in much the same way it always sounds weird when Americans say 'coon' to refer to racoons.
>> No. 18874 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 7:46 pm
18874 spacer
Niggardly just makes me think about The Economist when they received a number of complaints from Americans for using the word in an article during the mid-nineties.
>> No. 18875 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 7:55 pm
18875 spacer
>>18872

>If we had instead started calling black people "kettles" then we'd be on about that instead of spades.

Let's be careful not to start it then. You know how people get.

> in much the same way it always sounds weird when Americans say 'coon' to refer to racoons.

"Coonskin hat" is still used as a word though stateside. And nobody seems to construe connotations along the lines of Nazi lamp shades.
>> No. 18876 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 8:20 pm
18876 spacer
>>18875

I don't think coon was/is used much in the US as a racial slur, though I could be wrong. Those lads love a bit of racism.
>> No. 18877 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 8:31 pm
18877 spacer
>>18876
It probably seems more prominent than it actually is thanks to South Park.
>> No. 18878 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 8:37 pm
18878 spacer
>>18877

I know it's very common to use it to mean racoon, and probably most people aren't saying it to have a sly dig at the blacks.

They also call harvest mites "chiggers" which I could never say without feeling like I'd committed a crime.
>> No. 18879 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 9:04 pm
18879 spacer
>>18876

Coon still sees some use as a slur, but it has kind of been waning.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7L9io-b9Uew

>>18878
>chiggers

I think nowadays it's more common to call someone a rice nigger. Like other denominations of non-white folk, such as prairie, sand, or ice nigger.

All of them of course hugely racist, although you can't help smirking at some people's inventiveness with language.
>> No. 18880 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 9:08 pm
18880 spacer
>>18879
I think I was about 13 the first time I saw the term sand nigger, during the invasion of Afghanistan. It blew my mind a little about how ridiculous it seemed, as something like rag/towelhead would have sufficed.
>> No. 18881 Anonymous
2nd April 2019
Tuesday 9:14 pm
18881 spacer
>>18880

There's even the term water nigger for pacific islanders now.
>> No. 18882 Anonymous
3rd April 2019
Wednesday 12:06 am
18882 spacer
>>18875

Let's be careful not to start it then. You know how people get.

Why are you being vague and saying people, when you obviously mean those kettles. Let's call a spade a spade.
>> No. 18883 Anonymous
3rd April 2019
Wednesday 1:14 am
18883 spacer
>>18882

>those kettles

just begs to be made a word filter for something.
>> No. 18884 Anonymous
3rd April 2019
Wednesday 7:06 am
18884 spacer
>>18882

I'll call you a queen of spades, m8
>> No. 18885 Anonymous
3rd April 2019
Wednesday 8:07 am
18885 spacer
>>18884

Pot calling the kettle a spade m8.
>> No. 18886 Anonymous
3rd April 2019
Wednesday 7:20 pm
18886 spacer
>>18885

Different kettle of fish, lad.
>> No. 18887 Anonymous
3rd April 2019
Wednesday 7:36 pm
18887 spacer
>>18886
>Fish.

You are one sick fuck.
>> No. 18888 Anonymous
3rd April 2019
Wednesday 7:46 pm
18888 spacer
>>18887

I take it you are not a fishperson.
>> No. 18908 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 7:47 am
18908 spacer

11971392-6896091-image-a-67_1554648358714.jpg
189081890818908
>A hospital has been forced to apologise to a transgender woman who visited a ward dressed as Mrs Claus at Christmas after the nurse mistook her for a man and exclaimed 'erggh' when corrected.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6896091/Hospital-apologises-transgender-woman-dressed-Mrs-Claus-mistaken-man.html

If you didn't know any better you'd have thought it was Young Kenny from Phoenix Nights in fancy dress. If you have to apologise for mistaking someone who looks like a man for a man then the world has gone bonkers.
>> No. 18909 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 7:51 am
18909 spacer
>>18908

>If you have to apologise for mistaking someone who looks like a man for a man

They're probably more needing to apologise for saying "erggh" in response, you blinkered pillock.
>> No. 18910 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 8:00 am
18910 spacer
>>18909
Nobody actually says 'erggh' in real life conversation and noises like that can be highly subjective; one person's 'erggh' can be another person's 'ahh' or 'ohh'.
>> No. 18911 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 8:20 am
18911 spacer
>>18910

Sure.
>> No. 18912 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 10:57 am
18912 spacer
>>18910

hmm. 🤔
>> No. 18913 Anonymous
8th April 2019
Monday 10:59 am
18913 spacer

>> No. 19688 Anonymous
16th July 2019
Tuesday 8:08 pm
19688 spacer
The first transgender man to give birth and seek to be called the child’s father has lost a high court case to protect his privacy despite warning that he and his child could be victimised and bullied as a result.

Freddy McConnell, 32, a Guardian multimedia journalist who transitioned from female to male before giving birth in 2018, can now be named as the first person to give birth who wants to be registered as the child’s father. McConnell had been living as a male for several years, including taking testosterone from the age of 25 and undergoing chest reshaping surgery in Florida, before he sought to get pregnant, which required him to stop taking testosterone.

Prior to attending a fertility clinic he applied for a gender recognition certificate, which was granted before he gave birth. This meant he was legally male when his child was born. But when he went to register the birth and insisted he should be registered as the father, the registrar said he could only be registered as the child’s mother.

McConnell sought a judicial review in the family division of the high court of that decision and during the case, which has yet to conclude, his identity and that of his child were protected by an anonymity order. However, media organisations requested that order was lifted, arguing that McConnell had been cooperating with a documentary about the conception, pregnancy and birth of his child, using his real name, and that he had been interviewed about his experiences in the Guardian.

The judgment on whether he should be allowed to be called the child’s father is expected later this week.


https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/16/transgender-man-who-gave-birth-loses-high-court-privacy-case-fred-mcconnell

Should someone who is legally male when they give birth be classed as the mother or father?
>> No. 19690 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 9:25 am
19690 spacer
>>19688

Mother purely to avoid confusion in medical terms. Call them the father every other day of the week, but if they're ever in a hospital or doctor's or anything biology takes precedent.

It can cause more oversight than you might first imagine considering that not all medical staff have access to full medical records. If they don't know someone is trans there are bound to be fuck ups.
>> No. 19691 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 11:59 am
19691 spacer
>>19690

What a strange game we are playing politically with the concept of truth. When the objective reality is considered a potential taboo.


>> No. 19692 Anonymous
17th July 2019
Wednesday 12:16 pm
19692 spacer
>>19688
>a Guardian multimedia journalist
It would be, wouldn't it?
>> No. 20462 Anonymous
18th October 2019
Friday 7:42 pm
20462 spacer
Model, 25, who became Britain's youngest transgender person at 15 claims she's a victim of transphobia after pornographer refused to have sex with her because she has a penis

A transgender woman says she is a victim of 'transphobic' discrimination after being snubbed for a job as a female porn star - because she still has a penis.

Ria Cooper, 25, who became Britain's youngest trans person when she transitioned 10 years ago, had decided to embark on a career in porn when a photographer messaged her asking if she wanted to have sex with him for a film. But when the photographer heard Ria still had a penis he refused to work with her, bluntly proclaiming he couldn't do so because she 'has a cock.'

Ria has hit out at the 'transphobic behaviour' and says she's being unfairly discriminated against in her pursuit of a modelling career. Ria, from Hull, East Yorkshire, has reported the comments to Humberside Police, which is investigating the incident as a hate crime. Ria has described the comments as 'discriminatory' and 'appalling', comparing the abuse to that of a racist.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7588769/Transgender-woman-claims-discrimination-snubbed-porn-having-penis.html
>> No. 20463 Anonymous
18th October 2019
Friday 9:33 pm
20463 Makeup is literally crushed rocks and minerals
papercraft.png
204632046320463
Is it really that difficult to suspend disbelief and simply say hello instead of hello sir/madam? It's not asking to know 2+2=5, rather simply to play a game like any other social happening such as 'fine thanks, you?'.

and on the other hand is it so difficult to allow minor slip ups and confusions for people who don't really have a frame of reference when dealing with such novelty?

fuck, maybe the propaganda is getting to me.
>> No. 20464 Anonymous
18th October 2019
Friday 10:26 pm
20464 spacer
I have seen various posts of acrobatites who profess to believe that if a man gets off with a girl and then finds out she's got a cock between her legs, he's got to sleep with her anyway or it's transphobic. Is this a real thing? It's hard to imagine the mental contortions required to make that make sense in the context of ultra-sensitive consent seekers. If someone decides during sex, at any point and for any reason, that they want to stop, that's the end of that... right?
>> No. 20465 Anonymous
18th October 2019
Friday 10:37 pm
20465 spacer
None of this weird shit has permeated my social circles. I pray it never will, bunch of weird fucks.
>> No. 20466 Anonymous
18th October 2019
Friday 10:51 pm
20466 spacer
>>20464

It depends on the oppression modifier.

Trans women get a +8 to oppression while an ideal straight white male has no modifier. When you're comparing consent you have to add up the individual oppression modifiers for each participant to see who has the right to say no. If a less oppressed individual refuses to engage in sexual behaviour with a more oppressed individual then the less oppressed individual is prima facie guilty of some form of abuse, whether that be straight up sexual abuse or racist sexual abuse or in the named example, trans sexual abuse.

You were doing good with the definition of consent but you just haven't kept up to date with this really important real life stuff. You can find a full list and description of oppression modifiers at lgbtqqia.com/mornington-crescent
>> No. 20467 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 12:58 pm
20467 spacer
>>20466
I don't even know if you're serious or not.
Mirth anyway.
>> No. 20468 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 6:04 pm
20468 spacer
>>20464
It's more likely that the man will beat her to death and then be found not guilty.
>> No. 20469 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 9:09 pm
20469 spacer
>>20464
It's all very simple. Only the consent of the woman is particularly important and cock women are still women.
>> No. 20470 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 9:16 pm
20470 spacer
>>20468
>her
It's got a cock, it's a "him".
>> No. 20471 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 9:53 pm
20471 spacer
>>20469

I think the lad was talking legally rather than colloquially in which case all consent should theoretically be equal. If you happen to have an example of a UK court ruling in which male consent was regarded as less relevant than female consent I'd be glad to see it.
>> No. 20472 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 10:33 pm
20472 spacer
>>20471

>If you happen to have an example of a UK court ruling in which male consent was regarded as less relevant than female consent I'd be glad to see it.

Not directly what you were asking for, but in UK law, by definition, only a man can commit rape. So I'd think that says a lot.
>> No. 20473 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 10:39 pm
20473 spacer
>>20472

Can you elaborate please?
>> No. 20474 Anonymous
19th October 2019
Saturday 11:43 pm
20474 spacer
>>20473

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/1

Here's the verbatim definition of rape in the UK.
>> No. 20475 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 12:10 am
20475 spacer
>>20474

I accept that what you have posted is one definition of rape. I do not know enough about the law to exclude the possibility that other definitions of rape may exist. Can you please elaborate?
>> No. 20476 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 12:22 am
20476 spacer
>>20475

That is the singular definition of the word 'rape' in UK law. A woman cannot legally rape anyone, merely sexually assault them. Though a woman might be prosecuted just as harshly for a violent sex crime, it will never be treated or recorded as 'rape' and the automatically harsher sentencing involved.

That's not necessarily proof that male consent is given lower priority in our society or our courts, but this seems like a good indicator of that possibility to me.
>> No. 20477 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 12:30 am
20477 spacer
>>20476

You're right if you're correct but I find it hard to believe that digital or object insertion is not defined as rape in UK law.

Rape certainly sounds harsher than violent sexual assault despite the equivalent action of say anally raping a man with a dildo being the same as rape with a penis.

Regarding consent please be aware that our conversation has developed beyond its original constraints regarding consent so you don't need to tie everything back to the aspect of consent.
>> No. 20478 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 1:27 am
20478 spacer

REAL_MEN_ESC_panel-final-2.jpg
204782047820478

>> No. 20479 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 1:47 am
20479 spacer
>>20478

I always found this bullshit strange. Men who get raped are 99 times out of 100 broken. We're useless creatures consigned to nothing more than existing and maybe being useful on occasion if the circumstances present themselves.

It's not wrong to accept that society, if defined by normal means requires normal men. People who are not broken, broken people by definition act differently from their peers. If you have too many broken people in a group that group ceases to function as a group. Including the broken people breaks the group.

I, for one, would not mind being euthanised for the good of the group. In fact it seems strange to me that the group would take such a risk in including broken people within its ranks. Yet here I am, condemned to exist because all life is precious or some such bollocks and they took away our guns and access to cyanide from India. I weaken the group, I'm on the dole and I worry the sheep in my locale. Why am I forced to exist because it makes some cunts hundreds of miles away feel good that they did something to change social policy?
>> No. 20480 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 1:48 am
20480 spacer
>>20477
> You're right if you're correct but I find it hard to believe that digital or object insertion is not defined as rape in UK law.

Not him but that'd be "Assault by Penetration" covered under section 2.

It's also interesting that the wording is "his penis". Does this mean that if a tranny that identifies as she/her puts "her penis" in my anus without my consent that (s)he'd only be charged with sexual assault? I kid, kind of, but this kind of case is probably in our very near future.

In any case it's fairly obvious that the UK rape / sexual assault laws need another overhaul. If my (fairly rusty) memory serves me well then until quite recently it was only rape if penis in vagina penetration was achieved. Bum rape was sexual assault and got you 7 years instead of a lifer tariff.
>> No. 20481 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 1:52 am
20481 spacer
>>20479

I also shit up .gs. I'm so sorry but I have no friends and nowhere else to go. Please fucking ban me, I know I don't fit in here but I enjoy the culture. I know that my presence disrupts the culture and pushes away the people that make the content I enjoy, for a while I merely lurked here but recently I find myself feeling sorry for myself and lashing out by posting here despite knowing that I will never make a post that is both cohesive to the conversation and in keeping with the general aesthetic. I don't know why people like me are tolerated, I sincerely hope it's not pity but I genuinely suspect it is. Ban me or I will continue to make broken posts which don't line up with a normal person's way of thinking nor posts that are funny despite every single one of them attempting to be.

Also see this as a message to society.

>> No. 20482 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 1:53 am
20482 spacer
>>20480

>I kid, kind of, but this kind of case is probably in our very near future.

No, you make a good point. If we allow self identity legally it may well end up invalidating the rape law.
>> No. 20483 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 2:03 am
20483 spacer
>>20482

The police already chase up "transgender hate crime" simply because someone doesn't want to have sex with someone that has a penis, so we're already in that particular legal space already. Precedent and case law working as it does under the British legal system I wouldn't be surprised to see a case of a transexual person avoiding a rape charge because they identify as female within the next few years. Luckily with the double jeopardy "backdoor" I'll get my coat gone they could be retried for sexual assault and convicted, but if I'm remembering rightly that doesn't carry a life sentence in all but the most brutal of cases.

We should probably do away with "rape" altogether and just have a graded series of sexual assaults which take into account concurrent kidnapping, poisoning (drugging), violence, coercion, age, and so on and so forth.

While I'm on the subject, any legallads want to speculate if anal fisting would be Assault by Penetration or GBH? (Or even attempted murder?).
>> No. 20484 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 3:18 am
20484 spacer
>>20481
Based.
>> No. 20485 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 3:51 am
20485 spacer
>>20483

>The police already chase up "transgender hate crime" simply because someone doesn't want to have sex with someone that has a penis

I find this hard to believe, but also wouldn't be hugely surprised if it was true. Do you have an example? Not that it matters to me, if I pulled a girl and they ended up having a cock it'd only improve the experience.

>>20481

None of us are normal here mate. You're as welcome as anyone.
>> No. 20487 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 4:13 am
20487 spacer

drag-race-uk-contestants.jpg
204872048720487
Is anyone watching Drag Race UK? I'm a little bit in love with Scaredy Kat and I really want to go on the lash with Baga Chipz.
>> No. 20488 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 4:14 am
20488 spacer
>>20485

>None of us are normal here mate. You're as welcome as anyone.

Can we do this on /shed/? I want to do this but I already know the answer, "everyone is welcome here" and all that bollocks. The average poster, hell the average mod can tell the difference between a normal person and a mentally ill person.

As a fucking nutter I'm telling you that allowing us to exist will drive down the quality of this site until the normal people leave and you're left with spastics and people who believe that spastics are just as valid as anyone else.

This site is one of the bastions of what I deem society. I'm going to stop posting here because my ideas are not in keeping with the culture (how I present them, I'm just an obnoxious cunt, so .gs is usually like a --> b --> c --> d and I'm like a --> d and you're all cunts which stops everyone getting to d, not because I'm intelligent, but because I'm autistic). I'm going to stop posting on .gs, except on the relevant /shed/ thread if it comes to exist.

Every mod/IRCfag who saves face by saying he/his ilk are welcome are fucking liars who deserve to be shot. You can FEEL that I disrupt the conversation yet you tolerate me because nutters/people with a backstory are "to be tolerated" because the women (or the men who want approval from women) will withhold approval if you fail to support me and my ilk. This is not sexist, this is humanist. If no women were here it would be men who wanted approval from men they believed to be higher in the hierarchy than them.

I love everyone here, and I'm sure you all love me, but you should experience that love in an "aww isn't it great that spastics exist but I don't want them here" sense. I am detrimental to you, you should excise me. There is nothing wrong with that. I do not dislike you for it, in fact I dislike you for (in a broader sense) condemning me and my ilk to life.

tl;dr ur mum m8
>> No. 20489 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 4:26 am
20489 spacer
>>20488

Perhaps instead of beating yourself up for being a looney, you could just make an effort to raise the average quality of your posts? A quick perusal of /emo/ should show that we do in fact have lots of users with mental health problems. I've been sectioned a couple of times and I've given advice about medication or therapy in dozens of different threads.

You're obviously a smart lad and you're perfectly capable of making a positive contribution, just lay off the self-pity and the eugenics chat, yeah?
>> No. 20490 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 5:15 am
20490 spacer
>>20480
>Does this mean that if a tranny that identifies as she/her puts "her penis" in my anus without my consent that (s)he'd only be charged with sexual assault?
No.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/30/section/6
>> No. 20491 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 7:15 am
20491 spacer
>>20488

Part of the culture of this board is being banned for saying daft things, I've been banned loads and I'm a mod. You're not wrong that a post with a bit of an odd tone or message isn't always well received, but it's certainly not just the mentally ill who make posts like that, and as otherlad points out, we've had an entire board dedicated almost entirely to mental health problems for years.

Don't forget, this is a niche imageboard - normal people simply don't post on niche imageboards. We might not all be fully mental, bit we're all at least a little bit of an outsider in some respects. Perhaps I'd avoid you in real life, you do sound like you go on a bit, but one of the reasons I live on this website is because you can post basically whatever comes to mind. You might get shot down for it, you might not. All I can say is you're assuming a lot about what we think about you in particular, but I think other than this diatribe, you blend in quite well.
>> No. 20492 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 7:45 am
20492 spacer
>>20491

>normal people simply don't post on niche imageboards.

I regard you lot as the last bastion of normal people on this sceptred isle. I feel like the fantabulous WONDERFUL brigade of nutters drive you lot further underground and I regard myself as one of those fantabulous posters. I am unique and special in every regard, deserving of consideration and hearing here on an anonymous imageboard despite the fact that no cunt will put up with me in real life.

All I'm saying is that if you look up my post history (and my associated history, I phone post a lot on 2 phones) you will see that normal .gs posters don't want to be involved. It was the same 6-7 years ago when I was posting regularly, I was GCHQkebabalad. I was briefly on IRC and in that short period I managed to piss off Andromache and got myself banned. I'm not admonishing .gs posters in any way, I recognise that if the only constant is oneself then oneself is the problem.

It's not just about me though, I see a few mentalposters here clearing out the conversation and I worry about our properlads who have real jobs retreating even further in to themselves and embracing stoicism, I worry about XR lad deciding that his regular updates would receive more accolades elsewhere.

You seem to think that all outsiders are equal, we are not. Some can provide the ins and outs of a Reliant Robin, others can provide the XXX.XX configuration of a NetGear router. My contention is that those outsiders have left and the remaining nutters would struggle to populate /emo/.

I enjoy reading your complaints about how nutters have taken over the world, I'm nearly 30 so it resonates with me. I enjoy the kind of humour that I grew up with despite it dying out in the modern world. I want to be involved in that but every attempt I have made at it has left a sour taste in my mouth and the mouths of all participants. I love you all, so good luck and god speed, but please for the love of god don't let yourselves be overwhelmed by others of my kind (with less self awareness) in the name of tolerance. Ban people for being unfunny, ban people for rambling posts like this one, ban people for being disruptive cunts. Preserve yourselves and your identity at all costs.

But most of all marple is a knob.
>> No. 20493 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 7:51 am
20493 spacer
While I'm at it, I want to confess to being the BRITFA.GS? MOAR LIEK SHITFA.GS! Awesome Dog poster during the Britchan vs Britfa.gs war.

Don't believe me? Look up the IP, it only shows as Hammersmith under DB-IP. Everywhere else it shows my real location.
>> No. 20494 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 8:26 am
20494 spacer

19940292-7592413-image-m-36_1571526092557.jpg
204942049420494
Transgender lobby forces sanitary towel-maker Always to ditch Venus logo from its products

The maker of Always sanitary pads has given in to claims of discrimination by transgender men and removed the ‘Venus’ symbol of the female sex from the wrapping.

A trans activist using the pseudonym ‘Melly Boom’ had tweeted in July asking Always why it was ‘imperative’ to have the sign on their sanitary products. The tweet said: ‘There are non-binary and trans folks who still need to use your products too you know!’

Another activist, Ben Saunders – named young campaigner of the year by LGBT charity Stonewall in May after making a documentary about being transgender – contacted the sanitary pad makers in June with a similar complaint. The Always marketing team replied with a comment that Saunders, 18, posted on Twitter, reading: ‘We are glad to inform you that as of December we will use a wrapper design without the feminine symbol.’ The message stated that sanitary towels with the new packaging would hit the stores by January 2020 and added: ‘We are absolutely grateful for having people like you voicing their opinions.’

P&G, the American company that owns the Always brand, has confirmed that the new sanitary pad packaging without the venus symbol would be introduced across Europe. A spokesman for the firm said: ‘For over 35 years, Always has championed girls and women, and we will continue to do so. We’re also committed to diversity and inclusion, and we realise that not everyone who has a period and needs to use a pad identifies as female.’


Removing the Venus symbol from female sanitary products because it discriminates against transfolk. What magnificent bastards we are as a species.
>> No. 20496 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 9:13 am
20496 spacer
>>20494
The Professionally Offended Brigade strikes again!
>> No. 20497 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 9:30 am
20497 spacer
>>20494

What sort of headline is that?

There was nothing forced about it. It sounds like two people made a complaint, and there'll be another type of sanitary pad released without the symbol. It doesn't even say that they're discontinuing the old one.

The story is trivial. The worst thing that's happened here is that a private company has made an effort to make a particular product more inclusive to people who don't want to strictly identify with a gendered logo. Has anything really been lost, here?
>> No. 20498 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 9:37 am
20498 spacer
>>20496
>>20497

It's big because Venus, Aphrodite, the Morning Star is losing worship. Nobody wants to be responsible for that. Call it hocus pocus if you want but names and symbols have meaning, Venus is losing her feminine call in the eyes of the many and that is huge.
>> No. 20499 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 9:42 am
20499 spacer
>>20497
>Has anything really been lost, here?

There's an entire culture war between women and transfolk that is passing us by. Apparently there's a Flora boycott after they pulled advertising from Mumsnet because refusing to deny basic biology has been deemed transphobic.
>> No. 20500 Anonymous
20th October 2019
Sunday 9:43 am
20500 spacer
>>20498
Off your meds again, m7?
>> No. 20501 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 6:56 pm
20501 spacer

Screenshot_20191021-185248.png
205012050120501
The struggle is real.
>> No. 20502 Anonymous
21st October 2019
Monday 9:02 pm
20502 spacer
>>20501

The outrage.
>> No. 20505 Anonymous
22nd October 2019
Tuesday 9:49 am
20505 spacer
>>20501
Imagine having this much free time on your hands.
>> No. 20506 Anonymous
22nd October 2019
Tuesday 9:54 am
20506 spacer
Imagine bumping the same thread every morning.
>> No. 20507 Anonymous
22nd October 2019
Tuesday 1:41 pm
20507 spacer
>>20506

Who would do that.
>> No. 20558 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 8:25 am
20558 spacer
A birth coach has been ‘ostracised’ by her professional organisation after transgender activists branded as offensive a Facebook post in which she said that only women can have babies.

Lynsey McCarthy-Calvert, 45, was forced to stand down as spokesperson for Doula UK and has since resigned altogether from the national organisation for birth coaches. Her exit comes after transgender rights activists triggered an investigation in which Doula UK concluded her message breached its equality and diversity guidelines.

They did not expel the mother- of-four, who has been a doula – who provide continuous support during pregnancy – for six years, but threatened to suspend her unless she deleted the post. Mrs McCarthy-Calvert did so, but resigned believing Doula UK had ‘acquiesced’ to demands from a small number of activists and failed to stand up for women’s rights.

The Doula UK row started after Cancer Research UK dropped the word ‘women’ from its smear test campaign, instead saying screening was ‘relevant for everyone aged 25-64 with a cervix’.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7643251/Charity-hounds-birth-coach-post-saying-women-children.html

It's offensive to point out that only women can give birth or should have smear tests. The world's gone mad!
>> No. 20559 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 10:18 am
20559 spacer
>>20558

The point is that people can identify as something other than a woman but still have the reproductive organs of a binary woman. It might be quite a lot to get your head around, but if you just ignore it and stop getting angry about it and let people decide who they are, it'll get much less infuriating for you.
>> No. 20561 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 12:13 pm
20561 spacer
>>20558
Perhaps she should have said 'only females can have babies.
It seems rather extreme to force her out of a job for such a simple mistake, if it even is one tbh.
You do you expect to have happened if she stood her ground and refused to leave?
>> No. 20562 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 12:39 pm
20562 spacer
>>20559

Why don't the gender bending wierdos take your advice then, and stop getting angry when someone innocently assumes they're not going to offend anyone by stating a fact that has been empirically true for the last several thousand years of human thought, and has only recently begun to change thanks to a tiny minority of individuals.

I've nothing against people being blokes with fannies or vice versa, but the way some of that lot kick up a stink sometimes is sheer entitlement.
>> No. 20563 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 12:40 pm
20563 spacer

MRH1824_TrystanReese_-Extra2.jpg
205632056320563
>>20559

Loads of blokes are getting up the duff these days.

Also, doulas are fucking bollocks. They're just quack midwives that have absolutely no medical training and reek of patchouli.
>> No. 20565 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 5:20 pm
20565 spacer

idontwanttoliveonthisplanet.jpg
205652056520565
>>20558

I can't even be arsed to shake my head.
>> No. 20566 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 7:24 pm
20566 spacer
>>20562

Because one side of this argument is inclusive and one is not.
>> No. 20567 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 7:31 pm
20567 spacer
This whole "cancel" nonsense is getting tiresome. It sends entirely the wrong message, and has some perverse effects in practice.

Case-in-point: A woman says something that's not entirely on-side, and she's ostracised and loses her livelihood. Meanwhile, actual sexual predator Harvey Weinstein turns up at a comedy club, gets called out in-person by no fewer than four people, and they're the ones that end up having to leave.

The moral of the story: Never be a bit of a dick, because you'll be punished by a moralising mob. Instead, be a complete and utter cunt, and they'll never be able to touch you.
>> No. 20568 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 8:27 pm
20568 spacer
>>20567

I agree, despite agreeing with the general idea of what the braying justice mob are standing for, I just don't think the way it's done is useful or helpful. I don't for a second think you'll ever get someone who doesn't 'believe in trannies' to change their mind, but attacking and shaming them for talking about it only serves to strengthen the idea that this is two sides of an argument, rather than the idea of treating people how they want to be treated with the least emotional casualties possible.

TL;DR be nice to each other?
>> No. 20569 Anonymous
3rd November 2019
Sunday 8:37 pm
20569 spacer
I feel like if side A of the argument is "I feel bad/disrespected when you call me x" and side B is "I'm aware of that but still angry that I have to call you x", then there's a pretty clear answer here, but I don't fucking know, I'm just some bloke and I can't really imagine ever caring about how other people label me, but I can certainly empathise with the difficulties of being 'not normal'.
>> No. 20571 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 6:20 am
20571 spacer
>>20569

You are being dishonest to the non tranny supporting crowd.

If someone told you they believed the sky was green and that to say any different was offensive you might not cooperate because you think it is an absurd fantasy you don't want to indulge, or they are mistaken and need correcting. In fact you might consider it deeply unhealthy that you indulge them, and that doing so would only make them worse, what would be better is to correct their mistake. Or at least walk away accepting they are wrong but you can't correct them, so be it.
What becomes weirder is when other people around you start saying the sky is green, out of some sort of solidarity. They surely know the sky isn't green and is clearly blue, it is obviously blue why are we all saying it is green? At some point society becomes so used to calling the sky green that people gasp when someone says it is blue.

The same is true to them for genitals and sexual identity 'Were you born with x genitals? therefore you are a Y?' It is a very simple formula. It is much more logical to assume someone is mistaken then that the entire way we identify our functional purpose in reproduction is wrong. It is a very simple self evident classification system that has been the model to every culture since the dawn of history why is it suddenly not right?

But now that we can cosmetically change the appearance of a person does that make the classification system wrong? Well we still aren't at the stage of functionality changing the reproductive system so the argument would be no. No more than wearing black face makes you black even if you do it with the deepest sincerity and it is really convincing.

I suspect those people would be won over when functional transitions exist But I suspect there will be a new movement of appeal to nature and slippery slope at that point. After all I was brought up with a belief cosmetic surgery (when not used to correct some serious deformity) was a vanity driven abomination on society and we should be comfortable with what nature made us otherwise we'll never be satisfied, and it takes some effort to square the circle that we now accept cosmetic surgery correcting nature to conform to how we see ourselves for a lot of people rather than change our opinions to fit what is seemingly more objective.
>> No. 20572 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 8:06 am
20572 spacer
>>20571

Your analogy is shit and implies being transgender is purely a mental illness, which is an interesting discussion in itself, but a rather troubling conclusion to make considering the medical community as a whole supports and actively carries out gender reassignment.

>After all I was brought up with a belief cosmetic surgery (when not used to correct some serious deformity)

A serious deformity like being in the wrong body, you mean?
>> No. 20573 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 12:17 pm
20573 spacer
>>20572
You know that the medical fields position is that being trans is a form of body dismophia, which is indeed a mental illness. They just concluded that it is easier to appease body dismophia than to 'cure' it. Treatment is just a form of relief.

But yes the same way regardless how offended a religious person might get that you don't believe in their god. You are entirely allowed to not believe in their God.

>A serious deformity like being in the wrong body, you mean?

No much more like you don't like the hand nature delt and want a mulligan.


If I told you I had blue eyes when you can see from looking at me my eyes are brown, would your first reaction be to assume that I was trapped in the body of a person with brown eyes? And if the only way of giving me blue eyes would result in replacing them with non functional glass eyes that made me blind. Would you consider that a good idea? Anything short of a court battle before a medical person agreed to deliberately blinded me would be inappropriate. Do you think everyone around me should be supportive of my plight without question and cast away immediate doubts that I am doing the right thing?

People always turn their nose up at trans ethic and otherkin comparisons, like it is a slippery slope argument, but it is perfectly appropriate. Why are those ideas any less sound? The same way a religious person would scoff if you compared belief in the Lord to Zeus. There absolutely is a point there and if you reaction is anything other than 'makes sense' you are intellectually hypocritical.
>> No. 20574 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 12:34 pm
20574 spacer
>>20573

>But yes the same way regardless how offended a religious person might get that you don't believe in their god. You are entirely allowed to not believe in their God.

Absolutely, but if I tweeted that Christians were mentally ill I'd probably expect my boss to tell me to delete it.
>> No. 20575 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 12:36 pm
20575 spacer
>>20573

>Do you think everyone around me should be supportive of my plight without question and cast away immediate doubts that I am doing the right thing?

I don't think you quite understand how hard a trans person has to work to convince their doctor that reassignment is for them. There's little point continuing this discussion while you labour under the delusion that you can wander into your GP and get your knob chopped off on a whim.
>> No. 20576 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 12:47 pm
20576 spacer
>>20575

I didnt say it was easy at all. You just assumed my agenda.
>> No. 20577 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 12:55 pm
20577 spacer
>>20574

I doubt they would, you can be as critical as you like about christianity as a general rule in society as long as it is in public. They might not want you to on the grounds of loss of business which is a different point altogether. And hardly a moral high ground.

There are other one true religions they would encourage you to take down more aggressively but that is mostly because they don't want to get killed. Which again I understand but not a good principle.
>> No. 20578 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 1:07 pm
20578 spacer
>>20573

>You know that the medical fields position is that being trans is a form of body dismophia, which is indeed a mental illness. They just concluded that it is easier to appease body dismophia than to 'cure' it. Treatment is just a form of relief.


This. I don't think a transgender person will perceive their body as "deformed", but just as a body they don't want.

Gender dysphoria/dysmorphia is a very difficult phaenomenon to explain on a good day. There are a lot of patients who outgrow it eventually and accept their body, especially among teenage patients. A lot of those patients will then however turn out gay or lesbian. Then there are those who consider themselves "gender fluid" and don't want to fully commit to either (binary) gender.

The step from gender dysphoria to procedures of gender reassignment is only permitted (in the UK) when a patient has shown a persistent, long-term conviction that they are really in the wrong body. Those patients are actually the smallest group. Their gender dysphoria does not respond to traditional approaches like cognitive behavioural therapy, and seems to be as hard coded in them as sexual orientation is in many people.

And in the same way that gay conversion therapy only leads to more emotional problems for the patient, nobody commonly tries to "cure" transgender patients of their transsexuality. The most effective approcach is gender affirmation therapy, again, because transsexuality is often so hard coded in the brain that other forms of treatment are ineffective in improving the emotional well being of the patient.
>> No. 20579 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 1:25 pm
20579 spacer
You know, the more I think about, the more I feel like TERFlad (Trans Exclusionary Radical Furry) had a point. If gender is a social construct and you can be a woman despite fully functioning male genitals, I don't see how it's a big leap towards people identifying as black despite their lack of melanin, or people identifying as dogs despite their lack of a tail.

I know a lot of people's gut instinct is to say "Well that's different, obviously." but just out of plain principle I'm struggling to see if it really is.

There is a lot of infighting within the trans culture it seems, I was reading on another site about terms like "transmedicalist" which appears to be some sort of stigma against people who classify trans identity as a medical condition to be treated, even if they are fighting in favour of trans rights. I am broadly supportive of the cause but I can't help but think there's a lot of folks on-board purely because it suits them, and not practicing what they preach about inclusivity.
>> No. 20580 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 1:55 pm
20580 spacer
>>20579
>some sort of stigma against people who classify trans identity as a medical condition to be treated, even if they are fighting in favour of trans rights
I've said this here before, the reason the people on that side aren't prevailing is the constant TK'ing from people on their own side.
>> No. 20581 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 9:34 pm
20581 spacer
>>20580

As many movements tend to be, I think it's also that they're a pretty fragmented lot, with each subgroup adhering to often very dogmatic sets of beliefs and schools of thought that can be very much mutually exclusive.

I see nothing wrong with calling transsexuality a medical or psychological condition. Or even a disorder. I don't think it implies any kind of judgement. Something obviously isn't in order, i.e. you're unhappy with your hairy sweaty bollocks genitals, ergo you undergo treatment so things will be in order for you.

I struggled with depression for many years, and I have no problem at all with someone calling it a mental disorder. Because clinical depression very much fucking is. Nothing about your life is "in order" if you compulsively contemplate suicide almost every day when you get up. I got treatment for a serious mental disorder as far as I am concerned, and I see no stigma attached to the word "disorder" at all. Everything else is just common snowflakery.
>> No. 20584 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 11:12 pm
20584 spacer
So I've been reading up on the transmedicalist thing. This bit otherlad said got me pondering.

>I don't think a transgender person will perceive their body as "deformed", but just as a body they don't want.

Basically what it is, is that you're being exclusionary if you don't consider people without dysphoria to be real trans people. In other words, it's frowned upon to draw a line between people who are medically trans, and people who, for lack of better words, simply want to be trans of their own free will.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Transmedicalism

Going by that rationale I honestly can't see a counter argument to trans-racialists or extreme furries who claim to identify as their animal of choice. If that's the body you want, these people are saying you have a right to be identified as such.

The feeling I get is that I'd be torn to shreds for suggesting this in certain places, as though I'm trolling or trying to discredit trans people.
>> No. 20585 Anonymous
4th November 2019
Monday 11:26 pm
20585 spacer
>>20579

Gets even more complicated when you consider that some gay and lesbian groups are regarding HRT/GRS as a medical assault on young LGBT people who after a period of teenage confusion would eventually settle into their gay/lesbian identity (or so the theory goes).

I don't even care anymore, it's a fucking circus.
>> No. 20586 Anonymous
5th November 2019
Tuesday 12:13 am
20586 spacer
>>20584

I'm with you here. I don't actually think that changes my mind about supporting trans people and gender reassignment though, I quite simply don't care if someone wants surgery to look like a cat either, and I feel like a society that accepts that sort of thing is probably quite advanced. I'm sort of reminded of the Alien genome people in Transmetropolitan, though society wasn't kind to them in that story either.

To bring it back from comic books a bit, there are people who suffer from feeling as though a limb doesn't belong to them and they want it amputated. As far as I know nobody really entertains actually providing this service to these patients, but I don't know if it's fundamentally any different to gender reassignment, is it?
>> No. 20587 Anonymous
5th November 2019
Tuesday 1:14 am
20587 spacer
>>20586

>there are people who suffer from feeling as though a limb doesn't belong to them and they want it amputated. As far as I know nobody really entertains actually providing this service to these patients, but I don't know if it's fundamentally any different to gender reassignment, is it?



They absolutely do entertain it. This is a cornerstone of justifying transitioning on the NHS and why it is treated as dysmopher. Because it doesn't require you to believe what they think is true only that they are in psychological distress that this will relief.
>> No. 20588 Anonymous
5th November 2019
Tuesday 1:29 am
20588 spacer
>>20587

People get non essential limb amputations?
>> No. 20589 Anonymous
5th November 2019
Tuesday 11:07 am
20589 spacer
>>20588
My nan got one 60 years ago. Granted, it was at a factory rather than a hospital ...
>> No. 20601 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 3:01 pm
20601 spacer
>>20584

Furrylad here. Can confirm, people have been very fucking short with me for trying to draw comparisons like that. You make some valid points.

I think mainly the perception is that it's a disingenuous thing, similar to those times where a white middle class lad claims they're just as much victims of discrimination because X Y Z reason. Even if it's a valid point, people react against it because they will usually assume you're a "bad faith actor" trying to hit them with one of those "Gotcha!" arguments.

There's also just a perception (based on the old attack helicopter meme) that going beyond gender is self evidently either ridiculous, or dishonest. Maybe you don't need dysphoria to be trans, but I personally definitely have dysphoria about being a boring hairless ape. Role playing and hanging around other furs is the only way I get to feel some kind of connection to what feels like my "real" self identity.

I've had self proclaimed leftists attack me because being a furry is "just a hobby", not a self identity- I mean if you want to split hairs I could say having sex with other men is just a hobby. Dressing in drag is a hobby. A hobby that often leads to coming out as trans.

But, you know, people are hypocrites. Nothing surprising about that.
>> No. 20602 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 6:26 pm
20602 spacer
>>20601
How is it that you identify as a furry? I'm not even sure what that means.
>> No. 20603 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 6:29 pm
20603 spacer
>>20602
Same way you identify as a .gs poster I'm guessing.
>> No. 20605 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 7:01 pm
20605 spacer
>>20602

You know how in the Matrix where in the real world aboard the Nebuchadnezzar, everyone is a pasty malnourished baldy cunt; but when they go into the matrix they're attractive, athletic and sharply dressed. Morpheus tells Neo that's your projected self image.

It's kind of like that. If I went in the Matrix I'd be an anthropomorphic animal.

In fact, as a piece of related trivia, there was supposed to be a character in an early draft of the Matrix who was male outside, but female inside. It got cut presumably for being unacceptable back then.
>> No. 20619 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 9:51 pm
20619 spacer
>>20605

> there was supposed to be a character in an early draft of the Matrix who was male outside, but female inside. It got cut presumably for being unacceptable back then.


Funny when you think that that movie was done by two transsexuals.
>> No. 20621 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 10:03 pm
20621 spacer
>>20619
Not really. Maybe they wanted to do it for the exact reason but felt society wouldn't be accepting of it.
>> No. 20622 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 11:18 pm
20622 spacer
>>20621

It more likely got cut for being confusing to the audience than anything else.
>> No. 20624 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 11:30 pm
20624 spacer
>>20622

That too. Still not "Funny when...".
>> No. 20625 Anonymous
6th November 2019
Wednesday 11:40 pm
20625 spacer
>>20605
That's how the character Switch got their name. You know, the "Not like this..." one. I doubt the removal was political since nobody knew enough about transexualism back then to object to it. But it would have been one more weird element in a film that execs already worried would be too hard to understand for the general public.
>> No. 20627 Anonymous
7th November 2019
Thursday 12:53 am
20627 spacer
>>20625

That's the one. I tried to find a picture but couldn't remember the character's names. But yeah, I suppose they already got away with a lot in that movie. It's more or less a kitchen sink of philosophy and speculative sci-fi ideas.
>> No. 20629 Anonymous
7th November 2019
Thursday 10:14 am
20629 spacer
>>20627

>It's more or less a kitchen sink of philosophy and speculative sci-fi ideas.

Nearly all of which were pretty much nicked from other sci-fi movies and franchises. In that sense, the Matrix was kind of a pastiche of all the ideas about a high-tech dystopian future that were already out there.

Even the production design wasn't as groundbreaking as everybody said (bullet time aside), and took loads of inspiration from films like Men in Black. Not even the effect of (faux) Japanese characters running down a monochromatic computer screen was new, it could first be seen in Independence Day while they're aboard the alien mother ship.

Ok, so bullet time was the one effect that the Matrix genuinely created. Good for them. Everything else, they copied.
>> No. 20630 Anonymous
7th November 2019
Thursday 10:26 am
20630 spacer
>>20629
>Everything else, they copied.
Duh it's a simulation
>> No. 20647 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 10:21 am
20647 spacer
Tax expert who lost her job for 'transphobic' tweet takes case to employment tribunal

A tax expert who lost her job for tweeting that transgender women are not women yesterday took her case to an employment tribunal arguing that her dismissal amounted to discrimination against her beliefs.

Maya Forstater, 45, lost her job from the Centre for Global Development (CGD) in March this year after she was accused of publishing offensive tweets questioning government proposals to allow people to self-identify as the opposite sex.

The unprecedented legal dispute will act as an important test case in the UK on whether having ‘gender critical’ beliefs - the view that one’s sex is a biological fact which cannot be changed - is a protected belief under the Equality Act 2010.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/11/13/tax-expert-lost-job-transphobic-tweet-takes-case-employment/

‘I believe that being male or female is an immutable biological fact, not a feeling or an identity,’ Miss Forstater is expected to say in evidence later this week.

‘I believe that a person’s sex should not be conflated with the idea of “gender”, “gender identities” or “gender expression”. I believe that it is impossible to change sex or lose your sex. No change of clothes or hairstyle, no plastic surgery, no accident or illness, no course of hormones, no force of will or social conditioning, no declaration, can turn a female person into a male, or a male person into a female.’


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7683207/Researcher-lost-job-transphobic-comments-expected-say-men-women.html

https://medium.com/@MForstater/i-lost-my-job-for-speaking-up-about-womens-rights-2af2186ae84

It'll be interesting to see the outcome of this one.
>> No. 20648 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 10:29 am
20648 spacer
>>20647
>‘I believe that being male or female is an immutable biological fact’
She's going to lose if she does say that, because biologists don't agree.
More importantly, how do you get those single inverted commas? My keyboard only does " and '.
>> No. 20649 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 11:31 am
20649 spacer
>>20648
>More importantly, how do you get those single inverted commas? My keyboard only does " and '.

MAGIC.
>> No. 20650 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 1:08 pm
20650 spacer
>>20647

Sigh.

Fair enough make transphobia hate speech if you like. But what happens when the shoe is on the other foot, and some future right wing moral consensus wishes to make, let's say, criticism of religion into hate speech?

I wish people could get it through their heads that freedom of speech is the closest thing we have to a black and white necessity for free society. It doesn't matter which side you are on, and it doesn't matter how mean the things people say might be.
>> No. 20651 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 2:13 pm
20651 spacer
>>20650
It's interesting how a tweet of Maya Forstaters' with this exact meaning was cut down to less than half font size in the Telegraph article.

>"Why my case is important: Freedom of belief is fundamental to a democratic society. We can respect people with different beliefs without being compelled to profess to share them. We should never become so afraid of giving offence that we can't talk about things that matter -Maya Forstater (@MForstater) October 9, 2019
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/11/13/tax-expert-lost-job-transphobic-tweet-takes-case-employment/

-

>https://terfisaslur.com
Jesus Christ, people believe this. We've all heard of an echo-chamber these days but there's literally no effort to even hide it here. I know just how depressed i get spending too long at the other place - just imagine the reality tunnels of the people who'd have this site bookmarked. Fuck.
>> No. 20652 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 5:03 pm
20652 spacer
>>20650
You're not going to get away with that false equivalence. How is discrimination comparable to 'criticism'?
>> No. 20653 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 5:17 pm
20653 spacer
>>20652

What's discriminatory about talking shite on twitter? What service or right did she obstruct anyone from having by displaying her own controversial political views on social media?

Don't call false equivalence and then go on to make one yourself. And if you're going to, at least make an effort to address the point that was made.
>> No. 20655 Anonymous
14th November 2019
Thursday 7:44 pm
20655 spacer
>>20653

You're not wrong, in that people should still have the right to disagree with conventional wisdom. On the one hand, with sex and gender in particular, there really is more than one way of looking at it, not in the least because transsexuality itself is still not fully understood even by the world's most renowned experts.

But on the other hand also because as you implied, what's "right" and what's "wrong" can change with society's swinging pendulum. And also, if we say that simply having a disagreeing opinion hurts people like transsexuals, then that just isn't worthy of a democratic society. At the very least, a difference in magnitude should still be observed between someone simply stating opinion that transwomen aren't women, and somebody maybe actively harrassing a transperson in the street and calling them names and beating them up. Without that kind of scope, one side's opinion and its proponents can easily become totalitarian.
>> No. 20658 Anonymous
19th November 2019
Tuesday 7:03 am
20658 spacer
Whites can be black if they wish, says lecturers' union

People should be allowed to identify as black no matter what colour they are born, a lecturers' union has said.

The University and College Union (UCU), which represents more than 100,000 university lecturers and staff, set out its position on whether people should be able to self-identify as different races or genders. In the paper "UCU Position on Trans Inclusion", it stated: "The UCU has a long history of enabling members to self-identify, whether that is being black, disabled, LGBT or women."

A spokesman for the UCU said: "Self-identification is a standard practice in many organisations and the Office for National Statistics says 'there is no consensus on what constitutes an ethnic group and membership is something that is selfdefined'."


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/11/18/whites-can-black-wish-says-lecturers-union/
>> No. 20660 Anonymous
19th November 2019
Tuesday 1:24 pm
20660 spacer
>>20658
Self-identification is standard practice because any other policy is unworkable.

Guess what, we don't generally look to The Telegraph and its incisive analysis like "whites can be black if they wish" when formulating these policies.
>> No. 20661 Anonymous
19th November 2019
Tuesday 1:44 pm
20661 spacer
>>20660

Clearly the only reasonable option is for everyone to attend a mandatory assessment at the Office for Race Classification, where they will be assigned a racial identity based on skin colour, facial features and socioeconomic status. Anything else would just be hippy-dippy nonsense.
>> No. 20662 Anonymous
19th November 2019
Tuesday 6:30 pm
20662 spacer
>>20661
Bring a paper bag and a pencil and we can get started.
>> No. 20663 Anonymous
19th November 2019
Tuesday 7:40 pm
20663 spacer
>>20658
Is this not just a jargon filled version of what already happens? Every time I fill out a form I imagine ticking "white; other" instead of "white; British" but I don't think anyone would stop me even if I did it. I still strongly believe it's the obscene levels of jargon that make people recoil from this stuff.
>> No. 20664 Anonymous
19th November 2019
Tuesday 8:46 pm
20664 spacer
>>20663
I just tick the 'prefer not to say option'. Fuck HR.
>> No. 20665 Anonymous
20th November 2019
Wednesday 1:33 pm
20665 spacer
>>20658

And yet I'm still the victim in all this, unless I tick "Other" and put "Vulpes vulpes" underneath.

Check your species privilege, cis-species shitlords.
>> No. 20666 Anonymous
20th November 2019
Wednesday 8:28 pm
20666 spacer

eminem-slim-shady-1999.jpg
206662066620666
>>20658

>Whites can be black if they wish, says lecturers' union


I guess Eminem's career wasn't in vain then.
>> No. 20671 Anonymous
21st November 2019
Thursday 6:36 am
20671 spacer
>>20666

Or that of Elvis, I suppose.
>> No. 20672 Anonymous
21st November 2019
Thursday 7:53 am
20672 spacer
>>20671
>I am the worst thing since Elvis Presley
>To do black music so selfishly
>And use it to get myself wealthy

Credit to Eminem for having some self-awareness.
>> No. 20673 Anonymous
21st November 2019
Thursday 5:10 pm
20673 spacer
>>20672

I was pointing that out to >>20666 with the idea that this isn't a particularly new phenomenon.
>> No. 20674 Anonymous
21st November 2019
Thursday 7:16 pm
20674 spacer
>>20672

Ah, this brings back loads of teenlad memories.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVkUvmDQ3HY
>> No. 27458 Anonymous
4th September 2020
Friday 8:07 am
27458 spacer

jessicakrug0409.jpg
274582745827458
In another example of transracialism/racial fluidity, a white academic has admitted to pretending to be African American her entire adult life.

https://medium.com/@jessakrug/the-truth-and-the-anti-black-violence-of-my-lies-9a9621401f85
>> No. 27460 Anonymous
4th September 2020
Friday 8:24 am
27460 spacer
>>27458
So she isn't transracial, then? People who claim to be transracial don't believe themselves to be lying. Maybe do your research next time?
>> No. 27461 Anonymous
4th September 2020
Friday 8:39 am
27461 spacer
>>27460
I get the impression that she fully believed herself to be black when she assumed that identity but she has now seen the error of her ways. Either that or she's a complete mentalist and has now decided to latch on to cancel culture as that's the latest in thing, even if that means cancelling herself, because she goes from adopting one persona to another depending on what is influencing her.
>> No. 27462 Anonymous
4th September 2020
Friday 9:14 am
27462 spacer

shaunking.jpg
274622746227462
>>27461

I'm cynical enough to believe your second one is closer to the mark. She read that White Fragility book and she wanted in on that juicy self flagellation.

And yet this guy keeps on getting away with it like it's nothing.
>> No. 27465 Anonymous
4th September 2020
Friday 9:49 am
27465 spacer
>>27462
Either is plausible. It's not really too different from a transgender person who regrets having gender reassignment surgery or who thought they were born in the wrong body but later realised it was actually underlying mental health issues instead.
>> No. 27469 Anonymous
4th September 2020
Friday 11:52 am
27469 spacer
>>27465

Arguably that's pretty rare, because in order to get reassignment surgery (at least here) you have to go a long way to demonstrate it isn't just underlying mental issues or what have you. Incidentally that's why there are so many trans people who never get past the ladyboy phase, but that's another discussion.

Thing is there's nothing to stop you just going around saying you're a woman when you're never even spoken to a doctor about it, and plenty of people nowadays think that should be acceptable and encouraged because being trans is hard. It's that same sort of logic that puts things like this woman in a weird ideological blind spot where they don't get criticised, when really, they probably should.
>> No. 27485 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 5:57 am
27485 spacer
>>27469

>you have to go a long way to demonstrate it isn't just underlying mental issues

You have misunderstood the underlying philosophy. You have to demonstrate it is a specific mental issue. The medical position is that being transsexual is a form of body dysmophia, and that surgery to change appearance to match perception is the only thing that will relieve the distress.
>> No. 27488 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 12:03 pm
27488 spacer
>>27485

Sane difference, I'm not here to grind that particular axe.
>> No. 27490 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 2:10 pm
27490 spacer
>>27469
>>27485

What I don't get is why have the surgery in the first place? If they say that one's genitals don't determine one's gender, then why not be a woman with a cock?

On top of that, having a "neo vagina" or whatever they call it alienates them from both a significant dating pool of tranny chasers and from most straight people.
>> No. 27491 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 2:46 pm
27491 spacer
>>27490

You have fallen for the false equivocation that was intended.

Transsexual is a old term related to people who belive they were born the wrong sex.

Transgender is political term and concept created by post modern fisherpersons who sought to win the nature nurture debate about behaviour of the sexes by arguing that the difference between the sexes was purely a social construct. They co opted the movement to prove gender was fluid and biological sex irrelevant. It does not follow that transsexuals are transgender for the very reason you highlighted. They actually care what their genitals are. The confusion in the eye of the public is quite deliberate because it means accepting the premise of the argument just by using the language.
>> No. 27492 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 7:45 pm
27492 spacer

139845681439.jpg
274922749227492
>>27491


'You are a slow learner, Winston,' said O'Brien gently.

'How can I help it?' he blubbered. 'How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes? Men have penises and women have vaginas.'

'Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes women have penises. Sometimes men have vaginas. Sometimes they have all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.'

He laid Winston down on the bed. The grip of his limbs tightened again, but the pain had ebbed away and the trembling had stopped, leaving him merely weak and cold. O'Brien motioned with his head to the man in the white coat, who had stood immobile throughout the proceedings. The man in the white coat bent down and looked closely into Winston's eyes, felt his pulse, laid an ear against his chest, tapped here and there, then he nodded to O'Brien.

'Again,' said O'Brien.
>> No. 27493 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 7:57 pm
27493 spacer
>>27492

Christ, lads, is this what happens to you when you can't read the Mail for a day?
>> No. 27494 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 8:06 pm
27494 spacer

Eg0sGNYX0AAVi3X.jpg
274942749427494
>>27492
>Sometimes women have penises. Sometimes men have vaginas. Sometimes they have all of them at once

Superdrug have started calling biological females people who menstruate.

Anyway, I think it's time the mods locked the thread. It's the same discussion over and over again.
>> No. 27495 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 8:14 pm
27495 spacer
>>27492
Everyone who references 1984 should have their face eaten by rats
>> No. 27496 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 8:41 pm
27496 spacer
>>27493

Calm down, I was poking fun at the lad I was replying to.

>>27495

Modern brainworm lefties really do detest it for calling out their shit so directly. The beautiful thing is it's the one book you can never ever get away with cancelling or attempting to censor, because then you only prove its point.
>> No. 27497 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 8:45 pm
27497 spacer
>>27492
>>27494

Why isn't it enough for them to be called 'trans women'? Why does our definition of 'woman' have to change? We call you women as a nicety, there was no need to take it literally.
>> No. 27498 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 8:46 pm
27498 spacer
>>27496
>The beautiful thing is it's the one book you can never ever get away with cancelling or attempting to censor, because then you only prove its point.
I think Ray Bradbury and Orwell both just turned over in their graves for that one.
>> No. 27499 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 8:51 pm
27499 spacer
>>27496
I would rather live in the society envisioned by 1984 than continue to live in one where people are free to misinterpret 1984 so wildly. This sort of midwit nonsense surrounding a book most people haven't actually read is straight out of 1984.
>> No. 27500 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 8:53 pm
27500 spacer
Nevermind transgenders, there's intersexes having the best of both worlds. And they're not complaining. Imagine having a dick and a fanny at the same time. THE_DREAM
>> No. 27501 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:01 pm
27501 spacer
>>27499
Calling that a misinterpretation is over-generous, that's clearly someone who has never read it and is confusing what he's heard about it with another book entirely.
>> No. 27502 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:08 pm
27502 spacer
>>27498

Go on?

>>27499

Well don't worry, we're clearly heading that way so you'll get your wish before long. You've already internalised the doublethink well enough to imagine I'm the one who didn't understand it. Truly, we are post truth.

>>27501

Would someone who's never read it be able to flick over to a specific chapter and even page in a PDF to rip the quote from, or are you just being a wee daftie?
>> No. 27503 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:12 pm
27503 spacer
>>27502

Yes: evidenced by the fact that you did.
>> No. 27504 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:16 pm
27504 spacer

KZIU-DS7.jpg
275042750427504
>>27503

Ah, very wee daftie indeed then.
>> No. 27505 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:24 pm
27505 spacer
Fahrenheit 451 seems like the more appropriate dystopian book for current year. You should quote that at me next time


>Now let's take up the minorities in our civilization, shall we? Bigger the population, the more minorities. Don't step on the toes of the dog-lovers, the cat-lovers, doctors, lawyers, merchants, chiefs, Mormons, Baptists, Unitarians, second-generation Chinese, Swedes, Italians, Germans, Texans, Brooklynites, Irishmen, people from Oregon or Mexico. The people in this book, this play, this TV serial are not meant to represent any actual painters, cartographers, mechanics anywhere. The bigger your market, Montag, the less you handle controversy, remember that! All the minor minor minorities with their navels to be kept clean. Authors, full of evil thoughts, lock up your typewriters. They did. Magazines became a nice blend of vanilla tapioca. Books, so the damned snobbish critics said, were dishwater. No wonder books stopped selling, the critics said. But the public, knowing what it wanted, spinning happily, let the comic books survive. And the three-dimensional sex-magazines, of course. There you have it, Montag. It didn't come from the Government down. There was no dictum, no declaration, no censorship, to start with, no Technology, mass exploitation, and minority pressure carried the trick, thank God. Today, thanks to them, you can stay happy all the time
>> No. 27506 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:25 pm
27506 spacer
Any hermaphrodite Marxists here? 50/50 equality and all that.
>> No. 27507 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:34 pm
27507 spacer
>>27505
Yes, that's the other book I was talking about.
>> No. 27508 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 9:42 pm
27508 spacer
>>27495

That sounds awful. If there is anything that belongs in /101/ it is that.
>> No. 27510 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 10:24 pm
27510 spacer
>>27508

>If there is anything that belongs in /101/ it is that.

Room 101 is an allegory, a socialist utopia. A place where the state sent wrongthink. Nothing should go to 101.
>> No. 27511 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 10:35 pm
27511 spacer
>>27510
It's also on telly with Frank Skinner.
>> No. 27512 Anonymous
5th September 2020
Saturday 10:42 pm
27512 spacer
>>27510

Nah mate it was a conference room at Broadcasting House. People used to go there for meetings n shit.
>> No. 27514 Anonymous
6th September 2020
Sunday 2:00 am
27514 spacer
>>27512
Which only proves that the BBC really has been a hotbed of left-wing transgenderist propaganda all along.
>> No. 27607 Anonymous
9th September 2020
Wednesday 8:17 pm
27607 spacer
>>27458
She sounds like a right fruitloop.

>Over the course of her life Krug built an identity based on the worst stereotypes, beliefs and supposed dysfunctions of Black and Latinx people. It is bad enough that she pretended to be Black or Latina; worse, she portrayed herself as the daughter of addicts battling overdoses and suicide attempts on the “streets” of the Barrio. She claimed to be the only person in her family to go to college, took on caricaturesque anti-racist stances, and engaged in racist cosplay under the nonsensical name of “Jess La Bombalera.” If anyone questioned her white appearance, she would retort that her mother was a drug-addicted sex worker who her white father had raped.

>In her world, Black Latinx people were typecast and held static in a tangled pathology of trauma, violence and poverty. She openly bullied, mocked, gaslit and antagonized Black and Latina women she encountered in academic and activist circles as a way to further authenticate and validate her imaginary struggle and holier-than-thou politics. She made a mockery of radical politics and activist organizing by tearing down those she deemed less “woke” than herself. Perhaps one of the most disgusting things she publicly did was to attempt to justify the brutal murder of 15-year-old Lesandro Guzman-Feliz, who died in a machete attack at the hands of gang members in a case of mistaken identity, by claiming that had he lived he would have ended up being a cop.

>Much like the Blackface minstrel performers of the 19th century, Krug calculatingly used the most exaggerated, hackneyed and simply racist stereotypes of Latinx and Black people and made a mockery of their political stances. These exaggerated traits made it so that whites would not doubt her, since she exhibited all the characteristics associated with Latinos in film and television. And while her performance made her Black and Latinx colleagues uncomfortable, many avoided questioning her because she was prone to level accusations that we were “assimilated” if we did not exhibit the “authentic” culture of our communities or failed to live up to her hyperbolic radical politics.

>This was her clever mechanism of deception: against whites she deployed trite Hollywood stereotypes all too familiar to the white imagination, and against minorities she leveled accusations of respectability politics. She terrorized Black and Latina women, panned their work and politics, and made many of her colleagues take on additional labor under the pretense of having to deal with her imaginary family saga. Krug was particularly cruel to US-born Puerto Rican scholars, who she often accused of lacking the insider knowledge and cultural fluency that she reveled in.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/09/jessica-krug-white-scholar-black-latina
>> No. 27608 Anonymous
9th September 2020
Wednesday 8:59 pm
27608 spacer
>>27607
>This was her clever mechanism of deception: against whites she deployed trite Hollywood stereotypes all too familiar to the white imagination

... Or maybe we just take people at face value (no pun intended) when they say they're an ethnic minority. You can't always tell when someone has a mixed background, if I'd never seen Halle Berry and she introduced herself to me as Portuguese I'd see no reason to doubt her. Also why does the word "Latinx" seem to be proliferating, is there something with 'Hispanic' or 'Latin American' now?
>> No. 27610 Anonymous
9th September 2020
Wednesday 9:26 pm
27610 spacer
>>27608
Romance languages are gendered and a small petty group of people hate that.

Latino: Male and the default description for a group.
Latina: Female.

Latinx is Yankee cultural imperialism that isn't accepted by the Latino community because it breaks grammar and doesn't make any fucking sense. The end result will be that most words in Spanish will eventually end in -x.
>> No. 27612 Anonymous
10th September 2020
Thursday 12:37 am
27612 spacer
>>27610

I've seen the rise of e.g. Latin@ amongst some of my younger Brazilian friends lately. While I still think it's silly to try to strip the gender out of romance languages I do think that using @ as a sort of Schrodinger's a/o is at least somewhat more inventive than just chucking an x in there.
>> No. 27613 Anonymous
10th September 2020
Thursday 12:55 am
27613 spacer
This is what happens when you start treating Spanairds as non-white. The Yanks have inherited the Casta system from the days of Spanish colonialism and as such have damned themselves.
>> No. 27614 Anonymous
10th September 2020
Thursday 8:23 am
27614 spacer
>>27613
I thought Seppos classed them as white? Trayvon Martin's death was definitely portrayed as a white on black killing when George Zimmerman's family are South American and he identifies as Hispanic.
>> No. 27615 Anonymous
10th September 2020
Thursday 8:35 am
27615 spacer
>>27614

The Americans beleve there to be 3 races of people, white people who are American, Black people who were all the slaves of white people, and mexicans now PC called Latinx, Natives are a type of latinx. This is less of an simplification than you would think.

Chinese people are both black and white depending on the argument, and other peoples and cultures don't exist or if they do they are a type of black.
>> No. 27616 Anonymous
10th September 2020
Thursday 9:14 am
27616 spacer
>>27614

A lot of American conversations about race are weird because class is such a taboo topic. Most conversations about race are really about poverty and inequality, but nobody can admit it. In such a framework, whiteness is a very mutable concept - Colin Powell is whiter than a poor Latino.

Jewish and Irish people are the most stark example, because they went from being categorically non-white to categorically white within a couple of generations.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Became-White-Folks-About-America/dp/081352590X/

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Irish-Became-White-Routledge-Classics/dp/0415963095

Also:


>> No. 27619 Anonymous
10th September 2020
Thursday 2:36 pm
27619 spacer
>>27612
The obvious suffix for gender-neutral Spanish (and I presume Portugeuse, which I am less familiar with) is -e. Why @? That's ridiculous.
>> No. 27621 Anonymous
10th September 2020
Thursday 5:06 pm
27621 spacer
>>27608
>maybe we just take people at face value (no pun intended) when they say they're an ethnic minority

Most people would. It's not a black vs. white issue as they try to frame it; it's more to do with the nebulous concept of "wokeness" and there being so much hubris surrounding it. This is a prime example of how much of a liberty you can take with it and how far you can bullshit until someone actually calls you out on it.
>> No. 27622 Anonymous
10th September 2020
Thursday 6:58 pm
27622 spacer
>>27619
In Portuguese you would normally write e.g. Latino(a) or medico(a) instead of Latino/Latina, medico/medica etc. As the @ symbol looks a bit like an 'a' inside of an 'o' it's becoming fairly common (in informal usage, amongst younger people) to use it instead of the o(a) notation: Thus medico(a) becomes simply medic@.
>> No. 27623 Anonymous
10th September 2020
Thursday 7:00 pm
27623 spacer
>>27622

And like I said I do think it's a bit silly but it's a damn sight better than writing fucking 'medicx'.
>> No. 27624 Anonymous
10th September 2020
Thursday 7:21 pm
27624 spacer
>>27623
All of which are much less silly than German's "(m/w/d)" thing.
>> No. 28895 Anonymous
21st November 2020
Saturday 5:49 am
28895 spacer
Suzanne Moore has been forced out of the Guardian for "transphobic content" earlier in the year.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/commentisfree/2020/mar/02/women-must-have-the-right-to-organise-we-will-not-be-silenced

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/10/i-wish-everyone-strength-however-they-identify-suzanne-moore
>> No. 28908 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 8:07 am
28908 spacer
>>28895
>“The way the column is spoken about, it’s as if it was Mein Kampf,” says Moore. “Obviously I defended Selina Todd, but it’s mad that a professor of modern history at Oxford has to go around with security. The situation has become so crazy, I have friends, academics and others who are afraid of losing their jobs because of inadvertently saying the wrong thing.”

>“In an editorial conference, I’m told, a trans woman, who had resigned some weeks earlier – so not over my column – made a dramatic and upsetting speech about feeling unsafe and I think that was horrible for everybody,” says Moore. “I naively thought I would be defended, because that’s what’s always happened at other newspapers,” she says. “I thought a public statement would be issued making clear this letter-writing business was not on. What happened was, the editor offered to take me out to lunch. I said I didn’t want a lunch. I’m not five, I don’t need to be patted on the head and given a veggie burger.”

>Though her career began at The Guardian, she has written for other newspapers including The Mail on Sunday, where she worked alongside Peter Hitchens, one of Britain’s most vociferous Right-wing columnists. “Peter and I would have stand-up rows, we’re opposites, but that was it: next day we’d be back to normal. I’m able to work with people I disagree with,” she says. For years, she was also able to campaign alongside people she disagreed with on certain points, and they with her, but she says that is not true of the new generation who revere Jeremy Corbyn.

>“These young people, Momentum people, cannot tolerate difference,” she says. “They think they can, but they can’t. We saw it with Brexit. If you’re a Remainer, how do you win over people to your side? I know! Call everyone who doesn’t agree with you a racist idiot. That really helps, doesn’t it? It’s the same with Labour. Anyone who doesn’t like Jeremy Corbyn is a Tory, so guess what, people in the Red Wall voted Tory. So much for the art of politics being about persuasion.”

>“All the major writers on the paper wrote letters or messaged me. I got a message from someone saying: ‘I wish I could have spoken up for you but I was afraid of losing my job.’ There are a lot of people with mortgages and with children who want to speak up but can’t – women especially. This isn’t just about newspapers. I can walk along my street and a woman will stop me and say: ‘I’m a teaching assistant and I said something the other day and I think I might lose my job.’ It’s because of the incredible lobbying and institutional capture Stonewall [which campaigns for LGBT rights] has had on our education and public sector. It’s become quite a witch-hunt.”

>That self-censorship should hit The Guardian, which has always regarded itself as a beacon of liberal thinking, strikes her as particularly sad: “I know within the paper many, many women are unhappy because when something like the J K Rowling incident happens there are some people at The Guardian who feel they cannot defend her. I don’t know what the logic is any more, yet we have to have articles about some bloke who’s taken HRT and learnt to cry, and an obituary for Peter Sutcliffe.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/suzanne-moore-betrayed-bullied-saying-women-should-not-silenced/
>> No. 28909 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 8:15 am
28909 spacer
>>28908
I was vaguely sympathetic until the end there. What on Earth does Sutcliffe have to do with anything else she's mentioned?
>> No. 28910 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 8:15 am
28910 spacer
>>28908

Professional controversialist hoisted by own petard.
>> No. 28911 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 8:35 am
28911 spacer
>>28909
There's been a fair few complaints about The Guardian, as far as I'm aware the only paper to do so, running an obituary about Sutcliffe. Something about it being bad taste and anti-woman to focus on the killer rather than the victims.

As well as the Telegraph interview she's also written a massive wall of text about why she had to leave:

https://unherd.com/2020/11/why-i-had-to-leave-the-guardian/
>> No. 28912 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 8:45 am
28912 spacer

letter.png
289122891228912
>>28895
>>28908
So hang on, this was published in March and she's just recently resigning over this letter? I can't stand this crap, wherein people complain they can't dissent do a press tour, get loads of people backing them up, quit their job and act like they're being persecuted by "the trans lobby" and Momentum(?).

Why is she talking about being able to be mates with Peter Hitchens like that's an accomplishment? Not only do hundreds of thousands of people up and down the country work with people they'd happily see fed to a pride of lions, Peter Hitchens is a definitively awful person who stands against more-or-less everything Moore claims to stand for, and has actively tried to make British lives more unhappy and difficult for decades. It's an act of cowardice to speak kindly of such people. Also look at this phrasing from the Telegraph article, "[many people] have given Moore their support and she received – and is still receiving – many messages in private", but when folk criticise you in public it's the end of days.

Excuse me, I did some further research and it was another letter that didn't even name Moore that was her real reason for quitting. It contained such firery rhetoric as, "We strongly support trans equality and want to see the Guardian live up to its values and do the same." and "We are also disappointed in the Guardian’s repeated decision to publish anti-trans views.", so I entirely see how railroaded Moore must have felt when Kathrine Viner, editor-in-chief at The Guardian, responded to the letter thusly "It is never acceptable to attack colleagues whose views you do not agree with, whether in meetings, on email, publicly or on social media.”. Truly a chilling tale of a latter-day witch hunt.

"She has occupied herself since in writing a detailed account of her side of the story – and the wider debate on transgender rights – for the website Unherd, which will be published today. " Oh, I guess not then.
>> No. 28913 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 9:12 am
28913 spacer
>>28912
>Why is she talking about being able to be mates with Peter Hitchens like that's an accomplishment? Not only do hundreds of thousands of people up and down the country work with people they'd happily see fed to a pride of lions, Peter Hitchens is a definitively awful person who stands against more-or-less everything Moore claims to stand for, and has actively tried to make British lives more unhappy and difficult for decades. It's an act of cowardice to speak kindly of such people.

The point she's trying to make there is that you can disagree with someone whilst still being civil and capable of hearing them out. There has definitely been an increase in people being intolerant of different opinions.
>> No. 28914 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 9:18 am
28914 spacer
>>28912

I see the issue here you are part of the problem she described.
>> No. 28915 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 9:29 am
28915 spacer
>>28911
That's a reasonable complaint on its own but I still don't see how it has any but the most tenuous connection to the rest of what she's on about. May as well have ended with a complaint about the poor editorial catching of spelling mistakes. Unless she's making some connection between a sexually-motivated murderer and trans people?
>> No. 28916 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 9:35 am
28916 spacer
>>28915
I think she's trying to say that some women feel they're being relegated in society but they're afraid to speak out about this because of the potential backlash. Then the Graun come along and do an obituary about the Yorkshire Ripper, notorious for targeting women.
>> No. 28917 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 9:51 am
28917 spacer
>>28916
Was the obituary about how great he was and how the women deserved it?
>> No. 28918 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 10:04 am
28918 spacer
>>28917
Yes.
>> No. 28919 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 10:18 am
28919 spacer
>>28918
No wonder she's annoyed then.
>> No. 28920 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 10:32 am
28920 spacer
>>28908
I feel so bad for this woman being silenced, to the extent that where before she was confined to The Guardian I now have to read her drivel on .gs. Maybe when she gets really silenced they will run her on TV 24 hours a day.
>> No. 28921 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 11:07 am
28921 spacer
>>28920
She isn't claiming to be silenced. She said she left because she didn't feel like senior staff such as Katharine Viner had her back sufficiently, which is pretty fundamental to journalism.
>> No. 28922 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 11:11 am
28922 spacer
>>28913
I'd put money on the uptake being 99% down to the dynamics of social media, rather than ideology.
I suspect the ideological element comes in because younger people are far less likely to have a cry over being called a stupid cunt on twitter, since they've been receiving "death threats" since age 12.

At the risk of undermining my point, I'll add generally that all the crowing about civility in recent years rubs me the wrong way. A lot of the time, the battle is really between incivility couched in polite language and formalities, and direct rudeness from the powerless. Politicians, journalists, celebrities etc all grouping up to have a cry over the end of civility because Alex from Jaywick called them mean names on Twitter just because they voted to hurt people, said nasty words themselves, or were just generally acting like a knob.
>> No. 28923 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 11:20 am
28923 spacer

enjoy.png
289232892328923
>>28913
You don't understand. There is a humungous difference between me and Joe Bloggs putting the world to rights in a Costa Coffee or wherever, and Peter Hitchens having a weekly column in one of the most popular papers in the country and making dozens and dozens of TV appearences over the years. I'm not going to judge Mr Bloggs for being wrong in my eyes, but Hitchens is actively trying to make people's lives worse and has a huge platform for doing so, he's spent this year alone advocating for a Brazil-style "let 'em all die" approach to COVID. He's a bad person, he is an immoral person. Joe's just mistaken and if I can't talk him round, well, whatever, he's his own worst enemy. These are completely different circumstances and conflating the two is the ambrosia of far too many in the columnist class right now. They seem to forget that they aren't anonymously pinning their think pieces to the walls of a public bathroom, and that having hundreds of people disagree with you is entirely normal when you're being published online for the world to see.

I'd also like to add that no one appears to have been uncivil to Moore in real life, it was all Twitter bellends. To which I'd point out that if you're going to stick your hand in a wasp's nest what happens next is a foregone conclusion. If signing on open letter is nothing less than the most civil form of disagreement possible then what else is there? She can air her voice in The Guardian, but if those who think otherwise do so in public they're the problem? It's nakedly hypocritical.

Anyway, hope she enjoys her newfound civility over at UnHerd*, see attached image. *Christ, just call it "Sheeple Silencer" already, those pretentious arseholes.

>>28914
See above.
>> No. 28924 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 11:30 am
28924 spacer
>>28923
>She can air her voice in The Guardian, but if those who think otherwise do so in public they're the problem?

What tickled me is that when Moore posted the list of the (already leaked) signatories online, one of them allegedly Owen Jones had a hissy fit about being 'doxxed.'
>> No. 28925 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 11:44 am
28925 spacer
>>28923
I for one quite enjoy Peter Hitchens.
>> No. 28930 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 1:31 pm
28930 spacer
>>28924

As funny as it is, when is Owen Jones not throwing a hissy fit?
>> No. 28931 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 1:48 pm
28931 spacer
>>28930
You now have to post a cartoon or photoshop of Jones covered in floods of tears, so that we can see your homophobia writ large.
>> No. 28937 Anonymous
25th November 2020
Wednesday 11:17 pm
28937 spacer
>>28923

>he's spent this year alone advocating for a Brazil-style "let 'em all die" approach to COVID. He's a bad person, he is an immoral person.

Pardon me for laser focussing on this one specific segment of your post, but this really betrays a specific ideological belief I am increasingly questioning to myself, recently.

Is the sanctity of human life the be all end all of morality? The one end to which our ethical compass should point us? Is it really? Does quality of life never factor in to it at all? I had a revelatory thought the other day, during one of my long hours transferring bits of viral transport medium in to lysis buffer. Isn't that just basically the argument pro-life Christians have been making this entire time?

We've all been caught up in it because of covid, when arguably none of us cared that much before about all the deaths from everything else. Mainly because it was happening in other countries, to poor people, I might argue.

If it turns out that reinfection is possible and the vaccine isn't a magic cure all, we're going to have to come to terms with the deaths whether we like it or not. I predict this sudden spell of compassion for our fellow man will evaporate rather quickly at that point, when it turns out that virtuously sacrificing the pub and the package holiday were all for naught.
>> No. 28938 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 4:58 am
28938 spacer
>>28937
>Does quality of life never factor in to it at all?
It's a factor but "I want to go to the pub" still doesn't rate more highly than someone else's "I don't want to die". This is, still, a first world country: complaining that your quality of life has dipped while you've still got food on your plate, central heating, WiFi and cable TV just makes you sound like a whiny baby.
>> No. 28945 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 12:48 pm
28945 spacer
>>28938

Of course, you would be absolutely right were it not for the millions of people put out of work since the beginning of this year, with no prospect of finding it again any time soon thanks to the collapse of the already strained local economy. What we have done is allowed an unprecedented transfer of wealth and power into the hands of the elite to slip by us unnoticed in the name of doing the right thing, and we're not going to appreciate the long term damage that has been inflicted for a generation or more. You have presented a somewhat dishonest position.

As usual, the chattering classes have zero sympathy for the povvos who have been dealt a very serious and lasting blow by all of this, by characterising them as thickos and selfish bastards who want to kill their own grandma. It's all their fault for voting the Tories in last year anyway, we'll say, from the comfort of the work-from-home non-jobs and cozy furlough wages. Therein lies the lack of perspective: For you it's just giving up the pub and package holidays, for many it's meant giving up their livelihoods.

Maybe it will turn out to have been a price worth paying and we will succeed in eradicating covid. But if it doesn't turn out that way, and much like the seasonal flu, we see covid becoming a lower level but ever present menace killing tens of thousands per year despite vaccination programs... Well, I really don't think it can be said to have been worth it in that case.
>> No. 28946 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 1:19 pm
28946 spacer
>>28945

How fucking presumptuous. I've been out of work this entire year thanks to this. No, the answer to problems caused by the unprecedented transfer of wealth and power you mention is not to let all the vulnerable people die. It should be obvious what the answer is but for some reason you're ignoring that and focusing on how best you can present yourself as a victim.
>> No. 28947 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 1:27 pm
28947 spacer
>>28946
>focusing on how best you can present yourself as a victim.

Isn't that what politics is all about these days?
>> No. 28949 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 1:58 pm
28949 spacer
>>28946
> It should be obvious what the answer
Communism? Education? Simplifying regulation for small businesses? Reopen coal mines?
>> No. 28951 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 2:07 pm
28951 spacer
>>28938

There has to be a slidding scale, If I issued the demand no one is to go on holiday ever again otherwise I execute a hostage, and then I rolled it up to never go out for public entertainment, then no outside except for work and food, then only for food.

There has to come a point where people are willing to let that one person die so that everyone else can live a normal healthy life, and I don't think that is unreasonable. Cars are really fucking dangerous, they kill people, (sometimes ones who aren't even using them) and destroy the planet, but they improve our quality of life far too much to consider a few mere deaths.
>> No. 28952 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 2:28 pm
28952 spacer
>>28951

Could make the same argument for slavery.
>> No. 28953 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 2:30 pm
28953 spacer
>>28946

Nobody said the answer was to let all the vulnerable people die, presumptuouslad. None of this is black and white, which is the part you seem incapable of grappling with, and the more we learn about covid the less clear cut any of it is starting to look.
>> No. 28954 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 2:35 pm
28954 spacer
>>28953
No, they just questioned whether keeping them alive is worth it, with the implication that it's not.
>> No. 28955 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 2:42 pm
28955 spacer
>>28952

And as the post that spawned this debate pointed out, you could argue in the opposite direction until your reach the logical conclusion of pro-life anti-abortion fundamentalists, who hold that the value of a life always outweighs the suffering caused as a result of saving it.

In that particular instance, most people in the moral majority reason that the potential suffering is often not worth saving the life, and so murdering the unborn child is just. There's also the weight of a life already lived to consider, so that most people do not consider an unborn child's life as "valuable" as an adult, but again, the same inversion of the argument can be made that losing an elderly life with many rich experiences already lived is a lesser evil than seeing a young life consigned to misery.

All of us fall somewhere in the middle, we just rarely have to think about where.
>> No. 28956 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 2:48 pm
28956 spacer

RArISpnG_400x400.jpg
289562895628956
>>28955
>> No. 28957 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 2:56 pm
28957 spacer
>>28955

If you want to kill yourself out of misery then I'm not going to forbid you, but if you're prioritising your own mild difference in comfort over the life of someone who doesn't want to die then that's not your decision to make. Or at least, if you're going to make selfish decisions that affect others negatively then there's nothing to prevent others doing the same to you.
>> No. 28958 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 3:20 pm
28958 spacer
>>28957
> Or at least, if you're going to make selfish decisions that affect others negatively then there's nothing to prevent others doing the same to you.
Now you're getting it lad. If someone feels they are at risking from being negatively impacted by others, they can choose to avoid such situations. Each individual can make his or her own choice about risk. That's been the English way, for example allowing people to use their judgement when crossing the road safely, rather than having strict crossing laws and jaywalking etc.
>> No. 28961 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 3:51 pm
28961 spacer
>>28958
And yet it would still be manslaughter if I ran you over.
>> No. 28962 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 4:08 pm
28962 spacer
>>28957

>if you're prioritising your own mild difference in comfort over the life of someone who doesn't want to die then that's not your decision to make.

It absolutely is, if by no other point than how can you stop me making that decision? By making a threat? Then we get into the question of if that is your decision to make and if it is appropriate too. For all the dressing it up, the power to do a thing and to make a choice about if a thing should be done thing is purely defined by the capacity to be able to do it. The government has hand waved the majority of tough decision on covid to 'make it up for yourselves', if they aren't going to enforce it why shouldn't I make up my own mind any more than I shouldn't choose to buy weed light up a spliff which they also say not to do but don't really enforce?

A student union can be fairly elected and oppose the occupation of the west bank, it doesn't mean anything because it isn't like they have any power to stop it.
>> No. 28963 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 4:15 pm
28963 spacer
>>28962

There are literally laws governing this lockdown.
>> No. 28964 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 4:18 pm
28964 spacer
>>28962
>It absolutely is, if by no other point than how can you stop me making that decision? By making a threat?
Yes, see
>if you're going to make selfish decisions that affect others negatively then there's nothing to prevent others doing the same to you.
It's called the social contract.
>> No. 28966 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 5:57 pm
28966 spacer
>>28963

There are literally laws governing the sale and the purchase of weed, they are only as good as the willingness/capacity to implement them.

>>28964

the social contract isn't worth the paper it is written on.
>> No. 28967 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 6:34 pm
28967 spacer
Why do I get the feeling this bloke wants to cite the Magna Carta?
>> No. 28968 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 6:44 pm
28968 spacer
>>28967

>the Magna Carta

Tut.
>> No. 28972 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 7:11 pm
28972 spacer
>>28967

I don't at all. I get the feeling you can't distinguish between someone who doesn't believe in what you believe in and someone who is against it, your world view and your paradigm too simplistic.

Now I don't think the social contract exists, because it doesn't, it is a fairy tale something they teach in school to justify a position that is ultimately intangible and unjustifiable, like human rights, any power comes down to "we say so and if you don't do it we will do something you won't like through force", anything else is set dressing.

That doesn't mean I am a freeman of the land by pointing out the lies. The same way an atheist is not a Satanist, but there are Christians who can't tell the difference (because it is too alien to their simple world view if you don't support god you are in league with Satan end of), You can't tell the difference between someone who said is only as relevant as it is enforceable, and that which isn’t enforced can be ignored and someone who barks in court "man overboard".
>> No. 28973 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 7:30 pm
28973 spacer
>>28957

>Or at least, if you're going to make selfish decisions that affect others negatively then there's nothing to prevent others doing the same to you.

Selfish decisions like forcing everyone to lose their job just so old Ethel doesn't buy it six months early, you mean? It's entirely relative.

Personally, I feel our failure to act sooner set us on a path which required an over-correction of the course. Now, we find ourselves in a position where what we have done goes against the "greater good" by some margin, but we're committed to it because the embarrassment of our earlier failures made us all terribly conscious of letting it get worse.

But the main thing is, at no stage have we been prepared to go far enough. At no stage would it have been considered acceptable to close the airports, close the supermarkets and get the army out on the streets enforcing a genuine quarantine until the reservoir of infection in the population disappeared. Gosh, that would have been unthinkable.

Instead we'd rather take inadequate measures and then chastise people for not supporting those measures enthusiastically enough, because you've got to be a monster who wants all the old people dead not to support this frankly retarded set of limp-dicked half attempts at control.

It's all a load of shite honestly. Sick of pretending otherwise.
>> No. 28975 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 7:42 pm
28975 spacer
>>28972

I just meant you're batshit enough to not respect other's right to live.
>> No. 28976 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 7:45 pm
28976 spacer
>>28973

All we needed to do was restrict airports in january or february - We had people coming direct from Wuhan (or via Schiphol at least) and nobody so much as gave them a leaflet.

I don't really understand why, other than poor leadership - we were much more careful during the Ebola thing.
>> No. 28978 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 7:50 pm
28978 spacer
>>28973
I agree.

People and by that token popularist governments are too thick to appreciate the virtue of preventative measures.

All those people who cry 'but the economy' at the idea of closing the country, don't really understand the problem, the damage to the economy was inevitable, it was unpreventable the only question is, if it was a short term controlled manner, or if it was bleed out in a way for months that would that would actually do significantly more damage in the long term.
>> No. 28979 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 7:53 pm
28979 spacer
>>28976

>I don't really understand why, other than poor leadership

I suspect that's entirely why. I will stop short of suggesting it was down to Boris (or his advisors, ministers, etc) being personally irresponsible and rash, as much as I would like to- But I wonder what difference it would have made if they had already been in government for maybe a year or two, instead of a fresh, month old government?
>> No. 28980 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 7:55 pm
28980 spacer
>>28975

Who said people had a right to live? How can people have a right to something no one has control over to grant? Are you going to wave the Human rights act in the face of the doctor when they try to call time of death on a patient because that patient has a right to live?
>> No. 28981 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 8:08 pm
28981 spacer
>>28980

Fucking hell.
>> No. 28982 Anonymous
26th November 2020
Thursday 8:14 pm
28982 spacer
>>28973

Yeah fair enough.
>> No. 29012 Anonymous
27th November 2020
Friday 5:25 pm
29012 spacer
>>28982

I... No, that's not how this is meant to work. Can you at least call me a cunt?
>> No. 29020 Anonymous
27th November 2020
Friday 7:26 pm
29020 spacer
>>29012
Fair enough, you cunt.
>> No. 29021 Anonymous
27th November 2020
Friday 7:50 pm
29021 spacer
Why does this thread bump up the board every time I use gay porn, for fuck sake? I want to forget that depravity.
>> No. 29023 Anonymous
27th November 2020
Friday 8:54 pm
29023 spacer
>>29021
It's YMCA-lad messing with you.
>> No. 29024 Anonymous
27th November 2020
Friday 9:57 pm
29024 spacer
>>29021


>> No. 29144 Anonymous
1st December 2020
Tuesday 7:17 pm
29144 spacer

EoKvZpAXMAEbY5T.jpg
291442914429144
Ellen Page is now Elliot Page. Not sure why that's made me more attracted to them.
>> No. 29147 Anonymous
1st December 2020
Tuesday 8:21 pm
29147 spacer
>>29144
How does being trans and queer work?
>> No. 29148 Anonymous
1st December 2020
Tuesday 9:10 pm
29148 spacer
>>29144
>them
Shouldn't it be "he" now?
>> No. 29149 Anonymous
1st December 2020
Tuesday 9:24 pm
29149 spacer
>>29144

Well he's definitely the kind of lad I'd fuck. Suppose I'm gay now.
>> No. 29150 Anonymous
1st December 2020
Tuesday 9:25 pm
29150 spacer
>>29147

Bisexuals exist.
>> No. 29151 Anonymous
1st December 2020
Tuesday 9:28 pm
29151 spacer
>>29144

10/10, would shag his arse and/or bonus hole.

>>29147

Dunno m8, I assume he's a tommy two-ways.
>> No. 29154 Anonymous
1st December 2020
Tuesday 10:32 pm
29154 spacer
>>29148
Is it offensive to refer to people as them/they?
>> No. 29155 Anonymous
1st December 2020
Tuesday 10:44 pm
29155 spacer
>>29154

I don't think so - I'm quite sure when it's used in reference to cis people, nobody really even notices. It's far less offensive than misgendering them. On the other hand, if you're replying to a post in which the subject is literally telling us their pronouns, there's probably no need.

though I used "them" and "their" in this post and you probably didn't think that was out of place, did you?
>> No. 29163 Anonymous
2nd December 2020
Wednesday 2:53 pm
29163 spacer
Just another page in the trans agenda.
>> No. 29165 Anonymous
2nd December 2020
Wednesday 5:44 pm
29165 spacer
>>29163
Trans people can't read, idiot, how could they write a book?
>> No. 29185 Anonymous
3rd December 2020
Thursday 11:52 am
29185 spacer
>>29155
How often do pronouns actually get used?

I don't think I can remember the last time I needed / chose to use any in conversation.
>> No. 29188 Anonymous
3rd December 2020
Thursday 12:46 pm
29188 spacer
>>29185
You used three in that post.
>> No. 29194 Anonymous
3rd December 2020
Thursday 2:12 pm
29194 spacer
>>29185

I always got told off for using pronouns instead of names when addressing people. "Who's 'she', the cats mother?" And so on. Apparently it's impolite.
>> No. 29197 Anonymous
3rd December 2020
Thursday 3:48 pm
29197 spacer
>>29188
Mainly thinking the third-person variety in the context here, but points have been awarded.
>> No. 29212 Anonymous
3rd December 2020
Thursday 8:53 pm
29212 spacer
>>27610

>Latinx is Yankee cultural imperialism that isn't accepted by the Latino community because it breaks grammar and doesn't make any fucking sense. The end result will be that most words in Spanish will eventually end in -x.

More realistically, it's been adopted by many groups.

You can't expect a community of tens of millions to agree instantly on one thing, that would be absurd. Some people think it's fine, some don't, they've got varying reasons. As long as the meaning is understood, there's no really big deal.
>> No. 29214 Anonymous
3rd December 2020
Thursday 11:10 pm
29214 spacer
>>29212

The problem being, in this instance, that the groups it's meant to benefit aren't the ones who favour using it. Nearly all attempts at research into the matter show latino people more or less universally reject it, and it's only a niche of white liberals who insist on forcing the meme, so to speak.

I'm sure you can agree with what's problematic about that. White people being so callously chauvanistic that they've decided it doesn't matter if the people they're speaking on behalf of actually agree. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
>> No. 29215 Anonymous
4th December 2020
Friday 3:46 pm
29215 spacer
Speaking to the few Latin Americans I know, two of them have both said a more appropriate neutral suffix is "Latine", which rolls off the tongue a lot better than latincks anyway.
>> No. 29216 Anonymous
4th December 2020
Friday 7:55 pm
29216 spacer
>>29215
> "Latine"

M8 that's exactly how you end up with the entire internet calling Hispanic people Latrines for the rest of eternity.

On a vaguely more serious note, I don't know enough about Spanish verb conjugation to comment there, but in Portuguese it'd also totally clash with a lot of verbs which end in 'e' in either the third person or third person imperative. I imagine that in even more complicated Romance languages like Italian or Romanian the whole thing would be a total cluster fuck.
>> No. 29217 Anonymous
4th December 2020
Friday 11:14 pm
29217 spacer
I just remembered I had a friend from school who had a massive crush on Elliot Page almost ten years ago, but last time I spoke with him he'd come out as gay. Feeling happy for him right now.
>> No. 29218 Anonymous
4th December 2020
Friday 11:31 pm
29218 spacer
>>29217
Would a gay even be into a ftm tranny? What's the appeal if there's no cock?
>> No. 29221 Anonymous
4th December 2020
Friday 11:49 pm
29221 spacer
>>29218
And there's plenty of 'straight' men who are into mtf and prefer the version with a cock. Best not to ask questions - we've already lost tomboys.
>> No. 29224 Anonymous
5th December 2020
Saturday 3:34 am
29224 spacer
>>29217
To be perfectly honest, I had a massive crush on her when I was young. I didn't know then, but I just like petite girls, which I know now.
>> No. 29228 Anonymous
5th December 2020
Saturday 10:26 am
29228 spacer
https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-lgbt-transgender-trfn/uk-court-rules-against-trans-clinic-over-treatment-for-children-idUSKBN28B3AV

What do you ladx reckon to this ruling? Like for me it seems reasonably sensible but then I fear I'm just becoming a reactionary old man nowadays.

>LONDON (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Children aged under 16 will need court approval in England and Wales to access puberty blockers after a landmark ruling on Tuesday amid a global debate about the age at which a child can choose to transition gender.

>Three High Court judges said it was “highly unlikely” that a child of 13 or under was “competent to give consent” to puberty blockers, and it was “doubtful” that 14- and 15-year olds could “weigh the long-term risks and consequences”.

Like that doesn't seem unreasonable to me, making such life changing and in some cases irreversible changes to your body at that age seems... well a bit risky to say the least.

I was just getting drunk/stoned in the park and trying to get my fingers into fannies at that age. The thought of having one myself never even crossed my mind.
>> No. 29229 Anonymous
5th December 2020
Saturday 10:26 am
29229 spacer
>>29228
Also I was just an absolute fucking moron when I was that age, and probably still am tbh.
>> No. 29230 Anonymous
5th December 2020
Saturday 10:33 am
29230 spacer
>>29228

I did some fairly extreme things in the name of fitting in when I was in my early teens, up to and including heroin and self harm. I recognise I was on the far end of the scale of impressionability, but at the same time I suppose if I had made friends with trans rights activists rather than emo dealers, I might well have a regret-fanny right now.

On the other hand, I can't really imagine wanting a sex change unless I was pretty fucking sure, even at 14. I just hope this doesn't make it more difficult for those who truly need it.
>> No. 29231 Anonymous
5th December 2020
Saturday 10:37 am
29231 spacer
>>29228
Deciding not to do it is just as much a choice with just as irreversible ramifications. Pretending otherwise seems nonsensical to me. It's presenting a false dichotomy between nature and what humans do, particularly false in that of all things it's cherry-picking this one to make a stand with while ignoring the other areas in life where a similar distinction could be made.
>> No. 29232 Anonymous
5th December 2020
Saturday 10:47 am
29232 spacer
>>29228

Puberty blockers are reversible - if you stop taking them, you go through puberty. There's a lack of evidence on the long-term effects because their use is relatively new, but that's hardly a unique issue - you can't get long-term data without treating patients.

The crux of the High Court's ruling seems to be that the administration of puberty blockers should be treated as if it's irreversible, because the overwhelming majority of people who start on puberty blockers eventually start treatment with irreversible cross-sex hormones. That seems like a slightly weird argument to me - that this treatment is too dangerous for young people to make an informed choice about specifically because so few of them change their minds later.
>> No. 29234 Anonymous
5th December 2020
Saturday 12:11 pm
29234 spacer
>>29228
given how few people are affected, it seems like a waste of time that in the best case scenario will hurt as many people if it helps.
my recollection is that the number of people who actually take puberty blockers before 16 is in the low hundreds. the figure of referrals to the clinic is only 2500, and only a fraction of those will go on to any kind of treatment, and of those only a fraction will still be under 16 by the time they do, and only a portion of those will get puberty blockers, and so on. It's not like getting antidepressants where you can just walk in and the GP, fill in their 20 question form and walk out with a prescription.

The question I'm left with is: If you need a court order, can the doctor request that for you, or do you basically knock every kid with a family who can't (or won't) pay expensive legal fees off the list of people eligible for that treatment? if it's the latter, that's a pretty abhorrent thought.
>> No. 29236 Anonymous
6th December 2020
Sunday 7:21 pm
29236 spacer
>>29230

I was told by somebody elsewhere on the internet that there's some kind of research somewhere floating around about how the modern day "trend" of gender identity issues in teenagers mirrors the trend ten-twenty years ago of bulimia/anorexia, both of which you hear very little of nowadays.

Obviously the person saying this didn't provide a source and it was obvious they were going at it from a "this means they're the same and trans people are just a weird teenager mental health fad", but it kept coming to mind over the next few days and to be honest... Sounds sort of plausible actually.

I don't deny there are plenty of people who are "legitimate" trans, and it sounds nasty to have to draw a line, especially when so much of the effort has gone into de-stigmatising and getting it taken seriously. But at the same time I can kind of see it, that there's potentially a lot of kids just kind of drawn in out of impressionability and that fierce teenage peer pressure.

It's a thorny one ethically either way I think.
>> No. 29237 Anonymous
6th December 2020
Sunday 7:50 pm
29237 spacer
>>29236

That sounds like a "we need to address the underlying conditions" thing rather than a "we need to ban alleviation of the symptoms and punish the people who need it legitimately" thing.
>> No. 29238 Anonymous
6th December 2020
Sunday 8:04 pm
29238 spacer
>>29237

True, but who knows how things will pan out. Fifty years from now perhaps we'll be reading articles about how in the barbaric times of the mid 2010s people put their kids on hormone therapy because it was less hassle than giving them proper treatment, like getting your wife a lobotomy fifty years ago from now.
>> No. 29242 Anonymous
6th December 2020
Sunday 9:02 pm
29242 spacer
>>29236>>29237
Eating disorders began to be commonly diagnosed and treated "ten-twenty years ago", they didn't simply emerge from nowhere or because Kate Moss was famous at the time. This is as idiotic of a comparison as saying "emos invented self-harm" or thinking poets only started going mental after the "Sylvia Plath effect" was coined, you big pillocks. Usually I'd delete the horrible rude bit and look up a government paper to back me up, but the fucking idiots have saved the paper as an "ods" file which only seems to open in Excel but doesn't display anything but the cover, making it useless to me, so I'm annoyed at whoever did that as much as I am you pair.

>>29238
Oh, shut up, Graham.
>> No. 29243 Anonymous
6th December 2020
Sunday 10:05 pm
29243 spacer
>>29242

It can be a combination of new reporting and fad.

Everything about the last 10 years or so has lead me to the conclusion that the internet echo chamber thinks white straight men should hate themselves for being those things, so much so that in groups where they aren't present gay men are targeted instead, and that being one of the 'new genders' makes you interesting and and people will be proud of you, I can't see how you could be a teenager on the internet now and not be uncertain of your identity frankly, being normal isn't just considered bland it is the target of disgust.

Even the trannies have tuned in on this, they call them Trendsexuals.

Don't act like you don't know what I said is true you only need to look at twitter for 5 minutes to know it.
>> No. 29244 Anonymous
6th December 2020
Sunday 10:16 pm
29244 spacer

1591904376225.jpg
292442924429244
>>29243
>you only need to look at twitter for 5 minutes to know it.
Yeah, okay, goodbye.
>> No. 29245 Anonymous
6th December 2020
Sunday 10:33 pm
29245 spacer
>>29244

'Woke' twitter ruinned the first probe landing on an asteroid for everyone are you really going to gaslight that it isn't a complete shit pit?
>> No. 29246 Anonymous
6th December 2020
Sunday 10:44 pm
29246 spacer
>>29236
It does make one think. My confused thoughts are that we do love putting people into neat little boxes which doesn't necessarily conform to reality and can harm individual expression (see: the explosion in asperger self-diagnosis). I mean fucking hell is the internet atrocious for doing that which appears to have replaced the ills of traditional mass media in the 00s.

Sometimes a cigar is a cigar and a girl who is a bit tomboyish is still a hetero-normative girl. Ultimately it's that label culture more broadly that I think needs addressing combined with our tendency to pretend we have any idea what we're doing. A super-cool trans character on television is awesome for transgender kids but you can't pretend that kids might get anxious and confused if they're bombarded by messaging.

On the flip-side the negative reaction mirrors social anxieties in the same way satanic cult paranoia mirrored the breakdown of the traditional family care structure in the 80s and 90s. There's no doubt transgender kids exist but they don't really exist either on a day-to-day level for most of society, it's just a debate that makes noise because we're in a confusing time where things are changing and that's scary. Or it's a perfect excuse to be an ideological dickhead as >>29244 proves.
>> No. 29247 Anonymous
6th December 2020
Sunday 10:51 pm
29247 spacer
>>29245>>29246
I wasn't saying "Twitter is good actually", you fucking spanners. I was saying "if you were stood in front of my and started talking about Twitter I would spit on you and leave the room".
>> No. 29248 Anonymous
6th December 2020
Sunday 11:03 pm
29248 spacer
>>29228
>LONDON (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Children aged under 16 will need court approval in England and Wales to access puberty blockers after a landmark ruling on Tuesday amid a global debate about the age at which a child can choose to transition gender.
Not quite accurate. Private healthcare and internet pharmacies will be unaffected. This just punishes povvo trannies and/or pushes people outside clinical supervision.
>> No. 29249 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 12:29 am
29249 spacer
>>29248
It's also not accurate that this is a 'global debate' - it's only in the UK where every part of the political spectrum seems to have bizarrely formed a united front to crack down on trans rights.
>> No. 29250 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 1:12 am
29250 spacer
>>29242

Stop having a teary and go buy yourself a new packer, love.

>>29247

Not him, but talking about twitter is perfectly valid with regards to issues like these. Twitter is where the most vicious mentalists of either side (and pretending there are only two sides is misleading reductionism but we won't dive into that here) live, and have their opinions propagated. Twitter is the very definition of the "vocal minority" rule of thumb- Its userbase is relatively small, but it's also where the trendy urban journos hang out, so accordingly its impact on wider media, and therefore broader culture, is utterly disproportionate.

>>29249

>only in the UK

How are Uganda on trans rights? Russia? Stop being a fuckwit.
>> No. 29251 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 1:19 am
29251 spacer
Why don't you all let a far more intelligent man than any of us elucidate you on these muddy waters and stop going around in circles.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScZCL0KYj3M

Trans rights as a concept has been politicised as some kind of defining struggle of our time. It's a human right to identify how you see fit, unquestionably; but you're an absolute dickhead if you think that's the most noble cause worth fighting for in the 21st century, rather than just the boiled down tar of pure, unadulterated individualism.
>> No. 29252 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 9:12 am
29252 spacer
>>29251

Yeah we know.
>> No. 29253 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 9:55 am
29253 spacer
>>29250
You're really going to compare Western liberal democracies to fucking Uganda and Russia? What next, shall we talk about 'the global debate about whether voters should be subject to beatings at the polling station'?
>> No. 29255 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 10:58 am
29255 spacer
>>29252

And so on and so on... *schniff*
>> No. 29256 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 12:36 pm
29256 spacer
>>29253
Well it depends who they voted for doesn't it
>> No. 29257 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 1:02 pm
29257 spacer
>>29256
No.
>> No. 29258 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 1:05 pm
29258 spacer
>>29253

Go on then, what's the difference?
>> No. 29259 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 1:13 pm
29259 spacer
>>29258

The difference between Britain and Uganda is 25.
Britain = 2+18+9+20+1+9+14=73 ; Uganda 21+7+1+14+4+1=48
>> No. 29260 Anonymous
7th December 2020
Monday 1:36 pm
29260 spacer
>>29259
In Scrabble, Britain beats Uganda 9-8.

Also, Britain beats 'Murica because 'Murica is spelt incorrectly and doesn't score.
>> No. 29404 Anonymous
18th December 2020
Friday 7:57 am
29404 spacer
>Two judges have struck a blow to enemies of free speech after ruling people should have the right to offend and even abuse each other without facing a police investigation.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/12/17/exclusive-people-must-have-right-offend-without-facing-police/

Good news, everyone. It's been decided that freedom of speech includes the right to offend trannies. Take that, wokeness!
>> No. 29405 Anonymous
18th December 2020
Friday 11:02 am
29405 spacer
>>29404
Why can't I shake the feeling that no judge would say (and few newspapers would approvingly publish) "Free speech includes the right... to abuse another" in the case of politicians moaning about mean words on Twitter?
>> No. 29406 Anonymous
18th December 2020
Friday 11:06 am
29406 spacer
>>29405

I'm pretty sure that the ruling was the judicial equivalent of "haven't you got any proper criminals to arrest?".
>> No. 29407 Anonymous
18th December 2020
Friday 11:47 am
29407 spacer
You lads are losing sight of the long-game. If pig-in-a-wig is the common term for a trannie then posting a picture of a bacon sarnie becomes a hate crime.

ITZ

>>29405
Probably because it would never get anywhere as it's generally accepted that being abused is part of a politicians job like how you can get away with calling a policeman a cunt. Until Labour get in that is.
>> No. 29408 Anonymous
18th December 2020
Friday 6:33 pm
29408 spacer
>>29404
I doubt it makes exceptions for protected classes but hopefully it'll reduce the number of trivial cases being brought to the rozzers.

Hell, if calling someone a cunt over the internet was a prosecutable offence this whole website would be in stocks.
>> No. 29421 Anonymous
19th December 2020
Saturday 11:32 am
29421 spacer
>>29404
When do I receive my court-mandated N-word pass then?
>> No. 29424 Anonymous
19th December 2020
Saturday 11:53 am
29424 spacer
>>29421
I find nigger to be too American. Take a lesson from John Terry and use "black cunt" instead.
>> No. 29425 Anonymous
19th December 2020
Saturday 12:10 pm
29425 spacer
Or did he use "black bastard" instead?
>> No. 29427 Anonymous
19th December 2020
Saturday 1:39 pm
29427 spacer

wankmags.jpg
294272942729427
The Graun's reporting of the bloke suing his parents for chucking his $29,000 porn stash used this glorious image.
>> No. 29444 Anonymous
19th December 2020
Saturday 6:39 pm
29444 spacer
>>29427
I might need to email them to see if I can have a full HD sized version to use as a wallpaper. I really like the Hustler with the woman dribbling ice cream all over herself, high art.
>> No. 29445 Anonymous
19th December 2020
Saturday 6:46 pm
29445 spacer

gettyimages-491623880-2048x2048.jpg
294452944529445
>>29444
Getty have it.

Context:
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/art/features/madame-roxy-s-erotic-emporium-lucy-sparrow-interview-artist-behind-felt-soho-sex-shop-porn-censorship-and-her-stripper-past-a6684181.html
>> No. 29448 Anonymous
19th December 2020
Saturday 7:59 pm
29448 spacer
>>29445

Setting this as my missus' wallpaper to get her back for that little Owen Jones stunt earlier this year.
>> No. 29538 Anonymous
24th December 2020
Thursday 8:33 pm
29538 spacer
>>29537
This had fucking better be automated. If some spamming cunt thinks this place is a likely venue for shifting such tat, I despair.
>> No. 31253 Anonymous
14th February 2021
Sunday 10:26 am
31253 spacer
>An NHS trust is to use "gender inclusive language" for its maternity services, including terms such as "chestfeeding" and "birthing parent".

>Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals Trust is thought to be first in the UK to adopt the language in its internal communications and meetings. The trust said it recognised "challenges" gender identity can have on pregnancy, birth and feeding.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-56007728

How very Brighton.
>> No. 31254 Anonymous
14th February 2021
Sunday 11:39 am
31254 spacer
>>31253

There is obviously a lot to unpack here. but why is "chestfeeding" a preferable term, or is the whole point of the exercise to be difficult?
>> No. 31255 Anonymous
14th February 2021
Sunday 12:02 pm
31255 spacer
>>31254
>is the whole point of the exercise to be difficult?

Pretty much. A lot of the language used in this sort of thing is to make it exclusive and inaccessible to the general public because what really matters is entrenching your position within the "in crowd" rather than actual progress.

As far as I'm aware there has only been once case of transgender parents in this country and they live in London. Brighton NHS have wasted fuck knows how many man hours and resources just to show everyone how right on they are.
>> No. 31256 Anonymous
14th February 2021
Sunday 12:23 pm
31256 spacer
>>31253
I imagine in practice nurses will use the most apropriate term for the patients rather than 'chestfeed' as a new catch-all. When you consider the apparently very low number of Gender dysphoriad, i very much doubt this'll become the new normal.
>> No. 31257 Anonymous
14th February 2021
Sunday 12:28 pm
31257 spacer
>>31253
>>31254
>>31255
This has already been shown to be bollocks. They're still calling mothers mothers, this stuff only applies if the person in question is transgender, IE, FtM. A load of hysterical bollocks and if you'd read the article you'd know this.

>However, while some reports have stated that Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust is entirely replacing any language related to womanhood, this is not the case.

So stop crying, it's Sunday.
>> No. 31260 Anonymous
14th February 2021
Sunday 1:12 pm
31260 spacer
>>31257
They're still policing language used internally within the Trust.
>> No. 31261 Anonymous
14th February 2021
Sunday 1:46 pm
31261 spacer
>>31260
No they aren't, these are guidelines for the very few times an FtM rocks up with a bambino hurrying out of his fanny, so things can go as smoothly as possible and the midwife at the sharp end doesn't have to worry about upsetting anyone. If you've got a problem with that, then I'd be happy to hear what you think the Trust ought to do instead? Or do you just like whinging?
>> No. 31262 Anonymous
14th February 2021
Sunday 1:55 pm
31262 spacer
>>31261
>thought to be first in the UK to adopt the language in its internal communications and meetings.

Yes, yes they are. If someone has spent countless hours creating this policy you can guarantee they will be an absolute jobsworth about ensuring it is followed because they'll be highly protective over it.
>> No. 31266 Anonymous
14th February 2021
Sunday 2:28 pm
31266 spacer
>>31261

Brighton made their maximum speed limit 20 mph they are capable of anything.
>> No. 31267 Anonymous
14th February 2021
Sunday 2:41 pm
31267 spacer
>>31262

You're complaining about imaginary situations now lad.
>> No. 31437 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 8:55 am
31437 spacer

153516600_3907043199363142_6737400088709480615_n.jpg
314373143731437

>> No. 31438 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 9:02 am
31438 spacer
>>31437

Lets be fair mr & mrs potato heard are identical toys with different plug-ins, I'm not sure why they decided that they were going to half their product line but the decision wouldn't have been because it was woke that is just how you spin it.
>> No. 31439 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 9:05 am
31439 spacer
>>31438

If you put the mr and mrs components in the same box you can charge more for it, and if you have two kids you're still buying two anyway. Everyone wins, except gammons.
>> No. 31440 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 9:06 am
31440 spacer
>>31438
>>31439

And it's still gender binary in either case, the irony at the heart of woke gender politics.
>> No. 31441 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 9:11 am
31441 spacer
>>31438
They're still selling Mr and Mrs Potato Head, they're just renaming the overall brand that they both fall under to Potato Head.

https://twitter.com/Hasbro/status/1365038178814590995
>> No. 31443 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 10:18 am
31443 spacer
I wonder who fanned the flames and made this complete non-story a worldwide issue overnight? It's the perfect divide and conquer technique. Get the plebs arguing about how their kids toys (which aren't even changing) should have a cock so they are distracted from the actual issues. I suppose we can expect to see shit like this hit the world news regularly now and drown out everything else.
>> No. 31444 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 10:29 am
31444 spacer
>>31443
All we know is that it wasn't Billy Joel.
>> No. 31445 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 10:30 am
31445 spacer
>>31440
Absolute cretin. Take a look at yourself, a long hard look at yourself and ask "what the Hell am I doing?".

>>31443
It drives me insane, every bit of nonsense being hyped up so fat radio hosts and braindead columnists can engage in "culture war" bollocks.
>> No. 31446 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 10:42 am
31446 spacer

zoomsky.jpg
314463144631446
>>31443

The overwhelming majority of news and entertainment media is aimed at diverting the audience from the issues that really affect their lives.
>> No. 31447 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 10:46 am
31447 spacer
>A major blow to woke warriors was dealt yesterday as the government agreed to change a bill that had referred to pregnant “persons” instead of “mothers“. It took the Bill getting to the Lords for the change to be made, despite the absurd error being pointed out when it was still in the Commons…

>Lord Lucas was behind the change, after having submitted 15 separate amendments, so each reference to “person” in the bill was replaced with “mother or expectant mother”. Speaking yesterday he told the Lords:

>“Almost everybody who spoke from all around the House was clear that the use of the phrase “pregnant person” in the Bill was unacceptable… Words matter, especially on the long road to equality. The use of the word “person” in the Bill as it is now erases the reality that, overwhelmingly, maternity is undertaken by women and not by men. To leave “person” in place would be a step backwards in women’s equality”

>Minister Lord True accepted the amendment yesterday, saying the government “recognises the strength of feeling on this issue”

https://order-order.com/2021/02/26/government-agrees-to-call-pregnant-persons-mothers/

The forces of Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals Trust were repelled today but for how long?

>>31441
The thing about Mr Potato Head is that the 'Mr' is a juxtaposition that adds character to the product. It's like changing Pet Rock to just Rock. Someone in corporate still thought this was a good idea when it was, in fact, a bad one.
>> No. 31448 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 11:02 am
31448 spacer

Cheerleader_Being.png
314483144831448
>>31447

>Someone in corporate still thought this was a good idea when it was, in fact, a bad one

Agree to disagree lad. I for one can't wait for my kids to play with 'non-gendered corporeal fun object' from Mattel
>> No. 31449 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 11:03 am
31449 spacer
>>31447
>'Mr' is a juxtaposition that adds character to the product

Only if you believe gender is character, and it's becoming more accepted that that way of thinking is harmful.

I'd be in favour of a gender-neutral title, except that alternatives like 'Citizen Potato Head' or 'Comrade Potato Head' are a lot less jolly.
>> No. 31450 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 11:09 am
31450 spacer
>>31449

Perhaps they could have sidestepped the issue entirely by rebranding as Dr Potatohead. Give them all little white coats and stethoscopes or lecturer's blazers.

Run an advertisement campaign saying that Potatohead was working very hard on completing his PhD or MD programme, and has thus transcended the need for gender based titles.

I should get hired in PR or some shit.
>> No. 31452 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 11:18 am
31452 spacer
>>31451

According to who? The entire woke argument is that it is a concept divorced from sex or sexuality, it is a classification of personality THAT defines itself by pronouns, that is character by definition. How could it possibly be anything other?

I didn't get much sleep last night and typo'd. please bring back delete mods.
>> No. 31455 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 11:50 am
31455 spacer

stop.jpg
314553145531455
>>31446
Santa's let himself go.

I wish you should violently shake people through the internet and scream "YOU'RE ARGUING OVER A FUCKING KID'S TOY WHOSE NAME ISN'T EVEN CHANGING WHILST AN NIGH-OPENLY CORRUPT GOVERNMENT SIPHONS BILLIONS TO GIVE TO THEIR MATES TO DELIVER NO SERVICES IN RETURN, OVER A HUNDRED THOUSAND ARE DEAD FOR NO GOOD REASON, AND WE'RE STILL LETTING CORPORATIONS KILL THE FUCKING PLANET". I guess the culture war shit is perfect because it's the most efficient way to get people riled up - it seems to push a particularly effective button in a great number of people.

I've just finished re-reading a book called The Sheep Look Up, by John Brunner. Written in 1972, it's about a world where we didn't clean up the air in the 1970s and as a result the whole planet, but America especially is a toxic nightmare with poisoned seas, pollution so bad you can't go outside without a mask, and illness inescapable.

It's surprisingly forward-looking in some respects -- primarily the rise of populist governments in the face of crises who simply deny they are happening and call anyone who disagrees a traitor. One of the central characters is an academic-turned-social-commentator known as Austin Train, whom I am certain is based off Chomsky, and I imagine he must feel the way Train is presented to in the book - spent his lifetime warning of catastrophe, and amassed a large number of followers in doing so, but ultimately litte if anything came of it.
>> No. 31456 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 11:52 am
31456 spacer

mr-potato-head-doctor-science-tuber_1_17864a015231.jpg
314563145631456
>>31450
They did Dr Potato Head in the 90s.
>> No. 31457 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 12:04 pm
31457 spacer
>>31455
I think quite a lot of people feel that way
https://www.propublica.org/article/the-climate-crisis-is-worse-than-you-can-imagine-heres-what-happens-if-you-try
It's difficult.
>> No. 31458 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 12:37 pm
31458 spacer
>>31449
>Only if you believe gender is character, and it's becoming more accepted that that way of thinking is harmful.

It's putting a moustache and a fedora on a potato and calling it Mr - isn't that kind of gender fluidity what people want?

>>31455
>Written in 1972, it's about a world where we didn't clean up the air in the 1970s
>> No. 31459 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 12:40 pm
31459 spacer
>>31458
Are you unfamiliar with the concept of Science Fiction set in the future?
>> No. 31461 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 12:55 pm
31461 spacer

viaE7fIHRoOYJsejcOzh_smog19.jpg
314613146131461
>>31458
>>31459
It's set some time after 1972, unspecified exactly. This is what Los Angeles looked like in the 1970s, so it's not difficult to imagine why the writer thought it was all going to shit, and quickly.
>> No. 31464 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 2:18 pm
31464 spacer
>>31458
>It's putting a moustache and a fedora on a potato and calling it Mr - isn't that kind of gender fluidity what people want?

I don't know why, but this sentence is making me laugh more wildly each time I read it back out aloud to myself.

Perhaps it's because I imagine you lads taking every debate here deathly seriously, even though I know rationally you're all probably not.
>> No. 31466 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 2:53 pm
31466 spacer
>>31452
Can you, and everyone else, stop saying 'woke'? Who do you think you are, Piers Morgan?
>> No. 31474 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 4:35 pm
31474 spacer
>>31445

>Take a look at yourself, a long hard look at yourself and ask "what the Hell am I doing?"

Chuckling at people like you, mainly. I don't know what you found so upsetting about the statement I made, but there must be something in there that really puts a grain of sand down your jap's eye and I enjoy that.

I was right though. They haven't actually made Mr or Mrs Head non-binary or androgynous, they haven't changed the product to be more modern and progressive, they've just called the same product with the same stereotypical gender roles and imagery (moustache, handbag) something else. It's a shallow and cynical marketing ploy, just like woke polticks itself is shallow and cynical brain rot.

>>31466

It's a useful term. We all know who and what kinds of people "woke" means, like if you'd have said "fedora" five years ago.
>> No. 31478 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 5:04 pm
31478 spacer
>>31474

>It's a shallow and cynical marketing ploy

Only because some people get utterly hysterical about stuff that doesn't really matter and give massive multinational companies massive amounts of free publicity.
>> No. 31479 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 5:08 pm
31479 spacer
>>31474
You're not chuckling at me, you're having a discussion about the merits of gender with regards to a childrens toy no one's thought about since it was in a film 25 years ago. Enjoy your imaginary culture war nonsense while the levels of emiseration and contempt from the big hats that promote this bollocks only increases more and more. You prusumably don't care, but there's little I can do about the willingly close-minded and shortsighted.
>> No. 31482 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 6:02 pm
31482 spacer
>>31474
>It's a useful term. We all know who and what kinds of people "woke" means, like if you'd have said "fedora" five years ago.

I don't think it is at all. It's more like if you'd said "hipster" five years ago. The meaning is utterly nebulous and basically boils down to whatever pisses the person wielding the term off.
>> No. 31483 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 6:05 pm
31483 spacer
What I've noticed about anything to do with "woke lefty political correctness" is that it really riles people up when they're against it, but most people who support it are not nearly as emotionally invested, not nearly close to the caricature of a screeching fisherperson that is usually drawn up in these sorts of discussions.

What I'm saying is no matter who you are, if thinking about a plastic potatoes' honorific makes you angry or stressed, then you need to find a hobby that isn't shouting at people on the internet.
>> No. 31485 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 6:20 pm
31485 spacer
In China there is a word 白左 (baizuo) which is used to mock white Western Liberal types that westerners would themselves mock under the banner of 'wokeness'.

It's also interesting that 'woke' is a term popularized by American Blacks in the Civil rights movement to refer to awareness of cultural oppression of their group, whilst today it is largely used by liberals of the establishment group to signify that they aren't like the rest of yt ppl whilst often holding a position of privilege in society born of bad shit perpetrated by their ancestors against the ancestors of the other.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 31488 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 6:46 pm
31488 spacer
>>31485
>It's also interesting that 'woke' is a term popularized by American Blacks in the Civil rights movement to refer to awareness of cultural oppression of their group

Why are people so obsessed with waking up anyway, it's all 'arise ye workers' and 'open your eyes sheeple'. Let me tell you, if someone broke into my home when I was asleep and started mouthing off about how I need to get out into the street or help in seizing factory machinery then they'd soon count themselves lucky I only have slippers in reach.

What we need are people who dare to dream. That's an activity I can get behind.
>> No. 31491 Anonymous
26th February 2021
Friday 7:03 pm
31491 spacer
>>31483
Much like the lad above you referencing people who were calling others "hipsters" well past that dig's best before date, "woke" is just a ethereal non-concept for people to whinge about. It's just people making up other people to justify their negativity, over and over and over again. I don't understand it and I wish it would stop.

>>31485
I also don't give a monkeys about the same whinging types who happen to be Chinese.
>> No. 31505 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 2:30 am
31505 spacer
>>31485

This place has always heavily left of centre (which is hardly surprising given that the founders were a bunch of self-described Marxist mask of shame wearers) but it's got to the point where posting any political opinion to right of the Socialist Workers party or any sort of non-party-approved wrongthink regarding e.g. climate change, population growth, immigration or almost any other pseudo-political topic has become utterly impossible and or / pointless. I filtered out /pol/ a long time back and will no doubt end up filtering out /news/ as well. Unfortunately the rest of the board is basically dead other than /emo/ and a few amusing shitposts in /IQ/. Such is life.
>> No. 31506 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 2:40 am
31506 spacer

give peace a chance.jpg
315063150631506
>>31488

We need less Lenins And more Lennons.
>> No. 31507 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 3:00 am
31507 spacer
>>31505
Not a mod, but I've no problem with right-wingers on here. However, if your "right-wing" ideas are the extermination of fifteen million British citizens and whinging tediously and pompously about Die Kulturkrieg that your lot in charge started, then you can just do one. Practically every other sodding place on the internet is packed to the rafters with folk who are, basically, insane; talking about all manner of unhinged shite from globalist conspiracies to thinking any and all protest should be immediately met with a hail of lead from the British Army. This place is one of the few user driven websites where I can spend more than five minutes without feeling like I need to book a trepanning session with my GP.
>> No. 31508 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 8:11 am
31508 spacer
>>31505
>founders Marxist

Ah you've cheered me up, thanks.
>> No. 31509 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 9:17 am
31509 spacer
>>31505

That ban was for writing "ppl" you desperate-for-victimhood wanker.
>> No. 31516 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 11:25 am
31516 spacer
>>31507

And yet, for all that, both sides.
>> No. 31517 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 11:27 am
31517 spacer
>>31516

I hit enter when I shouldn't have, there. It wasn't meant to be such a brief post.

I was going to continue thusly: It's no longer a fence sitting wimp's way out not to pick your camp and fight to the death for it. I think we've come to a point where one has to realise, as a sensible and rational person, there really are nutters of all stripes out there from either wing of the political spectrum, and it's only the worst nutters you ever hear about these days.

Everyone's lost the plot as far as I'm concerned. There are real world issues to be tackled and in a way I think that's just the problem. Nobody has the foggiest how to, so instead they're arguing about white supremacist tranny toilets or whatever the fuck.
>> No. 31518 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 12:16 pm
31518 spacer
>>31517

You only hear about the worst cases so in response you have to be a centrist? This doesn't make any sense.
>> No. 31528 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 2:43 pm
31528 spacer
>>31518
I don't think he said that. But I guess the implication of his post that people need to turn back toward the centre so sensible discussions could take place.
>> No. 31534 Anonymous
27th February 2021
Saturday 3:55 pm
31534 spacer
>>31528
Why? If the problem is that media/algorithms are just amplifying the extremes then "we all need to turn back toward the centre" is a useless thing to say because it's addressing the symptom and not the cause. Further to that, if it was possible for us "all" to make a unified political shift like that then it would be just as much a solution to all move left, or right. All he's doing is jerking himself off for being a "fence sitting wimp", as he puts it. As though centrists haven't always felt justified in being centrists as much as anyone of any political stance feels justified in that.
>> No. 31554 Anonymous
28th February 2021
Sunday 2:51 am
31554 spacer
>>31518
>>31528

I would suggest it's not about coming back to the centre. It's not even about being far left or far right. There are rational and sensible people on both extremes, they're just outnumbered by the nutters the extremes tend to attract.

What it's about is keeping a healthy scepticism of alarmist, sensationalised viewpoints. These are the hallmarks of our time. For every fake outrage about Xr. Potato Head, there's some Yank college professor being sacked for doxxing all their students as racists, and then being outed as a "race faker". The kulturkampf has destroyed all capability of nuance and discussion on some subjects, because it all becomes drowned out in nonsense.

I know there's one or two of you here who like to bury your head in the sand and pretend it's nothing, but I'd suggest there's a very real reason we all post here instead of mixing with the normals on facebook or Twitter. It's because they're always on about this brain rot. Anit-vaxxing one week, hate crime the next, vegan pasties the one after. In the past this stuff was contained to tabloids you really could dismiss because most of the people reading those were only interested in the footy results and the telly planner, but now it's all different. It's ubiquitous.

There's four positions here. You're either a mentalist with a chip on your shoulder, you're an anti-mentalist with an bag of spuds, you're "well, both sides, I am smart", or you're the fourth and most intolerable; which is "I am so very smart that I shall post that one XKCD comic. None can touch me from this position of ultimate superiority."
>> No. 31557 Anonymous
28th February 2021
Sunday 10:08 am
31557 spacer
>>31554
>You're either a mentalist with a chip on your shoulder, you're an anti-mentalist with an bag of spuds
The "bag of spuds" wordfilter was only ever meant as a placeholder until we thought of something better but it's worked surprisingly well here.
>> No. 31561 Anonymous
28th February 2021
Sunday 1:20 pm
31561 spacer
>>31554
>I know there's one or two of you here who like to bury your head in the sand and pretend it's nothing, but I'd suggest there's a very real reason we all post here instead of mixing with the normals on facebook or Twitter.

I mostly just post here because Otherplace has awful taste but the other imageboard alternatives I'd consider don't have enough British posters to have a good conversation on some topics. You're spending too much time here if you think the views of the board are worth the price of reading them.
>> No. 31637 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 7:25 pm
31637 spacer

Jack in the pants.png
316373163731637
First girlfriend I told 'I think I'm gay' directly after losing my virginity to her. Second sexual partner I simply didn't enjoy the activity - apart from feeling she was 'too soft' and 'empty' inside, all of the resistance was mental, I couldn't go through with it without thinking "What am i ]doing?". The realisation that my meat stick was pushing in and pulling out of her meat hole felt futile. "We're just apes, but it's meant to be so much more".

My parents assumed I was gay from an early age, and I got a few comments in highschool. Sometimes I get off to semi-gay porn (as opposed to hard-gay, which I enjoy seldomly). I've messed around with my other pleasure spots, which is nice, but every time I take a shit it reminds me how disgusting the whole practice is. I feel as though it's very possible i could melt into the arms of the right man but i won't allow it - I have a beard for fuck sake.

The confusing part is that I have other conflicting sexualities - most obvious being that I still fancy women and appriciate femininity far more than masculinity. The guilt of harbouring this confusion before genuine love interests is immense - it makes me question the sincerity of my attraction to them, makes me seccond guess why i like them instead of just being attracted.

I was exposed to porn and inapropriate stuff while growing up, and exposed myself to hentai and porn during my early teens which may have affected the wiring of my brain. Considering modern studies on the affects of porn on the brain, it's quite possible i've made myself like this through my practices as a teenager. Typical 4chan shit as you can imagine, including some of the now removed boards. But then i wonder perhaps it was simply my nature to explore these things.

Then I get into questioning why i might like to be intimate with a man and the answer is often one of security. I'm sure we've heard it before - someone to protect and nurture me while all I have to offer for it is a creamy prostate. When I've managed to mess with my arse it's been incredible, felt like i was finally loved and accepting of myself - though a lot of marijuanna and hyno tapes were involved. I believe it'd be possible to get there compos mentis, and i could possibly even be 'happy' about it, envisioning myself as some version of that

I'm concerned that if I practice perversion it'll snowball into worse practices. My taste in gay-porn is mostly one of pale shaved bodies, which when viewed under a novel light becomes apparent how much youth and even childlike characteristics are valued in mainstream porn. It's less apparent in perceptions of heterosexual porn, I imagine because it's simply the societal norm for women to shave - but seeing it a new like I have really hits home the meaning of it and it's one I don't think should be engaged with.

I wanked myself silly for my entire adult life. Easily once per day, for a long time it was at least twice. Sometimes i've actually beaten it swollen throughout entire days (flaccid, mind). Thankfully I've hung back on that recently and have given the whole practice a break, though the guilt remains.
>> No. 31638 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 7:54 pm
31638 spacer
>>31637
Have you tried just not being gay?
>> No. 31639 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 8:26 pm
31639 spacer
>>31637
That's nice, but why are you telling us this? Also, I'm pretty sure you've made a thread here before sperging out about pornstars, specifically gay ones, being more popular the younger they look and got salty when we pointed out that was horeshit, because you're a closeted paedophile who trys to normalise it on the website for some reason.
>> No. 31640 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 8:52 pm
31640 spacer
>>31637


>> No. 31641 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 9:04 pm
31641 spacer
>>31637

>is mostly one of pale shaved bodies, which when viewed under a novel light becomes apparent how much youth and even childlike characteristics are valued in mainstream porn. It's less apparent in perceptions of heterosexual porn, I imagine because it's simply the societal norm for women to shave

I read something a while ago that some nutters at the EU wanted to class all images of quite unmistakable adults with a genital shave as "borderline child porn", because, well, the similarities in appearance. Or so they thought.

Much more generally speaking though, your early 20s are usually the peak of your physical condition, and at least in a visual sense, it's also the time of your life when you tend to look the most attractive, or at least when the likelihood is greatest that you are at peak physical attractiveness. So yes, youth is a big selling point in porn, because porn is a visual medium and because 50 year olds are dirty fuckers who would jump their daughter's best friend in a heartbeat.

You actually already count as a MILF in the business as early as about your late 20s. And even if a 28-year-old porn actress would be capable of giving you the prostate orgasm of a lifetime that would flat out make your knob explode if you met her in person, on screen, her market value is waning by that point. She may in her own way be more sexually attractive at 28 than she was at 18, but not in a way that the masses of porn viewers will appreciate who just want a quick wank to some picture perfect college girls.

I think male porn actors, especially in gay porn, have a longer shelf life, but male market value in the business doesn't tend to hinge as much on rosy cheeks and flawless skin as it does with female porn actresses. Having a few wrinkles and a tiny bit of grey hair as a lad doesn't automatically put you into the granny porn niche like it does with women.
>> No. 31642 Anonymous
5th March 2021
Friday 11:27 pm
31642 spacer
>>31637

It's alright mate, I basically wank to nothing but femboy furry porn but I'm entirety straight in real life. Sexuality isn't meant to be simple.
>> No. 31644 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 3:27 pm
31644 spacer
Rubber Bandits are pretty fucking cool, aye.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYgPznBrjiA

>>31639
>why are you telling us this?
My post was orignially a reply to a recent /emo/ thread but because it was rather self indulgent I decided to post it here instead - only now realising this is /news/. And no, I'm not that other bloke. I'm at least vaguely aware that my own perception doesn't automaticlly qualify as the entirety of the human condition.

>>31641
I honestly think censorship is the way to go with porn, like they do in Japan. When you consider the serious issue of porn addiction, mix in a bit of body positivity and and maybe a little womens rights, it seems like a good alternative to porn-passports or whatever those ID things were called. Labeling shaved porn as boarderline child abuse imagery is clearly nuts.

>>31642
Yeah, man. It's only as difficult as I make it. I just get a bit confused about what it means that I think shit like this.
>> No. 31645 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 3:39 pm
31645 spacer
>>31637

It sounds like the root of your problem here is that you feel guilty for having sexual fantasies that you consider abnormal, but really, there is no normal, everyone's into something. Even you truly honestly believe sex is just for reproduction and nothing else, masturbation can only be for pleasure, so either stop doing it entirely, or look around you and realise eveyone does almost everything on some level because it makes them feel good. Otherwise nobody would flavour their food, or watch TV, listen to music, and so on.

It's entirely okay to wank to whatever (legal) porn you want, and there's really no need to feel disgusting for putting something up your bum. The greeks loved a bit of gay sex, and it was not a shameful thing in their society.
>> No. 31646 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 4:23 pm
31646 spacer
>>31644

>I just get a bit confused about what it means that I think shit like this.

It doesn't mean anything. You like what you like. People don't have existential crises about their taste in food or films, but they freak out about what makes their willy hard or their fanny wet. We don't need a million different labels for every possible sub-sub-category of sexual orientation, we can just accept that human beings are complicated and messy and don't have to make sense.


>> No. 31647 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 6:21 pm
31647 spacer
Why do people do this, just repeat complete bollocks on the internet?

>>31644
>the serious issue of porn addiction

There is no such thing as a 'porn addiction' outside of your head, wanking to porn does not lower testosterone or whatever other bullshit you think either. I don't know what fundie cult decided to start spreading this nonsense online in recent years but it needs to stop.

>>31645
>The greeks loved a bit of gay sex, and it was not a shameful thing in their society.

Historically illiterate drivel conjured up by pederasts in the social sciences to justify their interests.

1. 'Greece' concerns a multitude of societies over both time and space but gay sex was never seen as something totally devoid of shame - you would have to go to specific times to even be tolerated. The typical textual evidence of this social-permissiveness is from the Symposium but which, if you actually read it, the debate concerns love and the illegitimacy of teachers buggering their students.

For tops it was described in the dialogue as a perverse behaviour engaged by old men which fathers would have to protect their sons from and who would soon lose interest in the boy as soon as he grew his beard. Concerning the bottoms it was a behaviour as a means to an end, the elderly man was expected to protect, guide and generally help in a relationship or, obviously, pay directly for the use of the boys youth. You don't even have to go to the past to view this behaviour, Central Asia and laplanderstan is rife with homosexual child abuse and its not a coincidence that all these societies take a dim view of women.

2. I speak of positions because sexuality was very different in the past given its patriarchal nature. Sex was a matter of conquest and submission, being on the receiving end of anal sex in particular was treated with contempt and boys would lose their citizenship as the assumption was they were engaged in prostitution. Tops were viewed more in hedonistic terms as being a pervert but it's not getting away with it so much as much of the shame was shifted onto whoever you ploughed whether that be men or women. This pattern lasted until Christianity took hold in Europe but even then the legal system would fall back on accusation of prostitution given the offence of buggery had physical acts involved.

In conclusion it's a projection where history is twisted, as it often is, by whatever someone is on their soapbox about. In another avenue there's an old joke that more papers have been written on Native American two-spirits than ever actually existed and it's probably true. This is not to say there's anything inherently wrong with fucking a consenting bloke from my own view but don't make up bullshit.
>> No. 31648 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 6:29 pm
31648 spacer
>>31647
I like how you soapbox
>'Greece' concerns a multitude of societies over both time and space
then later lean on the implication that there haven't been many trans people in Native American cultures, them covering more than 75x the landmass and 50,000 more years than Greece.
>> No. 31649 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 6:35 pm
31649 spacer
>>31647

Fucking hell mate I'm just trying to make someone feel okay about wanking to twinks, read the room.
>> No. 31650 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 7:13 pm
31650 spacer
>>31648
The two-spirit observation is a histography joke about the phenomenon of certain topics being obsessed over to death by certain other cultures which really tell you more about the ideas of the present than the past. A quick glance over the wikipedia for two-spirit should tell you that the term is a new one and largely counter-productive for proper historical or cultural study given how broad it is.

If you're going to use Greece as a geographic area with all cultures appearing there being Greek then it objective does predate any culture you would see in the America's.

>>31649
Oh right, don't worry Otherlad, the Atlanteans regularly wanked over twinks and now they rule the Moon's of Saturn. Be sure to just make up things to feel good about yourself in others areas too rather than going to the trouble of an examined life.
>> No. 31651 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 7:20 pm
31651 spacer
>>31650
>and it's probably true
You've criticised people for making things up and you're just making things up yourself.
>> No. 31652 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 7:29 pm
31652 spacer

1551492519880.jpg
316523165231652
I wish I knew some drag queens. Not sure why, I just think that you're probably living life right if you know at more than two drag queens.
>> No. 31653 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 8:05 pm
31653 spacer
>>31652
I've only known one drag queen well. After a while the constant cattiness and thinking that saying offensive things for shock value is funny begins to wear thin.
>> No. 31654 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 9:02 pm
31654 spacer
>>31653
>I've only known one drag queen well.
So my theory is sound, good, good. You lads don't usually back me up like this.
>> No. 31655 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 9:04 pm
31655 spacer
>>31650

You're just not paying attention at all, are you? What an absolute pillock.
>> No. 31656 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 9:17 pm
31656 spacer
>>31645
Honestly man so much of the guilt an shame is wrapped up in thoughts regarding my Mother. It might be okay but the thought that she's there laughing at me or whatever is awful. What's more i don't want to prove her right that i could be gay. Fuck her, she should never be a consideration in my sexuality - I don't understand why she is.

>>31646
>It doesn't mean anything
I think it does and to say otherwise is to justify everything. If actions have no meaning then what of morality? I want to understand this desire/behaviour before i decide whether I should enjoy it.

>>31647
>There is no such thing as a 'porn addiction' outside of your head, wanking to porn does not lower testosterone or whatever other bullshit you think either.
I believe no such thing about testosterone, and i use 'addiction' to mean 'pattern of behaviour' rather than 'dependancy'.
I've noticed acutely the effect of desensitisation to porn and the rapid decline into depravity that often accompanies excessive, habitual masturbation. I'f you've managed to avoid this then well done.

As for the Greek stuff, thanks for posting that. I appriciate the challenge to the trope.
>> No. 31657 Anonymous
6th March 2021
Saturday 10:03 pm
31657 spacer
>>31656

>If actions have no meaning then what of morality?

What you're attracted to has no relevance to morality - you can think whatever you want. Many people have far darker fantasies than you - rape, mutilation, and so on, but if they remain a fantasy, there is no moral impact. Otherwise we're literally talking about thought crime here.

Similarly, putting a dildo up your arse is not immoral, unless we really stretch it (pun intended) to the point where you're inconveniencing our nationalised health system. My point being, you should be able to think what you want and do what you want with your own body, and that's fine. This is going to sound glib, but I truly hope one day you do feel comfortable making yourself feel good without getting a metaphysical guilt trip from your mother.
>> No. 31658 Anonymous
7th March 2021
Sunday 1:03 pm
31658 spacer
>>31656

>I've noticed acutely the effect of desensitisation to porn and the rapid decline into depravity that often accompanies excessive, habitual masturbation.

that sounds like you just copied and pasted it off a Christian Right web site.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEBKwpmKoG0

The comment section under that video is even more troubling
.
>> No. 31659 Anonymous
7th March 2021
Sunday 1:07 pm
31659 spacer
>>31658

Hm. Looks like the mods have modified .gs so that URLs are now directly resolved into videos, without having to use the [yt] tags.

(the post delete function still isn't working though)

Ignore the second video in that post then, but take a moment to go to youtube and look at the comments. You can't even say they're funny or hilarious in any kind of way, just that it's sad and disturbing how sexually repressed some people are because of their religion.
>> No. 31660 Anonymous
7th March 2021
Sunday 1:21 pm
31660 spacer
>>31659
>URLs are now directly resolved into videos, without having to use the [yt] tags.
It's been like that for about two years now.
>> No. 31661 Anonymous
7th March 2021
Sunday 1:24 pm
31661 spacer
>>31660

Oh, ok. I was entirely unaware.
>> No. 31662 Anonymous
7th March 2021
Sunday 2:40 pm
31662 spacer
>>31661
purps is a stealth coder.
>> No. 31727 Anonymous
11th March 2021
Thursday 11:23 am
31727 spacer
>>31659
It's shit and doesn't work well a lot of the time though so I still use the [yt] tags.
>> No. 32142 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 12:41 pm
32142 spacer
>The columnist Julie Burchill has apologised to the activist and journalist Ash Sarkar, and agreed to pay her “substantial damages”, after a series of social media posts in which she accused Sarkar of being an Islamist, a hypocrite and worshipping a paedophile.

>The retraction comes after Burchill published a series of social media posts to and about Sarkar in response to the Novara Media senior editor’s criticism of Rod Liddle in December for an article from 2012 in which he wrote that if he was a teacher he “could not remotely conceive of not trying to shag the kids”. After Sarkar, who is eskimo, noted the Spectator piece last year, Burchill responded by accusing her of “worshipping a paedophile”, a reference to the prophet Muhammad.

>While much of the ensuing coverage of the incident, and the subsequent cancellation of Burchill’s book contract by the publisher Little, Brown, focused on that comment, Burchill also posted a series of further comments about Sarkar, claiming that she was an Islamist, a daft militant wog sympathiser, and speculating about her sex life. As well as directing her Facebook followers to “wade in on Twitter” against “the Islamists” and “carpet-baggers”, she wrote a crude poem about Sarkar that featured a description of “a gender fluid threesome with Marine Le Pen”. She also “liked” posts saying that Sarkar should kill herself and suggesting that she was a victim of female genital mutilation.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/mar/16/julie-burchill-agrees-to-pay-ash-sarkar-substantial-damages-in-libel-case

TERFs are fucking mentalists.
>> No. 32145 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 1:12 pm
32145 spacer
>>32142

what if anything does this have to do with TERFs? Or trans people?
>> No. 32146 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 1:20 pm
32146 spacer

ConservativePartyPoster1987.jpg
321463214632146
>>32145
Burchill's a notable TERF. However, whilst I don't think TERFs are much more than the latest moral panic, and will probably be looked back at as a hybrid of people who thought emos were dangerous and the pre-Cameron Tory fearmongering about gays, I legitimately don't think it's fair to judge them by the standards of Julie Burchill. Not least because there are no standards as far as Burchill's concerned.
>> No. 32165 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 4:24 pm
32165 spacer
>>32145
Not him but I can see it as fair comment about TERFs given they are even happier to make points about trans people based off of the behaviour of individuals.
>> No. 32186 Anonymous
16th March 2021
Tuesday 10:27 pm
32186 spacer
>>32146
>>32165

Fair enough I knew none of the names, so I couldn't see what relation if any they had to the topic.
>> No. 32229 Anonymous
17th March 2021
Wednesday 6:42 am
32229 spacer
>>32186
Julie Burchill is a moonbat fisherperson. Ash Sarkar is pretty much the female Owen Jones.
>> No. 32235 Anonymous
17th March 2021
Wednesday 9:30 am
32235 spacer
>>32229
Wouldn't say that. She only joined the Labour Party about a year ago, for instance.
>> No. 32391 Anonymous
19th March 2021
Friday 8:13 pm
32391 spacer
>>32146

The JPEG compression on that image is enough to disregard it as bollox, whatever it is!
>> No. 32423 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 4:12 am
32423 spacer

canvas.png
324233242332423
>>32391
Are you daft? Section 28 passed in 1988 and you think that poster's beyond plausability? Well, by all means, don't take my word for it, here's the Bodleian Library.
https://digital.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/objects/37d38e65-292a-4364-8b9e-8d42eca0a604/

"Children who need to be taught to respect traditional moral values are being taught that they have an inalienable right to be gay." - Margaret Thatcher, 9th October 1987.
>> No. 32424 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 1:04 pm
32424 spacer
>>32423

The past is a different country.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBGh9kK2lT4
>> No. 32425 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 1:39 pm
32425 spacer
>>32424
Be that as it may this was still the Conservative Party orthadoxy when many of our senior Tories were getting into politics, and Thatcher is a woman they venerate extensively and consider above all reproach.
>> No. 32426 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 2:01 pm
32426 spacer
>>32425
You can't get mad at the past for not being the future, lad. I doubt you will find a single Tory who will say that Thatcher the person did absolutely nothing wrong, instead they will point to the ideological grocers daughter or whatever.
>> No. 32427 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 2:58 pm
32427 spacer
>>32426
There were those at the time who made a choice to be homophobic and those who stood for basic human decency, the Conservative Party made a very conscious decision to do the former. If you were drawn to that kind of politics, the idea of a homosexual conspiracy at the heart of British education, that says something about you as a person. I'm quite sure Section 28 would receive widespread villification from almost all Tory MPs, but when the latter-day version of this bill comes to be, that same party will grasp it with both hands, I'm certain.

I probably wouldn't tell folk they're getting "mad" either, I've been banned for less.
>> No. 32428 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 3:14 pm
32428 spacer
>>32427
>I probably wouldn't tell folk they're getting "mad" either, I've been banned for less.
I think it was just a rhetorical device. Of course I've been banned from this place for using a rhetorical devices before, contextual irony is something the world seems to have stopped being able to comprehend in the last 10 years or so… everything is taken at face value.

You could write "while we are at it why don't we just bring back hitler?" and people will assume you are a nazi.
>> No. 32429 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 3:53 pm
32429 spacer
>>32428
The memory of being banned for saying something was "left of field" has never left me, is all.
>> No. 32430 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 3:58 pm
32430 spacer
>>32429
>"left of field"
Well deserved, imho.
>> No. 32431 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 4:52 pm
32431 spacer

image-a-78_1604159031804.jpg
324313243132431
>>32427

We can't de-contextualise Section 28. It was enacted at a time when HIV/AIDS was new, frightening and was decimating the gay community.

I opposed Section 28 at the time, there were undoubtedly a lot of nasty homophobes who supported it, but there were also a lot of people who were just scared witless and felt that something needed to be done.
>> No. 32432 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 5:07 pm
32432 spacer
>>32431
Can you entirely blame Section 28 on the AIDS epidemic? It's an appropriate image you use because two years before Section 28 the Don't Die of Ignorance campaign was telling every household in the country that "it is not just a homosexual disease" and "anyone with many sexual partners" is at risk.

So people who supported Section 28 knew fuck-all about AIDS as well?
>> No. 32433 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 5:21 pm
32433 spacer
>>32432

There was a fear in the early stages of the HIV epidemic that the disease would spread beyond the gay community and become endemic in the general population, but for a variety of complicated factors that only actually happened in sub-Saharan Africa. The widespread heterosexual transmission that the public health campaign warned about turned out to be a hypothetical that never materialised.
>> No. 32434 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 5:32 pm
32434 spacer
>>32433
What's your point?
>> No. 32435 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 5:48 pm
32435 spacer
>>32427
>but when the latter-day version of this bill comes to be, that same party will grasp it with both hands, I'm certain.

You mean like when they legalised gay marriage?
>> No. 32436 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 6:05 pm
32436 spacer
>>32431
This is completely untrue, nowhere is the spreading of HIV given as a justification of Section 28.

>>32435
I didn't mean literally more anti-gay legislation, lad. Use yer' noggin, alright? I mean a similarly irrational and exclusionary bill. Whatever it is they've already outlawed our ability to protest in earnest against it.
>> No. 32437 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 6:22 pm
32437 spacer
>>32436

Sure, it's pure coincidence that negative attitudes towards homosexuals peaked in 1987.

https://lgbtlawyers.co.uk/2021/02/08/section-28/
>> No. 32438 Anonymous
20th March 2021
Saturday 6:23 pm
32438 spacer
>>32432

Even if >>32436 lad rightly points out that Section 28 didn't literally cite it as its justification, there should be no doubt that it was the Conservatives' attempt to push the genie of early 1980s gay rights movements back into the bottle, which had gained traction and recognition also thanks to the fight against AIDS.


>>32433

>The widespread heterosexual transmission that the public health campaign warned about turned out to be a hypothetical that never materialised.

You could say that the campaign was then somewhat of a success.
>> No. 32533 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 7:34 am
32533 spacer

idpol.jpg
325333253332533
If you like a bit of pointless internet drama, r/ukpolitics got taken down after someone posted a Glinner article about one of rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk's admins, followed by a mod getting suspended for linking to a Spector article about them.

https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/something-rotten-at-the-heart-of

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/aimee-challenor-and-the-danger-of-transgender-politics
>> No. 32535 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 8:41 am
32535 spacer
>>32533
I'm still upset that the chapotraphouse subrudgwicksteamshow.co.uk was deleted.
>> No. 32536 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 8:54 am
32536 spacer
>>32533

In English, doc. No idea who these people are.
>> No. 32537 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 9:03 am
32537 spacer
>>32533
tl;dr if a politician does something bad it's because they're a politician, if a trans politician does something bad it's because they're trans.

TERFs suck.
>> No. 32538 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 9:04 am
32538 spacer
>>32536
Glinner is the writer of Father Ted and has been on an all consuming crusade against trannies ever since a joke in The IT Crowd was deemed transphobic.

Aimee Knight is a transwoman who was kicked out of the Green party for nominating her child rapist father as her election agent and then kicked out of the Lib Dems and Stonewall because of her now husband's obsessive fantasies about raping children. She's now got an admin job at rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk and bringing up her past is enough to get your account suspended.
>> No. 32541 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 10:07 am
32541 spacer
>>32538
Technically she was never kicked out of the Greens, she left of her own volition while her membership was suspended.
>> No. 32542 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 10:26 am
32542 spacer

6Rdhxyn.png
325423254232542
>>32541
Caroline Lucas claims her party membership was terminated a few weeks before she claims she quit the party over transphobia.

Not that it really matters. The larger issue is why Rudgwick hired her in the first place and the subsequent censorship of discussion, leading to the Streisand Effect, with just posting her name being enough to get your account suspended. There seems to be a blindspot whereby being from a particular minority/oppressed group means you'll get a pass from certain others for shitty behaviour.
>> No. 32543 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 10:37 am
32543 spacer
>>32542

The blindspot you refer to is a pretty common phenomenon in all identity politics interest groups.
>> No. 32545 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 11:04 am
32545 spacer
>>32543
>The blindspot you refer to is a pretty common phenomenon in all identity politics interest groups.

Really all 'victims' of intersectional politics.

In the wake of the 2015-2016 mass gang rape and sexual assaults in Germany by Moroccans Algerians you had people very quick to jump the gun to defend and protect them in their fears about islamophobia and racism, while there were demonstrably gangs of foreign rapists at large there were people concerned how it could look if justice were served.

I think it is 2 fold, firstly you get into a strange rhetoric that you feel you can't back down, the same way people refuse to admit Donald Trump was bad even at the point of a failed coup. You have too much invested ego wise at that point you've doubled down enough that there is no turning back.

The other is one of cultural relativism, once you have decided someone can't be measured by your normal standards of decency for one point, you apply that to all aspects of their life. - Am I suggesting that a lot of 'allies' are overcompensating for their own prejudices and contempt for these people and they actually think they are lesser? Yes, yes I am.
>> No. 32546 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 11:10 am
32546 spacer
>>32545
>Am I suggesting that a lot of 'allies' are overcompensating for their own prejudices and contempt for these people and they actually think they are lesser? Yes, yes I am.

There was a post much earlier in the thread that touches on this.

>>15050
>A friend of mine made a great point that these sorts of social justice people annoy the piss out of him, as he's gay, and they treat him with an odd sort of reverence and sensitivity that they wouldn't a straight bloke - thus still treating him unequally. He can never be sure if he's really friends with these marple haired women or if he's merely part of a social proof of their righteousness. By being hyper aware of his sexuality at all times, they make him feel even less normalised - like their relentless crusade makes him feel like a freak who should be swaddled in bubblewrap, rather than just a bloke who happens to like blokes.
>> No. 32547 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 11:11 am
32547 spacer
>>32545
>In the wake of the 2015-2016 mass gang rape and sexual assaults in Germany by Moroccans Algerians

1. It was ring-led by people who'd been in Germany for a while
2. The perpetrators weren't typical of migrants
3. Plenty of non-migrants assault women
4. It's violence and harassment against women as a whole that needs to be dealt with, not migration
5. You are a racist, actually
>> No. 32548 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 11:47 am
32548 spacer
>>32547
#NotAllMoroccans
>> No. 32549 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 12:11 pm
32549 spacer
>>32545

I realised in my edit I cut out link to the relvant event for anyone who doesn't remember.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015%E2%80%9316_New_Year%27s_Eve_sexual_assaults_in_Germany#Criminal_proceedings
>> No. 32550 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 12:22 pm
32550 spacer
>>32549
Turning a blind eye to Rotherham would have been a better example to bring up.

The main thing I remember about the attacks in Germany was the complete lack of coverage for several days by the likes of The Guardian, who instead chose to churn out a ridiculous number of articles about cricketer Chris Gayle attempting to flirt with an interviewer live on air. The silence was deafening.
>> No. 32551 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 12:29 pm
32551 spacer
>>32545

The refusal to acknowledge that members of a minority or victim group themselves can be bad people shows a lack of willingness to view them as individuals with their own agency. Essentially it means they don't even see them as human.

Horseshoe theory and all that, just not in the same way people would normally bring out that cliché. It's more like the old colonial mindset that it's the civilised white man's job to uplift the savages who don't know any better, in an ironic way.
>> No. 32552 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 12:34 pm
32552 spacer
>>32550
Careful Tommy or you'll end up back in prison for telling the truth!
>> No. 32553 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 12:50 pm
32553 spacer
>>32552
It was one Mr Griffin who was shining a light on what was happening in Rotherham, rather than Are Tommeh.

The problem with Rotherham is that it has vindicated people who will believe any old bollocks posted on Facebook; it proves that sometimes they are right and telling the truth whilst also being a reason to justify why those disagreeing with them shouldn't be trusted.
>> No. 32557 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 1:04 pm
32557 spacer
>>32550
>The main thing I remember about the attacks in Germany was the complete lack of coverage for several days by the likes of The Guardian, who instead chose to churn out a ridiculous number of articles about cricketer Chris Gayle attempting to flirt with an interviewer live on air. The silence was deafening.

I seem to remember that this is the time Breitbart proved invaluable in breaking a story that the authorities refused to acknowledge creating a surreal environment in how you had victims of savage attacks saying one thing and the police service posting that things had been peaceful. We certainly forgot that ever happened when the entire arm of the media descended on the spread of fake news.

2015-2017 was certainly a time span of 24 months. I even remember that time Brussels released a video response to Trump calling the city unsafe right before they suffered a daft militant wog attack on the metro.
>> No. 32559 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 1:30 pm
32559 spacer
As you will have noticed, the moderators set the subrudgwicksteamshow.co.uk to private last night. This is not a decision we took lightly, but one that was made to protect both the users and moderators of /r/ukpolitics.

A moderator posted an article from the Spectator - which contained a three-word mention, in passing, of a minor British public figure (expelled from both the Liberal Democrats and Green Party) - and was permanently suspended from rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk (and later reinstated after we contacted the admins) for "doxxing" as a result.

As we had no idea what had happened, or why posting this article resulted in a permanent suspension, we took the emergency step of making the subrudgwicksteamshow.co.uk private and immediately contacting the admins for clarification. We took this step to protect both the users of the subrudgwicksteamshow.co.uk, and ourselves, from further action by the rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk admin staff. It later became apparent that rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk has hired this individual as an rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk admin, and were banning people from discussing her past to protect their employee from harassment.

We would ask the following:

- Please do not name this individual, at all. Doing so may result in your account being banned by the admins.

- Please do not ask further questions about this, as doing so may result in your account being banned by the admins.

- Please do not discuss this incident on rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk publicly or privately (e.g. on private subrudgwicksteamshow.co.uks and/or in private messages, chat etc.), as doing so may result in your account being banned by the admins.

We are obviously extremely concerned by these developments, but cannot express our full dissatisfaction with rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk on the platform at this time.

~the r/ukpolitics mods


r/ukpolitics/comments/mbbm2c/welcome_back_subrudgwicksteamshow.co.uk_statement/
>> No. 32560 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 1:40 pm
32560 spacer
>>32559

God, everything about this story is just unbearably sad.
>> No. 32564 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 3:10 pm
32564 spacer
>>32559
Mods trying to explain themselves? What kind of tin-pot regime are they running over there? Makes me sick.
>> No. 32565 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 3:12 pm
32565 spacer
>>32559

So who's the individual you can't name?
>> No. 32566 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 3:14 pm
32566 spacer
>>32560
Agreed - all this is going to do is generate more articles by The Spectator and Graham Linehan about 'censorship by the trans mafia' and so on. So tedious.
>> No. 32567 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 3:16 pm
32567 spacer
>>32565
Bizarrely, they have decided not to name her in the statement, yet have linked to two news articles about her expulsion from the Lib Dems and Greens which give her name and photograph. How is that not identifying her?
>> No. 32568 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 3:20 pm
32568 spacer
>>32567
I think the mods have deliberately gone nuclear on this. They knew closing the sub for a bit would draw attention to the issue.
>> No. 32569 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 3:24 pm
32569 spacer
>>32568
Seems that way. It's already blowing up on stupid subs like r/conspiracy and r/DeclineIntoCensorship.
>> No. 32572 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 4:18 pm
32572 spacer
>>32567
Absolutely intentional, the final sentence of the statement:
>We are obviously extremely concerned by these developments, but cannot express our full dissatisfaction with rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk on the platform at this time.

So they're politely incensed, I'd wager. It is fucking ridiculous, especially since Aimee Challenor is quite clearly a bit of a nutter and has 0 chance of being a stable individual if they're hiring their child-rapist/torturer father as a bloody election officer, while also not deigning to mention this to any political party with whom she's been affiliated.

Coincidentally there was a thread the other day about female space on ukpolitics, and while they have no female mods (stating that no women applied in the last two rounds of 'hiring') and the userbase skews 70% male, you've got women posting there saying there should be 50/50 split of mods or to just get anyone with a vagina in the position. It's mental. Absolutely mental.
>> No. 32576 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 5:03 pm
32576 spacer
>>32572
From what I can tell, Challenor became the equality spokesperson for the Greens and was able to run for deputy leader mainly because she was a transwoman. Challenor became a diversity officer for the Lib Dems mainly because she was a transwoman. Challenor was able to get a job at Rudgwick with admin privileges mainly because she was a transwoman and was then able to censor anything critical of her under the guise of their "anti-evil operations."

This is what happens when you make decisions based on identity politics rather than whether they're actually suitable for the role.
>> No. 32582 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 6:31 pm
32582 spacer
>>32576
The term you're looking for is "trans woman".
>> No. 32583 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 6:37 pm
32583 spacer
>>32582
Potato potato.
>> No. 32588 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 7:32 pm
32588 spacer
>>32583
More like shitpost/shit post.
>> No. 32591 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 8:31 pm
32591 spacer
>>32583
It's pronounced potato.
>> No. 32593 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 8:35 pm
32593 spacer

potato.jpg
325933259332593
>>32591
No it isn't. Why are you saying it like that?
>> No. 32594 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 8:46 pm
32594 spacer

EaUeSPKWoAAINZV.jpg
325943259432594
>>32593
Look lad, it's potato, not fucking that ACK ACK ACK you've been coming out with.
>> No. 32601 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 9:22 pm
32601 spacer
>>32572
>bit of a nutter

I've gone down the rabbit hole lads, I'd say this is a bit of an understatement. This whole story is absolutely grim as fuck. I genuinely think the internet has sent the human race round the fucking bend.
>> No. 32603 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 9:49 pm
32603 spacer
>After a Transport for London (TfL) helpline employee told Knight that she "didn't sound like a Miss", she successfully campaigned to get TfL to investigate the incident and to use gender-neutral language in announcements, avoiding phrases such as "ladies and gentlemen".[39][40]

Why can't we just shoot these things.
>> No. 32607 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 10:45 pm
32607 spacer
>>32593
>>32594

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxDWAGFe2lQ&start=53&end=58
>> No. 32608 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 10:45 pm
32608 spacer
>>32593
>>32594

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxDWAGFe2lQ?start=53&end=58
>> No. 32610 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 11:26 pm
32610 spacer
If you're going to malign Aimee do it for the stuff she actually did wrong:

>>32572
>not deigning to mention this to any political party with whom she's been affiliated
Technically not true. She sent Facebook messages to members of the Green Party Executive notifying them that her father had been charged. What she didn't mention was that he was also a member, and the election agent business happened later. The party in turn fucked up by not doing anything with the information.

>>32576
>was able to run for deputy leader mainly because she was a transwoman
This isn't true either. Any member of the Greens with twenty nomination signatures can run for the leadership. As for equality spokesperson, I think being a member of a marginalised minority is kind of in the job description, so I dont know what your problem is with that.
>> No. 32612 Anonymous
23rd March 2021
Tuesday 11:36 pm
32612 spacer
>>32608

I don't know what's more offensive, the accent or the salad. Everyone knows that an Irish salad must include a hard-boiled egg, a rolled up slice of crumbled ham, a quarter of a tomato (watery and rock hard) and an ungodly amount of Chef salad cream. Also it must be served on precisely one day a year, when your mam says it's too hot to be cooking.
>> No. 32619 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 3:43 am
32619 spacer
>>32610
> As for equality spokesperson, I think being a member of a marginalised minority is kind of in the job description
You'd also think that not having enabled child sex abuse and not being knowingly married to a paedophile might also be in the job description, or maybe that's just me.
>> No. 32620 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 4:17 am
32620 spacer
>>32619

She is clearly a deeply traumatised and extremely vulnerable young person who has endured an absolutely horrendous upbringing. Whatever the failures of the Lib Dems and the Green Party, she doesn't deserve to be used as a political football.
>> No. 32621 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 4:53 am
32621 spacer
>>32620
Child protection really isn't a political issue.
>> No. 32623 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 7:13 am
32623 spacer
>>32610
>If you're going to malign Aimee do it for the stuff she actually did wrong:

I think you're missing the point. This is less about Aimee herself and more about the way she's been able to get a free pass from certain quarters by sole virtue of being transgender. The majority of the discussion has been about the way Rudgwick have doubled down and censored any criticism of her because that's far more of a concern.
>> No. 32634 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 9:50 am
32634 spacer

watchrudgewickdie.png
326343263432634

>> No. 32636 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 9:59 am
32636 spacer
>>32623
Who has "given her a free pass"? The political parties certainly didn't - she was either appointed to, or ran for, positions she had as much right as anybody else to occupy and did the work herself. Then once all the shit came out (about her father in the Greens and her partner in the Lib Dems) she was suspended and investigated. Surely if she had "a free pass" that wouldn't have happened?

And I can't speak to this rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk business without more information, whatever has happened it is concerning and can in all likelihood have been handled better, but let's assume for now that the stated position of rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk, that it is about protecting their employee from harassment, is true - is that "being given a free pass"? Do people have the fundamental right to harass someone?
>> No. 32637 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 10:01 am
32637 spacer
https://www.rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk.com/user/Blank-Cheque/comments/mbmthf/why_is_this_subrudgwicksteamshow.co.uk_private_see_here_for_answers/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

About a million subrudgwicksteamshow.co.uks have gone private.
>> No. 32640 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 10:42 am
32640 spacer
>>32610
>If you're going to malign Aimee do it for the stuff she actually did wrong:

I did.

>Technically not true. She sent Facebook messages to members of the Green Party Executive notifying them that her father had been charged.

Facebook. Exactly. How does that not ring a bloody bell?

She sent informal messages outside of official channels...come on, don't be a lemon. She knew what she was doing, and she was intentionally obfuscating and leaving a "Well I did try!" trail by doing something she knew would have no impact. Honestly, fucking Facebook!?

If she had dealt with it properly, she would have done a hell of a lot more than two informal messages through **unofficial** channels.

>As for equality spokesperson, I think being a member of a marginalised minority is kind of in the job description, so I dont know what your problem is with that.

Oh god, you're kidding right? This kind of opinion is sour as owt. I'm a member of a marginalised community but I'm actually quite frothing at the idea that I would be picked on that 'merit' rather than any actual merit or competency. It's actually fucking disgusting.

I'm actually quite furious at that suggestion. The idea that I'd get the role over a more competent person just because of who I put my dick in or where I am on the DSM? Fuck that noise, your attitude is cancerous.

>>32636
Dunno mate, how about you message someone higher up than you on facebook to give them the old heads up about your carpet-bagger dad? Apparently that's enough effort on her part for you, so why don't you do that and see what reaction you get? Because I think that will illustrate to you that she has more of a 'free pass' than you do.

Look I appreciate that you are defending this person, and I've defended her on rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk a little bit (mainly the principle, I find her odious), but you're overcompensating and playing into the narrative she wants.
>> No. 32646 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 11:24 am
32646 spacer
>>32640
What a lot of huffing about nothing. Dry your eyes.

Yes, I agree sending a couple of Facebook messages is not an appropriate method of notifying an organisation about a family member being a sexual predator. I'm not defending her for that - although in mitigation it's probably quite a distressing situation to be in - and she was facing disciplinary action from the Green Party as a result. However you accused her of not notifying the party at all, and I'm pointing out that as a statement is not true.

Yes, equality spokespeople have to be representative of marginalised people. I genuinely cannot comprehend the issue here. Are you suggesting Stonewall should have lots of straight people on their board and anti-racism organisations should be fronted by white people, as long as they are "competent"?

I note you ignore the fact you were wrong about her "being able to run for deputy leader because she's trans".

Again, I don't for a second think she's white as the purest snow in all this. I just want to make sure you're discussing the facts, because it tends to be when a trans person is involved unsavoury people twist them to suit an agenda.
>> No. 32653 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 12:02 pm
32653 spacer
>>32646
>However you accused her of not notifying the party at all, and I'm pointing out that as a statement is not true.
Not him, but she notified them when he was charged. We're not talking about a footballer getting a bit too hands-on with someone a few months shy of legal. He tortured and raped a 10yo as she watched. She then thought it would be a good idea to nominate him as her election agent. Then she went and married a carpet-bagger.

Worst of all, somehow Rudgwick thought she was an appropriate person to put in a role where she'd be dealing with teenagers. The question is whether they're really "protecting an employee from harassment" or just protecting themselves from reputational harm.
>> No. 32654 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 12:13 pm
32654 spacer
>>32653
>Not him, but she notified them when he was charged.
So you agree with me that she did notify them, albeit belatedly and inappropriately, and that he is wrong to say she didn't notify them at all.
>> No. 32655 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 12:18 pm
32655 spacer
>>32654
I honestly couldn't give a fuck what colour the bikeshed is, m7.
>> No. 32656 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 12:20 pm
32656 spacer
>>32653
>Worst of all, somehow Rudgwick thought she was an appropriate person to put in a role where she'd be dealing with teenagers.

For the first 6/7 years that Rudgwick existed one of the largest subs, by far, was r/jailbait. The place was a magnet for paedos and there was a massive outcry from them at the time over the fact that most of the images were sexually suggestive but not actually illegal to look at.
>> No. 32657 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 12:22 pm
32657 spacer
>>32646
See this is the problem with you. I bet I could pick out a dozen of your posts across the board. You want to be right, you want to trip people up, you come here to *win* rather than to talk, and it results in a really poor standard of discourse.

>What a lot of huffing about nothing. Dry your eyes.
Please, none of this bollocks. No-one here is actually having an emotional reaction.

Were you aware that inferring emotion on someone's behalf is actually a tactic used by trolls to bait people? Now I'm sure you weren't doing that, but it is a tactic used by trolls so maybe you might benefit from not employing it.

>However you accused her of not notifying the party at all, and I'm pointing out that as a statement is not true.
She didn't notify the party. **Unofficial channels**. She notified individuals within the party. That's the difference.

>I note you ignore the fact you were wrong about her "being able to run for deputy leader because she's trans".
I never said that. You're conflating different posters.

Easy mistake to make when you're posting with an agenda, instead of just posting.

>I genuinely cannot comprehend the issue here.
That's because instead of thinking reasonably, you've assumed that by my not agreeing with your extreme, I am proposing a counter-extreme. No, because the world isn't black and white. Why would you do that? Why would you read it like that, instead of a middleground? Why is that your assumption?

>Are you suggesting Stonewall should have lots of straight people on their board and anti-racism organisations should be fronted by white people, as long as they are "competent"?
Why on earth would you put competent in quotation marks? And why on earth would you assume I'd go to the opposite extreme of yours? Are you able to think outside binary concepts? I'd have assumed so, but no.
>> No. 32658 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 12:29 pm
32658 spacer

visual aide.gif
326583265832658
>>32623
>I think you're missing the point. This is less about Aimee herself and more about the way she's been able to get a free pass from certain quarters by sole virtue of being transgender.
I think they're proving the point in action.

They said "I just want to make sure you're discussing the facts, because it tends to be when a trans person is involved unsavoury people twist them to suit an agenda."

And what happens when people in senior positions of progressive institutions share this view? I wonder. Or I would, if it wasn't quite obvious.
>> No. 32661 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 1:32 pm
32661 spacer
>>32657
I've stated exactly why I'm posting what I am: to ensure that within the bounds of this discussion the record of what happened regarding Aimee is correct. You can say whatever shit you like about how terrible she is, as long it's factually correct. That's because I've seen the way that she's been discussed before elsewhere, and it's been twisted. In response you're calling me a troll with an agenda? Whatever.

>No-one here is actually having an emotional reaction.
OK.
>Honestly, fucking Facebook!?
>I'm actually quite frothing
>I'm actually quite furious at that suggestion

>She notified individuals within the party. That's the difference.
I don't agree. These were members of the party's executive. Perhaps there wasn't a clear process for whom she was supposed to notify, and that would be the party's fuck-up again. But these were important party representatives upon whom it was incumbent to have acted upon the information they were given. They were for all intents and purposes 'the party'.

>by my not agreeing with your extreme
Why is it 'extreme' for equality spokespeople to be exclusively from people of marginalised backgrounds? On the contrary I think that's considered the norm?
>> No. 32669 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 2:07 pm
32669 spacer
But you do have an agenda. You've clearly stated it. You're here to overcompensate for a perceived maligning of transpeople by stepping up for them, and only them, and making sure they have an extra level of support because of the additional troubles that transgender people in general face.

You're demonstrating the 'free pass', ie the assumption of good faith based on one characteristic, in this case their gender. Don't you see that? You're proving certain people right.

>I don't agree.
That doesn't matter, because I don't agree for the reasons I've stated. "Perhaps" it was the less likely scenario, but if we're relying on "Perhaps", then perhaps she knew that she'd get fucked if she went through official channels, and used facebook as a means of plausible deniability, proving that she 'tried' but not really proving anything meaningful. "Perhaps" is a fun word.

Perhaps she joined in with her father. Perhaps her partner's social media wasn't hacked. Perhaps she's a carpet-bagger.

>OK.
Haha, yeah I did say those things. Had I actually been emotionally riled by this, do you think that your response would exacerbate that, or relieve it? Yes, you know exactly. Thankfully it was all hyperbole, but I suppose I should cut that out as it gives you another angle of attack.

The point is that I should not be given priority for a job role simply because I'm part of a marginalised group, over someone competent.

>Why is it 'extreme' for equality spokespeople to be exclusively from people of marginalised backgrounds? On the contrary I think that's considered the norm?
Answer my questions first please. Why did you say "Competent" instead of competent?

The best possible situation is that the individual is good at their role. If being a representative is helpful in that role, then that's simply another aspect of quality, but not a necessary one. It's simply stupid that I'd be higher up the list than someone else more competent exclusively because I enjoy the odd cock. It's stupidity, clear and simple.
>> No. 32678 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 3:27 pm
32678 spacer
The greens badly needed a trans to put in the limelight demonstrate how progressive and woke they were, only one person applied so they fast tracked them, you can't blame them really, they booted her as soon as they caught wind of the noncing. The only shocking thing is that rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk has picked up the poo now. I guess there just aren't enough trans who share a particular political philosophy required for these roles (let’s not treat them as synonymous) for all the woke positions companies need to put them into, so after a while companies start getting desperate and dropping standards. The weird question in many ways is who is all this for? Because it isn’t for trans people themselves they aren’t a large enough demographic to matter that much.
>> No. 32679 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 3:29 pm
32679 spacer
>>32669
You're deflecting by making this about me. I've not "overcompensating", I'm correcting your basic errors of fact. It was right for Aimee to face disciplinary action for what she did. She got away with nothing. It's mind-boggling that I have to repeat it, but I'm all I'm saying is that she doesn't deserve to be persecuted for things she either didn't do (i.e. not notifying the party) or has no reason to be ashamed of (i.e. being an equalities spokesperson).

>That doesn't matter, because I don't agree for the reasons I've stated.
Fine then, let's agree to disagree. I've made my point that I believe she fucked up by notifying the party in a severely improper fashion, and you can resume lying to all and sundry that she didn't do so at all, even though an external investigation found that she did.

>Why did you say "Competent" instead of competent?
Because I was quoting you? Because you put the emphasis on that? Obviously basic competence is a required qualification for any role, but if you can't see why e.g. straight people are not good spokespeople for issues that affect LGBT people, however competent they may or may not be, then there's nothing more to say on this. It's not just helpful, it's absolutely fundamental that the person in the role is representative of marginalised communities.
>> No. 32680 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 4:19 pm
32680 spacer
>>32679
I hate to interrupt a good cunt-off but hiring a white/heteronormative person to speak or advise on minority issues might not actually be a bad idea. Maybe not for political parties where they're just playing a game but having these issues explained from the perspective of someone in the majority might deliver effective outcomes even if it won't fully convey feelings.

There's baggage of course but if you're speaking to the majority you might do well to do so with concern for understanding them. Like how back in the Middle Ages the Church didn't care what colour you painted Jesus because the message was what was important. I know we'll never reach the mature discourse found back when you could have a career as a professional farter but we can try.
>> No. 32683 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 4:36 pm
32683 spacer
Bit of a tangent but I actually don't know any trans people who do come from what I'd call "marginalised backgrounds", they're all white and previously male from relatively well off families who went to uni.

Now, I'm not suggesting this is the case for all trans people by any means, but certainly the ones within lefty political circles, one does begin to suspect that's actually got a bit to do with it.
>> No. 32684 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 4:42 pm
32684 spacer
>>32683
Trans people are marginalised in and of themselves, why single them out as needing something 'extra'?
>> No. 32685 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 5:07 pm
32685 spacer
>>32683

>certainly the ones within lefty political circles

It's the age-old problem of a loud, opinionated minority purporting to speak for a silent majority. Politicians at any level are rarely representative of the people they claim to represent. Most trans people just want to get on with their lives; they don't want special treatment, they just don't want to get murdered.
>> No. 32687 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 5:44 pm
32687 spacer
>>32684

That's rather the point. If they weren't making a big deal out of being trans, they wouldn't be marginalised at all. Bit like a poor downtrodden ex-royal making a fuss about all the nasty old racists they've bravely stood up to.
>> No. 32691 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 6:32 pm
32691 spacer
>>32687
How isn't that the same as saying if someone didn't make a fuss out of being female/black/gay/working class/disabled they wouldn't be marginalised?
>> No. 32692 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 6:51 pm
32692 spacer
>>32691

People can tell if you're black, and there's nothing a black person can do but go out into the world every day knowing some people will be hostile to you.

If you're not making a fuss about it, nobody needs to know you're trans. If you go around telling everyone that's what you are, it rather defeats the purpose, to my mind.
>> No. 32693 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 6:53 pm
32693 spacer
>>32692
That's such an ignorant comment I don't even know where to start with it. You're kind of the walking reason there should be more trans spokespeople.
>> No. 32696 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 7:03 pm
32696 spacer
>>32693

Are you saying there is a difference between transwomen and women, and transmen and men? And if there is one that it is anyone else’s business.
>> No. 32700 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 11:03 pm
32700 spacer

Screenshot 2021-03-24 230008.jpg
327003270032700
R3ddit have just gotten rid of the tranny mod
>> No. 32705 Anonymous
24th March 2021
Wednesday 11:27 pm
32705 spacer
>>32700

And they say cancel culture isn't real.
>> No. 32710 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 6:48 am
32710 spacer

kSypPBG.jpg
327103271032710
>>32700
The doxxing part is bollocks, seeing as she'd previously doxxed herself by posting her username elsewhere.
>> No. 32712 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 8:52 am
32712 spacer
Why isn't that poster who flips out at the sheer mention of rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk not going insane over you discussing this?
>> No. 32714 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 9:22 am
32714 spacer
>>32679 - What's your response to her being sacked, considering she did nothing wrong? You have clearly stated that because Amy Challenor is trans, you're making an extra effort. You've said so, multiple times. You will go to extra lengths to defend trans people. This is called 'overcompensating'.

I've talked about this with a few people, and almost every time I've mentioned both that 'she didn't inform her party' and 'she sent facebook messages to senior members' because it actually makes it funnier imo. This is actually one of the only times I've omitted that second part, but the fact that you were so aggressive about it made me very reluctant to work with you on that. That's your fault, as per the view you expressed above. You're here to attack.

>Because I was quoting you? Because you put the emphasis on that?
You are aware that quoting back a single word when it's used in its usual context implies that you think that word is inappropriate. That's not a question. You know that. Stop playing silly sausages. It's genuinely fucking mental to suggest that *REGARDLESS OF COMPETENCE* someone should be placed in a role due to their demographic. You'd cut off your nose to spite your face, it's simply stupid.

If the demographic really is unable to respond to someone outside their demographic, then honestly I don't care about what they want.
>> No. 32716 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 9:22 am
32716 spacer
>I hate to interrupt a good cunt-off but hiring a white/heteronormative person to speak or advise on minority issues might not actually be a bad idea.
Imo it absolutely is a fine idea. Unless the community they represent has been primed to dislike these individuals for their race/sexuality/etc, then there should be no problem as long as they're good at what they're doing.

>You're kind of the walking reason there should be more trans spokespeople.
If anything we need fewer. The shit ones are actively hampering their cause.

>if you can't see why e.g. straight people are not good spokespeople for issues that affect LGBT people, however competent they may or may not be
The problem is that I'm not a bigot, and I judge people as individuals rather than what demographic they belong to. Anyone can have skills and qualities that put them above the rest. Ignoring that because of their demographic is a discriminative double standard.
>> No. 32717 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 9:44 am
32717 spacer
>>32714
I already told you I don't have enough information about this rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk shite to make a judgement. We don't even know for sure if she was sacked or quit. It's obviously regrettable, whatever has happened.

I'm tired of having this repetitive conversation with someone so obnoxious and probably a teenlad so I'm not going to engage with you any further.
>> No. 32722 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 10:50 am
32722 spacer
>so I'm not going to engage with you any further.
That's bollocks, you love getting involved. You'll leave now because you've been called out on your hypocrisy, your double standards, and your lack of a non-bigoted argument for justifying why one should be ruled out for a role based on their demographic. You wanted a fight, you know you put people on the defensive, and you know you're a you're a shockingly ineffective spokesperson for the trans community online.

You're a hypocrite who can't even form a proper defence of your bigotry. You admit you have an agenda and then pretend you don't. You back out as soon as you're caught out, and try and spin it against the person you're attacking (not talking to, attacking).

Sort your head out, you're a mess.
>> No. 32723 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 11:29 am
32723 spacer
>>32712
Because while I don't give a hoot about any of this Kiwi Farms-tier guff, it all began as a discussion about said guff. It wasn't two people talking about the Paris Commune before a third and fourth showed up and started harping on about a rudgwicksteamshow.co.ukor who said something mean about Lewis Hamilton or something equally as pointless. You really ought to pay close attention to what I write on here, much of it is a quite entertaining and rather sage.
>> No. 32731 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 5:18 pm
32731 spacer
>>32723

I want to believe you, but that word filter suggests one of the 3 of us is pretty tilted by even the mention of the site. And it isn't me or >>32712.
>> No. 32733 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 5:49 pm
32733 spacer
>>32731

The word filter was put there to annoy the one user who, every time somone mentioned Rudgwick, posted a link, or gave an opinion inline with someone on the site, would go fucking mental and complain that rudgewick stuff belonged on Rudgwick.
>> No. 32734 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 5:59 pm
32734 spacer
>>32733

Also the Rudgwick Steam Show is a good day out with a fucking mental website.
>> No. 32735 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 6:20 pm
32735 spacer
>>32733

That argument seems back to front based on what the word filter affects.
>> No. 32736 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 6:22 pm
32736 spacer
>>32735

I'm not a clever man. I just wanted to annoy the complainer the next time they complained, and then nobody else complained about the filter so it stayed, in true britfa style.
>> No. 32738 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 6:46 pm
32738 spacer
>>32736

Fair enough I took 2+2 and made 5.
>> No. 32739 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 6:48 pm
32739 spacer
>>32691

Because being discriminated against because of your class/gender/race is structural and unavoidable prejudice that's going to occur unfairly regardless of what you say or do about it. If you're an educated white middle class tranny, your degree of marginalisation is about as severe as my marginalisation for being a furry.

Trans people are marginalised, of course they are, but if you already belong to the most privileged demographic with the sole exception of being trans, you've got relatively little to complain about. Intersectionality innit m8.

Have a guess which one of these avenues of marginalisation I think is the most impactful.
>> No. 32742 Anonymous
25th March 2021
Thursday 8:55 pm
32742 spacer
>>32731
>one of the 3 of us
I'm new here, and I don't know what the word filter applies to yet. But nobody has mentioned the cartoon white alien mascot of rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk, so let's see if rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk.com is the rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk that triggers the wordfilter.
>> No. 32743 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 4:58 am
32743 spacer

130762189422.png
327433274332743
>>32742
There's only three posters on the site.
>> No. 32744 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 8:17 am
32744 spacer
>>32743
If it ever seems like more, then that usually means one of us is arguing with himself.
>> No. 32745 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 8:26 am
32745 spacer

fourLights.jpg
327453274532745
>>32744
>> No. 32746 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 8:33 am
32746 spacer
>>32745

I <3 David Warner.
>> No. 32748 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 12:13 pm
32748 spacer
>>32739
>Intersectionality innit m8
What? That's not intersectionality, that's competing in the Oppression Olympics.

Intersectionality is the theoretical framework that oppressions intersect. It's got nothing to do with who has 'the most to complain about'.
>> No. 32749 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 12:30 pm
32749 spacer
>>32748

You are implying those concepts aren't related but they seem heavily entwined, one is just a pejorative for the ham-fisted attempts to implement the other.

Intersectionality without oppression olympics is meaningless because if we all try we can shuffle things around to say we are the victim and that we overcame something. Without keeping score we might as well throw the whole thing in the rubbish and just help the needy (how very classist of me but then you might end up helping a lot of white homeless men). But that doesn't determine who gets the keys to power, which is what it has really been about.
>> No. 32754 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 2:49 pm
32754 spacer
>>32748
>Intersectionality is the theoretical framework that oppressions intersect. It's got nothing to do with who has 'the most to complain about'.

Oppressions intersect and therefore...some people have more to complain about than others?
>> No. 32756 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 3:48 pm
32756 spacer
>>32749
I think you're about five steps away from saying the Jews are flooding Europe with immigrants in order to take over the world, lad. Get off the path now.
>> No. 32757 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 4:05 pm
32757 spacer
>>32756
You can't possibly be that arrogant to think everyone who doesn't agree with your philosophy is a literal Nazi.
>> No. 32759 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 5:07 pm
32759 spacer
>>32757
I think it's the same person who believes that being white should preclude you from taking roles relating to equality.
>> No. 32760 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 5:11 pm
32760 spacer
>>32757
Quite the opposite, I said his way of thinking is indicative of someone who is heading down the alt-right path. It's interesting that you misread my post like that though.
>> No. 32762 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 5:56 pm
32762 spacer
>>32760

"I never said you were a nazi I mearly said you believe there is going to be a white genocide orchestrated by the jews, because you critiqued my view"

Well when you put it like that I feel stupid.
>> No. 32763 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 6:36 pm
32763 spacer
>>32760

Could you explain what part of his post made you think that?
>> No. 32764 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 6:40 pm
32764 spacer
>>32763

He critiqued intersectionalism and as we all know, the only critiques of intersectionalism come from the far right. Do not look at the Marxist critiques of intersectionalism, they're just a false-flag by the far right.
>> No. 32765 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 6:46 pm
32765 spacer
>>32762
Again, I didn't say that that's what he believes. How is it you're struggling this much?

>>32763
It's the unspoken implication of there being a grand conspiracy at work: that oppressed people are only playing at being victims in order to grab "the keys to power", as he puts it. Like I say, that's only a few steps away from 'Jews are controlling our minds with SJW nonsense'.
>> No. 32767 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 7:16 pm
32767 spacer
>>32765

You should probably read his post again.
>> No. 32768 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 7:18 pm
32768 spacer
>>32765

>the unspoken implication

Solid argument.
>> No. 32769 Anonymous
26th March 2021
Friday 8:00 pm
32769 spacer
>>32765
>It's the unspoken implication of there being a grand conspiracy

Fucking hell.
>> No. 32780 Anonymous
27th March 2021
Saturday 11:28 am
32780 spacer
>>32767>>32768>>32769

Nah lads he got me fair and square with the unspoken implication of conspiracy, the reason I hand wave the idea that intersectional problems is I believe them to be wholly irrelevant to actual suffering and just about power for shapeshifting reptilaniods who control us- I don't care how black, trans, gay or female someone is, if they talk about their problems, of perceived discrimination as relevant when they earn over 100k a year, I am going to presume them a cunt and hold prejudice against them against them (why? I'll give you a clue it isn't because they are black trans gay or female (it is the hiss)) equally it doesn't matter how white and cis and male a homeless person is I am going to assume them to have no privilege.
You are going to never convince me the traits we seem to always focus on with intersectionality are more relevant than education, and wealth/income. And yet we don't talk about those anymore when we talk about privilege, isn't that interesting? It's like we aren't supposed to improve the system to be more equitable, or care about others need, No progress now is that the new reptilian overlord wears a different colour and shape of skin suit, that's the true liberation. And white males from poor backgrounds who are doing the worst in education in this country is problem solved, serves them right for being privileged shits.

So why do I think intersectionality as a concept took off then? Multiple reasons, Americans are incapable of talking about class is a big one, and we are now incapable of telling the difference between US and us. It appeals a lot of people who feel they are entitled to more but aren’t actually doing too bad for themselves, every minor transgression against them can now be weaved into a rich complex tapestry of how they have a worse life and deserve better with no real justification. Also it feels good to hand wave away any man who disagrees with your position as completely incapable of understanding and therefore invalid, you don’t have to explain or justify your position anymore it is your truth only you could know, and of course it appeals to any well to do female reptilian overlord who wants to take over an aging males nest, and the peasants are happy finally we have a female giant lizard devouring them instead.

It’s all tribalism of the worst kind that appeals to petty selfish motivations, improves nothing, and actively distracts away from killing the lizards.
>> No. 32781 Anonymous
27th March 2021
Saturday 12:50 pm
32781 spacer
>>32780
>And yet we don't talk about those anymore when we talk about privilege, isn't that interesting?
I know, right? It's almost as if they're trying to suggest that there's some correlation between those "traits" and education/wealth/income which isn't merely coincidental.
>> No. 32782 Anonymous
27th March 2021
Saturday 1:33 pm
32782 spacer
>>32781

And yet there isn't give that women do better in education? and Indians do better in income in this country than more privileged groups? what's THAT about eh? Anyone cynical might just dismiss the suggest connection as being relevant as a load of special intrest bollocks.
>> No. 32988 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 12:41 pm
32988 spacer

parody of it self.jpg
329883298832988
https://xtramagazine.com/love-sex/queer-haircut-straight-boyfriend-197564

> I received a text from an old friend. As the first person I came out to, he’d guided me through my “baby gay” years of college. “I like your haircut,” he typed. “You definitely don’t look straight.”
>Exactly what I was going for.

>In this tired solitude, all my communities—but perhaps especially my queer community—have drifted further away. Even more acutely, I felt that my queerness was drifting away. I found the pandemic invisibilizing. So much of this time is characterized by stasis, and we remember people as we last saw them. I sometimes feel one dimensional in other people’s eyes; through a hetero-lens, my queerness becomes flattened.


>Cole created space for my queerness to exist in our monogamous relationship, invited me to be all of myself with him. He sends me videos from Lesbian TikTok and tweets about Doc Martens. He consumes content from queer creators, texts me “happy bi vis day shorty!” and asks how he can be supportive.

>I laid in bed next to Cole and scrolled through Instagram, pausing my feed to watch the Canadian 1,500-metre record-holder bleach and dye her pixie cut over her bathroom sink. “She’s my new favourite queer runner,”

tldr; ME ME ME look at me!

The fuck is this narcissistic attention whore shit? Is being queer just a fashion and constant validation for othering yourself, so you don't have to face that you are boring and lack self esteem? Because that’s what you would think from reading the article.
>> No. 32989 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 12:52 pm
32989 spacer
>>32988

It definitely seems like it for the kind of people who make a point of saying queer instead of just, you know, gay, which is what all the gays I know call themselves.
>> No. 32990 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 12:52 pm
32990 spacer
>>32988
>The fuck is this narcissistic attention whore shit?
I think the term for it is "clickbait".
>> No. 32994 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 1:37 pm
32994 spacer
>>32988

Do you remember all those tiresome acrobat kids who collected identities like they were Pokemon? They're hitting 30 now and they still haven't developed a real personality.
>> No. 32995 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 1:42 pm
32995 spacer
>>32988
Magazine about queer culture publishes article about queer culture shocker.
>> No. 32996 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 1:42 pm
32996 spacer
>>32988
Cool it, hot head. It's just one article, you don't have to work yourself up into a heart attack over it. Love the reaffirmation of how low women's standards are though. The lad shaved off a bit of her hair, I think, and she wrote a whole article about how great he is. Not sure, didn't read it.

>Twitter screenshot
Off to the penal colony with you.
>> No. 32998 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 2:22 pm
32998 spacer
>>32995
If queer culture is really so vapid I'm not sure it is worth celebrating or protecting. I realise you could make the same accusations about being goth but we aren't supposed to think of queer as being quite so vain and lacking in substance and purely performative.

I cut my hair, now I am queer seems like a weird bar for entry and standard for self-identity, that when I got a new haircut and people at school called me gay, I am starting to wonder if they were right.

This person seems like all they have going on for them is telling people they are queer and that seems tragic. I see them as a microcosm of society what they are doing as a symptom of modern alienation, like we have fucked our own sense of self worth that we don’t know where to get it anymore.
>> No. 32999 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 2:58 pm
32999 spacer
>>32989
She's not gay, she has a straight boyfriend in a heteronormative relationship. She's, I guess, bi but she needs to reaffirm that because she can't just be a fucking individual but needs to feel part of a clique. I expect nothing less from the existence of a blogger on some unknown online website.

>>32998
Are you intentionally trying to rile us up over bullshit? Yes LGBT culture has a superficial consumerist undercurrent, lot's of wannabes, try-hards and outright mentalists. But it's that culture that has allowed it to flourish, a transaction between a people who have historically lacked an open cultural space and a capitalist system that by design fills that need with both sides recognising the absurdity and playfulness of it. Today's gay power bloc is the pink pound.

You see this relationship go awry instead with the OP where people try to break away from capitalism only to start immediately imposing rigid boundaries over who is acceptable and what services are provided.
>> No. 33006 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 4:25 pm
33006 spacer
>>32999

I think people should be be riled over this bullshit otherwise it removes all meaning from everything and you might as well say your sexuality is hufflepuff with a straight face.

If you don't gatekeeper this shit, the internet and capitalism will dilute this to the point that it loses all meaning and make it something you can just buy, you should be bothered if you think institutions have any meaning whatsoever. The alternative is that everything has its price and is up for consumption regardless of sincerity.

Yes I hate hyper consumerism. It's not so much that I think the wrong side won the cold war, but that I think since its end no one has had a hand on the break of the behavioural sink.

I suppose I can't be surprised LGBT is the lowest of low hanging fruit for company ethics. I remember going to London pride and the parade was exclusively companies the humanity has been entirely removed for corporate promotion. But I like to pretend everyone knows that the emperor has no clothes we aren't that doomed as a species, but articles like this remind me, No there really are people who would buy starbuck because the cup had a rainbow flag on it, because they think it makes them more gay, and being gay is cool.
>> No. 33009 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 4:43 pm
33009 spacer

0-229[1].jpg
330093300933009
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/03/trans-rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk-mod-fire-inviting-minors-home-hormone-shots-behind-parents-backs/

>Trans rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk moderator Ianna Drew Urquhart is facing scrutiny for allegedly having minors come to their apartment to take hormones and puberty blockers — apparently without their parent’s knowledge or consent.

>In a post on rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk, Urquhart joked that “with the number of trans girls that have come thru my apartment, I need to rename it Drewie’s House of Wayward Trans Girls.”

Oh dear.
>> No. 33012 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 5:00 pm
33012 spacer
>>33009
That's not as hideously obnoxious as the other one. Obviously, some under-18 LGBTQIA+ rainbow pixies are attention-seeking imbeciles who just need a slap, but others aren't, and there's no way of knowing which ones are which.

What I want to know is, when they pick a new name for themselves, why do they always pick such stupid names? Just be Claire or Sarah or Laura or Emma. Don't call yourself "Ianna", for God's sake.
>> No. 33014 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 5:15 pm
33014 spacer
>>33012

>when they pick a new name for themselves, why do they always pick such stupid names? Just be Claire or Sarah or Laura or Emma. Don't call yourself "Ianna", for God's sake.

Some of it might be overcompensation. On the other hand, I think a lot of people, not just trans, would probably go a bit colourful if they got to choose a new name for themselves.
>> No. 33018 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 5:36 pm
33018 spacer
>>33006
>capitalism will dilute this to the point that it loses all meaning

SpongeBob SquarePants being bi is a bit much for me but it's undoubtedly been an instrument for acceptance by translating gay wealth into power. If being gay ends up being as benign as being left-handed then what better outcome do you want? What meaning are you trying to find in sexuality?

Yes, Pride is a corporate festival. It has no specified date these days because hotels and retail make a fortune off every city doing it differently which allows for people to even follow Pride. I don't think it detracts from the fundamental purpose and if not then you can hang out with your authoritarian friends debating what punk is and calling people posers.

>doomed as a species

It's getting odder and odder that you people exist these days. We're seriously talking about colonies in orbit, on the Moon and on Mars without even dedicating a significant amount of human effort to the endeavour. As a civilization we're pretty much good for the foreseeable future, if we crack commercially viable fusion or even space-based solar power then we're more than fine.
>> No. 33029 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 6:33 pm
33029 spacer
>>33009

I'd block her puberty IYKWIM.

>>33018

>If being gay ends up being as benign as being left-handed then what better outcome do you want?

The early gay liberation movement that created Pride was closely interconnected with a broader left-wing movement and sought not merely acceptance, but a radical transformation of society. I'm largely OK with the pinkwashed corporate gay thing, but I can see why people get grumpy.

https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/pwh/glf-london.asp

>We're seriously talking about colonies in orbit, on the Moon and on Mars without even dedicating a significant amount of human effort to the endeavour.

Let the dullards have Earth - I'm going to Elon's pansexual circlejerk on Mars. While they're still arguing about gender identity, I'll be getting my knob replaced with one of these:


>> No. 33031 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 6:54 pm
33031 spacer
>>33018

>If being gay ends up being as benign as being left-handed then what better outcome do you want?
Well that is a lie isn't it. It isn't being treated like that. It is treated as something super important in a public space, this person had an existential crisis over that no one had congratulated them on being gay, and they had to look more gay and show others they look more gay to feel better about themselves that sounds like what is being created isn’t benign. I would much prefer it was benign.
This example violates a sense of what should be personal and the inner and what should be the public. In many ways my proble is not about this being about sexuality but the fact this person needs other people to tell them who they are, and I consider that a sickness and one that seems to have been on the rise.

>What meaning are you trying to find in sexuality?
If you don't see the inherent value in sexuality or any importance or relevance or sacredness to the self I can't even begin to explain the problem.
The only thing I could say that I hope you understand is, if there is a line where commercialization should stop and a right to privacy should begin that line should be drawn well before the point of confabulating sexual expression with your brand of coffee. I don't feel like my sexuality should, quite literally in this case, be someone else’s business.

>I don't think it detracts from the fundamental purpose
What is it you see as the fundamental purpose exactly? I do the same way that I shudder a church had sponsored content in the sermon, even though I am not religious I think some spaces need to be protected from corporate interference and expressing comfort in sexuality is one of them.

>It's getting odder and odder that you people exist these days.
My kind of people have existed since the crucible of humanity, Plato wrote a couple of angry rants about how Athens was going to the dogs, because too many girls were playing the flute, he was right then and I am right now.
I don't particularly care much about the point of if our species replicates, my stance is one of cultural advancement and actualisation as anything other than apes in jewellery who need society to constantly tell them they approve of them.
>> No. 33032 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 7:26 pm
33032 spacer
>>33031
I fully believe that spending too much time online makes people so obsessed with identity politics. It's like those sketches (I hope they weren't Little Britain but I think they were) about that guy who was the only gay in the village. The Internet brings us all together. Nobody who uses social media is the only anything any more, so you can never be "that guy who xxxx xxxxx xxxxxx". People who lead largely offline lives seem unaffected by this problem, but once you are being exposed to thousands of opposing viewpoints every day, on bloody Twitter, the only way to be "that guy" is to be yourself as loudly and intrusively as possible. Just like how we, here, regularly take it in turns to one-up each other with posts that of course we should burn down banks, everybody thinks that, but it won't really do anything unless the bankers are locked inside as we do it. Everything online is more extreme; it just is.
>> No. 33036 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 8:53 pm
33036 spacer
>>33032

>Nobody who uses social media is the only anything any more

True. No matter how marginal your minority is, there's going to be hundreds or thousands of you somewhere who are just like you. On a good day, this can do good, e.g. when it brings together sufferers of very rare diseases. Like that documentary I saw that one time about how closely connected children with progeria are, the world over. More power to them. But apart from that, all the shouty, difficult, opinionated, self important loners now have an illusion of numbers, and a platform from which they annoy all the rest of the world. And where an ad campaign gets taken down that literally no more than a few dozen people worldwide on Twitter took offence at.


>but once you are being exposed to thousands of opposing viewpoints every day, on bloody Twitter

The weird thing being that a lot of them think that their opinion is the only one that matters, and if you disagree with them, you get called every name in the book, or much worse. We've got an entire generation and a half now who have grown up sheltered in the belief that nobody has a right to have an opinion that differs from theirs.
>> No. 33037 Anonymous
5th April 2021
Monday 9:22 pm
33037 spacer
>>33036

There was a bit of an uproar before the last London Gay Pride about a bunch of TERFs wanting to march. IIRC only eight of them turned up. In real life it's obvious that they're just a handful of nutters, but social media is weirdly powerful in allowing a handful of nutters to seem like a mass movement.
>> No. 33040 Anonymous
6th April 2021
Tuesday 3:40 am
33040 spacer
>>33018
The idea of getting acceptance via money-as-power seems like the sort of thing that would underscore that we live in a deeply unwell society. Don't treat people like human beings because they're human beings, or because what they do in their bedroom doesn't affect you in any way, or any of that: No, do it because there's a 1.5% higher annual return on your company accounts if you pretend to like them.
And if the group isn't a particularly impressive economic force? Gypsies or something? Well then, why should you be expected to treat them as human?

>We're seriously talking about colonies in orbit, on the Moon and on Mars
We were doing this in the 1950s and 1960s before budget cuts hit. This isn't a mark of progress, it's a mark of decay. There are few things more depressing than the knowledge that our idea of "the future" has barely advanced from 2001. Not 2001AD, 2001: A Space Odyssey.
(Oh, but there's a winking irony to it all and instead of Pan Am space shuttles we've got the orbiting Tesla, so we've obviously advanced a thousand years in the last 60...)
>> No. 33042 Anonymous
6th April 2021
Tuesday 1:41 pm
33042 spacer
>>33037

> but social media is weirdly powerful in allowing a handful of nutters to seem like a mass movement.

Exactly my point.

It's virtually impossible as a corporation or a similarly large entity to not offend a small handful of people everytime you do X or Y. It's always been that way, even before the Internet. Even in the 1970s or 80s, BBC or ITV received complaints from people after airing gaudy programmes that the majority were fine with. In the case of some global ad campaigns, which are aimed at potentially millions or billions of people worldwide, all it takes is ten or twenty overly opinionated SJWs, and then a few hundred others who can't be arsed one way or the other but take at face value and retweet what professional SJWs spout all over the Internet, because it's yet another welcome way for those few hundred to channel their diffuse anger at the world.
>> No. 33190 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 2:33 pm
33190 spacer
https://americanhumanist.org/news/american-humanist-association-board-statement-withdrawing-honor-from-richard-dawkins/

>American Humanist Association Board Statement Withdrawing Honor from Richard Dawkins

>Regrettably, Richard Dawkins has over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values. His latest statement implies that the identities of transgender individuals are fraudulent, while also simultaneously attacking Black identity as one that can be assumed when convenient. His subsequent attempts at clarification are inadequate and convey neither sensitivity nor sincerity.


I guess Dawkins pissed off the wrong people this time.
>> No. 33211 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 6:55 pm
33211 spacer
>In 2015, Rachel Dolezal, a white chapter president of NAACP, was vilified for identifying as Black. Some men choose to identify as women, and some women choose to identify as men. You will be vilified if you deny that they literally are what they identify as.

>Discuss.

>I do not intend to disparage trans people. I see that my academic “Discuss” question has been misconstrued as such and I deplore this. It was also not my intent to ally in any way with Republican bigots in US now exploiting this issue .

It's plainly logically impossible that he was doing both things they claim.
>> No. 33222 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 10:15 pm
33222 spacer
>>33211

Christ he played the Dolezal card. Should have known better.

You've got to be very online to comprehend how far back the logic bends to support itself with all this stuff. Poor old Dawkins is a relic from an older, simpler time when the majority of people quietly knew Christians were mentalists. It's an entirely different matter with the idpol cult.
>> No. 33224 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 10:34 pm
33224 spacer
>>33211

Even the word "discuss" is offensive to certain people nowadays.

If your concept of A or B is as unassailable as you feel it is, then surely some wizened old atheist hack who hasn't written a good book in fifteen years, if that, isn't going to do your unassailable, self-evident truth any harm. Especially considering that he has been going after people all his life who, on a side note, have told you that you are an abomination for pretending to be a woman and/or taking it up your arse.


>>33222

> Poor old Dawkins is a relic from an older, simpler time when the majority of people quietly knew Christians were mentalists. It's an entirely different matter with the idpol cult.

I think this is the main problem. He is from a time with clear-cut front lines. If you were going against religion and its bigots, you knew you were going to piss off a certain demographic. But you knew who they were, and you also knew that there were more than enough people still backing you on your side of the fence who thought like you.

But if you now look at the fragmentation and frankly mind-boggling inconsistency within the social justice movement, you are going to piss off people left, right, and centre no matter what you say.
>> No. 33225 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 10:35 pm
33225 spacer
>>33222
Can you show me on the doll where the nasty trans woman touched you?
>> No. 33226 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 10:43 pm
33226 spacer

bumhole.jpg
332263322633226
>>33225
>> No. 33227 Anonymous
20th April 2021
Tuesday 11:38 pm
33227 spacer
What a surprise. A man whose public recognition is entirely built on not humouring personal beliefs, didn't humour personal beliefs.

I am honestly surprised it took this long for people to start labelling him transphobic.
>> No. 33228 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 12:00 am
33228 spacer
>>33227

He has a bit of a history of saying the wrong things, while not necessarily meaning the wrong things. He said a few years ago that he got fondled by a priest, but that it was kind of a hand-on-trousers kind of thing, and that while it felt "icky", it had no long-term effect on him and wasn't as bad as the sexual abuse some children suffer.

Which may not be a categorically wrong statement in and of itself, at least not in its entirety, but of course it's impossible to defend, given that it insinuates that a bit of kiddie fiddling is alright, as long as you don't overdo it.
>> No. 33229 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 12:29 am
33229 spacer
>>33228
I remember him talking about this in the God Delusion but there was more context to it. He contrasted the experience with the psychological harm of being told as a child that his friend was going to burn in hell forever for being the wrong type of Christian. Or it might've been someone else contrasting even worse carpet-baggerry, I must've read that 15 years ago.

The passage immediately came to my head when that controversy hit because nobody batted an eye in 2006. Admittedly, it did require reading a book, but still.
>> No. 33230 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 12:37 am
33230 spacer
>>33228

>but of course it's impossible to defend, given that it insinuates that a bit of kiddie fiddling is alright, as long as you don't overdo it.

I mean it is, but I take your point in the absolutist insanity of the modern world with its twitterstorms they would victim blame him for getting over it fine, and then turn on someone else within 5 mins for victim blaming with no self-reflection on thier own actions.
>> No. 33231 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 12:41 am
33231 spacer
>>33229

>the psychological harm of being told as a child that his friend was going to burn in hell forever for being the wrong type of Christian.

Did anybody really buy that? Between that and a priest putting his hand on your leg as a weelad, I'm sure most people will without hesitation say the latter is far worse. Dawkins was being kind of a bigot in his own right there.

I was told all kinds of stories as a weelad. One was that if I didn't stop picking my nose, my nan said she would come and cut my fingers off with scissors in my sleep. It was a terrible thing to say to weelad me, but I have no discernible childhood trauma from it nowadays.
>> No. 33232 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 12:59 am
33232 spacer
>>33231

If the kid truly believes in hell, and I suppose continues to believe in it as they grow up, then I think there's an argument to be made that the former could be worse. I don't think this enough to defend it beyond this post, I just can see an argument for "I fully believe I am literally going to suffer unimaginable pain for eternity" being more harmful than "a priest touched my knob".

Again, I'm hardly steadfast in this belief, I have experienced neither, and even if I was fully convinced in that position I'd still not say it out loud in public.
>> No. 33233 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 1:08 am
33233 spacer
>>33231
>Did anybody really buy that? Between that and a priest putting his hand on your leg as a weelad, I'm sure most people will without hesitation say the latter is far worse


I assume you are coming to this from a place of having no belief at all and I presume never have, of course you think the thing that you consider tangible worse. If you have any genuine belief in these concepts the idea of someone being cursed to suffer in agony for all eternity is much worse. If you never experienced that culture of a real fear of divine wrath because you grew up after it stopped being an over bearing force on society in an agnostic upbringing it is something almost impossible to explain.
>> No. 33234 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 8:01 am
33234 spacer
Let's be realistic though, there is a difference between a priest touching your leg versus actually giving your bumhole a buggering. I doubt Dawkins would deny that having your arsehole fucked raw as a kid is less traumatising than the abstract concept of spiritual damnation, but his point was that his personal experience of a priest getting a bit touchy feely was mild compared to the rigorous theological indoctrination.

>>33231

Lucky she never caught you wanking lad. You don't want to know what kind of fetish you'd have ended up with there.
>> No. 33238 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 11:44 am
33238 spacer

a33ad912e8dd91310ee3885c48e9fafe.jpg
332383323833238
>>33234

I think the point with Dawkins is that he is against any kind of dogmatism, both religious and intellectual. And I guess to some extent, you could argue that the threat of eternal damnation for questioning religious dogma and the deplatforming and shitstorming if you call into doubt the tenets of LGBT wokeness are two sides of the same coin.

Dawkins would have been burned at the stake for blasphemy a few centuries ago. Churches obviously no longer do that, but in their place now in terms of fervent support of an ideology that nobody is allowed to question are some very vocal segments of the social justice and wokeness movement.

It's not certain if their movement will mellow out as well over time and just not give a toss when somebody says white people identifying as black or men identifying as women is nonsense. Dawkins, in his mind, may simply think he's doing what he has been doing all his life, except that now he criticises the LGBT community instead of the church, but it's not that simple. Not to those who have been getting hot under the collar at his recent remarks.

Also, Dawkins as an evolutionary biologist too often argues from the standpoint that we're all still apes. That may not be entirely untrue, but ironically, he himself has become quite dogmatic about it. While evolutionary biology really has no way of explaining why white people suddenly identify as black in the 21st century, or why gender is, by some, considered a fluid continuum rather than being determined by the set of genitals between your legs that you were born with.
>> No. 33239 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 12:22 pm
33239 spacer
Why is Dawkins' statement being framed in this discusson as though it were 'blasphemy' or 'questioning dogma'?

People hold the belief that it is good and right to treat trans people as their identified gender both out of empathy and because the scientific and medical consensuses show it's the best outcome for their welfare. Is it fair to equate that to a religious belief derived from scripture or tradition?

Would it be 'blasphemy' if Dawkins questioned why we no longer treat homosexuality as an illness or disorder, or compared it to paedophilia, which we do? Would that be fair inquiry worthy of recognition by the American Humanists?
>> No. 33240 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 12:35 pm
33240 spacer
>>33239

>Is it fair to equate that to a religious belief derived from scripture or tradition?

My point was that the angle Dawkins is going for is that to him at least, LGBT and ethnic self-identification are dogmatic ideas, and that no idea is so absolute that nobody must question it.

In that sense, Dawkins may think that he's just switched opponents, from religion to LGBT, social justice, and wokeness. But that it's not quite that simple.

Also though, like I said, if your set of ideas is as unassailable as you think it is, then surely an old hack like him isn't going to be a threat to everything you believe in just by encouraging people to "discuss" your ideas. Especially when there's now ample scientific consensus on transsexuality or even homosexuality.
>> No. 33241 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 12:49 pm
33241 spacer

do what you must I have already won.jpg
332413324133241
>>33238
>While evolutionary biology really has no way of explaining why white people suddenly identify as black in the 21st century, or why gender is, by some, considered a fluid continuum rather than being determined by the set of genitals between your legs that you were born with.

I don't know about this. There's the danger I've noticed in the more radical forms of feminism that science is belittled and pushed out when it doesn't conform to how they'd like reality to be. But if you can't have objective facts then it often becomes two people babbling at one another like infants.

There's nothing objectively wrong with looking at a continuum of gender because the gendered brain is more two clusters with lots of outliers and there are mountains of evidence for this. Anyone who tries to argue against this is wrong no matter how many snappy retorts some Guardian-reading moron comes out with. That should be how you open up with arguing with an evolutionary biologist, or anyone, rather than screeching at them and stripping titles. With race that really is a case of tribes created by facts that you cannot change but it's more like applied histography where you can know why these tribal narratives exist as a result and response to conditions to skin colour.

Then again, pissing a bunch of people off and being stripped of a dumb title like 'humanist of the year' would probably bring me joy at his age. One day in the future I'm going to be sitting at the Christmas dinner table with my family and drop the line that computers aren't people and the government shouldn't watch your every move. I'll lose my mandated conformity perks and upset the grandchildren but fuck 'em, I'll be old they can't do shit to me.
>> No. 33242 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 12:52 pm
33242 spacer
>>33238

That's probably a fair assessment. And it is, if we're being completely honest with ourselves, easy to see parallels between religious dogma and current woke-ism, whatever you'd like to call it.

There have even been some who have speculated it's pretty much filling the gap left behind by religion in a society which is, for the first time in history, broadly agnostic and secular. That makes a lot of sense when you cast your gaze across the pond and look at the completely bonkers stuff the SJW crowd over there come up with, compared to our rather tame and by comparison, more or less agreeable European types.

I think the major difference is that when it comes to organised religion, you can make a solid and pretty compelling historical argument that the whole shebang is actually pure evil. Not the people who follow it, but the organisation of the Church, and the various atrocities committed in the name of Christ (or you know, the brown equivalent). It's a bit harder to justify being such a firebrand when it comes to queer people who just want to be left alone, even if in a lot of cases it's arguable they're causing more problems than they're solving and don't realise it. Or at very least that they're a set of annoying cunts.

Just isn't quite the same on balance, really.
>> No. 33243 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 12:57 pm
33243 spacer
>>33239
>People hold the belief that it is good and right to treat trans people as their identified gender both out of empathy and because the scientific and medical consensuses show it's the best outcome for their welfare. Is it fair to equate that to a religious belief derived from scripture or tradition?

Yes, you're making both a moral and scientific claims and both should be vigorously tested. Religious dogma is what is believed without question, whinge all you want about consensus but it is still a taboo that's been constructed.
>> No. 33245 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 1:23 pm
33245 spacer
>>33243

This is pretty much my own point. If your set of ideas and beliefs that you have made up your mind to defend to the death is as self evident and beyond question as you say it is, then what harm is somebody going to do if they put those ideas to the test.

Or rather, "beyond question" shouldn't mean that you plunge somebody into social media shitstorm hell if they have the audacity to ask questions anyway.


>>33242

>There have even been some who have speculated it's pretty much filling the gap left behind by religion in a society which is, for the first time in history, broadly agnostic and secular.

One thing that's tucked away in a chapter of The God Delusion, which I actually bought and read from cover to cover a long time ago, is that Dawkins argues that humans have a "desire to be good". He sees this as one of the underpinnings of religion in the first place. By and large, and some individuals who can't be arsed notwithstanding, we all have a desire to be a good person, and to do right. It then almost doesn't matter what the agreed-upon standard of "good" and "right" is in a society. You will have a majority of people more or less respecting, observing and following that agreed-upon standard, but minding their own business. But there always will be extremists who fall over themselves wearing those standards on their sleeve and living and breathing them and not tolerating naysayers, and often to the point of quite serious fanatism and bigotry.

And I think we are seeing wokeness and the social justice movement assuming that kind of role to some extent, in the increased absense of religious belief as the basis of society as you said. There are plenty of reasonable people who will more or less agree that minorities and LGBT individuals deserve equal rights and respect, and maybe society's protection for being more vulnerable than the average person. But what's giving the movement a bad name are the few crazies who won't rest until you are cast into eternal (social media) banishment even for the mildest of publicly-voiced doubts.
>> No. 33247 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:07 pm
33247 spacer
>>33243
>>33243
>>33245
>encouraging people to "discuss" your ideas
>both should be vigorously tested
>put those ideas to the test
Does everyone have a "right to debate" no matter how stupid their ideas are?

I quote Shaun of YouTube fame, on white supremacy: "I'm not here to debate whether any of these terms represent acceptable political positions. They don't. Here in the free marketplace of ideas, I will debate absolutely any argument or position, so long as it's debatable. For instance, I won't debate whether 2 + 2 = 5 with you, not because I can't prove it doesn't, but because there's no point. It's a waste of time. You know, take someone who thinks that 2 + 2 = 5, and will argue the point. I don't want to convince them that they're wrong. I don't want them on my side. You know, if they looked at the evidence and came to that conclusion, who knows what else they think? They're embarassing. Likewise with questions of equal rights. Whether or not people deserve equal human rights is a question with a right and a wrong answer as clear-cut as the previous example. If you believe, for instance, that white people are inherently superior to other races, and deserve to be treated preferentially by society as a result of that, you are wrong. There's nothing to be debated there. Not because I can't explain why you're wrong, but because as things stand, you're incapable of understanding why you're wrong."

And in the same way you can find many neo-Nazis willing to present their talking points and pseudoscientific literature on racial difference to you, if only you will listen, I don't see why Dawkins should get preferential treatment when he parrots similarly ignorant shite.
>> No. 33248 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:11 pm
33248 spacer
>>33247
>I quote Shaun of YouTube fame

How ironic in a discussion on valid opinions.
>> No. 33249 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:16 pm
33249 spacer
>>33247
>I don't want to convince them that they're wrong. I don't want them on my side. You know, if they looked at the evidence and came to that conclusion, who knows what else they think? They're embarassing. Likewise with questions of equal rights. Whether or not people deserve equal human rights is a question with a right and a wrong answer as clear-cut as the previous example. If you believe, for instance, that white people are inherently superior to other races, and deserve to be treated preferentially by society as a result of that, you are wrong. There's nothing to be debated there. Not because I can't explain why you're wrong, but because as things stand, you're incapable of understanding why you're wrong."

Lad just sounds like a knob tbh. "I will debate any argument or position, so long as I deem it debateable or in good taste". I bet he wouldn't even have the balls to consider the other side of that argument.

It also speaks to his self importance that he thinks the end goal of a debate is turning someone to your side, and if he can't do that there's no point. Best discussions/debates are the ones where you leave more informed over anything else.

What if I believe black people are inherently superior because they're more resistant to skin cancer from UV sources? It's still a cogent point, the only link you'd need to make if you were being obtuse is that I value not getting skin cancer, and that's my standard of superiority. Then there's a debate to be had. This guy's a knob.
>> No. 33250 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:18 pm
33250 spacer
>>33249
And you think Twitter is the right place for a Hegelian dialectic?
>> No. 33251 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:20 pm
33251 spacer
>>33249

"Debates can help both parties become better informed" does not oblige anyone to respond to your bait.
>> No. 33253 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:24 pm
33253 spacer
>>33251
Bait? You think it's bait to propose that we make a precedent of establishing a clear line of reasoning that can be followed to determine why arguments about racial superiority can go away? Because we're preparing people with the answers? Are you thick?

>>33250
No, it's toxic. Maybe if the culture was different then it would be possible for people to explore ideas more thoroughly, but as is, your morality is judged on a cash basis and not an accural basis, which is frankly fucked.
>> No. 33254 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:26 pm
33254 spacer
>>33253
I think it's bait that you're demanding people engage with you on any topic at all.
>> No. 33255 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:31 pm
33255 spacer
>>33254
You're the same person that posted that quote like it was important, aren't you? Well of course you won't want to discuss this, I'm talking down about someone you like, whose opinion you respect. And ironically you're one of the few people who might disagree with me on this board, but you don't have the wherewithal to stage a decent counterpoint.

It's all about misdirection and distraction with you lot.
>> No. 33256 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:34 pm
33256 spacer
>>33255
>You're the same person that posted that quote like it was important, aren't you?
I don't think so.
>> No. 33257 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:37 pm
33257 spacer
>>33255
No that was me. Why is that ironic?
>> No. 33258 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:43 pm
33258 spacer
>>33247

>Does everyone have a "right to debate" no matter how stupid their ideas are?

It's complicated. Racism and - perceived - racial superiority have such a bloodied history which brought about nothing but bad, that no enlightened person today who sees themselves only obligated to fair and impartial debate will take the leap to still defend your right to argue whatever strong points you may think racism still has.

Likewise, religious dogma about sexuality has caused untold suffering, from people being told they are an abomination for being gay to just somebody having sexual hangups in general because they were told in Catholic school that your body is your enemy. So you won't find many people today thinking that you have a right to call somebody a sinner or a pervert because you think their sexuality insult your faith. Well, at least not in Britain. Go to the Bible Belt stateside, and it's a whole different world.

So in essence, I guess there's a certain set of ideas and belief systems that are just no longer tenable unless you want to make yourself look like a complete cunt, but that doesn't mean you should categorically be denied a platform to defend some wacky fringe views you may have. I know it sounds a bit pick-and-choose, but see above.

Also, Richard Dawkins was the dog that had its day in the early 2000s with new-wave atheism, because the Christian Right had one of their own in the White House with George W. Bush, and it impacted not only agnostics and atheists in the U.S. but also in Europe. Richard Dawkins was an outlet for them particularly in America, somebody they could turn to. But then when Obama took office, and really also under Trump and especially now with Biden as a moderate Catholic, the need for opposition to religious zealotry became less. And that is also when Dawkins lost a good bit of his fan base and cultural relevance.
>> No. 33259 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 2:56 pm
33259 spacer
>>33257
It's ironic imo because the person who has conviction in their beliefs should be able to provide a cogent line of reasoning explaining why they have that conviction, so they're the best person for it, and so when they bow out it's a bit like...well, I'd have actually been interested in a sincere response from them.
>> No. 33260 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 3:19 pm
33260 spacer
>>33247
I can't believe I'm having to do this, point out why a youtuber is not a solid foundation to base an argument. I'm the one who pointed our how ironic it was in this discussion.

>Does everyone have a "right to debate" no matter how stupid their ideas are?

Yes and this is the central pillar of liberal democracy you're picking at here. By saying certain ideas cannot be debated you are in effect setting a totalitarian pattern that we're now encountering in social media and which has caused both harm to innocent people and emboldened wrong people. Why are you even using an imageboard? How are we supposed to do science in controversial fields if the scientists become politicised and punished because, for example, they're doing something as simple as studying difference between populations for health risk that might be construed as racist - who sets the bar here?

By all means you don't have to debate, you can just ignore it or make some mealy-mouthed statement on youtube because you're a slave patreon. We're not taking about that though are we. We're talking about the merits of a life examined for its own sake and whether certain things are off limits in that. It's not wrong to discuss the ideas of identity that have very much been part of the public discourse for a decade not matter if it makes you personally uncomfortable.

>I won't debate whether 2 + 2 = 5 with you, not because I can't prove it doesn't, but because there's no point. It's a waste of time.

Absolutely disgusting. The entire philosophy of mathematics is fascinating and in particular how it 'just werks' against our physical reality. It only gets worse with his attempt to equate human rights as this defined right and proper thing when we absolutely do not have a proper and universal conception of it outside the vagaries of natural right that bedevil jurisprudence.
>> No. 33261 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 3:24 pm
33261 spacer
>>33260

Why are you so convinced that nobody could possibly have a good thing to say on youtube? It's just a platform. It's like saying every Ford owner is a shit driver.
>> No. 33262 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 4:17 pm
33262 spacer
>>33260
>Yes and this is the central pillar of liberal democracy you're picking at here.
Very high minded but essentially untrue. Liberal Democracy functioned at its best when the terms of debate were set even more rigidly than they are today. (A function of the way mass media and mass political movements worked in the 50s-80s.) The opening up of actual free debate and discussion where once people faced very limited choices is, if anything, a crisis for liberal democracy. Everyone is all for a free market in news until it turns out people prefer stories made up whole cloth that agree with their worldview to the messy events of the real world.
>> No. 33263 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 4:17 pm
33263 spacer
>>33261
Well they could, but he's quite clearly saying why this particular one is a bit of a mincer.
>> No. 33264 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 4:19 pm
33264 spacer
>>33247

It's funny because Shaun of Youtube fame (if I'm even thinking of the right person) is one of those people so far around the woke bell curve I'd almost consider him a white supremacist. An inadvertent, well intentioned one, but a white supremacist nevertheless.

I tend to agree with him about a lot of more grounded real world politics, but as usual it's whenever race or sexuality or whatever comes up, he goes disappointingly off the deep end.
>> No. 33265 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 4:29 pm
33265 spacer
>>33261
Because if you going to appeal to authority then someone who makes a living reacting to things is not how you do it. The irony in his argument is inherent as youtube is by definition for any old idiot to 'toob' themselves, as far as the authorities will allow them.

Now go read a book.
>> No. 33266 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 4:43 pm
33266 spacer
>>33262
>Liberal Democracy functioned at its best when the terms of debate were set even more rigidly than they are today.

I actually think liberal democracy works better now than at any point in history. The opinion that people are now too free to find information and opinions is a worrying example of how the narrative is being manipulated by establishment anxiety. It is the muttering of a despot in the face of the printing press.

Whinge all you want about people making wrong choices but they're only symptoms of older issues that previously bubbled under the surface.

>Everyone is all for a free market in news until it turns out people prefer stories made up whole cloth that agree with their worldview to the messy events of the real world.

You're talking about back when we read tabloid newspapers. An industry that famously exaggerated the impact of the War of the Worlds broadcast because it was frightened of radio.
>> No. 33267 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 6:44 pm
33267 spacer
>>33265

There's plenty of youtube channels that are just essays read to you by the person who wrote it.
>> No. 33268 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 6:45 pm
33268 spacer
>>33264

>is one of those people so far around the woke bell curve I'd almost consider him a white supremacist

Could you expand on that? I've heard this said before but never seen the explanation.
>> No. 33269 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 7:15 pm
33269 spacer
>>33268
Not them, but I imagine it's something to do with being so keen on equality that it comes off as the fannies and the blackies and the brownies being lesser beings who must have the support of the white man to thrive.

I could be completely off the mark, maybe I'm just projecting.
>> No. 33270 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 7:27 pm
33270 spacer
>>33268

Refer back to the Idris Elba "not authentically black" thread (I can't remember which one it was even in now) and read up on white saviourism/white man's burden.

Basically the phenomenon where white race activists make fighting racism so much their business, using the logic of inescapable, systemic advantages given to white people because of what they ascribe to white supremacy, that the implicit assumption is they think blacks can't do it themselves and it will only end by whites willing it to end. So ultimately, their belief in the evil of lurking white supremacy is so strong they've ended up creating actual overt white supremacy, if you see what I'm saying.

I'm probably not explaining it very well because I've just woken up from a nap, but that's the gist. If you're the type to be critical of identity politics, it's one of the pieces of the jigsaw that indicates overall, the whole cultural zeitgeist of anti-racism, trans rights, LGBT representation etc etc is primarily for the benefit of the existing white middle class, or "professional managerial class".
>> No. 33271 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 7:33 pm
33271 spacer
>>33270

I sort of get it, but at the same time if the idea is that systemic racism supresses the ability of black people, then of course you need the none (or less) supressed white people to be doing the work.

Maybe I'm a racist, who fucking knows anymore.
>> No. 33272 Anonymous
21st April 2021
Wednesday 8:28 pm
33272 spacer
>>33268

If everything is the fault of racist white people, then it totally denies non-white people any kind of agency. If you believe that black people are fully-realised human beings, then some stuff must be their fault at least some of the time. Social justice veers into white supremacy when it portrays non-white people as helpless victims in every situation.
>> No. 33273 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 12:02 am
33273 spacer
>>33272
>If everything is the fault of racist white people
I mean, if by 'everything' you mean 'racism'. Is the point you're trying to make that the definition of racism is too broad, viz. these days if you say you're English you get arrested and thrown in jail?
>> No. 33274 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 12:47 am
33274 spacer
>>33272
If I cut off all four of your limbs, then being unable to climb stairs must be your fault at least some of the time, right? I could give you some prostheses, but then that would be reverse ableism or whatever.
>> No. 33275 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 12:49 am
33275 spacer
>>33270
>that the implicit assumption is they think blacks can't do it themselves and it will only end by whites willing it to end.
If blacks could fix racism all by themselves, don't you think they'd have fixed it already?
>> No. 33276 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 1:04 am
33276 spacer
>>33272

So racism is the fault of black people not doing enough to fight racism, and if you believe otherwise you're a white supremacist? Sounds very convenient, for, you know, actual racists.
>> No. 33277 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 1:06 am
33277 spacer
>>33272
I have nothing to add I'm just combo-breaking the three people saying the exact same thing in response to you.
>> No. 33278 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 3:33 am
33278 spacer
>>33273

Within the theory of "structural racism", everything bad that happens to non-white people is ultimately attributed to racism. Racism does exist and does affect people, but it's only one factor and (in this country) rarely the dominant factor accounting for differences in outcomes. Working-class black people have far more in common with working-class white people than middle-class black people. Attempts to attribute everything to racism often end up being racist themselves, by perpetrating the soft bigotry of low expectations or by reducing all social dynamics to racial dynamics.

https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/reasons-critical-race-theory-terrible-dealing-racism/

https://contexts.org/blog/who-gets-to-define-whats-racist/

https://www.newsweek.com/asian-americans-emerging-strong-voice-against-critical-race-theory-opinion-1574503
>> No. 33279 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 4:00 am
33279 spacer
>>33278

But is systemic racism not a function of class?
>> No. 33281 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 7:19 am
33281 spacer
>>33274

You're proving the point nicely. Black people haven't had all their limbs cut off, they've just got a heavier bag to climb up said stairs. The fact you think they've had all their limbs cut off shows just what you think of them, and how powerful you feel white people are.

This type of white supremacy is a self fulfilling prophecy.
>> No. 33282 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 8:20 am
33282 spacer
>>33281

Who gave them that heavy bag?
>> No. 33283 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 9:05 am
33283 spacer
>>33281
Are you really now arguing about the metaphor? Who gives a shit, it doesn't detract from the point he is making?
>> No. 33284 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 10:02 am
33284 spacer
>>33275

Bold of you to assume all black people want to fix racism. Don't confuse the fight to overcome racism with the fight to be on top. The most openly racist people I've met in my life have not been white.
>> No. 33285 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 10:06 am
33285 spacer
>>33283

Doesn't it. He is implying that people are completely incapacitated by systemic racism and it is self evident that they aren't. It isn't like Britain has a caste system.
>> No. 33286 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 11:48 am
33286 spacer
I think that racism isn't black and white (heh), people are more than capable of tearing each other down or rigidly sticking to thinking that harms them. We're not rational and we're not able to flick a switch on cultures to adapt them to a changing world. There is I suppose an inherent hazard of combatting racism in that you can miss that some people are just fucking arseholes and idiots can force their misery onto others.

>>33285
I can no longer tell what is and isn't sarcasm on here.
>> No. 33287 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 12:44 pm
33287 spacer
>>33282

More importantly, who gave black Carribeans a heavier bag than black Africans?
>> No. 33288 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 3:37 pm
33288 spacer
>>33287

The british empire?
>> No. 33290 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 5:41 pm
33290 spacer
>>33287

The obvious answer is of course class and social mobility. Black Caribbeans come from predominantly manual labour backgrounds as they came over with the windrush. But that answer doesn't work because it might mean class is more important than race and we can't have that in the modern brain rot rhetoric.
>> No. 33291 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 6:09 pm
33291 spacer
>>33290

>But that answer doesn't work because it might mean class is more important than race and we can't have that in the modern brain rot rhetoric.
Have you considered that you might achieve more with the solidarity of talking over those who are nominally on your side, instead of just constantly being rude? Rhetorical question, I'm right but you'll predictably just blame someone else and be even ruder again in response.
>> No. 33295 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 9:52 pm
33295 spacer
>>33291

At this point I am pissing into the wind mate, no one is going to listen to me or anyone. The circular logic of the rhetoric is and echo chamber is too strong. I don't post on amessage boards because I think I will suddenly change the modern worlds perspective. I've already accepted the only response I will get here is weird passive agressive tone policing arguments.
>> No. 33296 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 9:58 pm
33296 spacer
>>33295

When in doubt, when your ideas are challenged, always just decide that there's an echo chamber who can't understand your facts and logic. It's so much easier than trying to defend your ideas, especially ones as robust as this.
>> No. 33297 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 10:22 pm
33297 spacer
>>33291
He's not being rude. He said absolutely nothing rude. A question was asked, an answer given, and a second answer complained that class being more of a significant factor than race was something that seems hard to discuss now.

You didn't even have a reply to what they said. You started being rude. You didn't attack his ideas. You attacked him, had no counterpoint or anything, and then continued to have a go.

Are you the 'magical negro' retard? Either way you're quite transparent. You've not made a point, note defended one, and instigated the personal comments. Would you mind just not being such a twat?
>> No. 33298 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 10:30 pm
33298 spacer
>>33297
>He's not being rude. He said absolutely nothing rude.
That's weird because he agreed he was.
>Are you the 'magical negro' retard?
No. Are you the poster who thinks he can identify other posters but gets it wrong every time?
>> No. 33299 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 10:31 pm
33299 spacer
>>33285
>It isn't like Britain has a caste system.
Ay n1 m8
>> No. 33300 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 10:36 pm
33300 spacer
>>33298
No, though recently someone identified me off a post a few weeks ago, that was a good cop. I assume this place must have single digit users on the reg, so I can see the appeal of trying to join the dots. The dots here being completely avoiding the topic. Did you have a counterpoint?

>That's weird because he agreed he was.
Where?

And why's the significance of classism not worth discussing then? It's certainly a bigger factor than race in privilege.
>> No. 33301 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 10:39 pm
33301 spacer
>>33300
I guess that one went way over your head.
>> No. 33302 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 10:41 pm
33302 spacer
>>33301
And why's the significance of classism not worth discussing then? It's certainly a bigger factor than race in privilege.
>> No. 33303 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 10:42 pm
33303 spacer
>>33299

Yes that is what open systematic racism looks like and how it is practiced around the world right now.


If your idea of systematic racism is just innuendo and exaggeration behind closed doors, to the point that you can't even really be sure there is intent and it might just be coincidence or some other factor then it probably isn't systematic racism.
>> No. 33304 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 10:51 pm
33304 spacer
>>33302
Didn't say it was.
>> No. 33305 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 11:07 pm
33305 spacer
>>33304

Then what's the problem you had with this comment?

>But that answer doesn't work because it might mean class is more important than race and we can't have that in the modern brain rot rhetoric.
>> No. 33306 Anonymous
22nd April 2021
Thursday 11:11 pm
33306 spacer
>>33305
You really are a fucking moron.
>> No. 33307 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 1:02 am
33307 spacer
>>33306
As long as the browns have you to save them.
>> No. 33308 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 7:49 am
33308 spacer
>>33306
May well be, can you answer the question though?
>> No. 33310 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 8:54 am
33310 spacer
>>33307
>>33308
What you're imagining is happening here, isn't.
>> No. 33311 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:22 am
33311 spacer
If I were a mod, and you should be thanking your lucky stars I am not, I would have everyone who has posted in this thread for past three days rounded up and shot in a ditch.
>> No. 33312 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:27 am
33312 spacer
>>33311

Thankfully I believe that is well beyond the capacity for even the so-called-mods. But I suppose since you posted here you could lead by example.
>> No. 33313 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:29 am
33313 spacer
>>33310
I'm obviously quite dense, so don't worry, you can explain in the simplest possible terms :)

>But that answer doesn't work because it might mean class is more important than race and we can't have that in the modern brain rot rhetoric.

What's the problem with that comment? Why did you take it as a personal insult?
>> No. 33314 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 9:32 am
33314 spacer
>>33313
>Have you considered that you might achieve more with the solidarity of talking over those who are nominally on your side
Do you need everything repeated for you or should I break it down into more simple terms, use some bright colours?
>> No. 33315 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 10:08 am
33315 spacer
>>33314

They are not questioning that you decided to take offence at the statement. Their issue is they doesn't understand why you would be, so repeating it back to them that you are offended doesn't enlighten them. They don't have the same contempt for you are I do you see and assumes that if you claim you are open minded can be reasoned with you might be open minded and be able to be reasoned with.
>> No. 33316 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 10:13 am
33316 spacer
>>33315
I didn't take offence at the statement, I was just pointing out that if he wants more allies, telling the people ideologically nearest to him that they have "brain rot" isn't a good way go.
>They don't have the same contempt for you are I do you see and assumes that if you claim you are open minded can be reasoned with you might be open minded and be able to be reasoned with.
Thanks for that authentic frontier gibberish.
>> No. 33317 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 10:26 am
33317 spacer
>>33316

He didn't say they have brain rot I did. And you self evidently do. The fact you apparently agree with me but have been arguing about the way I said on behalf of an imagined offended person for a day is more than enough proof for me.
>> No. 33318 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 10:36 am
33318 spacer
>>33317

I didn't say I agreed with you. Why do you think everything's such a binary?
>> No. 33319 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 10:48 am
33319 spacer
>>33314 >>33316
Yes, "simplest possible terms", I'm not sure how I can simplify that any more. I'm asking why you thought that comment was objectionable. The only way I can see is if you absolutely disagree with the statement, ie that class is more important than race, in which case I'm interested in your reasoning why.

You've basically been conflating myself and a few other posters. Turns out multiple people are curious about what you mean, and don't really understand why you're being so hostile about it. I'm not the guy who mentioned brain rot,

>telling the people ideologically nearest to him that they have "brain rot" isn't a good way go.
You could have done so without the overt hostility:

>Rhetorical question, I'm right but you'll predictably just blame someone else and be even ruder again in response.
>> No. 33320 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 10:54 am
33320 spacer
>>33319
How horrible of me to be rude to someone who was being rude. How will they ever cope with such oppression!?
>> No. 33321 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 11:10 am
33321 spacer
>>33320
I'm more interested in whatever point you were trying to make. Why are you being so evasive? Just say your opinions and back them up, then we can discuss them. Your taking offence because you align with a group the otherlad accused of having 'brain rot' is besides the point.
>> No. 33322 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 11:16 am
33322 spacer
>>33321
>telling the people ideologically nearest to him that they have "brain rot" isn't a good way go.
Needs no backing up. Literally everything else is you projecting.
>> No. 33323 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 11:26 am
33323 spacer
>>33322
You've confused me with other posters before, I'm not sure you know who's projecting what. You seem to just be taking offence to everything.

I'm asking you to explain your opinion for the sake of discussion, if that's projection then call me the Odeon.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 33324 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 11:32 am
33324 spacer
>>33323
You're like a rejected Richard Dawkins clone screaming "Debate me! Debate me!" until they lock you in a hotbox until you're paranoid.
>> No. 33325 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 11:51 am
33325 spacer
>>33324

I would love to hotbox a Fiat Cinquecento with Richard Dawkins. Robert Winston in the back seat, aggressively necking Maggie Aderin-Pocock in between swigs of White Ace. Dawkins won't stop ranting about Melvin Fucking Bragg, so we go and egg Bragg's house at 2am just to shut him up about it.
>> No. 33327 Anonymous
23rd April 2021
Friday 3:46 pm
33327 sage
>>33287 here. I thought that >>33288 fell into the trap I'd put down, and >>33290 was reasonably on the mark there. I didn't see anything rude, don't understand the hissyfit either.
>> No. 33328 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 2:44 am
33328 spacer
>>33327

I guess I should be thankful to you defending my post but there really is no point, they have brain rot I don't know how much clearer I can be on this and how much they can repeatedly prove it. There is no point trying to get them to justify their position to reason with, they don't have one only brain rot. They are neither for or against my post they just (allegedly) don't like the way I hand wave off people with brain rot for having brain rot. Apparently I could change the minds of the whole public consciousness to be traditional marxists if only i didn't say people who have brain rot have brain rot on an anonymously on a website with 3 users.
>> No. 33329 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 5:39 am
33329 spacer
>>33328

You might have a good point, but it's impossible to tell due to how confusing and undescriptive your posts have been so far.
>> No. 33330 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 6:38 am
33330 spacer
>>33329
Careful, don't upset him or he might despise you.
>> No. 33331 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 11:24 am
33331 spacer
>>33329

My one point was pretty clear "class matters more than race" if you haven't picked that up by now you never will brain rot lad.
>> No. 33332 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 11:47 am
33332 spacer
>>33331

I envy you. I'd love to have the confidence/delusion that anyone who tries to argue with me must be a thicko who is automatically wrong. It must make life so much easier.
>> No. 33333 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 1:58 pm
33333 spacer
>>33332

I envy you you seem to not care about making friends at all.
>> No. 33334 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 2:45 pm
33334 spacer
>>33333

If you do care then why do you keep acting like you do?
>> No. 33335 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 3:22 pm
33335 spacer
>>33334

You are bringing out your a-game shit all over the thread trolling material now aren't you lad.
>> No. 33336 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 3:37 pm
33336 spacer
>>33335

It's always someone else's fault, even when they're just imitating you.
>> No. 33337 Anonymous
24th April 2021
Saturday 4:49 pm
33337 spacer
You can all fuck off now and go for a walk or something, it's a nice day and this cuntoff is starting to become tragic.
>> No. 34606 Anonymous
14th July 2021
Wednesday 10:24 pm
34606 spacer
>Siân Berry is to quit as leader of the Greens, citing conflict within the party over evangelist christian korean youtuber rights and claiming it had been a “failure of leadership” on her part that the party was sending “mixed messages”.

>Berry, who was the party’s candidate for London mayor, had been co-leader with Jonathan Bartley, who announced he was stepping down earlier this month. She said she had been agonising over whether to stand in the forthcoming leadership election but said she felt divisions in the party were too great.

>A vocal supporter of trans equality, Berry had said one of the first things she would do as mayor would be to set up a commission on the rights of trans Londoners. In her resignation letter on Wednesday, Berry said there had been significant disagreement with colleagues elected to the party’s frontbench team. She said the party’s democratic structure meant decisions could be made that leaders did not agree with and she felt it was irreconcilable with her own position.

>“There is now an inconsistency between the sincere promise to fight for trans rights and inclusion in my work and the message sent by the party’s choice of frontbench representatives,” she said. “This inconsistency has left me in a very difficult position. I can no longer make the claim that the party speaks unequivocally, with one voice, on this issue. And my conscience simply cannot agree with the argument that there is anything positive in sending these mixed messages, especially when the inclusive attitudes of our membership and wider society are clear.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/14/sian-berry-quits-as-green-party-leader-in-dispute-over-trans-rights

Why do parties on the left seem to eat themselves alive over trans rights?
>> No. 34608 Anonymous
14th July 2021
Wednesday 10:28 pm
34608 spacer
>>34606
So what is the big disagreement on?
>> No. 34609 Anonymous
14th July 2021
Wednesday 10:38 pm
34609 spacer
>>34606
Because on the one hand, it's incredibly and unequivocally righteous to be pro-evangelist christian korean youtuber. It's the most righteous thing you can do. But on the other hand, it's completely irrelevant to approximately 99% of people, so why make a big deal about it?

From there, you can also get into self-indulgent things like saying you are too special to have any recognisable legitimate gender:
https://gender.wikia.org/wiki/Stargender
Considering that even legitimate evangelist christian korean youtuberism still occasionally involves certain gender stereotypes whose universality can be debated (oh, you like wearing skirts? You must be a woman, just like everyone else at the Highland Games), it's very difficult to know where to draw the line between real ones and bollocks ones.
>> No. 34610 Anonymous
14th July 2021
Wednesday 11:04 pm
34610 spacer
>>34608
Some people in the party don't feel as strongly as she does on trans rights. I think that's all it boils down to.
>> No. 34611 Anonymous
14th July 2021
Wednesday 11:11 pm
34611 spacer
>>34610

That seems quite dishonest and doesn't even make sense as a reason to step down. Some people in the party are quite strongly opposed to her stance on it.
>> No. 34612 Anonymous
15th July 2021
Thursday 6:21 am
34612 spacer
>>34606

Because if they didn't, somebody with too much free time on Twitter would eat them alive for it instead, and that would have considerably worse optics.

The problem for the left is that it let these people through the door in the first place, in the name of doing The Right Thing and supporting a progressive cause; but a great many of them are narcissists who don't actually care about or need the left. The effect they have is like that of a cordyceps fungus.

It is not unique to the left, it's just more obvious what's happening. Parties on either side of the aisle find themselves at the mercy of their most radical elements, and dark triad personality types (narcissism, machiavellianism, and psychopathy) are rife at the fringes of the political spectrum.

>The Dark Triad traits predict authoritarian political correctness and alt-right attitudes

>The Dark Triad traits and Entitlement explained a substantial portion of variance in White Identitarianism and Political Correctness-Authoritarianism, and only a small portion of variance in Political Correctness-Liberalism. Across all attitudes, Psychopathy and Entitlement were the most consistent, strongest predictors. Results indicate that, from a Dark Triad perspective, Authoritarian PC advocates have more in common with extreme right advocates than those holding PC views related to compassion.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7369609/
>> No. 34613 Anonymous
15th July 2021
Thursday 7:42 am
34613 spacer
>>34606
They seem to, but they don't actually. The reason, then, is because it's the culture war issue of the moment and can be surmised in the phrase "more heat than light."
For how it plays out in reality, investigate what happened when all the mumsnet crowd in Scotland left the SNP (~45% of the vote) to join the Alba party (1.6% of the vote) which pandered to them in a fit of misguided opportunism.
>> No. 34614 Anonymous
15th July 2021
Thursday 11:20 am
34614 spacer
As someone in the Green Party, I can shed some light on this.

The Executive (GPEx) - which happens to be quite heavily composed of so-called " evangelist christian korean youtube" (i.e. transphobic) members - recently appointed a new panel of official spokespeople. It's important to note that a previous GPEx agreed a process for appointing spokespeople that explicitly gave the leadership a say in the decision, but the current GPEx actually blocked Sian and the other leaders from doing so.

One of the spokespeople appointed was Shahrar Ali, who is transphobic but "respectably" so - e.g. will say they always support LGBT people while in the same breath proposing policy motions to party conference condemning Stonewall and trying to take healthcare away from trans kids. As the leaders are effectively themselves spokespeople too, Sian obviously didn't feel she could work with him. It's not just 'a disagreement' - it's a total contradiction for her to lead a party and talk about how pro-trans we all are when we are appointing people like him to officially speak for us.

The way the Guardian article is written is a little misleading because Sian's statement is more nuanced - when she says there's been a "failure of leadership" to convince her colleagues, she doesn't mean a failure to convince the membership, who I think are majority pro-trans rights - she means a failure to convince those on GPEx to appoint a spokesperson team that didn't include anti-trans people. And the article's paraphrase "the party’s democratic structure meant decisions could be made that leaders did not agree with" - that implies the membership have elected the spokespeople, which they categorically haven't. It's the old boys club of the Executive who did it behind closed doors, alluded to by Sian as "the party".

In truth, our democratic structures are a joke and a mess that mean that we have ended up with official party spokespeople who don't agree with quite significant aspects of our policy. In addition the Executive is full of people who shouldn't be there but members can't hold them to account because what few processes there are to do so are arcane, and members can't negatively campaign against them in internal elections because to do so is a disciplinary offence, so they end up being a law unto themselves. In fact last year the current Chair of GPEx (who is the root of a lot of this bullshit) was suspended by the Disciplinary Committee, and GPEx just decided to unilaterally overrule them and bring her back - something they have no power to do!

We've been in a pretty dark place for a few years and I'm considering my membership.
>> No. 34617 Anonymous
15th July 2021
Thursday 11:58 am
34617 spacer
>>34614
>We've been in a pretty dark place for a few years and I'm considering my membership.

Is that primarily because of their stance on trans rights?

I get that trans rights are important, but I care far more about things like the police, the NHS, schools, libraries, the state of the roads, giving kids something to do on an evening. You know, things that affect most people in their everyday lives rather than a fringe issue.

The amount that Labour and the Greens tie themselves in knots over trans rights and the level of prominence it receives from them makes people think that they consider it to be one of the most pressing issues the country is facing.
>> No. 34618 Anonymous
15th July 2021
Thursday 12:03 pm
34618 spacer
>>34614
How much is this debate dominating the party? Is this something that's simmering away all the time and only occasionally boiling over, or has it been made The Issue by this lot at the GPEx? It seems like once TERFs get the bit between their teeth it's all they ever seem to go on about.

Thank you for making a post worth reading on this topic rather than going on about "stargenders" and Twitter.
>> No. 34619 Anonymous
15th July 2021
Thursday 12:11 pm
34619 spacer
>>34617
How can something be both 'important' and a 'fringe issue'?

If you're actually making this post in good faith then you must have been living under a rock. The current political discourse attacking trans rights - in which The Times is publishing almost one article per day on it - didn't exist only five years ago. Back then the Green Party was still pro-trans with a large LGBT liberation group. The difference then was we didn't have to talk about it - we were, or at least gave the appearance of being, united. It was not even a conversation. But since then, since the Gender Recognition Act consultation of '17-'18, a significant number of people in British society have been radicalised into thinking trans people are eating women in changing rooms.
>> No. 34620 Anonymous
15th July 2021
Thursday 12:20 pm
34620 spacer

hustings questions.png
346203462034620
>>34618
Oh it's become fucking constant, and incredibly draining. By way of example, there are GPEx elections going on right now. Here are some of the questions from the hustings on Tuesday.
>> No. 34625 Anonymous
15th July 2021
Thursday 3:45 pm
34625 spacer
>>34619

It's not that hard lad. It's important to the people it affects, but the people it affects are very few and far between in real life.

I think it is fair to say this issue causes a disproportionate amount of disruption when it comes up, in the most honest sense of the word disproportionate.
>> No. 34628 Anonymous
15th July 2021
Thursday 7:27 pm
34628 spacer
>>34625
I agree with your latter comment, at least.
>> No. 34629 Anonymous
15th July 2021
Thursday 7:38 pm
34629 spacer
>>34619
>How can something be both 'important' and a 'fringe issue'?
Important to a fringe of society.

>a significant number of people in British society have been radicalised into thinking trans people are eating women in changing rooms.
Do you think twitter had a role in this?
>> No. 34639 Anonymous
16th July 2021
Friday 8:44 am
34639 spacer
>>34629
No, not per se. Twitter is a medium for all kinds of people. I think the prime culprits are Mumsnet; the various anti-trans groups that have sprung up with fisherperson names like 'Woman's Place UK' and 'Fair Play for Women'; and the establishment press like The Times (as mentioned previously) who seem to have jumped all over this new opportunity to punch down with glee.
>> No. 34664 Anonymous
16th July 2021
Friday 11:19 pm
34664 spacer
>>34639

Are anti-trans people using the pretence of fisherpersonry as a smokescreen, or does it just turn out to mean fisherpersons have been big hypocritical bigots the entire time?

I'm never sure.
>> No. 34665 Anonymous
16th July 2021
Friday 11:52 pm
34665 spacer
>>34664
Remember feminism isn't a monolith. Not everyone who professes to be a fisherperson is going to agree on everything.
>> No. 34672 Anonymous
17th July 2021
Saturday 6:04 am
34672 spacer
>>34665
Women? Not being able to agree on things? Pull the other one!
>> No. 34673 Anonymous
17th July 2021
Saturday 11:58 am
34673 spacer
Adam Ramsay has written it up for openDemocracy - it's more or less as I said.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/si%C3%A2n-berry-on-transphobia-in-the-green-party-we-have-a-problem-to-solve/
>> No. 35041 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 2:18 pm
35041 spacer
Children as young as four will be allowed to change their name and gender at school without their parents’ consent under new guidelines issued by the Scottish government.

A 70-page document published yesterday urges teachers not to question pupils if they say they wish to transition to live as a boy or girl and instead to call them by their desired pronoun. The guidance states that evangelist christian korean youtuber people “may come out at any age” and calls on teachers not to tell children that it is “just a phase” if one of their pupils states that they are evangelist christian korean youtuber.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/scottish-teachers-told-to-use-pupils-chosen-gender-s9q0503l8

Primary and secondary schools have also been told to put books featuring evangelist christian korean youtuber people on the curriculum, allow pupils to choose which changing room or toilets to use, and consider introducing a gender neutral uniform.

https://www.Please don't ban me.co.uk/news/article-9888899/Scotland-let-pupils-aged-FOUR-change-gender.html

Why is it you get articles about this sort of thing in the likes of the Telegraph, Times and Mail but not in the likes of the Guardian and Independent?

I mean, we know full well what agenda the right-wing press are trying to pull but when the left-wing press don't even cover it then there's no wonder there's such a big disconnect between people being aware of other people's concerns in this country. It's not even on the same wavelength, it's completely alien.
>> No. 35042 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 2:32 pm
35042 spacer
>>35041
>Why is it you get articles about this sort of thing in the likes of the Telegraph, Times and Mail but not in the likes of the Guardian and Independent?

There are so many topics you could say this about.

Given you say you understand the agenda at work, I don't understand why any of this is supposed to be a valid 'concern'? Let's say the article was as follows:

Children will be allowed to come out as gay at school without their parents' consent under government guidelines. Teachers have been advised not to tell children that it is "just a phase".

Why would you expect to see that to be a story covered by the press of any political orientation, let alone the right, these days?
>> No. 35044 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 2:59 pm
35044 spacer
>>35042
Have you ever met a child? Did you see the news about them fruit juice to fake coronavirus tests to get two weeks off school? The whole hysteria of evangelist christian korean youtubers going into female changing rooms to diddle women is massively overblown, but I guarantee that if you tell a class of teenage boys they can use the girl's toilets if they identify as a girl at least one of them will do it for shits and giggles, possibly a crafty wank too.
>> No. 35045 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 3:08 pm
35045 spacer
>>35044
>if you tell a class of teenage boys they can use the girl's toilets if they identify as a girl at least one of them will do it for shits and giggles, possibly a crafty wank too.
Oh no! And then the world will end! Catastrophe!
>> No. 35046 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 3:09 pm
35046 spacer
The only reason I've not killed myself is because I refuse to die before this cunting thread.
>> No. 35047 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 3:09 pm
35047 spacer
>>35044
Have you ever met a child? You've heard of bullying, right? How in the fuck would a teenage boy who actually went through with that ever live it down? It would spread around the school like wildfire that he was the creepy perv who spies on girls having a piss and he would be known as such for the rest of his schooldays. No-one would be friends with him, no girl would go out with him. Jokes would follow wherever he went. And if he ever got angry about it they'd joke he was on his period.
>> No. 35048 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 3:11 pm
35048 spacer
>>35047
Depends on the child, doesn't it. If it was a kid that was already socially questionable, sure, but if it was one of the cool kids that did it then he'd be celebrated by his peers.
>> No. 35049 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 3:31 pm
35049 spacer
>>35048
In my day it was stuff like smoking, but clearly things have changed a lot if 'pretending to be a girl while having a slash' is considered the apex of adolescent cool.
>> No. 35052 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 4:00 pm
35052 spacer
We seem to have forgotten, as a society, that kids are not innocent little paragons of virtue. In fact quite the opposite, they're tiny fucking psychopaths. They are utterly sadistic to one another because they haven't developed the compassion not to be yet. I remember kids in primary school doing things to their peers that Joseph Goebbels would have considered cruel and unusual.

I'm not sure what the consequences of giving trans rights to kids will be, for good or ill, I just generally don't think kids can be trusted with the kind of responsibility modern people think they can be.
>> No. 35053 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 4:15 pm
35053 spacer
>>35052
>We seem to have forgotten, as a society, that kids are not innocent little paragons of virtue.
I don't understand why that's relevant and you didn't say anything that ties it to the context.

>>35047
So what? If they don't get bullied for that they'll get bullied for something else. Boys aren't banned from doing ballet just because they'll get bullied for it. This isn't how we select the criteria of what things children can do.
>> No. 35055 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 4:30 pm
35055 spacer
>>35053

Who says I was even talking to you, or engaging in the cunt off, gobshite?
>> No. 35056 Anonymous
13th August 2021
Friday 4:39 pm
35056 spacer
>>35055

The person who asked for your opinion in the first place.
>> No. 35369 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 7:24 am
35369 spacer
>Labour and the Conservatives have clashed on the issue of trans rights, as Sir Keir Starmer said it was wrong to say “only women have a cervix” and the health secretary, Sajid Javid, said this was a “total denial of scientific fact”.

>The Labour leader called for laws to go further to protect trans rights after he was asked about one of his MPs, Rosie Duffield, who said “only women have a cervix”.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/sep/26/javid-accuses-starmer-of-denying-scientific-fact-in-trans-rights-row

I always thought that statement was denying that transwomen are actually women, but the article suggests it's more about telling transmen that they're not really men because they have a cervix.
>> No. 35370 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 9:35 am
35370 spacer
>>35369

It clearly meant that a cervix is a defining characteristic of a woman. It means neither of those things and both those things simultaneously, because it doesn't engage with the premise of your argument. It would be like arguing about if a atheist was more protestant or catholic.
>> No. 35371 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 11:13 am
35371 spacer
What the actual fuck is happening? A cervix is a cervix and nothing more. You can still be a man if your cock has been lopped off due to misadventure or Judaism, why is anyone having this argument and why is it not seen for the complete farce that it is? Sure Sally will be upset if you make cracks about having kids just after her hysterectomy, but she's not any less of a woman for lacking something that's integral to women by virtue of not being found outside of the scope of women.

That's a thing actually, is there a term for something that is 'fundamental' to a group because it is never found in any other group? Maybe that word would save us all a lot of trouble. For example, testicles. Men have testicles and women don't, but losing testicles doesn't stop you being a man. Only men have the potential to have testicles, is what I'm saying. In which case is there a term for that which would help men without testicles feel less emasculated?

Transwomen are women but women aren't transwomen, they're not the same thing and that's fine, and not having something that 99% of other people have doesn't make you any less belonging to your demographic than any of them. Transwomen are still women and all that but women don't have cocks, and normally have cervixes. But not having those things doesn't make you not a woman.

Hearing the Saj call this a "total denial of scientific fact” just brings to mind a short brown troll reeling in a fishing rod wearing nowt but a shit eating grin.

It's the Emperor's New Clothes all over again.
>> No. 35372 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 11:23 am
35372 spacer
>>35371

People with spuds to peel about a certain group of people willfully ignoring the opposite side of their argument shocker.

It's like how back in the day people would say gays are all pedos, or the modern equivalent of saying transformers are all rapists, or furries are all zoophiles, or whatever other ridiculous blanket statement it is. It only even works as a logically coherent statement if you totally ignore the opposite truth of how many sex offenders their are amongst the "normal" population, which is almost certainly higher than in the target group just by sheer statistical probability.

You have to be stupid to buy it as a sound argument for more than a minute, but most people aren't stupid, they just like having their prejudices catered to.
>> No. 35373 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 1:36 pm
35373 spacer
https://thetab.com/uk/2021/09/24/why-is-matt-lucas-a-drag-race-judge-when-he-made-his-name-cross-dressing-for-cheap-laughs-224080
As everyone is well aware, drag in no way has a history of it being a vehicle for cross dressing for cheap laughs.
>> No. 35374 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 2:15 pm
35374 spacer
>>35373
Looking back, I never know how to feel about Little Britain any more.

In some respects I think it deserves the hate it gets now. A lot of the stereotypes probably did a lot of harm to young impressionable people growing up facing those sorts of issues.
But in some ways, the stereotypes they portrayed were pushed to such ridiculous extremes that they sabotaged any attempt at people continuing to use the same jokes in future. There's also the value that the ordinary members of the public in Little Britain were never in on the jokes, they were always deadpan trying to get on with life as normal.

If you had to have matt lucas dressed up in full drag with a wig and standing up to take a piss behind a bus stop to get a laugh, then now a trans woman with a bit of an adams apple or struggling to get a close shave is completely un-noteworthy.
>> No. 35375 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 2:49 pm
35375 spacer
>>35374
I was a fan of Little Britain back in the day, but haven't watched it in 15 years or so. The things that stood out as particularly insensitive even as a naive teen were David Walliams as a fat black woman, Lucas as the Thai bride, and Vicki Pollard as a demonisation of the lower classes. Come Fly With Me was even worse, maybe because by then I was old enough to know that being made up with slinty eyes and school uniforms and saying "ting tong wing wong" was a bad portrayal of Japanese people.
>> No. 35376 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 3:32 pm
35376 spacer
I think the big problem with all these evangelist christian korean youtuber debates is that you're meant to pretend for a short while during the sex change procedure, and this seems to be too much for some people. I've got a friend who is doing it, and I have not seen this friend for a few years so I will keep referring to him as him since he has not instructed me otherwise. But I am confident that biologically, he will still be a he at this stage. He has a penis, almost certainly. But before he gets his willy cut off, we must first all support him by treating him as though his willy is already removed. In person, I would treat him as though he is a woman, because that's what he wants. But by my own rules for myself, I would class this as pretending. I am pretending he is a woman, until he gets the full vagina, at which point I guess he really will be a woman. People fight this like it's a great battle, because they don't want to be forced to pretend. I'm not pretending here, though, so it's all good. And whenever I see him again, I will pretend then, because I'm nice. It's not that hard to pretend, but while some people refuse to pretend, we also have people who refuse to say they are pretending, and that my friend totally is a woman and always has been. That's bollocks to me, but I wouldn't admit this to him.
>> No. 35377 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 3:34 pm
35377 spacer
How do you get the new Transformer/Decepticon wordfilters, anyway? Are you just typing these words manually?
>> No. 35378 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 4:06 pm
35378 spacer
>>35377
Is evangelist christian korean youtuber filtered?
>> No. 35379 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 4:14 pm
35379 spacer
>>35049
Throwing a plate of curry through the girls changing room window got a lad at my school some plaudits after the detention.

It's like you're trying really hard to pretend kids aren't inconsistent impulsive idiots. Don't you remember everyone and their cousin having depression? Have you not seen the wave of DID posts on tiktok? Kids and teens fucking love being different and having labels, and as long as a cool person is doing it and not someone who was going to get bullied anyway, it's going to be seen as something funny. Ignoring that and pretending otherwise doesn't make it so.

Why is trans-ness above scrutiny compared to any of those other things anyway? Like I'm just comparing the way tiktok users will attack any hint of criticism over faking transness as invalidating, meanwhile there's communities dedicated to mocking people who fake DID symptoms for attention? It's just anecdotal really but there's a noticeable disconnect in how it's treated.
>> No. 35380 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 4:33 pm
35380 spacer
>>35379
>It's like you're trying really hard to pretend kids aren't inconsistent impulsive idiots. Don't you remember everyone and their cousin having depression? Have you not seen the wave of DID posts on tiktok? Kids and teens fucking love being different and having labels, and as long as a cool person is doing it and not someone who was going to get bullied anyway, it's going to be seen as something funny. Ignoring that and pretending otherwise doesn't make it so.

Yeah kids go through stuff like that. But adults sneer at them at tell them it's just a phase or they have to grow up, and for a lot of kids this means either rebelling and getting hurt or bottling things up and having issues later in life because of it.

Us adults love to laugh and sneer at young people for their insignificant problems, but we forget how big and scary those problems were for us when we were their age.
Kids just need us to listen to their problems and take them seriously.
>> No. 35381 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 6:32 pm
35381 spacer
>>35376
>I think the big problem with all these evangelist christian korean youtuber debates is that you're meant to pretend for a short while during the sex change procedure
I have to say, this is one of the more kafkaesque parts of our policy on the whole thing: You've got to go around as a crossdresser without any updates to your government issued ID etc for a while, and if nobody gives you a gay bashing for that then after you've done that for an arbitrarily long time they'll accept that you're not just pretending and probably actually want to go through with it. It strikes me as rather like the home office demanding you live as an illegal immigrant for a few years before they'll consider giving you a visa.
>> No. 35382 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 7:04 pm
35382 spacer
>>35381
Is that something someone thought would be a neat precaution, or did it arise from some sort of "I got my bits lopped off but I changed my mind" kind of scenario?

I'm not sure about the specifics here. I'm aware of the period spent 'testing' or whatever, but is that only on the NHS or can you just get a fast track with BUPA? Because if so then I'd have more sympathy for the government protecting themselves from that.
>> No. 35383 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 7:05 pm
35383 spacer
>>35379
I just want to point out that I don't actually use tiktok, it's just all the posts I see on /darkangels/ are sourced from tiktok.
>> No. 35384 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 7:20 pm
35384 spacer
>>35382
From my understanding talking to trans people, the waiting lists just to be seen can be up to three years, then as someone else mentioned, you have to live as your chosen gender for months before they'll prescribe hormones, then you'll have months if not years of those before you get the surgery. While there are certainly people who will transition and regret it, I think having over 4 years to wait before you officially transition should be enough to stop people doing it impulsively.
>> No. 35385 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 7:21 pm
35385 spacer
>>35374
I never got the appeal of Little Britain. The obvious flaw for me was that I didn't find it funny, but it was literally the same episode repeated ad nauseam. Week in, week out it was characters saying a catchphrase organised in a different order. It's about as close as you can get on the telly to the Radio 1 playlist.
>> No. 35386 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 7:49 pm
35386 spacer
>>35384
I don't know, aren't there all those stories of people who regret the whole knob-chopping bit because of the body horror involved? No homo but I'd certainly rather bum a girl with a cock than do...a girl with a vagina (?)

From the other angle wanting to mutilate yourself is very out-there and clearly an extreme mental disorder whose treatment we allow because of reduced suicide risk.
>> No. 35387 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 7:51 pm
35387 spacer
>>35385
This made it ideal for kids at the end of primary/beginning of secondary school. "I want that one" you would say, "Yeah but no but yeah but no..." someone would respond, and every kid in the playground joined in, as they too took part in Little Britain watching. It united the small minded. Comforting repetition.
>> No. 35388 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 7:52 pm
35388 spacer
>>35382
Closer to "neat precaution", but I'd immediately assume that the unspoken point was to just discourage people from bothering at all. Make the experience miserable and hope that after being sufficiently scorned by the people in their local area, they'll give up and just live a miserable life with dysphoria like a normal person instead of annoying authority figures by being different.
It's worth putting it all in the context that the current law was only created at all because the Blair government were taken to the ECHR and lost a case where they argued they shouldn't have to give people the ability to change their gender on legal documents, and that as late as 1999 the North West Lancashire Health Authority had to be taken to court because they had a blanket policy of not funding sex reassignment surgery.

It's not so much motivated by your modern mumsnet kind of fear that roving gangs of evangelist christian korean youtuber people are going to go into all the rape shelters as it is motivated by 50+ year old authority figures quietly preferring that weirdos top themselves than make their presence known, wishing people could be normal and coming from the days where marital rape was still perfectly legal. A period where evangelist christian korean youtuberism was an uncommon plot point or punchline rather than an existential threat to western civilisation, the dictionary, and the shadow cabinet of her majesty's most loyal opposition.
>> No. 35389 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 8:37 pm
35389 spacer
Would hormones to make a person with a cervix the opposite sex be useful in body building if the person taking it has no cervix?
>> No. 35390 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 8:55 pm
35390 spacer
>>35385
I'm glad someone else was brave enough to say this. People keep disagreeing with me on this website, so I thought I'd just leave you to enjoy your fucking abysmal sketch show without me on this occasion, but I really hated Little Britain.

Oddly, though, other people would sometimes tell me about sketches from it that were funny. It's just that whenever I watched it myself, it immediately became the least funny thing I had ever seen.

>>35389
Testosterone is certainly useful for that, yes.
>> No. 35391 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 9:05 pm
35391 spacer
>>35390
Is there anyway for me as a man, to say that I have become a woman who wants to become a man, and get some testosterone?
>> No. 35392 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 9:07 pm
35392 spacer
>>35389

Extremely. A remarkable number of Soviet female athletes transitioned, because (without their knowledge) they spent most of their formative years on sex change hormones.

The inverse is also true - transwomen experience a very rapid reduction in strength after starting hormone treatment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQhUjaiveAg
>> No. 35393 Anonymous
27th September 2021
Monday 11:27 pm
35393 spacer
>>35392

It's more complicated than that. There aren't really "sex change hormones" as such. Hormone replacement therapy typically involves a blocking agent which inactivates your body's own male or female hormones, and then on top of that you are given opposing sexual hormones which develop the desired physical characteristics.

What is true is that your brain really only becomes fully male or female during puberty. Estrogen or testosterone very fundamentally rearrange your physical brain structure from early puberty compared to your childhood brain, and these changes are generally irreversible as you grow into an adult. Which is exactly where illegal steroids can come in if you were a Soviet or Eastern European child prodigy who was surreptitiously given those steroids growing up.

Illegal steroids and performance enhancers were rampant in much of the Communist Bloc, not just the Soviet Union, because, hey, they had to prove Socialism's superiority over the West. It always blew my mind that they were somehow able to outwit what should have been impartial governing bodies like the IOC, who even in the 1970s and 80s didn't take kindly to that sort of thing.
>> No. 35394 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 12:36 am
35394 spacer
>>35393
They didn't yet have the irrepressible energy of anti-doping superhero Dick Pound.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Pound
>> No. 35395 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 1:12 am
35395 spacer
>>35392
Basically, can I obtain roids through hormone replacement therapy clinic or what have you? I don't want to resort to illegal means.
>> No. 35396 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:12 am
35396 spacer
I'm all for trans rights, but to the point of allowing trans people to compete in sports is wrong in my opinion. But to voice that in the trans-friendly communities I talk with sometimes would be suicide.
>> No. 35397 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:36 am
35397 spacer
I for one want a steroid Olympics. Have everyone as jacked up on as many performance enhancing drugs as possible, maybe go as far as allowing some cybernetic bullshit too. Let's see the real apex of human performance rather than just the best national Olympic committee money can buy within the rules
>> No. 35398 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 11:46 am
35398 spacer
>>35396
There's a deaf Olympics, a Special Olympics, and there even used to be a gay Olympics. I see no reason why they couldn't have a separate 50/50 gender Olympics. I doubt many people would enter, but I bet some tiresome people would watch it performatively.
>> No. 35399 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 12:05 pm
35399 spacer
>>35396

>but to the point of allowing trans people to compete in sports is wrong in my opinion

On the other hand, should transpersons be excluded from competitive sports just because they are trans?
>> No. 35400 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 12:13 pm
35400 spacer
>>35399 just because they are trans?

Be as trans as yo like, but the same levelling rules that keep men out of women's sports, or stop me entering the local under-5 rugby league, still apply. Square that circle however you can.
>> No. 35401 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 12:28 pm
35401 spacer
Just have a baseline strength/stamina test as entry into either Cat A or B in the NuOlympics. Then maybe we can see some weak men compete in the womens stuff and so on.
>> No. 35402 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 12:34 pm
35402 spacer
>>35401

That sounds like a reasonable compromise.
>> No. 35403 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 12:45 pm
35403 spacer
>>35401
>Then maybe we can see some weak men compete in the womens stuff and so on.

I can't imagine it ending well. Imagine if I, a greasy and overweight bloke, entered myself into F-category wrestling and still dominated the professional women while sporting (and rubbing) a massive chub. Some of the competitors possibly being children.
>> No. 35404 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 12:47 pm
35404 spacer
>>35401
How are you going to stop people from the high-strength category just faking weakness and entering the low-strength category? How are you going to deal with all the women who take issue with being put into what will undoubtedly be seen as the second-class Olympics?
>> No. 35405 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 1:05 pm
35405 spacer
>>35404
I imagine many paralympians will be quite unamused by these questions.
>> No. 35406 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 1:11 pm
35406 spacer
>>35405

Right. Nobody wants to be caught faking an amputated leg.
>> No. 35407 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 1:12 pm
35407 spacer
>>35405
Given that it took the Paralympics from the 1960s until 1992 to get seen as more than just a second-class Olympics and that they all go through rigorous athlete assessment of impairment eligibility including actual diagnosis rather than "a baseline strength/stamina test" which is easily faked, they would probably understand the validity of those questions.
>> No. 35408 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 1:21 pm
35408 spacer
>>35406 Yeah, who'd ever do such a thing?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basketball_ID_at_the_2000_Summer_Paralympics

At some point we're going to accept that sport's just a hobby for fun and stop all this 'competing' nonsense.
>> No. 35409 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 1:41 pm
35409 spacer
There should be a Translympics.
>> No. 35412 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 3:36 pm
35412 spacer
>>35408

>Yeah, who'd ever do such a thing?

You're not really trying to say that that's the same thing?
>> No. 35413 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 5:02 pm
35413 spacer
>>35404

It's harder to fake weakness than you say, assuming you're monitoring correctly for it.
>> No. 35414 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 5:03 pm
35414 spacer
I just think they should make all sports unisex. Women would whinge but frankly fuck them, they're not complaining about the asymmetrical balance or gender when it benefits them are they.

You get to make a living selling pics of your feet on Instagram, and I get to thrash you in the 100m. You've got to take the good with the bad ladies.
>> No. 35415 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 8:59 pm
35415 spacer
>>35414

>I just think they should make all sports unisex

Women do perform worse against men at most sports where raw body strength and endurance are required. There's not much point having women wrestling men, at least not on a broader scale.

I could see mixed teams in football though. If you've ever seen women play, they are often much more agile than men, one reason is probably less body mass on average. I'm sure a lot of them could outrun a male midfielder or two without a problem. And one thing you also have to give them is that they have a much higher pain tolerance. They'll just get up and get on with the game.
>> No. 35416 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:02 pm
35416 spacer
I probably already asked this question but why are sports like shooting still gender specific? I think the men's categories you have to shoot more shots, but I really don't think the difference in endurance between a man and a woman holding a (quite lightweight) rifle can be that large.
>> No. 35417 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:18 pm
35417 spacer
>>35416

It's not something you'll hear a lot of people admitting openly, but men have better stress endurance when it comes to mental capabilities. It's one reason why men and women don't compete against each other in chess, for example. And I guess it also goes for a sport like shooting, where probably 75 percent of your success depends on your ability to concentrate under stress.
>> No. 35418 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:20 pm
35418 spacer
>>35416
Stephen Fry made this point once, and I was immediately convinced that it's true: men invented pretty much every sport, so all sports are really designed to showcase things that men are better at. Therefore, men are better at all sports. No man would devise, nor participate in, a sport where he'd immediately get battered by any woman. It goes against our mindset. Even chess is mostly male at the top. There are women chess players, and they beat men regularly, but the best woman would be annihilated by the best man. Women just aren't as passionate about not losing at chess as men are.
>> No. 35419 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:26 pm
35419 spacer
>>35415
Hearsay is that technically women can play in the EPL (I can't find an official source) it's just that no-one is going to sign them. I've seen that professional top tier women footballers get beaten by U16/17 teams. I think the difference is much bigger than you're imagining.

Since I've actually started watching football last year, I've been impressed at some of the stuff people get up from. Obviously lots of them fall down, and we saw that egregious example during the world cup where that Italian lad curled up in agony in the penalty area and then immediately got up to celebrate that a goal. But a lot of them genuinely do just want to get on with it, which was nice to see after the expectations I had.
>> No. 35420 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:27 pm
35420 spacer
>>35418

That sounds like it makes sense, though I assume something like gymnastics was a male sport that women are better at because they're more agile? I don't really know enough about gymnastics to say.

I'm clearly more entrenched in the patriarchy than I thought, as I really can't think of anything else, not without my mind going to unfunny stereotypes like a washing up race. And even then.
>> No. 35421 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:31 pm
35421 spacer

Vickey Pollard.png
354213542135421
>>35418
So what would a female centric sport look like? I'm sure our collective mind could imagine better than the handbag throw.
>> No. 35422 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:35 pm
35422 spacer
>>35419

It was sort of depressing when I went out with a professional cyclist and realised that my relatively untrained hobbyist cyclist self could outpace women on actual national (and eventually olympic) teams. I felt bad, though I suppose that's silly, it's hardly my fault.

Having said that, I think women's cycling, particularly crits and track sprints, are much more exciting to watch than the male versions. There's more tactical stuff, they're more agile, and most importantly they're so much more fucking aggressive and tough. Indeed in cycling, if there's a woman's race in any given televised event, it's often more watched than the men's, which is why women in cycling are particularly annoyed about the large pay gap between the genders.

And really, it's all relative, isn't it? I don't particularly care that the men go 10kph faster, if their race is much less eventful. I don't care if men can kick a football harder, if the women show a better game (which again I think they can do, men's football is a joke)
>> No. 35423 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:39 pm
35423 spacer
>>35419

Chess is divided into "everyone" and "women", with no specific men's competitions. Back in the 1990s Judit Polgar had a peak ranking of 8th in the world overall. Since then the highest-ranked female player is Hou Yifan, who peaked at 55th.
>> No. 35424 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:40 pm
35424 spacer
>>35415
>I could see mixed teams in football though

I can't because women are routinely humiliated by boys teams.

>>35418
I was going to question what a proper women's sport would look like but realised I already know from my school days that their psychopaths when you put them on a hockey field.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 35425 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:44 pm
35425 spacer

competitivediscussion.jpg
354253542535425
>>35421
>> No. 35426 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:45 pm
35426 spacer
>>35420
Women and men do gymnastics are different to account for the body. Blokes go down a strength orientated route while women stick to flexibility with those freak arms they have that can bend slightly backwards from the elbow.

Same with ballet where the men get natty enough to do all the lifts.
>> No. 35427 Anonymous
28th September 2021
Tuesday 9:53 pm
35427 spacer
>>35424
I played ice hockey at university level, which was mixed by design. We had a few female players in the league that were incredible hockey players, and in large part it's because being good at that particular sport is as much about perfecting techniques as it is about physicality. Less talented male players tend to get overconfident when they're high on testosterone and start trying to whack the puck harder, when they haven't yet perfected the technique.
>> No. 35429 Anonymous
29th September 2021
Wednesday 8:58 am
35429 spacer
>>35415

>And one thing you also have to give them is that they have a much higher pain tolerance. They'll just get up and get on with the game.

I don't think we can be under any illusion that that has anything to do with pain tolerance whatsoever, it's just that hamming it up when someone brushes your shin has somehow become and integral and accepted part of the male game.

I still stand behind the unisex idea. Equity not equality, or whichever way the fuck round it is. One makes sense and the other doesn't. Fairness means treating everyone the same, not treating everyone differently.

Following that logic I don't see why we stop at gender, surely we should also measure things like runner's legs to make sure they're only competing with people in the same leg-length category, otherwise tall cunts have a natural unfair advantage. You know?
>> No. 35430 Anonymous
29th September 2021
Wednesday 9:19 am
35430 spacer
>>35429
Are you saying you think midget basketball is a good idea?
>> No. 35431 Anonymous
29th September 2021
Wednesday 9:30 am
35431 spacer
>>35430

No, but they've got limbo medals ripe for the picking.
>> No. 35432 Anonymous
29th September 2021
Wednesday 11:53 am
35432 spacer
>>35429

I used to practice taekwondo. Never made it to tournament level, which starts with the green to green-blue belt, but I went to tournaments a lot with my mates. You wear a padded vest and a padded helmet as well as wrist and shin and groin guards. You are automatically disqualified if you just beat up your opponent willy-nilly, i.e. the idea is to score points for well-executed kicks or punches, and not to cause the other guy injuries, but that doesn't mean you don't suffer pretty savage blows. Anyway, you are taught that if the pain is in any way bearable, you at least complete your round, or ideally the whole fight. You'll still have plenty of time to bemoan your injuries when it's over. That doesn't mean you should carry on if you know there is something very wrong, like a broken bone. In which case the refs will call off the fight in the first place. But you learn to take pain and bear it. Somebody from our club once got a very bad kick to the chin in mid-fight, which looked pretty painful and he had a bit of blood coming out of his mouth, but after a quick cleanup, he still kept on till the end, and it only turned out a day later at an orthodontist's that he had a hairline fracture in his jawbone.

You look down on football players a bit in martial arts, is what I am saying, I guess.
>> No. 35608 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 1:13 pm
35608 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJFkibGI4kY

5:50.
>> No. 35613 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 2:30 pm
35613 spacer
>>35608
Well, either no-one's gotten ahold of it yet or no-one's touching it because he knows more than they do. A quick google shows no drama surrounding his input on this topic and that's quite refreshing, but then it's early days and the woman he's standing up for has already received death threats, so...either way, would be nice if conversation around these topics could be more open without people so readily resorting to threatening violence. The loudest voices portending to represent the trans community often happen to be some of the most dehumanising and vicious ones, so regardless of their sincerity they still do damage.

Can't we just agree that gender doesn't matter and for everyone to stop focusing on it?
>> No. 35614 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 2:37 pm
35614 spacer
>>3543
My dad was a professional judo fighter back in his day and now referees judo tournaments, and before my joint problems got bad enough I became a proto-invalid I used to fight as well, and went to my fair share of tournaments. At none of the levels I saw did anyone wear any form of protection apart from mouth guards for people with braces.

To be fair, this was 15 years ago minimum so they may have changed that now.
>> No. 35616 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 2:44 pm
35616 spacer
>>35608
>>35613
Why is he talking about sex rather than gender? It seems like he sidestepped the issue a bit.
>> No. 35617 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 2:55 pm
35617 spacer
>>35616
Because the issue is sex, having looked into the Kathleen Stock controversy. I've not read her book, but she appears to be claiming that biological sex is more important than gender identity.

There's this extremely unbiased and not at all sneery article on the telegraph that goes into more depth: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/columnists/2021/10/14/not-trans-issue-must-stand-free-speech/

And a guardian one if you want.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/oct/12/professor-says-career-effectively-ended-by-unions-transphobia-claims

In light of that Apple head of diversity making the controversial statement that a room full of white men can be just as diverse as one full of minorities, and how Kathleen Stock is a professor of philosophy, I'm starting to believe that diversity of thought is much less of a priority than superficial diversity. I've not seen any debunkment of her arguments, or even really which parts of the book have been controversial, just that she's a transphobe and needs to go and that's that.
>> No. 35618 Anonymous
15th October 2021
Friday 3:13 pm
35618 spacer
Another couple of articles which give a broader picture.

Here's pink news, a counter to the bias of the telegraph. Notice how it does not mention any of the death threats which are mentioned in other articles. https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/10/13/kathleen-stock-sussex-university-trans-students/

This one's probably the most level I can find, but it's a year old. Gives a good idea of the context and how long this has been brewing though: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/kathleen-stock-life-front-line-evangelist christian korean youtuber-rights-debate

Biological sex is immutable as I understand it, and someone born a male will always be male. Sex just doesn't seem to have much weight, it categorically determines nothing about your behaviour or your personality, just how you look. It's simply your biology. Pretending otherwise is telling the Emperor that his new clothes look spiffing. If someone can be upset by being reminded they were born male, that's a them problem, not a social problem.
>> No. 35645 Anonymous
16th October 2021
Saturday 11:55 pm
35645 spacer
>>35618
>it categorically determines nothing about your behaviour or your personality, just how you look

That's wrong fucking wrong though. Male and female anatomy obviously differs inside and out but even in neuroscience there are decades of research supporting differences in capability over populations. In fact one of the evidences of evangelist christian korean youtuberism having a biological basis is in an observed brain correlation.

>Here's pink news, a counter to the bias of the telegraph.

Laugh out loud.
>> No. 35646 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 12:55 am
35646 spacer
>>35617
>just that she's a transphobe and needs to go and that's that.
You say that as if categorically denying the existence and legitimacy of a group of people somehow isn't enough to justify removing someone from a position of power and influence.
>> No. 35649 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 1:52 am
35649 spacer
>>35618
I think a lot of the trouble is caused because no category is really immutable. Most are technically a social convention that we make up to make it easier to put things into boxes and almost every exception can be handwaved by redrawing the category. That is to say "sex" is only a thing as far as we all generally agree that it exists. The underlying things we describe as "sex" exist, but it's a social decision to take that particular set of material circumstances and describe them by that word. (Compare: some countries lack a separate word for "green" and "blue". Obviously those segments of the colour spectrum still exist, but they're stuck in the same category. Conversely, Russian doesn't have a single word for "Blue", preferring to separate out light and dark blue into two separate colours.)

People like to give the impression they're arguing about an underlying reality because to say "this is social convention and i'd like to change it" invites your opponent to say "no, this is reality itself we're talking about!" and put your argument in a weaker position, but ultimately it's a battle about social conventions more than material reality. A lot of time and effort is spent worrying about who has the correct definition of this or that category where really it's more like a bunch of people with different colour preferences trying to decide if we should paint the house blue, синий, or 푸르다.
>> No. 35650 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 3:29 am
35650 spacer
>>35645

You can go in circles for hours chasing the biological, mental, scientific "basis" of all this but really it's all besides the point; and even if it wasn't, the relevant fields of science aren't sufficiently advanced yet to really give us concrete answers.

It's a sociological question above all, when you get down to it, it always comes back to nature vs nurture. Regarding that question, the case studies that have historically been of the greatest interest to academics are those of "feral children", the real life Mowglis who are raised by wolves or bears in the wild, because of how starkly they illustrate the concepts. Based on the incidences we know of, you can make a coherent argument that even species is a social construct, so something as trivial as gender should be no problem.

The problem is the wildly conflicting stances you'll find on all sides, and the trans community itself can't even get their chickens in a line. There are parts of the trans community who desperately want it to be some kind of hard-coded biological reality imprinted somewhere between your DNA and your dental records who get very offended if you say it's mental, and then you have the other half who want it to be all about self-identity and validating individual expression who get very offended if you suggest it's biological.

Personally I just think we should have a real life wordfilter. You can identify as whoever you want, dress as whatever you want, and we'll allow all the surgery and hormones under the sun; but if you try and talk about it at all you start spouting giberrish about Malaysian mukbang TikTok-ers.
>> No. 35652 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 1:44 pm
35652 spacer
>>35650
>It's a sociological question above all

No, lad. Postmodern science is a joke taken too far. Male and female sex exists and that's an objective fact.

>Regarding that question, the case studies that have historically been of the greatest interest to academics are those of "feral children", the real life Mowglis who are raised by wolves or bears in the wild

We have biological evidence. We even have that sick fuck that raised a twin as the opposite sex.
>> No. 35653 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 6:51 pm
35653 spacer
>>35645
Why do you think it's wrong? I'm saying it determines nothing for certain, not that there are no differences between the sexes. It is true that your gender does not **determine** your interests, proclivities, aptitudes, etc. It can affect them, but it determines essentially nothing about you because it's a social construct and not an immutable characteristic.

I don't know why the pink news thing is funny, it carries a clear bias opposite to the bias of the telegraph article, unless I've misread.

>>35646
She's not said that though, do you know what she's said? I'm not up to reading the entire book, but it's not like she stops perceiving people once they say "I'm trans", she just (appears) to be saying that she views biological sex as trumping gender.

Where did you get "categorical denial of the existence and legitimacy of a group of people" from? Have you read the book or do you have quotes from her?

And it's not just removing her from a position of power and influence, it's death threats and hate mail. The trans community has to come down harder on that stuff or the floating voters will keep associating the loud mentalist minority with the progressive trans movement.

>>35649
Subjective shades of colour and the phenomenon of 'blue' being one of the last colours to be identified in literature are not the same as 99.9% of people being easily classed into two buckets of sex 1 or sex 2, if I'm understanding you.

>>35650
You *could* make an argument that species is a social construct, but I don't think it would be anything other than sophistry of the same order as Zeno, and I could disprove you by shagging one of every creature and having only the human female become impregnated and disappointed as a result.
>> No. 35654 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 7:47 pm
35654 spacer
>>35653
Can we not do the whole "pretending inconvenient things that actually happened didn't" thing again? It's getting tiresome.
>> No. 35655 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 8:58 pm
35655 spacer
>>35652

>Male and female sex exists and that's an objective fact.

It's a good job that's not the part that's in question then isn't it you div.

Once again, the circle loops around on itself. This was my point.

>You *could* make an argument that species is a social construct, but I don't think it would be anything other than sophistry of the same order as Zeno, and I could disprove you by shagging one of every creature and having only the human female become impregnated and disappointed as a result

The important part is that once a child has been raised feral, it is impossible to rehabilitate them as a functional human. Once they have passed the key developmental stage where they would have learned the basics of human interaction, it's alien to them, there's no way of getting it in.

There's one very interesting case of the lad who was able to be re-integrated, because he had spent enough time among humans before being abandoned. His stories about the experience are fascinating.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcos_Rodr%C3%ADguez_Pantoja

For further reading if you are interested in this stuff you should consider the case of Genie, the child who was locked inside a dark bedroom with absolutely no mental or physical stimulation until she was nearly 14. She was essentially denied the ability to develop any kind of mental faculties.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genie_(feral_child)

You have cases like the one where the doctor tried to force the young lad to transition and then he killed himself; but all that proves is that whatever they did (besides being incredibly and absurdly unethical) didn't work. While on the other hand we have plenty of evidence that the environment in which you are raised affects the state of your mind as an adult. We're too thick and primitive to understand what's going on with trans people and how to help them; maybe once we crack it it will turn out that convincing them to stay as their biological sex is the better option after all. Only time and some unbiased research will tell.

But until then we're stuck offering them the contemporary equivalent of icepick lobotomies, meanwhile ignorant people bicker and argue about whether or not their condition is even real.

I think that's the part that pisses me off. I don't have a boat in the lake on this matter, personally, but it always seems to me that nobody is honest about what the argument is actually about. It's about the ethics of transitioning as a treatment, and the implications of essentially allowing self-diagnosis to be the norm.
>> No. 35656 Anonymous
17th October 2021
Sunday 9:04 pm
35656 spacer
>>35655

Second half was at >>35653, obviously.
>> No. 35699 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 12:53 pm
35699 spacer
Is a lesbian transphobic if she does not want to have sex with trans women? Some lesbians say they are increasingly being pressured and coerced into accepting trans women as partners - then shunned and even threatened for speaking out.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57853385
>> No. 35700 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 12:53 pm
35700 spacer

_117517801_tweetcomp5blur.jpg
357003570035700
I saw 'lesbians' trending on twitter but unfortunately it was no reason to get my cock out.

>'We're being pressured into sex by some trans women'

>Is a lesbian transphobic if she does not want to have sex with trans women? Some lesbians say they are increasingly being pressured and coerced into accepting trans women as partners - then shunned and even threatened for speaking out. Several have spoken to the BBC, along with trans women who are concerned about the issue too.

>"I've had someone saying they would rather kill me than Hitler," says 24-year-old Jennie*. They said they would strangle me with a belt if they were in a room with me and Hitler. That was so bizarrely violent, just because I won't have sex with trans women." Jennie is a lesbian woman. She says she is only sexually attracted to women who are biologically female and have vaginas. She therefore only has sex and relationships with women who are biologically female.Jennie doesn't think this should be controversial, but not everyone agrees. She has been described as transphobic, a genital fetishist, a pervert and a "evangelist christian korean youtuber" - a trans exclusionary radical fisherperson.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57853385

What would you do if you brought back someone of your preferred gender and they whipped out a big veiny cock or meaty shower curtains.
>> No. 35701 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 12:59 pm
35701 spacer
>>35700

>What would you do if you brought back someone of your preferred gender and they whipped out a big veiny cock or meaty shower curtains.

Greedily gobble whatever genitals they happen to have like a starved dog in a skip full of offal.
>> No. 35702 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 1:00 pm
35702 spacer
>>35701

Also girldicks are generally squidgy rather than veiny.
>> No. 35704 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 1:35 pm
35704 spacer
>>35700
Why is it only lesbians? Am I transphobic, as a male, for my preference for women who were born as women and didn't use to be men? Yes, of course, but who honestly gives a shit?
>> No. 35705 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 1:45 pm
35705 spacer
>>35700

I propose we all just start saying genital preference instead of sexual preference and hey presto, the whole issue goes away. You're not excluding trans people or cis people or whatever, you're just saying "I prefer vaginas" or "I prefer penises".

I'm being facetious and glib of course but really it infuriates me just how pedantic, semantic, entirely fucking academic so much of this bullshit is. It's like a whole section of society collectively moving the goalposts in an argument they're not winning.

(But make no mistake, I have little symapthy for the terfs either, frankly. The way I see it, they're just being bitten on the arse by the logical progression of their own ideology, and now they're all *surprised pikachu face*, you know?)
>> No. 35706 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 1:56 pm
35706 spacer
Preference implies it's a choice. My sexual preference is for women with proportionately huge arses. Sexual orientation isn't a preference; I don't choose to be bi.
>> No. 35707 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 2:02 pm
35707 spacer
>>35706
I'm a sex addict and had my experience with a lad at 15, just didn't enjoy it and find men to be a bit gross, but I think if you got the right guy with the involvement of some women, and a lot of drugs, I could try it again. It's not just preference, it's the threshold of what you'll do for an orgasm.
>> No. 35708 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 2:53 pm
35708 spacer
>>35707
>and a lot of drugs
I get the feeling this part of the sentence is doing a lot of work.
>> No. 35709 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 3:18 pm
35709 spacer
>>35707

Not even that. Sexuality is immensely complex. I don't think anyone is fully straight or fully gay, I subscribe to the sliding scale idea. It's very slippery if the right drugs are involved, and depending how horny the person is, and so on.

It's not even just about getting off either, because you might have a massive orgasm denial fetish and if you can't find a woman to do it, consider eventually letting bloke do it. It's about getting your itches scratched and receiving attention as much as giving.

I've previously described how I'm functionally 100% straight in real life, but if you're got a profile picture of a hot twinky furry femboy on Telegram, I'll roleplay the gayest cybersex you have ever imagined. What does that make me?

Personally I don't give a fuck what it makes me. It is what it is.
>> No. 35710 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 3:25 pm
35710 spacer
>>35699
>>35700
Am I old and out of touch if I think it's unbecoming for the BBC to lower itself to such clickbait culture war shite? If they're just going to churn out stuff like this I say bugger it, privatise the bastards and spare a few trees being mulched up into third rate TV licence threat letters.
>> No. 35711 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 3:48 pm
35711 spacer
>>35710

Not surprising. The BBC News website has been pressured to be more like Buzzfeed for many years now: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/may/21/bbc-news-buzzfeed-digital-strategy-sir-howard-stringer
>> No. 35712 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 3:51 pm
35712 spacer
>>35710
You can't strike down any discussion by calling it a culture war, hon. If someone just isn't attracted to someone else they should be able to say so without getting a lynch mob turn up and, similar, a women's space on a dating app should have the option for a woman to not meet evangelist christian korean youtuber men.

I wasn't of the opinion that any of this was up for debate. But apparently among the public it is.
>> No. 35713 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 4:15 pm
35713 spacer
>>35712

Can I have an option on a dating app to not meet nutter fisherperson bints? Because I'm getting sick of that.
>> No. 35714 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 4:33 pm
35714 spacer
>>35712
Don't worry, culturewarriorlad. They're not going to sleep with you. Nobody's going to sleep with you. You are going to die alone like us two.
>> No. 35715 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 5:00 pm
35715 spacer
>>35713
Is it really that nuttery to go on a date with a woman and expect a female of all things to turn up?
>> No. 35717 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 5:42 pm
35717 spacer
>>35713
Maybe - there should be a button to exclude people who identify as evangelist christian korean youtuber and an option to exclude people who exclude people who identify as evangelist christian korean youtuber?

It honestly seems mental that you can't given every evangelist christian korean youtuber woman has written on their profile 'I'M A KOREAN. I HAVE AN EVENGELICAL SURMAN. PLEASE DO NOT MESSAGE ME IF YOU'RE NOT INTO THAT.' because it would be daft not to and was likely only removed as an option because of some feel-good idea backed by no evidence.

>>35714
How dare you. I'd have you know that I'm absolutely smitten with a woman at the moment and have resisted boring you people by talking about how I thought I'd grown out of ever being able to feel like a giddy teenager again. Mostly because there's no fucking way I can keep a girl like this.
>> No. 35718 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 5:43 pm
35718 spacer
The best fucks I've had have been with acrobat fisherpersons. Come over to the progressive side.
>> No. 35720 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 7:38 pm
35720 spacer
>>35717
People will use it to target them. I imagine in the same way that evangelist christian korean youtuber men will sneak into women's toilets and go on a violent arsepissing rampage. In that it won't happen, or rather it won't impact the rate at which it currently happens.
>> No. 35721 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 7:43 pm
35721 spacer
>>35711
You really do have to wonder what the point of a public broadcaster is if they're going to subject it to targets which lead it to ape the private sector anyway. You can't even go "You don't have adverts!" when it comes to web content - that works for the people still watching telly, but I don't get adverts on Buzzfeed (because I block them) and the rest of the world does get adverts on the BBC website.

>>35712
Can't word a funny post about how the BBC shouldn't mention sex at all and the cultural section of their website should be entirely about dead French painters and German composers so, a tangent then: The language of "spaces" is bizarre. One of those little bits of not-quite-HR speak which is everywhere now. Like calling your Twitter account your "platform". Where did we dig that up? Academia-via-acrobat?
>> No. 35723 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 8:38 pm
35723 spacer
The BBC website is much more "online" than the real BBC. This means it is more willing to challenge those in power, which is the duty of all journalists. So it's good and you need to step back.

Apart from those weird news headlines that are just a quote from a person, like, "BREAKING NEWS: 'I feel cold'" or some bollocks like that. I wish they'd stop with those.
>> No. 35724 Anonymous
26th October 2021
Tuesday 8:43 pm
35724 spacer
>>35723
>This means it is more willing to challenge those in power
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed with a wanky quote. Like all British journalists they're stenographers until proven otherwise.
>> No. 35727 Anonymous
27th October 2021
Wednesday 9:34 am
35727 spacer
>>35723

>it is more willing to challenge those in power

Citation very much fucking needed here lad. All I ever see is Laura Kuennsberg with her insectoid proboscis tongue three feet deep in the Tory minister du jour's arsehole.
>> No. 35728 Anonymous
27th October 2021
Wednesday 10:06 am
35728 spacer
>>35718

Nah, we've discussed this on the blue board lad. For every filthy kinky fisherperson there's a dozen posers who just want to signal that they're a freak in the bedroom because it makes them cool, when in reality they're just boring pillow princesses.

The ones who actually are filthy, though, their sexual pathology is remarkable. They're always subs and always into violent choke-fucking and CNC type stuff. I think that's the thing that really tipped me over the edge and made me stop respecting fisherpersons- Underneath all the ideological posturing, it's always such an obviously personal complex.
>> No. 35729 Anonymous
27th October 2021
Wednesday 8:15 pm
35729 spacer

0d5.jpg
357293572935729
>>35727

>Citation very much fucking needed here lad.
>> No. 35730 Anonymous
27th October 2021
Wednesday 8:54 pm
35730 spacer
>>35729
It's an observation based on my extensive time spent with both outlets. I freely admit that I don't have any kind of smoking gun persuasive enough to convince anybody who claims Laura Kuensberg has an "insectoid proboscis tongue". I guess no citation is needed for that particular claim, though.
>> No. 35731 Anonymous
27th October 2021
Wednesday 9:53 pm
35731 spacer
>>35730

Why would anyone want a citation for something self-evident?
>> No. 35797 Anonymous
5th November 2021
Friday 9:05 pm
35797 spacer
Lily Cade, the primary source of the recent anti-trans BBC article claiming that trans women are predators coercing (cis) lesbians into having sex with them, not only posts incredibly violent tirades calling for trans women to be lynched:

https://www.newsweek.com/anti-evangelist christian korean youtuber-activist-quoted-bbc-calls-trans-women-lynched-1645231

She is also an admitted sexual predator who has sexually assaulted multiple women in restrooms:

http://therealpornwikileaks.com/lily-cade-apologizes-amid-sexual-assault-allegations/

And also posts her pedophilic fantasies on acrobat:

http://therealpornwikileaks.com/dolly-leigh-jasmine-summers-accuse-lily-cade-assault/

Who would have ever thought?

The bathroom one is especially amusing. It seems women's bathrooms have never been safe, even before men ingeniously infiltrated them via the cunning subterfuge of a £15 Primark dress.
>> No. 35798 Anonymous
5th November 2021
Friday 9:06 pm
35798 spacer
>>35797

Whoops, fucked up my links a bit. This was meant to be the last (the juiciest) one:

https://web.archive.org/web/20211103173731/https://lilycade.acrobat.com/post/175778242513/would-you-fuck-a-girl-that-is-younger-than-18
>> No. 35799 Anonymous
5th November 2021
Friday 9:12 pm
35799 spacer
>>35798
Stop teasing, the archive link doesn't work. Can you screencap?

Though do remember that we are British, not American, and younger than 18 is not younger than 16 so unless there's something explicit in the article, the 'pedophilic fantasies' is a bit much. I've never heard of this woman but I don't see the problem with her apology either, it's quite compelling.
>> No. 35800 Anonymous
5th November 2021
Friday 9:31 pm
35800 spacer
>>35799

"Acrobat" is a wordfilter.
>> No. 35801 Anonymous
5th November 2021
Friday 11:33 pm
35801 spacer
>>35799

The link contains an excerpt from some lesbo-smut she'd written on Tumblerrr. The quite obvious author self-insert character is bragging about their body-count, and admits to fucking under age girls, as young as fourteen. The encounters described are degrading in the extreme and dubiously consensual, and mostly appear to revolve around bathroom molestations.

Now, it's only erotica, so normally it's no evidence of real life wrongdoing. We all wank off to something a bit dodgy now and then I'm sure- That doesn't mean we'd do it in real life, does it?

However... When you put that hand in hand with someone who has been accused and admitted (no charges pressed) such real life wrongdoing, in very similar circumstances... Well, that paints it in a bit of a different light, for my money.
>> No. 35802 Anonymous
5th November 2021
Friday 11:56 pm
35802 spacer
>>35797
They've edited the story to remove mention of her and the quotes from her, but kept the development of her contribution.

It's almost like there's an agenda behind that article.
>> No. 35803 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 1:27 am
35803 spacer
>>35802
I don't get why you lads seem so behind the curve on hit pieces. In this one it doesn't even make sense, women shouldn't be pressured into having sex with people they don't want to and the argument seems to centre on how much of an issue this social pressure is - so who cares about some dyke drama?
>> No. 35804 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 1:30 am
35804 spacer
>>35803
>so who cares about some dyke drama?
Ah, I see the Woman Respecter has returned.
>> No. 35805 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 5:33 am
35805 spacer
>>447630
Couldn't get the horn on for it, would have been wanking a soggy cucumber. Ended up being a great night as we knew it would, and now we're going to have pilled up sex and I won't cum until tomorrow morning because drugs.

Women are great, they're just like you but softer and formed in a different culture. Don't be down about women, be down about cunts.

>>447631
I'd be with you but for the fact he apparently asked her if he could stay over and she said 'yes', which means the situation is probably much worse than relayed, but that's all supposition.>>35804
>> No. 35806 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 5:51 am
35806 spacer
>>35805
WORRA PLONKER!!!
>> No. 35807 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 6:26 am
35807 spacer
>I am 16, and identify as an ace lesbian (NMLNM, or non-men loving non-men). I have questioned my sexuality since the age of 12 or 13, thinking I was bisexual. I downloaded TikTok, which allowed me to explore my identity more and interact with other queer young people. Until this summer, I questioned my identity multiple times a day (exhausting and not affirming), but I slowly began to feel confident in labelling myself as a demi-romantic, asexual lesbian (I like to use labels). However, that feeling didn’t last long. I felt dysphoric a lot of the time, and I hated my breasts. Fortunately, after about a month, I rediscovered the term “demigirl” and it just fitted. I am also trying out she/they pronouns, but haven’t told anyone. My gender is quite fluid – some days I feel more neutral, other days ultrafeminine.

>I am open about my sexuality at school and online, and would happily tell most people that I am gay, but don’t want to “come out” to my parents. I think it’s a combination of fear, not of rejection (they are supportive of the LGBTQ+ community), and the fact that I hate the idea of having to “come out” if you are queer; I don’t want to contribute to our heteronormative society. Should I tell my parents so they have time to process it, or should I wait until I have a partner to introduce to them? Also, I feel obliged to inform them of my pronoun change, but I don’t want to be the one to teach them how to use she/they pronouns. I wish they would educate themselves.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/nov/05/i-am-16-and-identify-as-an-ace-lesbian-but-i-dont-want-to-come-out-to-my-parents

Word salad.
>> No. 35808 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 6:49 am
35808 spacer
>>35807

I think it's basically Warhammer for girls.
>> No. 35809 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 11:44 am
35809 spacer
>>35807

Is this a real person or have they been feeding a neural network on woke Twitter?

It really comes off like a satirical string of clichés, with the final punchline about wishing her parents would "educate themselves" as the cherry on top.
>> No. 35810 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 12:24 pm
35810 spacer
>>35809
It's what happens when a teenage girl spends too much time on the internet and gets sucked down various rabbit holes.
>> No. 35812 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 2:06 pm
35812 spacer
>>35809
It sounds real enough to me. I know people who move in these circles, and all the words are real and, I think, correctly used. Demi-anything is an identity that can be safely ignored and dismissed as bollocks unless you're speaking to one; it pretty much boils down to "any normal person would class this as a personality trait rather than a genuine identity", like the infamous sapiosexual.

I don't really know about she/they pronouns, to be honest, but I've heard them mentioned. I assume you can choose whether to refer to her as a "she" or a "they", which obviously means everyone is just going to pick "she" so there must be more to it than that.
>> No. 35814 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 2:39 pm
35814 spacer
>>35812
>I don't really know about she/they pronouns, to be honest, but I've heard them mentioned. I assume you can choose whether to refer to her as a "she" or a "they", which obviously means everyone is just going to pick "she" so there must be more to it than that.

You've probably got to read her mind to guess whether she's having a neutral day or an ultrafeminine day. If you get it wrong then you need to educate yourself more.
>> No. 35815 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 2:53 pm
35815 spacer
>>35812
Demi is wank, it's the most self indulgent "I'm special" label I can imagine. "Ooh, I'm different from all you slags who just hop into bed before introducing yourselves, I need to really get to know someone before I'm attracted to them"

Can I call a label wank if it can be applied to me? I'm gender fluid and demisexual, and both labels are utterly meaningless, self indulgent wank. So you're not a gender stereotype and you have to connect with someone before you feel sexual attraction towards them? Well done, you're a normal human being just like everyone else.

Now asexual, there's a label. Clear cut, bish bosh done. Useful, descriptive, and specific.
>> No. 35818 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 4:22 pm
35818 spacer
>>35815

>Now asexual, there's a label. Clear cut, bish bosh done. Useful, descriptive, and specific.

Unfortunately, it seems to have become a trap for young people who are just sexually anxious. Asexuality is a real thing but it's actually very rare, whereas sexual phobias and low libido are quite common. The issue is compounded by SSRIs, which are a widespread treatment for anxiety and for a lot of people absolutely kills their sex drive.

I have no sense of smell, because I got punched in the head a lot as a teenager and damaged my olfactory nerve. It doesn't particularly bother me, but I haven't adopted it as part of my identity and I'd happily accept a cure. I sympathise with people who genuinely have no sexual desire and feel marginalised by society, but I also worry about people who have built their identity around a potentially treatable condition.
>> No. 35819 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 7:31 pm
35819 spacer
>>35815
They've got you there, demi is a subset of asexuality.
>> No. 35820 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 8:28 pm
35820 spacer
>>35819
No it's not. Asexuality is complete lack of a sex drive. Demisexuals have sex drives. Calling it a subset of asexuality is about as useful as calling heterosexuals a subset of asexuality because they don't want to shag people of the same gender.

Do people really think that demisexuality is a subset of asexuality? That's mental. I can't even understand the motive behind such obtuseness, what benefit is there to that other than ticking another label off?
>> No. 35821 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 8:35 pm
35821 spacer
>>35820
I think the logic is that they don't have a sex drive except when-. I don't make the rules anyway.
>> No. 35822 Anonymous
6th November 2021
Saturday 8:44 pm
35822 spacer
>>35820

You said it yourself, that's exactly what it's about.

You know fifteen years ago when autistic people would be on Deviant Art and they'd make original characters (do not steel) with badly drawn anime pictures, and they were always some implausibly over the top Mary Sue 3,000 year old shape shifting nature spirit who's both an angel and a demon and she takes the form of a 13 year old but she's also timeless and full of ancient wisdom, and all that?

That's basically what this is, only applied to your real life personality. That's the best understanding I can come to.

Thing is the internet has a lot to answer for here, and while I hate to sound like some kind of boomer, because growing up on the internet didn't do me any harm, I think for this lot it's really doing some damage. Way back when I was a teenager it was a huge relief to come to terms with the fact I don't have to fit into a specific box, I don't need to conform exactly to some label and stereotype. By the time these kids realise the kind of nonsense they've swallowed (and I think it's pretty safe to say nearly all of them ultimately will), they'll be in their mid to late twenties, and realise they wasted a lot of their best years hyper-focussing and worrying over nothing.
>> No. 35827 Anonymous
7th November 2021
Sunday 12:31 pm
35827 spacer

3ehde8ygfjx21.jpg
358273582735827
There's this lesbian that I know and on all pictures she posts of herself she edits her jawline and chin to make them look bigger, especially the chin. She's not necessarily butch but she does go for that short hair boyish look. Is a big manly chin attractive amongst bulldykes?
>> No. 35880 Anonymous
11th November 2021
Thursday 8:15 pm
35880 spacer

cllr-danny-beales.jpg
358803588035880
>Camden's trans crossing causes stir over impact on disabled community

>A new colourful crossing installed in Camden to support the evangelist christian korean youtuber community has caused a stir amid accusations it is harmful to people with disabilities. The trans flag crossing - a first in Camden - was unveiled at the junction of Marchmont Street and Tavistock Place yesterday (Monday, November 8).

>It has been installed ahead of evangelist christian korean youtuber Awareness Week which starts on Saturday (November 13). Councillor Abdul Hai, Camden's cabinet member for young people, equalities and cohesion said: “Camden is renowned for being ‘no place for hate’ and a borough that has a strong and continuing history of respect and support for everyone."

>The criticism comes after coalition group Transport for All (TfA) expressed their concerns about colourful crossings in a letter written to London mayor Sadiq Khan at the end of September. Part of a project launched earlier this year with designer Yinka Ilori, TfA wrote that such designs "create safety and accessibility concerns" for some disabled people. The group - comprised of representatives of the Alzheimer's Society, RNIB and Guide Dogs (among others) - identified those with visual impairments, learning disabilities and dementia as being especially vulnerable.

>A post written by TfA on November 3 said Mr Khan had agreed to a "temporary pause on the installation" of such crossings. This newspaper has sought confirmation of this from the mayor's office.

https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/local-council/colourful-trans-flag-crossing-in-camden-draws-criticism-8473886

Say goodbye to your weekend lads. These things do annoy me because it's not only performative but also daft to mess around with signs that are supposed to represent symbols in a nearly universal language.
>> No. 35885 Anonymous
11th November 2021
Thursday 9:48 pm
35885 spacer
>>35880
always get the impression these things are just asking to be framed as "trans vs disabled" rather than "politicians and do-gooders trying to hop on a bandwagon vs the disabled, meanwhile actual trans people just wish the gender identity clinic didn't have a waiting list longer than the list of dickheads in elected office"
>> No. 35886 Anonymous
11th November 2021
Thursday 10:02 pm
35886 spacer
>>35885

It's almost like somebody out there wants the debate around the topic to be an endless, fruitless, circular culture war, instead of a practical discussion of what can be done to help those affected.
>> No. 35889 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 12:10 am
35889 spacer
>>35885
>>35886
I think part of the problem is that doing things of any impact costs money. You can paint a road crossing for a few thousand pounds and win voters by acting sassy on twitter to naysayers but the big stuff just isn't worth it from a Machiavellian perspective and a policy of providing adequate public services that bankrupt the council.
>> No. 35890 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 2:51 am
35890 spacer
>>35885
Why don't you ask the people in the pic?
>> No. 35891 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 6:51 am
35891 spacer
How does having a bit of road painted even help anything? Like what is it actually meant to achieve other than some vague talk of "awareness"?

Genuinely don't understand it.
>> No. 35892 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 7:57 am
35892 spacer
>>35891

It makes people feel superior to other people, which is literally the only purpose of politics in 2021.
>> No. 35893 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 8:25 am
35893 spacer
>>35891
It makes trans people feel visibly supported.
>> No. 35894 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 8:51 am
35894 spacer
>>35892
This is such a completely illogical opinion.
>> No. 35895 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 10:24 am
35895 spacer
>>35894

"We're not going to actually do anything, but we're going to make a public display of how much we care" is peak contemporary politics.

Painting a zebra crossing in Camden isn't going to change the minds of any transphobes, it isn't going to materially improve the lives of any trans people, it's just an empty gesture. We've become so jaded that we no longer expect our elected representatives to actually do anything useful, so we give them credit for at least making the right noises.

It should be self-evident that we don't live in a utopia where all problems have been solved and all public bodies have infinite resources. The decision to do something pointless is inherently a decision not to do something useful. If you polled 100 trans people and asked them how Camden council should spend a couple of grand to support trans people, I doubt that any of them would say "paint a zebra crossing like a trans flag".

I think that the culture wars are a symptom of a wider problem. We endlessly squabble over words, because we have no faith in the possibility of real change.
>> No. 35896 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 10:44 am
35896 spacer
>>35895
>If you polled 100 trans people and asked them how Camden council should spend a couple of grand to support trans people, I doubt that any of them would say "paint a zebra crossing like a trans flag".

>it isn't going to materially improve the lives of any trans people

These aren't the same thing. Saying something is completely pointless is not the same as saying it's nowhere near enough (which I agree with). As I said, it makes trans people feel visibly supported. I note your hypothetical survey isn't about whether those 100 trans people appreciated the crossing or not.
>> No. 35897 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 10:44 am
35897 spacer
>>35880
In a development that I'm sure that literally everyone saw coming, suddenly every tran-hating bigot on the Twitter has an opinion on accessibility.
>> No. 35899 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 11:03 am
35899 spacer
>>35890
I'd ask a few things of second from the left IYKWIM. Such as why so many women are wearing those jackets lately.

>>35891
It brings crossing the road into the 21st century. It is a true symbol that the point of modern politics is not in arriving at a destination but in making sure the journey we're on (to hell) has the right coat of paint even if said coat harms people.
>> No. 35900 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 1:21 pm
35900 spacer
>>35899
It was only when I went back to look who you meant that I noticed the gold chain around the black lady 's neck, which I assume means she's the Lord Mayor of Camden of whatever and isn't another one of them. Perhaps the blokes didn't use to be women either.
>> No. 35902 Anonymous
12th November 2021
Friday 1:45 pm
35902 spacer
>>35897
Tbf it's hard to argue with the Alzheimer's society.

As I was saying, it's hard to argue with service dogs.

Fuck. It's hard arguing with the blind, if you're against them then you're probably being an arsehole.

Why are you culture warring anyway? The trolls on twitter, whom I'm sure are absolutely all sincere and not at all just fucking with the easily triggered, are just as bad as the trans people who are refusing to back down on this and taking it as transphobic. It's a complete non-issue (or should be at least), it's just optics and people are lapping it up.

Like just change it to a bloody zebra crossing with pink and blue highlights on the strips, that way barely anything changes for anyone. The zebra crossing b/w is still intact, and the trans flag is still there. Bang, done. Or split the trans flag up with black lines same shade as the tarmac. So many solutions besides just removing this important symbol of trans support.
>> No. 35911 Anonymous
13th November 2021
Saturday 6:25 pm
35911 spacer
>>35902
The Alzheimer's Society, service dogs and the blind aren't the issue. It's the cunts that jumped on the bandwagon to weaponise those legitimate concerns to bash the transes with.
>> No. 35912 Anonymous
13th November 2021
Saturday 7:04 pm
35912 spacer
>>35911
In fairness, by the looks of things the Mayor of London said to various charities that he would put a stop to this but evidently this was ignored because I imagine it's pretty easy to gaslight people with Alzheimer's. The whole public twitter debate seems to have at least put it properly on the agenda even if you feel it's all for the wrong reasons.
>> No. 35915 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 4:29 pm
35915 spacer
I don't have much to say about all of these issues, but I want to mention I think it's incredible for Kathleen Stock to be viciously hounded out of her job only for her to immediately land a gig at the so-called "University" of Austin. Some folk just have all the luck in the world.
>> No. 35916 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 4:40 pm
35916 spacer
>>35915
It's awful she's been silenced in the way she's described in all those interviews on national TV and in the national press.
>> No. 35917 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 5:27 pm
35917 spacer
>>35915
I have absolutely no idea who that is, but I looked her up and even the Guardian sounds pretty supportive of her side of things:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/28/sussex-professor-kathleen-stock-resigns-after-evangelist christian korean youtuber-rights-row
If you can't even get a Guardian journalist to throw a Twitter-paddy about an issue, perhaps the backlash has already begun.
>> No. 35918 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 5:44 pm
35918 spacer
>>35915

This academic lot are more bent than politicians.

I don't want to get into it and start sounding like a tinfoil hat nutter but there have been loads of cases of people getting sacked from one job and quitely re-hired at some other university, sometimes going as far as just inventing a new post.

Of course it's never the ones who do some kind of real subject, you know the sciences or maths or what have you. But when you're the kind of person who basically doe nothing but professionally navel gaze about meaningless shite that will never affect anyone's real life in any meaningful sense, you're apparently in a protected class.

Really makes you think.
>> No. 35919 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 7:08 pm
35919 spacer
>>35918
Academic here. Yes.

Although it's just as bad in the hard sciences, and the research the majority of people in the hard sciences are doing has a similarly miniscule chance of having a real impact on anyone's life.
>> No. 35920 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 9:59 pm
35920 spacer
>>35919
Come on mate. My thesis on the effects of the smoothness of the blades in a blender and its relationship to the sizes of the bubbles it creates will definitely help someone... somewhere... at some point... I think...
>> No. 35921 Anonymous
14th November 2021
Sunday 10:13 pm
35921 spacer
>>35920
I bet you're not even factoring in stick blenders. That level of chaos is beyond your tiny mind's feeble grasp.
>> No. 35990 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 10:11 am
35990 spacer
Apparently 17% of Gen Z are LGBT. 1/6, roughly.

So either there is something froggy in the water, or sexuality is a choice. Or they're just a bunch of attention seeking blighters.

I know this is a hot take but I'm still processing this statistic. Obviously self reported data and all, plus the growing scope of what it is to be LGBT, but surely this is throwing up a bit of dust around the topic of sexuality and choice/nature and nurture.
>> No. 35991 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 10:17 am
35991 spacer
>>35990

>So either there is something froggy in the water, or sexuality is a choice. Or they're just a bunch of attention seeking blighters.

I'm curious how you've determined that those are the only options. Are you saying that because the percentage is bigger than it used to be that something has changed? It's not like 50 years ago anyone was doing a gayness survey, let alone in a way that would ever give accurate numbers.
>> No. 35992 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 10:19 am
35992 spacer
>>35990

Or young people are rarely certain about their sexuality, or a higher percentage of people are LGBT than you expect, or some combination of all of these.
>> No. 35993 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 10:27 am
35993 spacer
>>35991

>It's not like 50 years ago anyone was doing a gayness survey

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_Reports
>> No. 35994 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 11:04 am
35994 spacer

poa20492f1.png
359943599435994
>>35993
>> No. 35995 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 12:22 pm
35995 spacer
>>35994

37% of the male respondents in the Kinsey studies reported at least one homosexual experience. Loads of people were a bit gay in 1948, but in 2021 a lot more of them are willing to recognise it as part of their sexual orientation.
>> No. 35996 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 2:24 pm
35996 spacer
>>35990

Or they're the first generation to grow up in a society that considers homophobia socially unacceptable and has much better access to educational material about LGBT stuff via the internet.

Remember it was literally illegal for schools to "promote homosexuality" (eg. acknowledge that LGBT people exist or do anything about homophobic bullying) until the mid 2000s.

I suspect it's more likely to be a combination of bi/pan/asexual people who would have previously answered "straight" on a survey realizing it at an earlier age thanks to better education and awareness, and more people giving honest answers because there's less perceived risk.

>>35993
I think you missed
> let alone in a way that would ever give accurate numbers.
Kinsey's sampling methodology is rather questionable, and in all fairness it would have been hard to get a sample that was both representative of the population and would give honest answers to a gayness survey in the 50s.
According to the wiki page you linked Kinsey's results showed that something like 11% of men were gay or 50/50 bisexuals and 36% weren't exclusively straight.

While the numbers are all over the place most of the literature I've seen suggests something like 3-5% of the population are exclusively gay and anywhere between 5-25% are some variety of "not straight", so >>35990's 17% figure isn't particularly surprising.
>> No. 35997 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 3:32 pm
35997 spacer
The number I've always heard has been 10%, and that has always felt about right to me. A lot of people can nitpick themselves into a letter of LGBTQIA+ if they really wanted to, and I fully believe that 7% of today's wrong 'uns have done precisely that.

Of course, I'm sure we all at some point saw a handsome man and thought, "Hey, I wonder if I'm gay?" Maybe now that I'm out there, strutting my stuff every day on the way home from your mum's house, the people who see me don't dismiss it, as we all did, but rather take the interesting thought experiment as a signal to put themselves into the letter groups. Of course, this must hugely offend the actual gays, who must constantly draw their eyes away from my Adonis-like form to be told by zoomers, "Yeah, I'm the same as you, except for me it's only sometimes and I can choose to no longer be that way if it gets inconvenient." That would infuriate me.
>> No. 35998 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 3:55 pm
35998 spacer
>>35997

Bisexuals exist.
>> No. 35999 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 5:26 pm
35999 spacer
>>35998
But they count in the initial 10%, surely?
>> No. 36000 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 7:27 pm
36000 spacer
>>35999

I think that comment was addressing the latter part of the post, not the former.
>> No. 36001 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 8:19 pm
36001 spacer
>>35997
I'm bicurious. But I'm also straight. Nomming a cock or whatever is just an idle fantasy. I wouldn't co-habit with a bloke.
>> No. 36002 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 9:03 pm
36002 spacer
I do think there's a lot of people nowadays who say they're gay (or whatever) when really they're not.

It's a matter of pedantry how you decide it in the end though I think. My personal feeling is that there is, in fact, no such thing as somebody who is 100% straight. We're all somewhere on a sliding scale, the trouble is there's no real way of objectively measuring it. (Or at least, nobody has listened to me yet- If I was the government's chief homosexuality scientist, my unit of measurement would be "how much MD does it take for you to let a lad suck you off (and vice versa)".

But like we've discussed elsewhere here before, being gay isn't really about being gay any more. Queer is a lifestyle. Western capital has pounced upon alternative sexual identities as a sales opportunity. It's a market demographic like any other subculture, and this muddies the waters when talking about homosexuality in general. You can be gay and go about your life with nobody really noticing these days; but being queer is a thing of it's own, and the beautiful thing about the word queer is that it doesn't come with a strict requirement to actually be much of a queer. You just have to look the part, move in the right circles, and generally not like normie straight people stuff.

I know more than a few girls who identify themselves as queer, and I know fully well that the gayest thing about them is they watch lesbian porn and occasionally leave their pits unshaved. If that's enough to qualify then I'm gayer than Freddie fucking Mercury- But again, that's not the point.

It's a bit like how being a "nerd" is mainstream now, and every cunt calls themselves a nerd because they like Marvel-DC movies or whatever. Having an identity that marks you as different in some way to the masses of normie sheep sells.
>> No. 36003 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 9:16 pm
36003 spacer
>>36002
>My personal feeling is that there is, in fact, no such thing as somebody who is 100% straight. We're all somewhere on a sliding scale
I agree completely. But have you ever told a bisexual this? They hate it, precisely because it takes away their unique identity. Sexuality is a spectrum, but if it's a spectrum then everyone is on it, and the bisexuals I have pointed this out to (online, where admittedly literally everyone is mental, so perhaps they're not a representative sample) get so hilariously upset that in the end I stopped pointing it out.
>> No. 36004 Anonymous
22nd November 2021
Monday 11:38 pm
36004 spacer
>>36002
Watch out lads, historical materialist lad has arrived. Can you handle his insightful analysis of 'well it doesn't really mean that'?
>> No. 36007 Anonymous
23rd November 2021
Tuesday 2:37 pm
36007 spacer

Angry Lab.jpg
360073600736007
>>36004
Booooooo
>> No. 36017 Anonymous
24th November 2021
Wednesday 7:30 am
36017 spacer
I was talking with my kids yesterday and they know quite a few people at their school who are openly gay. It blew my mind a little bit because when I was at school nobody came out for fear of getting their head kicked in.
>> No. 36018 Anonymous
24th November 2021
Wednesday 9:41 am
36018 spacer
>>36017
My friends mum has worked in a comprehensive school for decades now. She said these days that if anyone is being discriminatory/racist they get their shit kicked in.
>> No. 36044 Anonymous
25th November 2021
Thursday 11:39 am
36044 spacer
>>36017
I think at my school in the noughties there was an odd halfway-house. Gay and queer were used as mildly insulting terms and so on, but I think if anyone actually did come out as a committed bumder, that was on the whole respected.
>> No. 36149 Anonymous
2nd December 2021
Thursday 8:29 am
36149 spacer

Blog-who-am-I2.jpg
361493614936149
Science Museum bows to woke pressure after complaints Boy or Girl? display excludes evangelist christian korean youtuber people

The Science Museum is set to alter its Boy or Girl? display following complaints over a “lack of mention of evangelist christian korean youtuber”. Curators will make changes to a gallery covering human biology in order to “update (the) non-inclusive narrative”, it can be revealed.

A display on sex characteristics titled Boy or Girl? has received complaints “due to the lack of mention of evangelist christian korean youtuber”, according to internal documents, and there are plans to make alterations to the exhibit which asks “how are boys and girls different?”

The Science Museum has confirmed that work has begun to review the exhibit covering subjects including hormones and chromosomes, and has stated that all such reviews “take into account new scientific and curatorial research and visitor feedback”. Internal documents state that there was “action to consult the Museum of Transology” - which bills itself as the largest collection of evangelist christian korean youtuber’s people’s artefacts - in relation to the Boy or Girl? exhibit.

The display highlighted for its lack of evangelist christian korean youtuber coverage, and earmarked for alterations, already makes mention of topical issues relating to gender, including feelings of being “born in the wrong body” and how these are addressed.

The Boy or Girl? cabinet currently holds a fake penis to be worn under clothing as a “packer” to provide a male appearance, as well as a compression vest to flatten the chest. Testosterone patches worn to include bodily changes are also displayed.
In its current form, the under-review display includes an information panel which states that “sex usually refers to someone’s biological characteristics”, whereas “gender is more difficult to define”. The panel continues: “Your gender identity is our sense of yourself as male or female, or, for some people neither or both. It may not match your biological sex.”
Plans to make changes to the display following complaints about a limited mention for evangelist christian korean youtuber issues, as noted in internal emails, has been criticised by campaigners.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/12/01/science-museum-change-biological-sex-exhibit-complaints-excludes/
>> No. 36150 Anonymous
2nd December 2021
Thursday 9:02 am
36150 spacer
>>36149
Weird they're doing that which nobody seems to care about but the article completely ignores how much flack the museum's getting over taking money from oil companies.
>> No. 36153 Anonymous
2nd December 2021
Thursday 9:06 am
36153 spacer

https___bucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be7.jpg
361533615336153
>>36150
It's largely window dressing.
>> No. 36159 Anonymous
2nd December 2021
Thursday 12:00 pm
36159 spacer
>>36149
Was it this bad for gay people in the 80s? Probably even worse right?
>> No. 36374 Anonymous
18th December 2021
Saturday 6:00 pm
36374 spacer

268501871_10159493457103249_5957152343664236000_n.jpg
363743637436374

>> No. 36376 Anonymous
18th December 2021
Saturday 6:15 pm
36376 spacer
At this point I'm certain the majority of mainstream ECKY discourse is a psyop. It's 2+2=5 brainwashing mind fuck propaganda. The point isn't the narrative, the point is making people submit to what they're told is the truth.

I must clarify that I'm not a trans-denier, they certainly exist and I support their right to exist. But their movement has been weaponised; much like giving weapons to the mujahideen who would go on become Al Quaeda and provide the justification for nearly two decades of manufactured conflict, the various factions of transit vans and surf'n'turfs and what have you are being used as unwitting cultural mercenaries.

Engaging with the subject in good faith, as such, feels like nothing but wasted time.
>> No. 36377 Anonymous
18th December 2021
Saturday 6:17 pm
36377 spacer
>>36374
A fine example of middle old people shithousery.
>> No. 36379 Anonymous
18th December 2021
Saturday 6:32 pm
36379 spacer

eckythump-black-pudding.gif
363793637936379
>>36376
>ECKY discourse

?
>> No. 36380 Anonymous
18th December 2021
Saturday 6:33 pm
36380 spacer
>>36379

evangelist christian korean youtuber. evangelist christian korean youtubers.
>> No. 36846 Anonymous
5th February 2022
Saturday 6:02 pm
36846 spacer
Got permabanned from rudgwick for "promoting hate", for a post that essentially made the point that people need to stop wasting their time arguing about trans bullshit.

It's funny because I've said some truly dreadful things in my time on rudgwick, but the thing that finally got me a permaban was a mild, balanced, fence sitting post directed mostly at anti-trans people, telling them to stop going the fuck on about it. You reckon the mod who swung the hammer was a tran by any chance? Hmm.

Say what you want about trans bullshit but the evangelists don't do themselves any favours. The attitude of "if you're not with us you're against us" is probably a major factor in why more people don't support them, frankly.

I mean quite honestly the last five or six years, I've gone from broadly supporting the idea of trans rights to just reflexively rolling my eyes every time the mere concept is mentioned. Back before I'd ever actually met or interacted with any of them, I was totally on board with it, but as they've got more vocal and visible over the years, my feelings have become slowly more negative.

It's a bit like gypsies come to think of it. I want to be the morally upstanding person who thinks they're a misunderstood persecuted minority, but every actual experience I've had with them tells me otherwise.
>> No. 36849 Anonymous
5th February 2022
Saturday 6:25 pm
36849 spacer
>>36846
Mate, it's bad enough when people whine about bans here. I don't give a shit about you getting banned on Rudgwick.
>> No. 36850 Anonymous
5th February 2022
Saturday 6:26 pm
36850 spacer
>>36846
I got permabanned too, on all devices on all accounts. Every account I make now is banned within hours. I'm wondering how they know it's me when my IP changes all the time.
>> No. 36851 Anonymous
5th February 2022
Saturday 8:39 pm
36851 spacer
>>36846
Are most of your experiences with them online? All the online ones are the lowest of the low, and the notorious 41% meme just means the other 59% haven't got the message yet. But I know people who are oddly obsessed with the community, so I have almost certainly met an above-average number of them, at least in passing, and in person they're usually totally okay. Many of them are even cooler and more interesting than the cisgender freaks who bang on about "allyship".
>> No. 36852 Anonymous
5th February 2022
Saturday 9:31 pm
36852 spacer
>>36851
I talk to a load of them online and most of them are fine. That's the thing. Whether they're trans or cis or leftists or whatever the proper metal ones are the ones who go out of their way to be heard and can't cope with criticism, whilst the majority are just getting on with living their life.
>> No. 36853 Anonymous
5th February 2022
Saturday 9:41 pm
36853 spacer
>>36852

I think frankly there's a line to be drawn between "real" trans people, and plain old narcissists who are just jumping on the band wagon to score some easy validation.

It's deeply taboo to bring that up within "the community" because so much of it is built around the absolute avoidance of gatekeeping at all costs, but that's exactly why that sort of toxic individual has such an easy time latching on. Nobody can ever call them out for their behaviour, and even if they do something stupid enough to blow their cover, it's far too easy for them to wield the accusation of intolerance as a shield.

I suppose that's not even a problem unique to the trans community, it affects pretty much any group aiming to be tolerant and welcoming, but they certainly seem to be bearing the brunt of it these days.
>> No. 36860 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 8:03 am
36860 spacer
Male, female, feline... Bristol University guide lectures staff about neopronouns

Lecturers at a leading university are being given guidance on neopronouns, which include emoji labels and catgender, where someone identifies as a feline.

The University of Bristol has provided guidance for its staff on "using pronouns at work", urging them to declare in verbal introductions and email signatures whether they use he/him, she/her or they/them, to support evangelist christian korean youtuber students. But unlike myriad pronoun manuals on other campuses, Bristol lecturers are also directed to neopronouns which include “emojiself pronouns”, where colourful digital icons - commonplace on social media - are used to represent gender in written and spoken conversation.

Bristol’s guide explains that some people use "neopronouns such as Ze/Zir/Zirs". A website linked to by Bristol's guide, explains that neopronouns are third-person pronouns that are not officially recognised in the language they are used in. This directs to a webpage by LGBTA Wiki, which says these are used by those who feel their gender is beyond the male or female binary, and lists "emoji pronouns" as an example. Staff are told on the website: "Emojiself pronouns are a subcategory of nounself pronouns, which are pronouns that, instead of using letters, utilize emojis. These pronouns are not intended to be pronounced out loud and are only intended for online communication. In spoken conversation one may or may not use pronouns that are based on the emoji."

Another section explains how noun-self pronouns are used by "xenic" individuals whose gender does not fit within "the Western human binary of gender alignments". The webpage adds: "For example, someone who is catgender may use nya/nyan pronouns." Catgender, it says, is someone who "strongly identifies" with cats or other felines and those who "may experience delusions relating to being a cat or other feline". The word nyan is Japanese for "meow". Bristol’s guide says that if staff make a mistake by using the wrong pronoun, "it is important not to become defensive or make a big deal out of it. Simply thank the person for correcting you, apologise swiftly, and use the correct pronouns going forward". It urges lecturers to be "proactive" by stating their pronouns voluntarily at the start of conversations and meetings, to create a normal culture on campus that avoids needing to ask one’s pronouns or making assumptions based on looks.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/02/06/male-female-feline-bristol-university-guide-lectures-staff-neopronouns/
>> No. 36861 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 8:48 am
36861 spacer

het.jpg
368613686136861
>>36860

The time is soon at hand for Furrylad, who is also Class Warrior Lad, to seize control of the kulturkampf narrative using the newfound status of otherkin at the top of the idpol totem pole; and wrestles control of the left out of the hands of blue haired thick rimmed glasses wearing weirdos, and back onto the path of materialist politics. The ultimate uno reverse card.
>> No. 36862 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 9:29 am
36862 spacer
I've been thinking about it and I'm not entirely sure it matters what pronouns someone has if I'm emailing them. If I'm emailing someone I'll be using "you" and talking in the second person rather than talking in the third person and calling them he/she/nya/nyan. It's creating guidance for something that won't be used.
>> No. 36863 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 1:31 pm
36863 spacer
>>36860
People get upset about neopronouns, and I can't really go for Ze/Zir/etc (sorry [lads? mates? pals?], "they" is the superior neutral English pronoun.), but when it gets to the "silly" ones like bun, bunself, etc, it gets very clear to me that a lot of it is inflexible older people taking language too seriously, more interested in doing it "properly" than understanding the practicalities of real-world usage. It's the exact same thing as going "Why don't young people use capital letters? It's because they're thick!" rather than having an interest in what acrobat users themselves discovered they were doing - that on the internet, without vocal cues, talking in lowcaps can convey a casual tone, proper capitalisation and punctuation can be more formal, conveying distance or dissatisfaction.
An adjacent thing happens with sex and gender and whatever else - materially, it doesn't mean much on the internet. You can't verify if I'm a man, a woman, or bnuy. ("it means bunny, mum. No, it's not grammatically wrong to drop the 'a' because... oh, nevermind.") so a lot of the sticking power of traditional pronouns is lost, while new pronouns can convey new information that the old ones don't. With he/she pronouns on my profile, you'll probably just assume I'm a man or a woman, and you've got good odds of getting the right one just with site demographics - calling me "she" is like using "the" in a sentence, it tells me nothing. If on the other hand you call me "she" and my profile description clearly says my pronouns are "bun" etc, i can ignore that if i know you because i'll assume it's an error or override it with knowing you're alright, we probably aren't going to fall out over it, but if i don't know you it tells me that you either didn't read my description or read it and ignored it. Conversely if I don't know you and you use the right one, I can see that you've read the description and are willing to make the effort to sound a little silly to respect my request, so immediately, just by that little thing, I've made you give me some information about how much I can trust you in the online world - I can't have a handshake to make sure you're not carrying a knife, but that doesn't mean new avenues to similar ends aren't available to me.
(It also makes a little information available to you in a snappy way - If my pronouns are 'bun', etc, I probably like Rabbits, and unlike 'he' or 'she' there's little reason I'd want to ''pretend'' to like Rabbits, while I might pretend to be a man on rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk or a woman on acrobat just to fit in. So you know there's little risk in sending me some Rabbits if you'd like to strike up a conversation.)
>> No. 36864 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 1:34 pm
36864 spacer
>>36860
>Catgender, it says, is someone who "strongly identifies" with cats or other felines and those who "may experience delusions relating to being a cat or other feline".
I can't help but feel that this is just a shit bad-taste joke at the expense of trans people. And not even a funny bad-taste joke like Jimmy Carr's.
>> No. 36865 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 1:47 pm
36865 spacer
>>36863
>new pronouns can convey new information that the old ones don't.

Like what?

>if i don't know you it tells me that you either didn't read my description or read it and ignored it. Conversely if I don't know you and you use the right one, I can see that you've read the description and are willing to make the effort to sound a little silly to respect my request, so immediately, just by that little thing, I've made you give me some information about how much I can trust you in the online world

So it's just plain old narcissism?
>> No. 36866 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 1:51 pm
36866 spacer
I knew a trans person who used the prounouns gir/grrr/girself. Incidentally those are Tony the Tiger's pronounces.
>> No. 36867 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 1:54 pm
36867 spacer
Cancer thread.
>> No. 36868 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 1:55 pm
36868 spacer
>>36863
>new pronouns can convey new information that the old ones don't.

Like what?

>if i don't know you it tells me that you either didn't read my description or read it and ignored it. Conversely if I don't know you and you use the right one, I can see that you've read the description and are willing to make the effort to sound a little silly to respect my request, so immediately, just by that little thing, I've made you give me some information about how much I can trust you in the online world

So it's just plain old narcissism?
>> No. 36869 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 2:17 pm
36869 spacer
>>36864

While you may well be right about this case in particular, you know what? It's funny actually- Because to be honest, I can actually see myself respecting the furry/otherkin/neko/catgender lot (if they're out there) a great deal more than the sort of folks who go under the umbrella of "trans" nowadays.

It's like this >>36863 lad says:

>there's little reason I'd want to ''pretend'' to like Rabbits

That's actually a fair point.

Even amongst furries, the otherkin crowd have always been seen as fringe weirdos. If you're prepared to be one of the outcasts in a community solely consisting of outcasts, then I can only imagine you're telling the truth when you say feel like you're a wolf in a human body. I don't necessarily believe you are, but I believe you feel that way. Whereas I don't think you can say the same with quite as much certainty about the chancers calling themselves they/them to try and trick a few straights on Tinder.

Or even well known ones like that Philosophy Tube person. I honestly don't think that person transitioned because it was the truth about their gender, I believe they're indulging a narcissistic lifestyle crossdressing fetish. That person does not harbour a genuine earnest belief that they are a female.

That motherfucker is hiding some nasty shit, I just know it, I can feel it in my bones. Even nastier than whatever Tom Scott can't afford us finding out.
>> No. 36870 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 2:18 pm
36870 spacer
>>36867

Fuck off with that.
>> No. 36871 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 2:43 pm
36871 spacer
>>36869
I understand PhilosophyTube raped ContraPoints, and transitioned solely to get into Contra's pants again. My only source is 4chan's /lgbt/ board, but seems believable.
>> No. 36872 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 2:49 pm
36872 spacer
>>36865
>>36868
It's not fundamentally narcissistic, that's just a side effect of trying to spell out how people operate. It's similar to writing that an animal "evolved to" do this or that. Animals don't go around thinking about evolution and genetic fitness. They just do what comes naturally. It's people looking back on it who can see the results and go "ah, peacocks show off their tailfeathers to signal genetic fitness to their mates" - peacocks themselves don't go around thinking like that, that would be mad. We "evolved to" be incredibly social creatures, so it comes naturally that we pick up on all these little details without trying.

As for what neopronouns convey: Typically it's interests, personal characteristics, that you think neopronouns are fun, or just that you like the sound of that pronoun. That's not a massive amount of information, but it tells me more than "she/her" when I can infer just from the fact that I'm on acrobat that the person I'm talking to is probably a woman, and that in any case she's a woman separated by a computer screen. This part, people probably do put more thought into - just like they put thought into what clothes they pick out. You probably don't want to go by nyanself if you loathe and detest cats.
The thing I'd like to emphasise is that I think it's a function of the technology, rather than people being narcissists or idiots or general wronguns. The technology makes real-life sex/gender distinctions less important, then social consequences flow from that. On acrobat and Twitter it's neopronouns, on imageboards it's that everyone's a man. I might be wrong in the exact details of how it all works, but that's the idea I'm really trying to get at.
>> No. 36873 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 2:51 pm
36873 spacer
>>36869

>I honestly don't think that person transitioned because it was the truth about their gender, I believe they're indulging a narcissistic lifestyle crossdressing fetish. That person does not harbour a genuine earnest belief that they are a female.

I'm not trying to disprove you or anything, but what is it about them that makes you think this way?

My other question would be if it really matters? I don't think I care what reasons someone might have for presenting themselves the way they do. I suppose in this specific example it might change the impact or purpose of the work they put out there on youtube.
>> No. 36874 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 3:20 pm
36874 spacer
>>36864
All that line told me is that the catkins have seemingly given up and picked a new name.
>> No. 36875 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 3:35 pm
36875 spacer
>>36874
Part of the thing that gets me questioning it is that this whole thing is about identity but the "catgender" folks are quite explicit that they are not cats, they do not identify as being cats, and do not intend to fuck cats though that would be fine too, I guess, which makes me think that when you line up it up against the other gender expressions, one of these things does not belong.
>> No. 36876 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 4:19 pm
36876 spacer
>>36863
>>36872
This is an interesting take. Wanna share a further reading list or at least some weblinks?
>> No. 36877 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 5:31 pm
36877 spacer
>>36873

Like the otherlad going on about narcissism, I think there's something to that in the case of PhilosophyTube. If you notice, they copied everything more or less note for note off Contrapoints. They even had a bit of a "thing" for a while, I believe, although I'm not nosey enough to keep up that closely, which ended on some quite sketchy terms.

What I see there is the classic expression of narcissism. PhilosophyTube the bloke, before his transition, fancied the fuck out of Contrapoints. But to a narcissist, attraction comes in the form of seeing someone who reflects themselves, who they want to be. How they see themselves. Their reflection.

And so he quite literally tried to become her, and it's quite creepy if you think about it that way.

I mean as trans people go, PhilosophyTube the woman is one of the best passing transes I've ever seen, but then, she's also a trained actor. So of course she's good at it... She's playing a character. Obviously I can't speak to this individual's private thoughts or feelings but there seems to have been very little of the typical mental anguish that comes with confronting and coming to terms with something like this; she just decided to do it, and went to work on it. Intentionally.

I don't want this to sound too gossipy or mean or anything but that's just the impression I got, as someone who's been a casual kind of-sorta not quite fan but semi-regular viewer of their channel (and the other associated similar ones).
>> No. 36878 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 5:47 pm
36878 spacer
>>36877

>They even had a bit of a "thing" for a while

And we all want to watch them go at it. Even the transphobes. Especially the transphobes.
>> No. 36879 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 5:57 pm
36879 spacer
>>36878

I don't know about that, but there is one trans YouTuber who makes my willy very confused, I can judt never remember the name so I have to hope she comes up in the feed. She does videos about geography and stuff I think. Glasses, bit scrawny and nerdy. I think one of you lads mentioned her before.

Anyway I wouldn't say I'm a transphobe, but I bet certain types of tranno would; either way I would ravage her arse.
>> No. 36880 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 6:08 pm
36880 spacer
>>36864
It's just the attack helicopter joke rewritten
>> No. 36881 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 6:26 pm
36881 spacer
>>36879
Amusing. "I'm not a racist, but I bet there are a few darkies out there that would have a problem with me."
>> No. 36882 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 6:40 pm
36882 spacer
>>36881

Yeah. It's almost like trans people and black people aren't, in fact, some kind of hive mind, and they're capable of having individual opinions on what's ist or phobic and what isn't. What a ridiculous idea.
>> No. 36883 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 6:51 pm
36883 spacer
>>36881
You're white, aren't you? Someone not looking for reasons to be offended might have gotten the joke.
>> No. 36884 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 7:56 pm
36884 spacer
>>36883
I, for two, didn't notice there was a joke.
>> No. 36885 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 8:18 pm
36885 spacer
>>36883

What joke?
>> No. 36886 Anonymous
8th February 2022
Tuesday 9:12 pm
36886 spacer
>>36877
>And so he quite literally tried to become her,
That's a hell of a conclusion to jump to.
>> No. 36887 Anonymous
9th February 2022
Wednesday 11:53 am
36887 spacer
>>36886
They have a bad case of autogynephilia. They are attracted to women so much they wish to be the woman so they can have lesbian sex. Many such cases.
>> No. 36888 Anonymous
9th February 2022
Wednesday 12:01 pm
36888 spacer
>>36886

Not if you've watched both of their content, to be honest. The overlap does get a bit eerie now that I've considered it in that light.
>> No. 36889 Anonymous
9th February 2022
Wednesday 12:05 pm
36889 spacer
>>36888
PT also fancied Hbomb but you never saw him turning himself into a skinny bald dweeb. Stop attempting to psychoanalyse people you've only ever seen perform.
>> No. 36890 Anonymous
9th February 2022
Wednesday 4:46 pm
36890 spacer
>>36889

>Stop attempting to psychoanalyse people you've only ever seen perform.

Ah, the white knight has arrived. Probably trying to save his beloved mother from the terrors of the world.
>> No. 36891 Anonymous
9th February 2022
Wednesday 4:54 pm
36891 spacer
>>36890

Nobody's going to take you seriously while you're using memes from 2007 as an argument.
>> No. 36892 Anonymous
9th February 2022
Wednesday 11:57 pm
36892 spacer
>>36890
Grow up, lad.
>> No. 36893 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 12:24 am
36893 spacer
>>36889

Well obviously, who wouldn't prefer to transform themselves into an attractive lady?

What kind of argument even is that you div?
>> No. 36894 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 3:58 am
36894 spacer
>>36893
Mate...
>> No. 36895 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 8:35 am
36895 spacer
>>36891
>>36892
>>36894

Stop replying to my posts.
>> No. 36896 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 11:07 am
36896 spacer
>>36894
>>36892
This dearth of discourse is the reason there are three trans threads bumping about. Well done you.
>> No. 36897 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 11:12 am
36897 spacer
>>36896

No it isn't.
>> No. 36898 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 11:13 am
36898 spacer
>>36896
Nah, people just like to shoehorn shit in. It's the same reason the crusties will turn half the threads into a cunt-off about climate change because they'd rather shit up the entire site rather than stay contained within the Greta thread.
>> No. 36899 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 11:36 am
36899 spacer
>>36898
>Crusties
God, how old are you, mate? Going to start whinging about hippies next, yeah? Or the horseless carriage? I can't believe what Henry VIII's done to the coinage, that blasted knave.
>> No. 36900 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 11:38 am
36900 spacer
>>36898

You don't hear us complaining about all the obvious fresh off the boat brit/pol/ immigrants who've been doing their best to turn every thread into an autistic retarded libertarian circlejerk for the last twelve months.

Comin over here, takin are memes, and they don't even learn the culture.
>> No. 36901 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 11:53 am
36901 spacer

OKETZBQFZVKVZGKNQ4II4RY3RM.jpg
369013690136901
>>36899
Okay, soap-dodging road protestors. Driving round in their converted ice cream vans; pierced belly buttons, pierced eyebrows, pierced tongues... I bet they'd have their arseholes pierced, if they could get their cheeks into the machine. If I had my way, I'd shepherd them all into one of their tunnels knock out all the pit props and see how they like being close to the earth then.
>> No. 36902 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 12:16 pm
36902 spacer
>>36901
Yeah, they're not proper doers like you, who's spending Thursday afternoon arguing the toss about trans women and has been doing so for almost for a timespan roughly equal to the amount that of which the USA was at war with Nazi Germany.
>> No. 36903 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 12:19 pm
36903 spacer
>>36902

From the number of nonsensical or contradictory things about the post I assumed he was trolling.
>> No. 36904 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 12:28 pm
36904 spacer
>>36901

>I bet they'd have their arseholes pierced

Ah, you poor sheltered posh boy.
>> No. 36905 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 12:29 pm
36905 spacer

87705.jpg
369053690536905
>>36902>>36903>>36904
I'm disappointed none of you managed to pick up on the reference.
>> No. 36906 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 12:36 pm
36906 spacer
>>36905
I did, it just seems like you also happen to earnestly agree with the sentiment.
>> No. 36907 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 12:40 pm
36907 spacer
>>36906
If the boot fits.

I don't really care what you eco-warriors do, I'd rather you just didn't shoehorn it into every other thread to have the same old tedious debate yet again.
>> No. 36908 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 12:41 pm
36908 spacer
>>36907
>same old tedious debate yet again
You didn't say that in this thread of all threads, you didn't.
>> No. 36909 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 12:50 pm
36909 spacer
>>36907

We only talk about where it's relevant. It just so happens that it's always relevant in every thread, because ultimately, we're all going to die from it.

Unless it kicks off over Ukraine, then fair enough, it's all been a bit redundant.
>> No. 36910 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 12:50 pm
36910 spacer
>>36908
At least the repetitive trans discussions are largely contained within this thread.
>> No. 36911 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 1:11 pm
36911 spacer
>>36907

You shoehorned it into this thread.
>> No. 36912 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 1:18 pm
36912 spacer
>>36911
I'm not shoehorning in a discussion on climate change. Rather, it's a perfect example that people on this site love to go round in the same circles over and over again.
>> No. 36913 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 1:20 pm
36913 spacer
>>36912
Any example of that is redundant, you may as well post examples of the site's colour scheme. What's happening is you're saying you get to bring topics up when you think they're relevant and dictate that other people shouldn't do the same.
>> No. 36914 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 1:27 pm
36914 spacer
>>36913
You're right. The cunt-off over that lad's fireplace has enriched all of our lives.
>> No. 36915 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 1:29 pm
36915 spacer
>>36914
The next thread down from this one is entirely pictures of Carol Vorderman.
>> No. 36916 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 3:31 pm
36916 spacer
>>36915
DO NOT BESMIRCH THE GOOD NAME OF VORDERMAN.

IF THERE WAS ANY JUSTICE SHE WOULD BE ON ONE OF THE .GS IDENTS INSTEAD OF FUCKING DONNY TOURETTE.
>> No. 36917 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 5:15 pm
36917 spacer
>>36915
And long may it be.
>> No. 36918 Anonymous
10th February 2022
Thursday 5:49 pm
36918 spacer
>>36900
I shall gentrify this whole site and there is nothing you illiterate spivs can do about it.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 38001 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 5:13 pm
38001 spacer

Demonstranten-fur-Trans-Rechte-belagern-Treffen-fe.jpg
380013800138001
Some women have penises.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/protect-trans-lives-hundreds-march-23495508
>> No. 38002 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 5:34 pm
38002 spacer
>>38001
That's a commonly believed myth.
>> No. 38003 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 5:35 pm
38003 spacer
>>38001
Each?
>> No. 38004 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 6:13 pm
38004 spacer
>>38001
If we accept trans women as women, then, logically, some women will have penises. Same with trans men and vag.

Is this baffling to you? Is it a difficult concept? Because it's kind of fundamental to trans inclusion.
>> No. 38005 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 7:36 pm
38005 spacer
>>38004

I'm perfectly willing to believe transwomen are women, but I do think they should at least commit to the idea.

If we have to keep differentiating between transwomen and ciswomen it kind of defeats the object, to my mind. It's like they want us to implicitly acknowledge that they're not really the same thing, but you're just supposed to doublethink it away.

If we don't want to quite be that rigid about it then I think we're really just going to have to accept trans as a sort of halfway house, third gender sort of thing. Male, female, and other.
>> No. 38006 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 7:40 pm
38006 spacer
>>38005

Some men have a hook for a hand, is it doublethink to implicitly acknowledge that those pirates are men yet also somehow, still pirates? Or that some men have hooks but aren't pirates and some pirates have hooks and some don't?
>> No. 38007 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 7:51 pm
38007 spacer
>>38005
If I got a sex change, they wouldn't cut my cock off right away. I would ask everyone to treat me as a woman, and in that respect, I would be a "woman". I would dress as a woman, give myself a woman's name, start the hormone treatments, and be a "woman". Biological women would also be "women", because they are women.

Some "women" have penises. But the quotation marks are considered offensive, and that's why you don't write them on the sign. I think that if we all viewed things this way, it would be a whole lot easier to understand it when people talk about (")women(") having penises.
>> No. 38008 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:05 pm
38008 spacer
>>38005
>I do think they should at least commit to the idea

Before we consider anything else, understand that there's a huge waiting list/expense for gender reassignment surgery, so many of those who want it can't get it. It doesn't seem fair to gatekeep identities by who has the money or time or luck to be able to medically transition.

>transwomen and ciswomen

Why are you writing like this? Do you omit the space from blackwomen and whitewomen? Gaywomen and straightwomen? It's weird.
>> No. 38009 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:09 pm
38009 spacer
>>38008
I'm willing to assume he's writing it because it looks more correct. "Trans" as an abbreviation for "tr*nsg*nder" is just lazy. Writing it as two words is like writing bla women and wh women. However, much like when something crosses the Atlantic Ocean, it is transatlantic, someone who crosses into being female could be transfemale, or a transwoman as he wrote.
>> No. 38010 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:20 pm
38010 spacer
>>38004
Men have penises, women don't. This has been the way for thousands of years and no-one had a problem with it until the modern west. If you're intersex or another fraction of a minority, congratulations, you're different, whatever you are has an asterisk beside it, just like everyone else in the world in one way or another. They can deal with it like the rest of us - by learning to self validate.

Men can't give birth. If you find it dysphoric to be referred to as a man while you're pregnant with a child in your womb which is a result of your own fertilised eggs - you're a woman. You might have a beard and call yourself 'Greg' but you're still a woman. If you existed in a vacuum, you'd be the definition of a woman and women would have wombs and be able to give birth. But they don't exist in a vacuum and 99.9% of women have dozens of characteristics in common while 99.9% of men lack those characteristics, and vice versa.

Just while we're here, 'Chestfeeding' is a pretty damning exhibit of the defeminisation of language and an attempt to calcify offence. Breast cancer didn't get rebranded 'chest cancer' once people figured out men can get it too, men just had to deal with the fact that part of their anatomy was called their 'breast'. And they clearly did, because men are now much more comfortable in general with discussing health issues and emotions than they were before, and we've all seen Fight Club, so acknowledging 'breast cancer' as just another type of cancer is almost a trivial issue. But the loud trans advocates aren't decrying this terminology, and some are supporting these changes with arguments like 'language changes over time', well yes it does, and if it happens organically then that's great. Present it as a new normal, that's good too. But attempting to force it on people through shaming and accusations of bigotry is frustrating for many people who would easily be vocally on side if the positions were less extreme, and the mentality less 'you're fully with us or you're evil'.

>>38007
>Some "women" have penises.
But having a penis is incompatible with being a woman. You might feel more comfortable with identifying as one, but that doesn't mean you can expect to be perceived as one, or expect to be treated as one by anyone but those who are close to you and legitimately care about your feelings.
>> No. 38011 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:30 pm
38011 spacer
>>38008
>Why are you writing like this? Do you omit the space from blackwomen and whitewomen? Gaywomen and straightwomen? It's weird.

No, you're weird. It's cisapline and transalpine Gaul, not cis alpine and trans alpine Gaul. You're just making up arbitrary requirements so you can spout off, and alienating people in the process with absolutely no benefit. It's like person-first language - no it's not fundamentally inclusive, neither is the alternative fundamentally exclusive, so can you just give people the benefit of the doubt and work on understanding them instead of expecting millions of people to communicate exactly how you'd prefer?

>It doesn't seem fair to gatekeep identities by who has the money or time or luck to be able to medically transition.
It doesn't seem fair that people die from preventable illness, but it's down to money and time and luck. So this is something that we solve with better education and allocation of resources to socialized medical care, not by kicking off at people who don't acknowledge that your sharp, conical tits are the real deal.

>>38009
>"Trans" as an abbreviation for "tr*nsg*nder" is just lazy.
Is that necessarily an issue? Abbreviations are lazy, but that's not inherently disrespectful. That surely has to be inferred?
>> No. 38012 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:33 pm
38012 spacer
>>38010
She's not coming back, Graham.
>> No. 38013 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:35 pm
38013 spacer
>>38008

>It doesn't seem fair to gatekeep identities

This is an interesting point and something I think is key to the whole thing. This might sound like waffle or it might not, but do give me the benefit of good faith here.

The thing about identities is that traditionally, you don't choose them yourself. I think this is the sticking point fora lot of people- An identity is something you just be, and then people will recognise that. You don't need to declare yourself as that thing, in fact in a lot of cases that undoes the whole thing. You don't need someone to tell you they're a metalhead, you can tell from the hair, the attire, the fact they're always saying things like "I only like their first three albums, after that they sold out."

People talk about gatekeeping a lot nowadays, but if all you have is a half dozen Metallica MP3s and you most often dress in trackies and footy shirts, nobody is going to really recognise that you're a metalhead. This isn't a perfect analogy obviously, and it doesn't track 100% with trans stuff- But I think it's quite relevant to a lot of the types of bisexual/non-binary girls I have met, where if they didn't tell you about it (which they will), you wouldn't otherwise have known.

The availability of reassignment surgery is a massive practical consideration, you are correct about that. But if it wasn't, just hypothetically speaking, would it still be gatekeeping to say a woman who wants to keep her cock is a bit of a poser?
>> No. 38014 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:41 pm
38014 spacer
>>38012
Mine never left, even after scrolling the fatty thread with me. She's the one who raised the defemenisation point after we watched that video. She's vocally supportive of inclusivity movements but feels like her femininity is being eroded, especially as the inverse doesn't as often apply to male terminology.
>> No. 38015 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:43 pm
38015 spacer
>>38010

>Just while we're here, 'Chestfeeding' is a pretty damning exhibit of the defeminisation of language

That's pretty funny actually.

How does it make you feel that I support trans rights pretty much purely because I dislike women getting all the special treatment, and shit like this is giving them a taste of their own medicine for the past few decades of browbeating us.

I don't give a shit who's got what in their knickers but I really hate fisherpersons (radical, third wave, post- and vanilla, whatever, all the same to me) and I love how much trannos piss them off.
>> No. 38016 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:49 pm
38016 spacer
>>38015
>I really hate fisherpersons
Yeah, I hate movements dedicated towards social equity too.
>> No. 38017 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:51 pm
38017 spacer
>>38016

That's probably because you wouldn't recognise one if it cut your balls off and made you wear a dress.
>> No. 38018 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 8:52 pm
38018 spacer
>>38015
>How does it make you feel that I support trans rights pretty much purely because I dislike women getting all the special treatment, and shit like this is giving them a taste of their own medicine for the past few decades of browbeating us.

It makes you look miserable mate.
>> No. 38019 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 9:03 pm
38019 spacer
>>38018

Not as miserable as the lad who cares about words like "chestfeeding" because his girlfriend moans at him about it.
>> No. 38020 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 9:33 pm
38020 spacer
>>38010

>Men have penises, women don't. This has been the way for thousands of years and no-one had a problem with it until the modern west.

Buddhists had a debate about what to do with evangelist christian korean youtuber people who wanted to become monks or nuns. That debate started in the 4th century BC. Canonical Buddhist texts consistently refer to four genders and we're not entirely sure what the fourth one is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_sexual_orientation#Ubhatovyanja%C3%B1akas
>> No. 38021 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 9:48 pm
38021 spacer
>>38020

>Canonical Buddhist texts consistently refer to four genders and we're not entirely sure what the fourth one is.

There's a lot of this in various historical societies, but sadly that kind of stuff is never really as supportive of modern ideas about gender roles and identities as we'd like it to be.

Looking closer, most of the time it turns out that their gender norms were in fact much more strict than ours, to the point where if you were a skinny wimpy lad or a bit of a munter of a lass, you didn't qualify for your gender and got lumped in a different category.
>> No. 38022 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 10:35 pm
38022 spacer
>>38019
>Not as miserable as the lad who cares about words like "chestfeeding" because his girlfriend moans at him about it.
He hates fisherpersons while supporting fisherpersons who invented a term for other fisherpersons they don't like and still go by the label 'fisherperson'. The label 'evangelist christian korean youtuber' is literally predicated on broader 'feminism' being the ideology of the trans movement, so you/zhi/it is simply fucking retarded.
>> No. 38023 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 10:44 pm
38023 spacer
>>38021

In a similar vein we don't consider man/boy, woman/girl to be separate identities. They're important distinctions looking at you paedolad and it does carry a lot of different connotations if you call someone a boy rather than a man, for example, but they're not considered different genders.

We also used to have a lot more eunuchs, which were sort of a category of their own. I wonder if a lot of modern trans people would have been more comfortable as a eunuch in the old days. It's not polite to say it this way because it goes against the grain but I do feel like a lot of trans people are actually more trying to escape the expectations of their current gender, rather than directly desiring those of the other.
>> No. 38024 Anonymous
26th March 2022
Saturday 11:43 pm
38024 spacer
>>38010
>If you existed in a vacuum, you'd be the definition of a woman

I've never understood this essentialist position. You know gender is a human social construct? It's not a cosmic force of the universe. We've defined what men and women are ourselves. We've invented the words and the concepts because we wanted to classify observable primary and secondary sexual characteristics, and decided they neatly fell into binary categories. Now we've advanced a bit more and found things can be somewhat less neat and more fluid than that which demands a rethink. Or you can just go "God made Adam and Eve" instead.

As for chestfeeding, you make a good point that we don't call breast cancer in men anything different. I wouldn't call this bigotry because your reasoning is not rooted in bigotry. But you couch it in rhetoric that is ("loud trans activists" etc.) so maybe that's why you're receiving such backlash. Basically you sound like "we can't call it a blackboard anymore because it'll upset nignogs".
>> No. 38025 Anonymous
27th March 2022
Sunday 12:32 am
38025 spacer
>>38024

>I've never understood this essentialist position. You know gender is a human social construct? It's not a cosmic force of the universe.

That being the case, why is it so important for feminine penis havers to be identifide as bona-fide Women? The essentialism cuts both ways.

Just being pedantic here mostly, I don't have any problem with it.
>> No. 38026 Anonymous
27th March 2022
Sunday 2:00 am
38026 spacer
>>38024
>I've never understood this essentialist position. You know gender is a human social construct? It's not a cosmic force of the universe.
That's because it's not an essentialist position, you're just painting it like that to conjure some rhetorical ammo. I know that if I consider my gender, and that my gender is derived from my biological sex, I realise the two are inextricably linked and that's about it, because my gender dictates absolutely nothing about my personality and is therefore not much use other than as a less formal version of my sex.

>loud trans activists
Oh, come off it. There exist on this earth people who are a) loud, b) trans, c) activists. Those are the people to whom I'm referring. It's not some dogwhistle or mixing , it's quite literally what it says on the tin. Those people, even if they are a vocal minority, are bloody annoying, and it doesn't bode well that you seem unable to comprehend that such people exist, and are annoying.

>that's why you're receiving such backlash.
You mean the lad on here who replied in one line ad homs and then stops posting for a few days? He doesn't count.

>Basically you sound like "we can't call it a blackboard anymore because it'll upset nignogs".
No, I sound like "men can't give birth" because I've not been lobotomized.

I'm obviously a classlad because I know all this enmity would be significantly reduced if everyone had...what was it...more money, and more time? To get the treatment they needed? That comes from dismantling the class structure, consuming the rich with a glass of chianti and such, and benefits everyone.

It doesn't come from people pretending their pain is worse than everyone else's and demanding external validation. Those people can fuck off if they're going to turn away useful allies because they don't use the right terminology to refer to ladyboys.
>> No. 38027 Anonymous
27th March 2022
Sunday 2:17 am
38027 spacer
>>38025
That's not what "essentialism" means.
>> No. 38031 Anonymous
27th March 2022
Sunday 10:57 am
38031 spacer
>>38027

Actually it is. Consider someone being transracial instead of evangelist christian korean youtuber. The only construct that can possibly lean on is the essentialism of traits like, I don't know, enjoying rap music or a predilection for fried chicken. You have a position that on one hand, says gender is a social construct that doesn't matter, but then argues in favour of a gender identity supported entirely by the existing framework of gendered personality expectations. It's an essentialism of what is considered feminine.
>> No. 38033 Anonymous
27th March 2022
Sunday 12:37 pm
38033 spacer
Have you ever had a nonbinary person tell you that gender is a spectrum? If so, have you ever replied that if it's a spectrum, then we're all on it, and they're not special at all? They do get very upset, or at least they did once when I said that.
>> No. 38034 Anonymous
27th March 2022
Sunday 1:07 pm
38034 spacer
If there was a big, slightly-inhabited-but-not-too-much island way off in the sea somewhere where all the trans people could sail away to and set up their own progressive society, do you think they would?
>> No. 38035 Anonymous
27th March 2022
Sunday 1:20 pm
38035 spacer
>>38034
I doubt it. I wouldn't move thousands of miles to a remote island full of chronic masturbators.
>> No. 38039 Anonymous
27th March 2022
Sunday 8:48 pm
38039 spacer
>>38031
I'm not sure that really is essentialism. It's not that wearing dresses is essential to being a woman, but that wearing dresses is essential to being seen as a woman. (My recollection is that such essentialism is even enforced by the current law on gender reassignment - you have to "live as a woman" for a bit, and if you do that without playing into stereotypes, they're going to go "hang on, you just kept living like normal!")
I think of it this way: Imagine I want to be Canadian. Legally, to be Canadian all I need is get a job in Canada, live there a bit, and then apply for Canadian citizenship, and maybe renounce my British citizenship. Probably much easier than getting a gender recognition certificate here. But if I really, really, want people to see me as Canadian and not as a British guy with Canadian citizenship, it would help to pick up a Canadian accent and not talk about all the shit I did in sixth form in England, even though the accent isn't really an essential part of being a Canadian. There are surely Canadians out there who were born in Canada to Canadian parents, grew up in Britain, and then moved back to Canada but kept dual British-Canadian citizenship, and they're indisputably Canadian even though they've got the same accent and more legal right to live in Britain than I do. Because by default I'm not seen as Canadian I wind up having to lean into symbols of Canadian-ness more than a Canadian-by-default (While at the same time not acting like a comical stereotype.), even after I am for all legal and official purposes Canadian.

So neither the law, nor the accent, nor where you grew up, nor various other symbols in and of themselves wind up deciding how people instinctively identify your nationality - an arbitrary social and legal construct. But when people see you in a way that doesn't align with how you see yourself, you'll have to start playing into these things if you want to change their minds.
Canada is an arbitrary choice, I don't really know how picky they are.
>> No. 38040 Anonymous
27th March 2022
Sunday 9:04 pm
38040 spacer
>>38031
>Actually it is
No, it isn't. What you're describing is the opposite of essentialism.
>> No. 38041 Anonymous
27th March 2022
Sunday 11:01 pm
38041 spacer
>>38033
And then did you say 'lol trolled'?
>> No. 38042 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 12:06 am
38042 spacer
>>38040

I am beginning to suspect you have no idea what that means at all.
>> No. 38043 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 12:50 am
38043 spacer
>>38042

Feel free to explain to the rest of the class what you think it means.
>> No. 38044 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 1:35 am
38044 spacer

Opera Snapshot_2022-03-28_013355_duckduckgo.com.png
380443804438044
I suspect maybe neither of you knows what it means. You might want to find a new buzzword and use that instead.
>> No. 38045 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 1:41 am
38045 spacer
>>38044

I'm not convinced anyone who uses essentialism to talk about gender has any understanding of the concept they're arguing about.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_essentialism
>> No. 38046 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 10:35 am
38046 spacer
>>38042
>>38043
>>38044
>>38045

Words have different meanings in different contexts, and essentialist/essentialism is one that has come to have a specific meaning in political philosophy. Broadly it refers to a moral economy that evaluates what people are rather than what they do.

The reason you're getting nowhere cunt-offing with each other is that you can be essentialist on both sides of the evangelist christian korean youtuber debate. It's not a one side is, other side isn't thing here. You might perhaps want to think of it as biologically essentialist versus culturally essentialist, instead.
>> No. 38047 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 12:51 pm
38047 spacer
>>38046
>You might perhaps want to think of it as biologically essentialist versus culturally essentialist, instead.
Or, in other words, what people are versus what they do.
>> No. 38049 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 2:03 pm
38049 spacer
>>38047

Yes, which exactly why it's still essentialist when you say a woman is [insert stereotypically feminine personality traits here], just the same as saying a woman is having a vagina/womb/XX chromosomes.

This is why the debate goes in circles, because you can't deconstruct gender to something you can simply choose to identify as, without having to then go on to reinforce the stereotypical gender traits of what that gender is supposed to be. It's absolutely fine if you want to say there's nothing stopping a woman having a beard, being built like a brick shithouse, and working on a construction site, while still being called a woman; but at that point what's even the point of drawing a line between the two?

Thus it starts to look daft having a teary over whether people will acknowledge you are a woman or not, because whether you are a man or a woman is in itself meaningless at that point. So why does it matter?

It only matters if you wish to conform to the traditional gendered expectations; you require acknowledgement that meeting those standards makes you that gender, because that's what that gender is. Essentially.
>> No. 38051 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 3:39 pm
38051 spacer
>>38049
>So why does it matter
I feel unusually strongly that it doesn't have to matter. That it's entirely normal to want to be seen as an arbitrary thing, without holding any particular attachment to the social signifiers of that thing. Perhaps sticking on justifications later (i.e. feeling you're a woman, then half-inventing an enjoyment of stereotypically feminine activities to convince others of what you already feel, rather than feeling you're a woman because you enjoy stereotypically feminine activities.), but always the signifier coming first. That if you flipped all gender norms overnight, there'd be Transwomen out there who'd swap to the presently-male, now-female norms because it really is about being seen as "a woman", even if that now means behaving like a man and being a man now means behaving like a woman. That for some the label comes first, then the conformity to expectations, and not vice versa.

It's not rooted in any particular feeling towards evangelist christian korean youtuberism either - the most natural way to explain this sentiment felt like tying it into the Canadian example above, but would've required more contrived examples to illustrate.
>> No. 38052 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 9:32 pm
38052 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wu0pAp0Z9vo
>> No. 38053 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 9:43 pm
38053 spacer
>>38052

Jesus that was painful.
>> No. 38054 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 10:09 pm
38054 spacer
>>38052
I think he's saying that both sides should put aside the rhetoric and get round the negotiating table.
>> No. 38055 Anonymous
28th March 2022
Monday 10:54 pm
38055 spacer
>>38052

I don't understand why politicians always squirm around under this kind of question and try to give a neutral safe answer that pleases nobody, when it only makes them look like bigger dickheads.

Surely it makes more sense to just pick a side, score the points with them for saying what they like to hear, and just take the loss on the other ones? At least that way you're appealing to somebody, even if it pisses some other people off. This way nobody on either side likes you.

Or even just say "piss off, you know how controversial that subject is, I'm not going within ten feet of it, ask me something else." pretty sure that would throw a lot of interviewers off their game too, just pull a reverse paxo and straight up tell them "look i'm not daft, you're only asking me that to make me look like a dickhead, now ask me something that doesn't put me in an impossible double bind, you tit."
>> No. 38058 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 3:06 am
38058 spacer
>>38055

I've always liked this Jim Callaghan interview where he openly refuses to answer the questions put to him. He's being just as evasive, but somehow winds up feeling more open and agreeable for being straightforwardly closed off, for nearly laughing at Robin Day's attempt to put the same question over-and-over in a sort of inverse mirror image to that notorious Michael Howard interview.
>> No. 38059 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 3:47 am
38059 spacer
>>38058
I like that it's the top result for "notorious Michael Howard interview".

But did you threaten to overrule him?
>> No. 38060 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 5:17 am
38060 spacer
>>38055
Until Starmer can give a succinct and straightforward answer to "can a woman have a penis?" it's going to keep following him around like Tim Farron being asked about Christianity/gay marriage.
>> No. 38067 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 1:33 pm
38067 spacer
Can I identify as vegan if I still eat meat?

Honest question.
>> No. 38068 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 1:40 pm
38068 spacer
Men don't have cervices. A man who has a cervix is still a man, like a keyboard with an extra key is still a keyboard, but men don't have cervices.

I never hear anything from amputees or people born with fewer limbs that normal (normal, yes) that their existence is being denied because people say a human has two arms and two legs. So why is it different for evangelist christian korean youtubers?

This is an opportunity for our resident trans advocates to discuss just this point, if they'd like to discuss.
>> No. 38071 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 1:58 pm
38071 spacer
>>38067

If you like.
>> No. 38072 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 2:01 pm
38072 spacer
>>38068

It's not different, you don't hear them because you're not paying attention as you're not actually interested in them and are just using them to try and make a point.
>> No. 38073 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 2:06 pm
38073 spacer
>>38072
Can you continue the first part of your post and elaborate there? Instead of playing into their game by carrying on the rest of your post with the worryingly on-brand for the people I imagine that poster is baiting.
>> No. 38074 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 2:08 pm
38074 spacer
>>38073

Disabled people complain about disability erasure all the time. What more is there to elaborate on? His premise is false.
>> No. 38075 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 2:30 pm
38075 spacer
>>38074
Can you provide some credible evidence that organised bodies of disabled people are advocating against normalisation of depictions/references to people including them having two arms/two legs etc?
>> No. 38076 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 2:31 pm
38076 spacer
>>38075

Yeah probably.
>> No. 38077 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 2:38 pm
38077 spacer
>>38074
He wasn't referring to disability erasure. Saying that normal people have two legs is disability erasure how?

>>38076
Twitter's over there m8
>> No. 38078 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 2:56 pm
38078 spacer
Where did you get the idea that the right way to respond to bait is to spend time and effort refuting it? Waste your time on it, that'll show him! Mugs.
>> No. 38079 Anonymous
29th March 2022
Tuesday 3:08 pm
38079 spacer
>>38078
Welcome to Britfa.gs.
>> No. 38080 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 1:07 pm
38080 spacer

LP1-930x620.jpg
380803808038080
>Jamie Wallis MP comes out as trans and speaks of rape ordeal

>Politicians have praised a Welsh MP for his bravery after he tweeted he has gender dysphoria and has been a victim of rape and blackmail. Jamie Wallis, who was elected in 2019, is the first MP to come out as trans. The Conservative MP for Bridgend said a man sent pictures to his family and demanded £50,000 in 2020. He said he was raped in a separate incident.

>Mr Wallis wrote that after he was raped "things have taken a tumble. I am not ok." The MP confirmed that he fled the scene of a car crash two months after he was raped. Prime Minister Boris Johnson told MPs "the House stands with you and will give you the support you need to live freely as yourself".

>Earlier, Tory MP Andrea Leadsom confirmed that Mr Johnson made a "light-hearted joke" on Tuesday night about Sir Keir Starmer's decision not to answer whether a woman can have a penis in a debate on trans rights. It was reported that Mr Johnson began a dinner among Tory MPs by saying: "Good evening ladies and gentleman - or as Keir Starmer would put it, people who are assigned female or male at birth." SNP MP John Nicholson told BBC Politics Live the joke was "appallingly bad taste".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-60925885

First female MP, the only two female PMs, legalising gay marriage and now a trans-MP. Is there anything the Tories won't do for the woke vote?
>> No. 38081 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 3:20 pm
38081 spacer
>>38080
There's that nonbinary one who's Welsh and might be Plaid Cymru.
>> No. 38082 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 3:22 pm
38082 spacer
>>38080
I think it's good that a Tory had come out as trans. A lot of trans supporters put them on pedestals and believing they can do no wrong rather than viewing them as ordinary people. Caitlyn Jenner has done a lot for the trans-rights movement simply by being living proof that a gender-bender can be a cunt, just like the rest of us.
>> No. 38083 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 5:28 pm
38083 spacer
Is it not blatantly obvious to anyone else that he's only saying it to get away with a hit and run car accident?

(And he has asked specifically to still be referred to as he/him, before some smart arse tries to pick up on that)
>> No. 38084 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 5:35 pm
38084 spacer
>>38083
Barely anyone knew about the hit and run before this. The announcement today has shone much more light on it.
>> No. 38085 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 5:44 pm
38085 spacer
>>38083
That doesn't make sense. That'd be like trying to get rid of a wine stain with a house fire.
>> No. 38086 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 5:51 pm
38086 spacer
>>38080>>38082
Yeah the Tories being the party of choice for repressed and closeted homosexuals isn't a new or surprising thing, the Tory whips absolutely love their little black books full of kompromat on all their MPs, at least until they come out and the party has to try and find a convenient excuse to get rid of them.
Adding closeted trans people to that list is no different.
>> No. 38087 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 7:14 pm
38087 spacer
>>38083

I'm pretty sure he's just a transvestite who has been backed into a corner. Better to announce that you "want to be evangelist christian korean youtuber" than have your weird sex stuff splashed over the tabloids.
>> No. 38088 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 7:18 pm
38088 spacer

CrgElXXWEAAFdD4.jpg
380883808838088
>>38087
>have your weird sex stuff splashed over the tabloids.

It feels like we're overdue something.
>> No. 38089 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 7:46 pm
38089 spacer
It was reported that Mr Johnson began a dinner among Tory MPs by saying: "Good evening ladies and gentleman - or as Keir Starmer would put it, people who are assigned female or male at birth."
>> No. 38091 Anonymous
30th March 2022
Wednesday 11:27 pm
38091 spacer
>>38089
I find myself hoping that the current story will put us in the perverse situation where the Conservatives get to stay quiet on trans issues, satisfying greedy social liberals by going "look, we literally have a trans* MP", while satisfying conservative anti-woke types by simply not being asked about it leaving those voters to assume they can't be worse than Labour, meanwhile Starmer's hit by the opposite as he keeps trying to dodge the question, meaning it keeps being asked, hopefully saying something right out of the thick of it in a moment of panic and getting himself on the wrong side of everybody.

Which I say more as a confession than as a boast. I am aware that I have gone slightly mad, abandoning the politics of the hope for the politics of hope things go wrong so we can point and laugh.
>> No. 38093 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 8:49 am
38093 spacer
Despite myself I'm greatly enjoying the confusion in left wing communities about how a trans person could possibly be a Tory. It's utterly damning of their mindsets that they have trouble seeing that political interests are slightly deeper than "trans/anti trans". It is a bit sad considering these people could do so much good if they weren't thoroughly embittered and willing to turn down allies over semantics.

Wes Streeting has gone from that pleasant gay lad I voted for one time who I never really heard much about, to an evil and horrible person who is basically a Tory and will presumably be getting death threats for stating that women have vaginas and men have penises.

That said, Rayner's response was bordering on fantastic, though the question in her case was phrased like a softball compared to Keir's.

Well, time to watch the left tear itself apart again while partygate fades from memory and the Tories position themselves to find a successor.
>> No. 38094 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 9:36 am
38094 spacer
>>38093

>It's utterly damning of their mindsets that they have trouble seeing that political interests are slightly deeper than "trans/anti trans"

You're missing out the part where the current government is demonstrably anti trans.
>> No. 38095 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 9:36 am
38095 spacer

ngncx8euaof51.png
380953809538095
>>38093
>I'm greatly enjoying the confusion in left wing communities about how a trans person could possibly be a Tory. It's utterly damning of their mindsets that they have trouble seeing that political interests are slightly deeper than "trans/anti trans". It is a bit sad considering these people could do so much good if they weren't thoroughly embittered and willing to turn down allies over semantics.

I've seen people suggesting they expect better from Wallis now that he's announced he "wants to be" trans, even though he's the exact same person he was a couple of days ago before all of this.

I suppose it's nothing new, I've known people get very mad at the thought that immigrants won't automatically vote Labour. They have no idea how bigoted they're being because they think they're well intentioned.
>> No. 38096 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 10:06 am
38096 spacer
>>38093
>Wes Streeting has gone from that pleasant gay lad I voted for one time who I never really heard much about, to an evil and horrible person who is basically a Tory and will presumably be getting death threats for stating that women have vaginas and men have penises.
I'm not sure which left wing communities you're hanging out in. Most of the ones I'm familiar with have never had a good word for him, but also never mentioned him in terms of trans-issues. My experience has been seeing him treated as basically a Tory for the same reasons that Blair is treated as basically a Tory - for being on the right (if you prefer: centre) of the Labour party. I've seen far more people attack him for writing articles in The Sun, for being a NUS-to-MP pipeline type who backs tuition fees, for working at PwC, or for wanting to use private firms to cut NHS waiting lists than for anything about trans issues. (If he really wanted to confuse people, he could always suggest using private firms to get down the gender identity clinic waiting lists I suppose.)
>> No. 38097 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 10:51 am
38097 spacer
>>38096

>I'm not sure which left wing communities you're hanging out in.

Spoiler: none.

That said I don't doubt there are some quite bum-flustered woke liberal types out there who call themselves lefties, and are quite annoyed about a trans Tory MP.

They probably feed their dogs vegan food though, so nobody has to care what they think.
>> No. 38098 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 12:09 pm
38098 spacer
>>38094
Are there any good ones you can suggest which discuss left wing policy and are more a bit like Benn vs Blair discussions rather than contrarian faggotry like >>38097 and labour/labourUK subrudgwicksteamshow.co.uks for active discussion on current events? Green and Pleasant is a bit off the deep end, and a couple of years ago /r/baduk's leftist contingent died out and it stopped being an interestingly polarized place.

Admittedly I've never paid attention to Wes before, I just tend to vote labour or another left wing party. What's the word on him?

>>38095
>I've known people get very mad at the thought that immigrants won't automatically vote Labour.
Yeah, that's a good one too. My partner's sister decided to vote for the first time in her life in 2019 and we're fairly certain she went Tory, which is kind of funny because we're both fairly ardently left wing but not "swipe left if you're not in my echo chamber" left wing as seems to be quite common now.

>That said I don't doubt there are some quite bum-flustered woke liberal types out there who call themselves leftie
Define 'left wing'?
>> No. 38099 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 1:20 pm
38099 spacer
>>38097
None of my Facebook friends mentioned it at all. There is every chance that at least some of them just haven't seen it because they get their news from such a narrow set of Twitter accounts who also haven't mentioned it.
>> No. 38100 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 1:32 pm
38100 spacer
>>38098

Don't bother with Rudgwick for politics, seriously. For the good of your mental health. Stupidpol and it's European counterpart are the only sane leftist rudgwicks, but they're not without their flaws. The heavy population of right wing posters (due to the fact they're the only ones that don't ban right wingers on sight, and their mods are committed to upholding a semblance of genuine free speech, within the boundaries of global Rudgwick rules) means the commentthreads get even more autistic about things like trans rights or chronic masturbators than this place. The rest of them are very much of the echo chamber mold you mention.

>define left wing

Economically redistributive politics. Liberal =/= left, no matter how much they love gays or trans people. It's really not as difficult a question as you want it to be.
>> No. 38101 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 1:51 pm
38101 spacer
>Despite myself I'm greatly enjoying the confusion in left wing
communities about how a trans person could possibly be a Tory.

People like this don't end up as Tory MPs because they have a deep personal connection to Tory values, they've done it because they can't come to terms with their own identity or are scared of being outed and so repress their true sense of self and take on a person like this.

Something that the LGBTs and straight cis people really need to get together and agree about is that whether you like the other side or not, having people hiding their true identity is no good for anyone. Except the blackmailers and people in positions of authority of course
>> No. 38102 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 1:52 pm
38102 spacer
>>38101
*persona not person
>> No. 38103 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 2:58 pm
38103 spacer
>>38068

So if a woman is born without a cervix, she's a man?
>> No. 38104 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 3:29 pm
38104 spacer
>>38100
>Economically redistributive politics. Liberal =/= left, no matter how much they love gays or trans people.
I thoroughly agree.

>It's really not as difficult a question as you want it to be.
No, it's a very simple question which some woke posters have a hard time answering when talking about politics.

>>38101
>People like this don't end up as Tory MPs because they have a deep personal connection to Tory values
You're saying trans people can't also be greedy xenophobes who pull the ladder up after them? He could absolutely align with Tory values considering that Tory values have very little to do with idpol and more to do with economics, individualism, and foxhunting. Surely you'll only choose your party based off of idpol if you genuinely care about the benefit of your own demographic rather than, for example, taxation and corporate accountability, welfare and social funding, right?

In which case it seems eminently probable that many, many people who don't care about idpol but are part of a demographic like LGBTQ+ will care more about themselves and their own prosperity, which is determined by their subjective judgement and values, rather than the prosperity of the group.

>>38103
>So if a woman is born without a cervix, she's a man?
>So if a woman is born without a cervix
>So if a woman is born
>So if a woman
>a woman
3/10
>> No. 38105 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 4:01 pm
38105 spacer
>>38104

>3/10

But you said they're only a woman if they have a cervix? I don't understand
>> No. 38106 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 4:13 pm
38106 spacer
>>38105
>But you said they're only a woman if they have a cervix?
I didn't say this. Where was this posted?

>So if a woman is born without a cervix, she's a man?
>a woman
You shouldn't be confused, you answered your own question.
>> No. 38107 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 4:36 pm
38107 spacer
>>38106

You're not being nearly as clever as you think you are. This is just tedious.
>> No. 38108 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 5:09 pm
38108 spacer
>>38107
I'm not being clever, it's just that >>38103 is being monumentally dense and you seem to have been swept up in their orbit.

The question is poorly formed, and if you can't see that then I can help you - but you have to ask nicely.
>> No. 38109 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 6:27 pm
38109 spacer
Why worry about being born? Let's say your mum was coming home from the whore factory and got run over by a train because of how disappointed she is in you, but she survives above the stomach. Is she no longer a woman because the bottom half of her is missing? Of course not. Physical characteristics are not a good way to identify biological sex; they can offer clues but evangelist christian korean youtuberism is not the only loophole where they really don't prove anything at all.

Of course, it follows from this that cutting your knob off won't make you a woman either. But if we accept that we are all pretending that they're women, but we continue to pretend, then it's really not that big a deal. Nobody needs to get offended as long as everyone pretends. It's very, very simple.
>> No. 38110 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 6:52 pm
38110 spacer
>>38100
>Economically redistributive politics. Liberal =/= left

Look everyone, it's someone on the 'left' who can't enunciate proper theory that excludes liberals because if he does he'll just like like a knob. I look forward to you telling me how Sunak rising income tax makes him a leftist.

>>38109
Wasn't the question about having a penis?

>> No. 38111 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 6:56 pm
38111 spacer

FNHf0W4X0AYqsX9.jpg
381113811138111
Stephanie Hirst was in the news the other day. You know what? I'd slip her one.

When she came out as trans about seven or eight years ago she looked like a man with long hair but now she looks like a woman, an attractive woman. We should give all evangelist christian korean youtubers a limit of five years to get their act together and if they still look like a mong after all that time we should shut them off from society. We all know it's the freaks who are giving them a bad rep.
>> No. 38112 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 7:01 pm
38112 spacer
>>38110

If I had to take this bait I'd probably go with something about how the foundation of liberalism is fundamentally individualist. Liberal political parties typically endorse free market economics whole heartedly. The modern day Conservative party is liberal through and through.

>I look forward to you telling me how Sunak rising income tax makes him a leftist.

That's a very bizarre non-sequitir lad. Have you been on the Smarties again? You know the e-numbers get you a bit daft.
>> No. 38113 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 7:53 pm
38113 spacer
>>38110
>GLC
Good lads on a night out.
>> No. 38114 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 9:08 pm
38114 spacer
>>38112
>If I had to take this bait I'd probably go with something about how the foundation of liberalism is fundamentally individualist. Liberal political parties typically endorse free market economics whole heartedly. The modern day Conservative party is liberal through and through.

And see this is the problem because you'd be wrong, you're trying to gatekeep but when it comes to fundamental political philosophy you don't know what you're talking about. It's embarrassing.

The precise tension between liberalism and socialism is the state of law in the matter, if you wanted to take a cynical look at liberalism you would call it system sustaining as far as that system extends toward an underlying merchant class and their interest in property rights underpinned by enlightenment ethics - there's the individual but the individual is bound into a system of relationships which liberalism argues is affirming on an emergent level. A social liberal take, one which you would be well aware of if you picked up a book and actually read British political history, would present a modification of this system using heavily redistributive measures to ensure participation but the underlying system remains the same - hence why Anglo-Labour is better characterised as a movement drawn from Quakers than the continental left rooted in Hegelian consciousness and why the genuine far-left-leaning Labour power structure of the interwar years was so awkward.

You also think liberalism = the Conservative Party but I guess nothing can be done if you don't understand the differences in conservative and liberal ideology.

>That's a very bizarre non-sequitir lad.

Sunak engages in redistributive politics, he might engage it from a starting point you disagree with but the current government engages in a host of redistributive policies funded along a system that draws the majority of its revenue from printing progressive taxation. It's not even a novel position, the Tories are fundamentally wedded to one-nationism and that is particularly strong under the current government despite the pressure from the parties neoliberal faction.
>> No. 38115 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 9:15 pm
38115 spacer
>>38111

I'd affirm her gender identity IYKWIM.
>> No. 38116 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 10:22 pm
38116 spacer
I don't think there is a gay thread, but...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60947028
>Plans to ban so-called conversion therapy in England and Wales have been abandoned by the government.
>According to NHS England, conversion therapy tries to change someone's sexual orientation or gender identity.
>The ban was announced in the Queen's Speech in May 2021.
>But a government spokesperson said it had instead "decided to proceed by reviewing how existing law can be deployed more effectively".

You know, if I was a secretly TG MP from a party that was in government, and I was planning to come out, I would ask the party leadership when the most convenient time to do so would be, so if they wanted to implement some anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation, we could work together to bury that news story under my own inspirational tale of when I got bummed so hard I turned into a woman. Not that I'm implying such a thing could possibly have happened here, of course.
>> No. 38118 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 10:41 pm
38118 spacer

Homosexual Medicine.jpg
381183811838118
>>38116
I don't get it. Why would you ban something if it's consenting adults?
>> No. 38119 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 10:47 pm
38119 spacer
>>38118

Because liberalism means having the right to do as you're told.

The legislation was abandoned because nobody could figure out how to ban gay conversion therapy without also banning sissy hypno.
>> No. 38121 Anonymous
31st March 2022
Thursday 11:38 pm
38121 spacer
>>38114

You are using a lot of fancy words to talk a lot of bollocks, mate.
>> No. 38122 Anonymous
1st April 2022
Friday 12:39 am
38122 spacer
>>38116
>The government insists it will ban so-called conversion therapy for gay or bisexual people in England and Wales - but not for evangelist christian korean youtuber people. It comes hours after it had said it would drop the ban entirely.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60947028

It's GS Wot Won It!
>> No. 38666 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 9:09 am
38666 spacer

emily-bridges-transgender-cyclist-zach-comp-1.jpg
386663866638666
A evangelist christian korean youtuber cyclist has said that she was inundated with violent threats after Boris Johnson opposed her participation in women’s races.

Emily Bridges, 21, was due to compete in the National Omnium Championships in April against a field including Dame Laura Kenny, the five-time Olympic champion. However, she was stopped after a late intervention by British Cycling. Bridges began hormone therapy late last year.

Speaking a few days after the event, the prime minister said: “I don’t think biological males should be competing in female sporting events.” He added: “That doesn’t mean that I’m not immensely sympathetic to people who want to change gender, to transition.”

Speaking to ITV News yesterday evening, Bridges said that she received hate-filled messages including threats of violence should she ever compete in a women’s race.

“It’s really strange to see probably the most famous man in Britain talking about you and having an opinion on something that he doesn’t know anything about,” she said. “The response after that was as expected: I had threats of physical violence made against me by complete strangers online. People are entitled to hold an opinion about it, but there’s a way to go about voicing that opinion and threatening to kneecap me is not that way. I’m scared a lot of the time about being who I am in public. Is someone going to recognise me? They were real concerns and it was a real fear that I had after the comments were made, and it was scary. I was scared.”

In the months before the omnium race Bridges competed in men’s events with British Cycling approval and won the last one she entered at the British University Championships.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-cyclist-emily-bridges-threatened-after-pms-comments-qmb6ghxqm
>> No. 38667 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 11:20 am
38667 spacer
>>38666
I think it's great we have a caste of untermenschen now.
>> No. 38668 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 12:58 pm
38668 spacer
>>38666

I see she's taken to the "people said things on the internet therefore I am a victim and should be protected" mindset rather well.

In all seriousness, I think this issue is often being presented in reverse. "Men's" categories aren't actually men's categories, they're open categories that anyone is able to compete in. They tend to become de facto men's categories in most sports for obvious physiological reasons. It's the other categories that are selective and with good reason; just as you have to meet the criterion of being born after a certain date to compete in a youth league, you currently have to be designated a sex in order to compete in a women's league. The problem isn't with categorising sports, the problem is with categorising sex.

We could consider having more specific categorisations to represent different shades of grey between the sexes, a bit like they have in parasports, based on entry criteria like whether you've undergone so many years of hormone therapy, whether you were designated a particular way at birth, etc.. Ultimately, though, it's up to the sports commission to decide the most significant biological factors in their sport and to categorise as they see fit. Ultimately, a sex-segregated league is just as arbitrary as height classes or weight classes, but we do it (ideally) to bring out the best competition -- but even that's subjective.
>> No. 38669 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 1:41 pm
38669 spacer
>>38668
There was a cycling race at the weekend for women and "people of a similar ability regardless of gender", which Emily Bridges won and another trans-cyclist came second. The tabloids weren't happy about it.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1621252/trans-cyclist-beat-women-riders
>> No. 38670 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 3:14 pm
38670 spacer
>>38668
I've seen this idea of women's sports and "open" sports before, and I thought it was a bit anti-male at first, but honestly it makes perfect sense. The only viable alternative that I can think of, is that you can't do women's sports until the sex change is complete and you're definitely fully female. That's the best way to do it, but the only way to judge if someone is fully female is if they're not better than all the other women. In other words, I would let them compete as long as they're not allowed to win, and that obviously won't work.
>> No. 38671 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 3:25 pm
38671 spacer
>>38668

Trans athletes make a certain kind of fisherperson's head explode, because it reveals contradictions in their ideology that they are unable to reconcile.

>We're just as good as men!
>We can't be expected to compete against men!

Nobody is going to say that men and women are identical in every possible way except for reproductive organs, athletic performance and a propensity for violent crime, because that obviously sounds mental. Still, nobody is prepared to address the possibility that men and women are different in other ways that may explain differences in other outcomes. The furious and completely disproportionate arguments about trans people is just a defence mechanism to avoid addressing that point. Trans people are being turned into a bogeyman, but at least a certain kind of middle-class woman won't have to think about the possibility that maybe she is bad at reading maps.
>> No. 38672 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 4:05 pm
38672 spacer
Would a lot of this evangelist christian korean youtuber nonsense disappear if people appreciated that informal English allows for the conflation of male/man and female/woman? It just seems like so much of it is semantic.

>>38671
>We're just as good as men!
>We can't be expected to compete against men!

Think it's probably more a case of a four generation movement having millions if not billions of supporters from various cultures who might sometimes have different opinions. It's probably not the same people saying both things. Ultimately I think transgingers in sport and in bathrooms are both non-issues that distract from the more important stuff like terminology and the need for external validation that hinges on wording.
>> No. 38673 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 4:24 pm
38673 spacer
>>38671

That may be a factor, but I think it's mainly contentious because it threatens to change the easy definition of "woman" when it's used for women's leagues, and also because it pressures people to enforce rules that seem discriminatory, i.e. "you can't compete in this league because you were born a particular way". As I mentioned, though, the former is very much an issue outside of sport. In sport, we already have such arbitrary rules on our bodies in many leagues, it's just about applying them intelligently and in a way that encourage the best from competitors.

I think that in maybe 20 years, the "women's" category won't officially exist, but we'll probably have a de facto women's category. I'm now toying with the idea in my head. How about:

- G1 as an open class for everyone (where mainly men will compete)
- G2a specifically for transmen that don't want to go into G1 (and possibly transwomen who don't meet the criteria for G2b?)
- G2b for women and transwomen that have completed so many years of hormone therapy and/or have started their transition at a critical pubertal age
- G3 for only those designated female at birth who've never had hormone therapy (i.e. our current version of the "women's" category that we clearly want to create and that's causing so many issues).

I can foresee the risk of G2 basically becoming the "evangelist christian korean youtuber" class, as I can't imagine why any woman who was born female would want to go and compete in G2b rather than G3. But hey, it's just a first attempt, and surely it's better than having this tedious controversy repeatedly.

>>38669
>"people of a similar ability regardless of gender"

That doesn't work because this is clearly a crap criteria. We need a harder category than that.
>> No. 38674 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 4:41 pm
38674 spacer
But if we introduce other categories, where would Caster Semenya race? She's a very successful women's 800m runner who gets criticised occasionally because she was born with very high testosterone levels for a woman. None of this is her choice; as far as she's concerned, she's just a woman with a deep voice who's absolutely amazing at running. I would let her keep competing with the other women because, again, she was #bornthisway and cannot reasonably be accused of cheating. Unless she actually has a cock after all, which some bitter female runners like to baselessly allege.
>> No. 38675 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 4:42 pm
38675 spacer
>>38673

What about Caster Semenya?

Also can I have a G4 class for people who are shit at sport?
>> No. 38676 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 4:57 pm
38676 spacer
>>38674

The IAAF spent several years trying to figure out Semenya's biological sex and their final report was just the shrug emoji. She doesn't have a cock, but she does have a Y chromosome and an undescended pair of bollocks.

When the IAAF ruled that Semenya would have to take testosterone blockers to be eligible to compete as a woman, it sparked outrage amongst people who wanted to ban trans women from women's sport.
>> No. 38677 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 5:11 pm
38677 spacer
>>38673
Let's be honest that of those the only categories that will be commercially viable and impactful enough to generate pubic money is G1 and maybe the sexy lady one.
>> No. 38680 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 8:19 pm
38680 spacer
>>38677
There's probably already a tournament with such classes; they just won't be used by most tournaments we would have heard of. For example, the Gay Games probably accommodate such people:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_Games

Similarly, the Paralympics has all manner of disability sport categories, but it doesn't have all of them. For example, there is RR1 racing, which is like the 100m sprint for people who are too disabled to even stand up. It's very uncomfortable to watch; they have little trolleys with wheels and they sort of flap themselves to the finish line. It's voyeuristic and horrifying, and I say this as someone who loves the Paralympics. Officially, it's not a Paralympic category because there aren't enough athletes of a high enough level to justify including it, but nevertheless, it exists, and if RR1 racing exists but isn't in the Paralympics, then I'm sure atypical gender categories exist in other tournaments. So if these categories were introduced and then not included in the major tournaments like the Olympics, then that's basically how things are now anyway.

Also,
>>38677
>generate pubic money
>> No. 38682 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 9:39 pm
38682 spacer
>>38669
If it's the event I'm thinking of, they had two categories that are sort of equivalent to men's and women's but without limiting themselves to that. Cis men and women each race in one of the two, but trans/NB/GNC riders compete in either, based on self-identification.

>>38670
The earliest manifestations of segregation of women's sports was in banning them from competing outright. When categories first came about, it wasn't for the sake of allowing an "even playing field" for women, it was to spare men the embarrassment of being beaten by a woman. Then they could be downgraded and paid less like the second-class citizens they are.
>> No. 38686 Anonymous
8th June 2022
Wednesday 10:36 pm
38686 spacer

Beryl-Burton.jpg
386863868638686
>>38682

To be fair we also banned the working classes from sport, hence the existence of Rugby League.
>> No. 38688 Anonymous
9th June 2022
Thursday 1:14 am
38688 spacer
>>38686
It was a mistake to ever give either of them the vote.
>> No. 38733 Anonymous
12th June 2022
Sunday 7:54 pm
38733 spacer
I'm confused again, isn't a June pride month a septic thing and we do it in February? I'm seeing those rainbow flags about and I don't know if I should be angry on behalf of gay people or because of fags appropriating the new symbol of the NHS.
>> No. 38735 Anonymous
12th June 2022
Sunday 9:37 pm
38735 spacer
>>38733

Pride month is a new thing, but Pride marches have traditionally been held on the nearest weekend to the 28th of June, the anniversary of the Stonewall riots.
>> No. 38736 Anonymous
12th June 2022
Sunday 9:43 pm
38736 spacer
>>38733
February is Alphabet History Month. Except in the US, when they celebrate Black History Month - which, as we all know, is actually in October.
>> No. 38737 Anonymous
12th June 2022
Sunday 10:09 pm
38737 spacer
>>38735
Sounds like an Americanism to me.
>> No. 38840 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 12:20 am
38840 spacer

jm6esmgy11v51.jpg
388403884038840
>Halifax branded 'disgraceful' by most famous employee Howard in pronoun badge row

>Customers have been swapping to rival banks, cutting up credit cards and withdrawing assets worth up to £450,000 after Halifax told those who "disagree with its values" to close their accounts. A number of Halifax customers have reportedly started to close their accounts after the bank told people who don't like their staff pronoun badges to leave.

>On Tuesday, the company shared a picture of a nametag on Twitter with Gemma and "she/her/hers" written on it. In response to accusations of "the shipping forecast", Halifax tweeted: "We strive for inclusion, equality and quite simply, in doing what's right. If you disagree with our values, you're welcome to close your account."

>The tweet, which has been liked by more than 12,000 Twitter accounts, has sparked a huge reaction. Former employee Howard Brown, who became a household name as the face of Halifax for over a decade, has also waded in and branded the bank's attitude towards customers as "disgraceful".

>One person said: "I closed my credit card account today, after 15 years of being a customer." Another revealed their entire family has transferred their accounts to Nationwide, adding: "Loss to Halifax is in excess of 450K in investment accounts and savings." And a third account holder from the Midlands, who moved £1,100 from his credit card to another bank, said: "I've closed my account....sick to death of woke."

>Howard, who caught the nation's attention with his star turn in the Halifax adverts in the 2000s, said: "That's not the Halifax I knew, that's not the customer service I knew. If this had happened when I was working there, we'd all have been shocked and disappointed. It's a service industry – you should leave politics to the politicians. They've got this one wrong."

>Halifax did not confirm how many customers had closed their accounts this week. Users online were quick to pass judgment when the name badges were first announced, but the bank openly hit back and offered its opinion on the matter. One said: “If a person is wearing a NAME badge, wouldn’t it be more polite to use that NAME, isn’t that the point of a NAME badge, otherwise, why put the NAME on the NAME badge in the first place?”

>Halifax replied: "We want to create a safe and accepting environment that opens the conversation around gender identity. We care about our customers' and colleagues' individual preferences. For us, it’s a very simple solution to accidental misgendering.” Another added: “What if a Halifax employee doesn’t want to put pronouns on their lapel, perhaps because they reject the cult of gender ideology? Will they be disadvantaged in any way? Barred from promotion? Fired?”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/halifax-customers-leave-fury-over-27381061

Whose side are you on, lads. A fucking bank or the tabloid reading untermenschen?
>> No. 38841 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 12:31 am
38841 spacer
>>38840
I need to see Gemma's tits before deciding.
>> No. 38842 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 1:38 am
38842 spacer
>>38840
Can they both lose? Gender pronouns are such an utter fucking irrelevance to 99% of society, and I am confident the remaining 1% are aware that they will need to explain their positions to people. And yet, if you close your bank account and throw a tantrum about it, I am immediately against you. It strikes me as like if you weren't allowed to go into Halifax unless you were willing to write an entire manifesto about whether you prefer Family Guy or American Dad, and then when you go in, the bank gets firebombed by the Mrs Brown's Boys fan club. It is literally impossible for me to put aside my hatred for all sides.

Can I make my preferred gender pronouns a racial slur? That's not very inclusive of them if I can't.
>> No. 38843 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 2:37 am
38843 spacer
>>38842
In fairness to the untermenschen, the bank did smugly say that if they don't like it they should leave. They dared them to do it.

It's like when Sainsburys did that black history month thing and told anyone who didn't like it to shop somewhere else. Now I'm fine with the darkies, I black up every year on Halloween to spread awareness, but I just don't much appreciate my local supermarket taking that tone with me.
>> No. 38844 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 2:38 am
38844 spacer
>>38840
Christ. Howard always came across like a friendly nerd, twenty years later he's a nutter.

What the hell is going on these days? Honestly, even if turn your nose up at the idea of making trans people feel included, why would you be "shocked" and call it "disgraceful"? He's shouting at some grammar on a badge.

>In response to accusations of "the shipping forecast"
What does that even mean?
>> No. 38845 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 2:42 am
38845 spacer
Oh it's a wordfilter. Ho hum.
>> No. 38846 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 2:45 am
38846 spacer
>>38845
>Ho hum

Leave your mum's singing out of this.
>> No. 38847 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 2:51 am
38847 spacer
>>38844
In defence of Howard Christ, you're right, everything is mental now I think he's talking about the way the Halifax social media bods were all "like it or lump it, pal".

I'll be honest I don't really get why this bothers people so much. Did folk used to take pride in their ability guess someone's pronouns? What's the deal?
>> No. 38848 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 5:54 am
38848 spacer
>>38840
I've always hated seeing articles which run with lines like this:
>Customers have been swapping to rival banks, cutting up credit cards and withdrawing assets worth up to £450,000 after Halifax told those who "disagree with its values" to close their accounts.
It's a sort of half-lie that you can't call out in less than a paragraph which means it's effectively invulnerable, a lie because the way you naturally read the words in their context ("in a news article") is a lie, but if you read it like a lawyer ("customers, plural of customer") it's true. All it takes is for 2 customers to have acted to justify the line, but 2 customers, or even a much bigger number of dickheads on Twitter doesn't actually tell you anything about what Halifax customers as a whole are up to.
(Let's break this up by imagining one to feel smarter than: The customer who dumped their Halifax account to swap to another Lloyds Group bank.)
But papers love to write stories on this model: You could do an article that goes "Frenchmen eat wallpaper!", and I'm practically certain I could dig up a few wallpaper eating Frenchmen, but the implication of presenting it as an article would be that this is news, perhaps that eating wallpaper is something that lots of them do, or that wallpaper-eating is a new trend in France, or that there's some news story to it beyond "I dug into the random noise of the internet and used the resulting detritus to mint what are effectively untruths which will give you a misleading impression of Frenchmen" - if I just wanted to share a tiny number of weirdos without misleading people, I'd have presented the story in a different way. But then I'd get less clicks, wouldn't I?

The article is only a partial case, since it can't decide whether the story is Twitter idiocy spun misleadingly (not news, ever.) or Howard commenting on Twitter idiocy. (tragically, arguably news.)
>> No. 38849 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 10:08 am
38849 spacer
>>38848
>It's a sort of half-lie that you can't call out in less than a paragraph
Watch me.
>There's no evidence anything happened beyond some angry tweets.
>> No. 38850 Anonymous
3rd July 2022
Sunday 1:16 pm
38850 spacer
>>38847
>I'll be honest I don't really get why this bothers people so much. Did folk used to take pride in their ability guess someone's pronouns? What's the deal?
It's just a very small thing for everyone to suddenly be passionate about. If you meet someone who prefers to use gender pronouns that aren't the ones you would instinctively use for them, that's a big deal, because they're very rare. And yet they seem to permanently be at the forefront of all conversations. It's not their fault, but the backlash is hugely understandable, to me at least.

I don't particularly care for spaghetti. It would annoy me if someone assumed spaghetti was my favourite food. If I went to the Delicious Italian Food Convention, I would have to keep telling people I was only there for the pizza. And I might, perhaps, get annoyed at people constantly being shocked that I like pizza but not pasta. I'd get sick of explaining myself, certainly. But when you start making every other visitor there wear a badge to explain whether or not they like spaghetti, in order to accommodate me, that's pretty ridiculous, isn't it? This inconvenience would be just something I'd have to deal with. Giving everyone else except me a badge to say, "I quite like spaghetti actually" just feels like an overreaction. And all the disabled people who can't get up the stairs, and all the women who get raped by filthy swarthy Italian savages, and Mario Balotelli who gets monkey chants from his own team's fans, would all wonder why nothing is being done to help them. Because I bet you Halifax doesn't give a fuck about them.

And you know who else forced people to wear badges to indicate details of their personal identity? That's right: the Nazis.
>> No. 38857 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 1:50 am
38857 spacer
https://news.sky.com/story/new-public-buildings-must-have-separate-male-and-female-toilets-government-says-12645756

>All new public buildings should have separate male and female toilets, the government has announced.

>The move follows a call for evidence in which some women said they had safety concerns about the rise in 'gender neutral' toilets.
>> No. 38858 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 11:12 am
38858 spacer
>>38857
Disabled toilets are gender-neutral! This is so easy! I don't understand how they can get away with constantly rehashing this worn-out, threadbare talking point. Or just have lots of little rooms, like the disableds get anyway, instead of big communal ones with cubicles. This is getting embarrassing. I have solved this problem years ago. Why won't anyone listen to me?
>> No. 38859 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 11:58 am
38859 spacer
>>38858
They need an untermensch class to be seen to wage continual war on, if they can appear to be doing it without actually doing anything meaningful then that works out cheaper. Why would they listen to you when your suggestion would actually solve the issue?
>> No. 38860 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 12:08 pm
38860 spacer
>>38858

Yes, but then you would insinuate that being gender fluid is the same as being disabled. That would have people kicking up a twitter shitstorm again in no time.

Kind of makes you miss the old days when I was a teenlad, 30 years ago. Gender fluid as a word didn't really exist back then, and if you'd asked somebody, they probably would have assumed vaguely that it was a polite term for your spunk or fanny custard.

There were gender benders like Boy George or Pete Bums, whose careers had already spanned close to ten years by then, but nobody would have subscribed to the idea that as a general rule, there are really ten or twenty different genders, like woke millennials maintain today. Boy George was just kind of an oddball playing with the concept of gender as such, but again, he was just one of a kind.
>> No. 38861 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 12:19 pm
38861 spacer
>>38858
But that's a bit unfair on women.
>> No. 38862 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 12:40 pm
38862 spacer
>>38857
On the one hand I bet this is really just a load of women being scared to toot with men around. Safety my arse.
On the other I've seen what unisex toilets are like, they amplify mess and gaggles of women hang about in them getting in the way of the sinks.

>>38858
Looks like they've already thought about it.

>A consultation will be launched in the autumn, which will also consider the design of unisex self-contained cubicles to maximise privacy and whether improvements to disabled persons toilets should be made.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/all-public-buildings-to-have-separate-male-and-female-toilets

I'm not entirely sure there's a conspiracy at work with this. People who feed into consultations are just naturally regressive.
>> No. 38863 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 5:07 pm
38863 spacer
>>38858

You don't even have to invoke disabled toilets. Nearly every single person in this entire country already has gender neutral toilets in their own home. Consider the implications of that fact- The train mafia must have travelled back in time to force their agenda on housebuilding regulations before household plumbing became commonplace, and undermined women's poo safety from the past!

If everywhere just had individual toilets this would never even conceivably be a problem. Does anyone know where the concept of segregated bathrooms comes from in the first place? Because I bet it's not very old, and I vet it has zero correlation with women getting sexually violated during the sacred act of curling one out.

Birds being hysterical nags, what else is new.
>> No. 38864 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 5:50 pm
38864 spacer
>>38860
>but nobody would have subscribed to the idea that as a general rule, there are really ten or twenty different genders

Problem is that the right wing keeps taking things that only a tiny minority of nutcases on the left think, or often just makes shit up entirely, and puts it out there to manufacture outrage, that outrage is used to garner support from moderates and centrists.

No one at all fucking believes there are 20 genders. For the most part the defining thing that all the genderfluid nonbinary crowd have in common is that they're completely sick of going through life where the contents of your pants dictates what colours you're allowed to like or whether you can watch football or what sort of job you can do.
>> No. 38865 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 6:39 pm
38865 spacer
>>38864
>only a tiny minority of nutcases

It's always a tiny minority isn't it.

>For the most part the defining thing that all the genderfluid nonbinary crowd have in common is that they're completely sick of going through life where the contents of your pants dictates what colours you're allowed to like or whether you can watch football or what sort of job you can do.

Is the gender police in the room with us now?
>> No. 38866 Anonymous
5th July 2022
Tuesday 6:42 pm
38866 spacer
>>38865
>Is the gender police in the room with us now?
They're mostly back to policing gender on Twitter, after a busy weekend of trying (and failing) to shit on trans people at London Pride.
>> No. 38867 Anonymous
6th July 2022
Wednesday 8:22 am
38867 spacer
>>38863
>You don't even have to invoke disabled toilets. Nearly every single person in this entire country already has gender neutral toilets in their own home. Consider the implications of that fact- The train mafia must have travelled back in time to force their agenda on housebuilding regulations before household plumbing became commonplace, and undermined women's poo safety from the past!

But that's obviously a different kettle of shit than public toilets with strangers. You can't do one of those 'haha i'm being sarcastic because it's so obvious' things when there's a key difference of the mixed toilets being in your own home with people you trust.
>> No. 38868 Anonymous
6th July 2022
Wednesday 8:50 am
38868 spacer
>>38867

Doesn't the vast majority of abuse or sexual assault happen in your own home? Yours specifically? That does bring the point back around to the fact that "trust" is fairly immaterial here because cases of strangers assaulting people going to the toilet are vanishingly rare. You may not trust negroes, that's not an argument for segregated toilets, that's a you problem. A negro gentleman is not likely to kick down the cubicle door and beat you about the head with his belt, but your da, who you trust, is.
>> No. 38876 Anonymous
6th July 2022
Wednesday 4:05 pm
38876 spacer

EbTY6MuWoA8WRMN.jpg
388763887638876
>>38868

> negro gentleman is not likely to kick down the cubicle door and beat you about the head with his belt, but your da, who you trust, is

Are you from a broken family?

I agree with your general point though, that much of stranger danger is complete tosh. Not saying it doesn't happen, but cases where perpetrators and victims knew each other typically far outnumber those where they didn't.
>> No. 38878 Anonymous
6th July 2022
Wednesday 4:17 pm
38878 spacer
>>38867
>>38868

More to the point though, your gender neutral toilets at home are an individual room with typically a lock on the door, which is more private and therefore arguably safer than any public convenience, segregated or not. If all public loos were individual rooms like your home lavatory, this entire debate would be impossible to have.

Course it's not actually about any of that and that's the point. If we were to look at it at all rationally we'd conclude that that's perhaps a sensible line of approach. But it's entirely just the dregs of the tank from the old-guard fisherperson arsenal, attempting to stay relevant. People assume the fisherfolk demographic is lefty but it's really not, most of the OG fisherfolk are deeply boomer, they're middle class middle aged women who have time on their hands to get annoyed that nobody pays enough attention to them. Same shit as the wave of pedo hysteria 20 years ago.

Bored bints need a bogeyman. The right loves having a bogeyman to play up to. This kind of culture war nonsense is what put the current collapsing government where it is, and it's the only thing they've got left to cling on with, by their very fingernails.
>> No. 38880 Anonymous
6th July 2022
Wednesday 4:22 pm
38880 spacer
>>38878
>Course it's not actually about any of that and that's the point. If we were to look at it at all rationally we'd conclude that that's perhaps a sensible line of approach. But it's entirely just the dregs of the tank from the old-guard fisherperson arsenal, attempting to stay relevant. People assume the fisherfolk demographic is lefty but it's really not, most of the OG fisherfolk are deeply boomer, they're middle class middle aged women who have time on their hands to get annoyed that nobody pays enough attention to them. Same shit as the wave of pedo hysteria 20 years ago.

What the fuck are you talking about. This is the policy response to a public consultation on mixed-sex bathrooms, it says nothing about you and the hons visiting the women's restroom of your local pre-school so long as you've got a dress on.
>> No. 38882 Anonymous
6th July 2022
Wednesday 4:24 pm
38882 spacer
>>38880

You must be quite dense.
>> No. 38884 Anonymous
6th July 2022
Wednesday 4:26 pm
38884 spacer
>>38876

>Are you from a broken family?

I just think everyone should have a toilet attendant at home, like they do in clubs.
>> No. 38885 Anonymous
6th July 2022
Wednesday 4:57 pm
38885 spacer
>>38884
Do women's bogs have those too?
>> No. 38888 Anonymous
6th July 2022
Wednesday 7:11 pm
38888 spacer
>>38885

If you assume that women's toilets don't need them because they might be more cleanly with their number 1's and 2's and with taming the red dragon, then no, that isn't the case. In fact, going by what some attendants will tell you, a lot of women's toilets especially at clubs where half the people are off their tits all evening can look worse than men's bogs.
>> No. 38895 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 1:39 pm
38895 spacer
>A researcher who lost her job at a thinktank after tweeting that evangelist christian korean youtuber women could not change their biological sex has won her claim that she was unfairly discriminated against because of her gender-critical beliefs.

>Maya Forstater suffered direct discrimination when the Centre for Global Development (CGD), where she was a visiting fellow, did not renew her contract or fellowship, an employment tribunal found on Wednesday. The tribunal also ruled that Forstater, the executive director of Sex Matters, suffered victimisation with respect to the removal of her profile from CGD’s website.

>Its decision comes after Forstater successfully brought a test case to establish that gender-critical views are a protected philosophical belief under the Equality Act. She initially lost that case at an employment tribunal in 2019 but won a landmark decision on appeal last year, with the judge stressing that while gender-critical views might be “profoundly offensive and even distressing to many others … they are beliefs that are and must be tolerated in a pluralist society”.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/jul/06/maya-forstater-was-discriminated-against-over-gender-critical-beliefs-tribunal-rules
>> No. 38896 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 2:11 pm
38896 spacer
>>38895
>with the judge stressing that while gender-critical views might be “profoundly offensive and even distressing to many others … they are beliefs that are and must be tolerated in a pluralist society”.

It's funny that judges in the country are some of the biggest speech Nazis around but they do in half enjoy using their power to talk shit to people in no position to say anything back.
>> No. 38897 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 3:52 pm
38897 spacer
>>38896

If a judge agrees that her views are "profoundly offensive and even distressing to many others" does that mean she can theoretically get charged under the communications act for airing said views on the internet?
>> No. 38898 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 4:26 pm
38898 spacer
I see trannie brainworms are back on the agenda.

It's wierd because they made the right call for entirely the wrong reasons. Even as someone who supports trans people, it's true to say they can't change their biological sex, because they can't. You can't rewrite your DNA like a sea cucumber. If that was possible I suspect trans people would be far, far more accepted.

Ideology taking precedence over objective scientific fact is always worrying. Fair enough if this woman was a paid up evangelist christian korean youtuber who turbo-posted on r/gendercritical about being raped while she was having a poo, but that's a separate issue to the fact what she said was objectively true.

I've noticed lots of the Tory leadership hopefuls being baited into the culture war and that's just great entertainment in one sense, I get a foreboding feeling that were going to see the most divisive idpol intellectual contagions stoked to full heat over the coming months as the real world economic problems we should be bothered about escalate.
>> No. 38899 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 5:13 pm
38899 spacer
>>38898
>Ideology taking precedence over objective scientific fact is always worrying
Is that happening though? Transfolk aren't claiming to have been born with different genitals to the ones they were born with. Claiming that the way people dress or identify is a question of scientific fact is confusing ideology with science.
>> No. 38900 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 5:19 pm
38900 spacer
>>38898
I don't see why giving an opinion on an inarguably a contentious issue in modern society should be grounds for an employer to discriminate, regardless of how they slice their cucumbers. Posting on twitter in general should be grounds for immediate dismissal, not merely views that have nothing to do with her work life or which do not conform to reality.
>> No. 38901 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 5:23 pm
38901 spacer
>>38899
You cannot change your biological sex, lad. That's what she was tweeting about.
>> No. 38902 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 5:33 pm
38902 spacer
Biological sex is a floating signifier and a boring one at that.
>> No. 38903 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 5:37 pm
38903 spacer
>>38901
What I said was predicated on that.
>> No. 38904 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 6:23 pm
38904 spacer
>>38898
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 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 6:28 pm
38905 spacer
>>38904

>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 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 7:33 pm
38906 spacer
>>38899

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 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 7:49 pm
38907 spacer
>>38906
>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 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 7:58 pm
38908 spacer
>>38907

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 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 8:27 pm
38909 spacer
>>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.
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 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 8:45 pm
38910 spacer
>>38904
>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.

>>38909
The fuck is driving everyone to overuse 'folk' these days? It's like I'm at a Nuremberg rally.
>> No. 38911 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 8:51 pm
38911 spacer
>>38910
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. 38912 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 9:23 pm
38912 spacer
>>38910
>folk
Because it's gender-neutral.


>> No. 38913 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 10:51 pm
38913 spacer
>>38911
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 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 11:05 pm
38914 spacer
>>38913
>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 Anonymous
10th July 2022
Sunday 11:52 pm
38915 spacer
>>38914
The reason it has an offensive connotation is it's illusion to being owned as property.
>> No. 38916 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 12:15 am
38916 spacer
>>38915
So you're suggesting that degrading people is okay if it doesn't centuries of baggage attached to it?
>> No. 38917 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 12:37 am
38917 spacer
>>38916
When, exactly, were sex-changees tolerated and respected in every way?
>> No. 38918 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 12:46 am
38918 spacer
>>38917
Ah, so actually if it was never properly tolerated it's okay to continue to use it to degrade people? Got it.
>> No. 38919 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 2:01 pm
38919 spacer
>>38909
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.

>>38916
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 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 3:58 pm
38920 spacer
>>38919
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 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 5:51 pm
38921 spacer
>>38920
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 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 6:48 pm
38922 spacer
>>38921
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 Anonymous
11th July 2022
Monday 7:29 pm
38923 spacer
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 Anonymous
12th July 2022
Tuesday 3:17 pm
38924 spacer
>>38922
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 Anonymous
26th July 2022
Tuesday 6:40 pm
39011 spacer
https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2022/07/26/drag-queen-story-hour-aida-h-dee-reading-protest-sovereign-citizens/

>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 Anonymous
26th July 2022
Tuesday 6:44 pm
39012 spacer
>>39011
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 Anonymous
26th July 2022
Tuesday 6:51 pm
39013 spacer

FYlkBqSXkAA9R5N.png
390133901339013
>>39011
>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 Anonymous
26th July 2022
Tuesday 7:03 pm
39014 spacer
>>39011

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 Anonymous
26th July 2022
Tuesday 7:34 pm
39015 spacer
>>39014

Never mind the dames in children's panto. It's a very American thing, thinking it's new or unusual.
>> No. 39016 Anonymous
26th July 2022
Tuesday 8:24 pm
39016 spacer
>>39014
>>39015
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 Anonymous
26th July 2022
Tuesday 8:27 pm
39017 spacer
>>39016
>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 Anonymous
27th July 2022
Wednesday 11:37 pm
39018 spacer
>>39017

Somebody please convince gammony types to picket pantos because Widow Twanky is a groomer. I want to see local news report on this.
>> No. 39019 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 10:03 am
39019 spacer

Screenshot 2022-07-28 100248.jpg
390193901939019
>>39018
I'll bet the gammony types now are the sort who 200 years ago would have happily dragged up to smash the tollgates.
>> No. 39020 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 12:05 pm
39020 spacer
>>39018
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 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 12:34 pm
39021 spacer
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 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 12:55 pm
39022 spacer
>>39021
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 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 1:34 pm
39023 spacer
>>39022

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 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 1:52 pm
39024 spacer
>>39022

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 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 4:01 pm
39028 spacer
>>39022
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 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 8:02 pm
39029 spacer
>>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.

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 Anonymous
28th July 2022
Thursday 8:27 pm
39030 spacer
>>39029

>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 Anonymous
4th August 2022
Thursday 11:30 pm
39062 spacer
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. 39063 Anonymous
4th August 2022
Thursday 11:37 pm
39063 spacer
>>39062
No. I'm already typing as quietly as I can.
>> No. 39065 Anonymous
5th August 2022
Friday 3:11 am
39065 spacer
>>39062
Yeah, nothing ever displays broad trends or has philosophical or cultural underpinnings to be explored, stuff just happens innit.
>> No. 39066 Anonymous
5th August 2022
Friday 8:07 am
39066 spacer
>>39062
Love a good outburst when it's your chosen people being discussed.
>> No. 39067 Anonymous
5th August 2022
Friday 9:09 am
39067 spacer
Purpz, I'll buy you a new video card if you make sure this thread is kiboshed and buried under flagstones.
>> No. 39068 Anonymous
5th August 2022
Friday 9:26 am
39068 spacer
>>39067
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.
>> No. 39096 Anonymous
10th August 2022
Wednesday 8:55 pm
39096 spacer

298194565_7859303347445506_219877448615852458_n.jpg
390963909639096
Nothing to discuss; I just think this was really, really funny.
>> No. 39097 Anonymous
10th August 2022
Wednesday 9:20 pm
39097 spacer

what-doctor-girl-were-allowed-assume-gender-anymor.jpg
390973909739097
>>39096
>> No. 39098 Anonymous
11th August 2022
Thursday 9:11 am
39098 spacer
>>39096
>>39097
Go back to Facebook.
>> No. 39205 Anonymous
1st September 2022
Thursday 1:58 pm
39205 spacer
>ALTHOUGH J.K. ROWLING’S Harry Potter series was rooted in fantasy and make-believe, the author seems to be drawing inspiration from something a little more realistic for her latest book: her own life.

Rowling’s new novel, The Ink Black Heart — part of her crime-thriller series Cormoran Strike and penned under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith — involves a storyline that appears to mirror Rowling’s public downfall after she continually made statements that have been widely condemned as transphobic.

>In her new book, Rowling introduces readers to Edie Ledwell, a creator of a popular YouTube cartoon who sees internet trolls and her own fandom turn on her after the cartoon was criticized as being racist and ableist, as well as transphobic for a bit about a hermaphrodite worm.

>The creator is doxxed with photos of her home plastered on the internet, subjected to death and rape threats for having an opinion, and was ultimately found stabbed to death in a cemetery. The book takes a clear aim at “social justice warriors” and suggests that Ledwell was a victim of a masterfully plotted, politically fueled hate campaign against her.

>But despite the clear similarities to her own life, Rowling claimed to Graham Norton that it’s all just a big coincidence. “I should make it really clear after some of the things that have happened the last year that this is not depicting [that],” she said. “I had written the book before certain things happened to me online,” she continued. “I said to my husband, ‘I think everyone is going to see this as a response to what happened to me,’ but it genuinely wasn’t. The first draft of the book was finished at the point certain things happened.”

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/j-k-rowlings-latest-book-ink-black-heart-transphobic-views-1234582911/
>> No. 39206 Anonymous
1st September 2022
Thursday 2:15 pm
39206 spacer
>>39205

>But despite the clear similarities to her own life, Rowling claimed to Graham Norton that it’s all just a big coincidence.

Sure it is love.

Pathetic really though, if you're going to put yourself on the anti-woke battlements, you can't act like such a bloody poof yourself. Everyone knows online death threats are basically the same thing as when somebody at school offered you out for a fight, then when you showed up behind the bike sheds at 3, nobody was even there.

The whole reason that lot are so concerned with policing what people say online is because they haven't got a life, and their entire social circle revolves around Twitter and the Discord channels they moderate. I should imagine it's exceedingly unlikely JK Rowling is in danger of being attacked by a mentalist tranno terrist, because that would mean leaving their sysadmin cave and exposing themselves to daylight.
>> No. 39207 Anonymous
1st September 2022
Thursday 2:51 pm
39207 spacer

hell_realm_1200.jpg
392073920739207
>>39205

>Cormoran Strike

We are living in the hell realm.
>> No. 39208 Anonymous
1st September 2022
Thursday 2:58 pm
39208 spacer

cormerantstrike.jpg
392083920839208
>>39207
Are you suggesting that Cormoran Strike isn't a name that makes you think of the protagonist as cool and interesting?
>> No. 39209 Anonymous
2nd September 2022
Friday 1:14 pm
39209 spacer

unknown.png
392093920939209
>>39205
The book quotes weev at one point which is extremely weird to me.
>> No. 39210 Anonymous
2nd September 2022
Friday 4:06 pm
39210 spacer
>>39209
That is bloody odd but could also explain a bit.
>> No. 39211 Anonymous
2nd September 2022
Friday 4:08 pm
39211 spacer
>>39209

The many perils of giving boomers unsupervised internet access.
>> No. 39268 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 6:38 pm
39268 spacer

_126688286_gettyimages-512602960.jpg
392683926839268
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-62879838

>Former James Bond star George Lazenby has apologised after being accused of making "creepy" and "disgusting" comments in an on-stage interview.

>The actor, who played 007 in the 1969 film On Her Majesty's Secret Service, was appearing as part of an Australian tour called The Music of James Bond.

>Audience members in Perth took offence at what they described as "homophobic" comments, and explicit anecdotes.

>The 83-year-old Australian actor has been removed from all future performances on the tour.
>> No. 39269 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 8:15 pm
39269 spacer
>>39268
What did he actually say?
>> No. 39270 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 8:20 pm
39270 spacer
>>39269

Something about dragging some celebrity's daughter from a club into his car and shagging her. Lack of consent nowhere implied.

Apparently, the proper reaction nowadays is no longer "You legend, mate!!", but to flat out cancel somebody.
>> No. 39271 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 8:21 pm
39271 spacer
>>39270

Doesn't sound very homophobic.
>> No. 39272 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 8:26 pm
39272 spacer
>>39270
I can't find any direct quotes. Looks like we're expected to judge him for wrongspeak based on the opinions of the kinds of people who go on twitter and complain about things.
>> No. 39273 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 8:29 pm
39273 spacer
>>39270
They've canceled George Lazenby. If they can get Lazenby, they can get anyone! WAKE UP SHEEPLE.

Listen to yourselves, some old cunt gets booed off stage and it's an international incident. Who gives a shite? When was the last time either of your pair even remembered he was alive?
>> No. 39274 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 8:41 pm
39274 spacer
>>39272
People on twitter are mostly complaining about the half-dozen (apparently? I can only see four) people who were arrested or charged with calling the carpet-bagger a carpet-bagger or holding signs.
>> No. 39275 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 9:05 pm
39275 spacer
>>39273
They didn't even cancel Sean Connery.


Once again, it's one rule for the James Bond who was also the Milk Tray Man, and another rule for the James Bond who was also in Darby O'Gill and the Little People (which would probably get cancelled today as well).
>> No. 39276 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 9:19 pm
39276 spacer

4a205fa8e4840916bd4bb94bd2416b0e.jpg
392763927639276
>>39273

He always was one of the lesser Bond actors.

What that doesn't address is the fact that nowadays you really don't have to try hard to piss people off on social media. Or a live audience of Gen-Y and -Zers.

Wait and see, the woke lot will eventually get all of the earlier Bond movies banned. And those are still the ones that were actually good.

https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/film/james-bond-has-always-been-a-misogynist-dinosaur-now-he-has-to-change-1.3375210
>> No. 39277 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 9:26 pm
39277 spacer
>>39276
I doubt it was twenty-somethings. What 22 year old is booking tickets to see a man who played Bond once, a million years ago, chat about whatever?
>> No. 39278 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 9:34 pm
39278 spacer
>>39277

It's part of a commemorative tour celebrating the music of the Bond movies.

>The actor, who played 007 in the 1969 film On Her Majesty's Secret Service, was appearing as part of an Australian tour called The Music of James Bond.

You're right that people in their twenties or even teens aren't the key demographic of Bond fans, at least not as far as the classic Bond films from 50 to 60 years ago are concerned, but people of my generation (late generation X) still know when a joke's a joke, and that includes not taking offence at some also-ran, one-time Bond actor's tales of his sexual exploits.
>> No. 39279 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 10:41 pm
39279 spacer
if the Kill James Bond podcast haven't said anything, I don't see why anyone else should either.
>> No. 39280 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 10:56 pm
39280 spacer
>>39276

>What that doesn't address is the fact that nowadays you really don't have to try hard to piss people off on social media. Or a live audience of Gen-Y and -Zers.

There will be studies written on this in years to come. Academics will build their careers on researching the behavioural dynamics of social media if they're allowed to without being cancelled for being furry-phobic or whatever by then.

I think it comes down to two main things, related but not necessarily complementary. On one hand you have a similar dynamic to the one we discussed about paedo vigilantes, where they want to indulge that confrontational, belligerent, even malicious side of their nature (which we all have, to some degree) in a socially sanctioned manner. And on the other hand there's the desire for what our friends in the antipodean fruit cultivating community call "clout". Having clout makes you feel important, it makes you feel listened to. It makes you feel like you matter, in a world in which seldom few of us actually do.

A lot gets said about narcissism on social media, and particularly in "woke" circles, but I think the narcissism is a symptom of a more base level social ill, not the root cause.
>> No. 39281 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 11:23 pm
39281 spacer
>>39278
I really don't think talking about "dragging" a woman out of a pub to shag her sounds all that much like a "joke". Obviously tone and intent are important, but just because Lazenby's been telling this story like it's a funny one for however many decades doesn't mean it's actually okay. I'm sure you'll all get on at me for being a big, wet, seaford importer or what have you, but I knew a young woman who was dragged out of a club while too pissed to do much about it, almost bundled into a cab, and only through the intervention of her mates was she spared goodness knows what they gave me a right good hiding when they caught up to me. Obviously that last part's a joke, but the rest is Gospel truth and so I'm rather unsympathetic to Mr Lazenby's "tales". You ask around and most women have a story of something like that happening to them. I'm not trying to make you out to be some horrible woman hater, and maybe I'm mistaken on all counts, but it's very easy to be blind to this kind of thing as a bloke. This kind of thing being the levels of bullshit women have to put up with. And in the 1960s and 70s? I can't even begin to imagine.
>> No. 39282 Anonymous
12th September 2022
Monday 11:34 pm
39282 spacer

VIPIrelandPicture-Ref184592-1571929594.jpg
392823928239282
>>39280

To quote Ireland's wisest man, "Twitter isn't a social network, it's a massively-multiplayer roleplaying game in which people compete to have the best complaint".
>> No. 39283 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 12:09 am
39283 spacer
>>39281

Mate pretty much all jokes stop being funny and start being horrifying if you are that determined to take every single word of them 100% literally. The thing about a joke is that usually, most of it isn't meant to be taken literally, and your position relies solely on the worst possible case interpretation of the term "dragging".

Sure the literal case it might have happened, and that's not nice, but the same can be said of any joke that involves... Well, basically anything. Probably 75% of all jokes involve something unfortunate happening to somebody, that would sound really very unpleasant indeed if you were an alien from another planet who doesn't know what a joke is.
>> No. 39284 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 12:32 am
39284 spacer
>>392832
But this isn't a joke in the hilariously absurd way "I tried to steal spaghetti from the shop, but the female guard saw me and I couldn’t get pasta", is a joke. This sounds like a funny anecdote, like a thing that happened that Lazenby thought would get a laugh, probably because at an earlier time, with a different crowd, it did. And I don't think we do have to rely on the worst interpretation of dragging, you can strong arm someone who's intoxicated and is not really thinking she needs to put up a fight rather easily I imagine.

I don't know, I'm going to charitably call you willingly naive for this line of thinking. If you can't see why comments like Lazenby's would evoke a negative reaction in perfectly sound minded people I don't know what to tell you.

Why's this even being discussed ITT? Unless that cricketer's daughter had a cock I fail to see the relevance.
>> No. 39285 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 12:42 am
39285 spacer
>>39280
> It makes you feel like you matter, in a world in which seldom few of us actually do.
And, of course, for the terminally online, the total insignificance of the self is infinitely more prevalent. It's like that Little Britain sketch about the only gay in the village, who gets outraged when he meets another gay. Even though it should be a positive thing, he takes it as an assault on his identity and he just gets angry.

>>39284
Those sketches could be argued to be homophobic. And with that, I have brought this thread back to its original topic of LGBTQIA+ tolerance. My God, I'm brilliant.
>> No. 39286 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 1:05 am
39286 spacer
>>39284

>I don't know, I'm going to charitably call you willingly naive for this line of thinking. If you can't see why comments like Lazenby's would evoke a negative reaction in perfectly sound minded people I don't know what to tell you.

I am being devil's advocate to some extent, but the fact is, it is possible to make a completely harmless joke along those lines, and if you ask me, people should just stop being so easily bumsore about things.

It's like the low-hanging fruit of that old fashioned "women belong in the kitchen making sandwiches" style of humour. When you actually think about that, when you actually put your mind towards it, that kind of joke is totally harmless. Nobody should be getting upset about it because no amount of jokes about sandwiches are going to somehow lead us to living in A Handmaid's Tale, but that's exactly the sort of reaction people have to them these days. I bet you would get less shit for actually raping a woman right there on the stage than telling a "get back in the kitchen" joke. Obviously I don't mean that literally.

I suppose my point overall is: Yes, I see why people might be upset by it, or jokes like it; but at the same time, fuck those people, I don't really give a fuck if they are offended. A joke is a joke. If you think a joke indicates he might have done a bit of casual raping back in the day, that's a different matter, that's a sexual assault allegation. In a way it's actually really weird that you'd prefer he just not tell jokes about his history of casual rape and continue to get away with it; you're more bothered about him bringing it up again and again than if he did it or not.
>> No. 39287 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 2:03 am
39287 spacer
>>39286
It's good that someone is playing devil's advocate, because we need that in a society where everyone is in a race to be the most outraged. But, that being said:
-Jokes need to be funny. Most of these offensive jokes are based on incongruity and exaggeration; if I said I went fishing in Portugal and caught and then ate the remains of Madeleine McCann, that's a bit funny because I am hilarious it obviously didn't really happen, and it's so far beyond what anyone would do that it's just absurd. But there are those mental people who constantly confess to crimes they hear about on the news, when they had nothing to do with them, and those people aren't funny at all because it's entirely possible that they did do it.
-It is also entirely possible that the man who played James Bond in the late 1960s did, in fact, rape women, and not in a funny way like if he was dressed as a clown, or attacked them using a jack-in-the-box with a boxing glove in it.
-George Lazenby played James Bond. He is a role model, not just to impressionable ten-year-old boys but also to severely emotionally stunted adult Deano mongs. Both of those groups are very easy to persuade to become rapists themselves. If I told the joke where I ask you the best thing about having sex with 23-year-olds there's twenty of them and then I saw on the news that people who admire me were deciding to become child molesters, then at the very least I would probably stop telling that joke.
-I don't want him to "just not tell jokes about his history of casual rape and continue to get away with it"; it's the getting away with it that offends me. A rapist telling a joke from a prison cell is far preferable to a rapist being paid thousands of Australian dollarydoos to boast about his crimes before going home to his mansion to sit in his swimming pool. If he was in the stocks while bamboo grows up through his cock as a punishment, and then he told the exact same joke, I probably would laugh just like I did when I bantered Alan Turing into suicide by repeatedly telling him he dropped his gay card.
>> No. 39288 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 6:24 am
39288 spacer
Having been at quite a few comedy gigs that later became news, I'd be very reluctant to make any sort of judgement about Lazenby's comments based on second- and third-hand accounts. I've seen a lot of perfectly ordinary gigs with a few edgy lines get described as a "shocking tirade" delivered to a "dumbstruck and horrified audience" in the papers. I've seen someone who got up to go for a piss at a bad moment described as an "audience member walking out in disgust".

Maybe Lazenby was totally out of order, but it's also quite possible that he was just being a rambly old man who told some stories that landed flat. Jokes have an intrinsic level of linguistic ambiguity, humour is highly subjective, people feel left out by humour that they don't get and a lot of people become irrationally angry if they don't find something funny. We tend to judge comedy by a different and stricter set of criteria than other forms of entertainment. If people go to a music concert that they don't like, they rarely come to the conclusion that the people on stage can't actually play music at all and that the rest of the audience must be stupid or insane. If you think that a magician is literally magical, everyone assumes you're a bit cracked in the head.

If the promoter who booked Lazenby decides not to book him again, fine. If he decides to tell his colleagues why he won't book him again, that's also fine as long as he's being reasonably fair and accurate. What I can't stand behind is someone's character being judged based on half-remembered retellings of things they said on stage.

I'm old enough to remember when a lot of comedians were inarguably sexist and racist and homophobic in a very much non-ironic manner. Plenty of people thought that they were objectionable, plenty of people made jokes at their expense, plenty of people knew that they wouldn't enjoy a certain type of performer or the kind of acts booked by a certain type of club. Very few people were calling for those comedians to be blacklisted by their industry and excluded from society. I think it's pretty much unarguable that we have become more censorious.
>> No. 39289 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 12:08 pm
39289 spacer
>>39288

It's not just obscure comedy acts either who struggle with today's backlash against anything which teeters on a fine line between pushing the envelope and being outrageously disgusting.

Any comedian starting out today would probably never, ever get to be on a stage again if they told a joke like this one -


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QOIRuc6sZU

Probably nobody went home that evening thinking that Ricky Gervais was even remotely endorsing child abuse. It was one of those dark, offensive jokes that people like Ricky Gervais or Jimmy Carr built their careers on, and at least back then, people knew that while it was a bit out there, it was just a joke.

But that's the problem these days. There is no more understanding that comedy can, and should have a right to be dark and offensive, within reasonable limits, but that it's just a joke, and that Ricky Gervais positively never wanked himself off in front of his daughter. A lot of younger people in particular now think anybody doing offensive material like that deserves to not only be booed off the stage and get crucified in a social media shitstorm, but to never find any gainful employment again. They'd probably even be outraged if they then spotted that comedian working in McDonald's to pay their bills. Surely, somebody who used to tell child abuse jokes shouldn't get to hand you your burgers and chips at the drive-through window.
>> No. 39290 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 12:32 pm
39290 spacer
>>39289

Nobody cares about Lazenby, except you being outraged about how you imagine other people would be outraged. There's far more going on right now than with the people you made up to be angry about.
>> No. 39291 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 1:22 pm
39291 spacer
>>39289

>Any comedian starting out today would probably never, ever get to be on a stage again if they told a joke like this one

That's not quite true, but the reality is arguably worse. You can get away with dark material, right up until you don't. The same routine you've used for the last 200 gigs can suddenly get you in the papers if the wrong person is in the audience. 99.9% of comedygoers are sensible and reasonable people, but there's always that one-in-a-thousand who might decide to try and ruin your career.

Some people, for reasons only known to themselves, are just looking for an excuse to get offended. They don't care about what you meant, they're just waiting for their keyword-recognition algorithm to identify a naughty word. There's also a big cohort of people who will happily laugh along to jokes about x and y, but will immediately become outraged by jokes about z because they know someone who is z.

Ten or fifteen years ago, people would heckle, they'd walk out, they'd complain to the management, they'd try to start a fight with you when you left the venue. None of that is particularly nice, but at least you can deal with it, at least they're confronting you. Today, people will record you on their phone, take a bit out of context and stick it on social media. They'll tweet about what they thought you said, even if it bears little or no resemblance to what you actually said. It's sneaky and cowardly, because the comedian often doesn't even know that someone was annoyed until it has blown up into a "controversy" and because they have no easy way of asking someone else who saw the same routine.

Ironically, this shift has gone hand-in-hand with a massive increase in the number of genuine sexual predators working in the comedy industry. Normal people aren't equipped to navigate that sort of minefield, but for literal rapists it's home turf.
>> No. 39292 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 1:37 pm
39292 spacer
I would add to my earlier devil's advocation that a joke also has the right to be shit and unfunny. Nobody is stopping painters slapping a few blobs on a canvas and calling it art; so nobody should be pretending a joke isn't a joke just because it isn't funny.

>>39290

>lalala I can't hear you, so you're not real
>> No. 39293 Anonymous
13th September 2022
Tuesday 1:42 pm
39293 spacer
>>39291

>Some people, for reasons only known to themselves, are just looking for an excuse to get offended. They don't care about what you meant, they're just waiting for their keyword-recognition algorithm to identify a naughty word.

I think that sums it up quite well.

Happening on something they can get outraged about is giving them release. And probably a feeling of significance and meaning, in a world where their existence otherwise doesn't mean shit, because they are the ones then breaking that bit of information to the twittersphere. And they get to reap the recognition of being retweeted thousands of times and people commenting under their tweet. It's really just a strange kind of way of feeding someone's narcissism.
>> No. 39294 Anonymous
15th September 2022
Thursday 2:00 am
39294 spacer
I've been rewatching Futurama recently, and the episode where Bender becomes a female robot so he can win lots of medals in the women's Robot Olympics absolutely couldn't be made now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bend_Her

It's my big complaint about Futurama that you can split it into "the legendary fantastic episodes" and "the rest", and this is very much one of the rest, but it does feel pretty astounding how the woke metropolitan elites of Futurama (one of the writers is Al Gore's daughter!) made an episode where a totally unqualified male robot stomps all over female Olympians by pretending to be female. At the time, I assume nobody cared, so it's like a time capsule into attitudes towards this topic back before everyone in the world had to have an opinion on it.
>> No. 39295 Anonymous
15th September 2022
Thursday 12:10 pm
39295 spacer
>>39294

Yeah, that one is weird when I think about it, but more because I feel confident almost nobody back then was even remotely interested in or aware of "the issue" as an issue. It just wasn't. It never occurred to me at the time it had any parallels to anything that existed as a real world debate. It wasn't even particularly politically slanted, it was just a funny absurd concept in a cartoon.

If that episode was done today, it would almost certainly take a different tone, but it's not really a capsule of attitudes on a topic, because it wasn't a topic back then. It shows us what attitudes to a topic would be if they hadn't since then been so heavily politicised and propagandised. It shows how much effort has been expended to make an issue of the matter.
>> No. 39296 Anonymous
15th September 2022
Thursday 1:16 pm
39296 spacer
>>39295

> nobody back then was even remotely interested in or aware of "the issue" as an issue.

I think that's one characteristic of present-day identity politics. The issuisation of non-issues.

To me it speaks of a generation who have the free time to declare those things an issue that nobody before ever thought of as an issue. I'm not saying that being a young person today doesn't come with some very real problems, all identity politics aside, but a lot of those issues are made up, armchair academic problems with which they are just making life more difficult for themselves and on which they are wasting needless energy.
>> No. 39297 Anonymous
15th September 2022
Thursday 1:27 pm
39297 spacer
Are you lads sure it's a non-issue? There's definitely been various stories about whether transwomen should compete against other women over the years.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URz-RYEOaig
>> No. 39298 Anonymous
15th September 2022
Thursday 1:32 pm
39298 spacer
>>39296

>To me it speaks of a generation who have the free time to declare those things an issue that nobody before ever thought of as an issue.

If you want to start a real shitstorm in idpol circles, ask people where they went to school, ask them what their parents for a living. It's just an establishment distraction tactic, as per.

Ordinary young people have a lot of very pressing issues - housing, the cost of living, the climate, pensions - but it suits the establishment to argue that they're just gender-obsessed idpol loonies. It suits the establishment to portray only the subset of young people who can afford to hang around in Westminster all day waiting to do an interview, it suits them to represent the north through the prism of vox-pops conducted in an indoor market during office hours. The media do it because it's easy and no-one challenges them on it because it produces convenient narratives.
>> No. 39299 Anonymous
15th September 2022
Thursday 2:11 pm
39299 spacer
>>39297

>Are you lads sure it's a non-issue?

Yes. For sporting bodies, the trans issue is a convenient smokescreen to cover up for rampant doping. If we're arguing about the handful of elite female athletes who happen to have a Y chromosome, we aren't looking at the testosterone and haematocrit levels of the other 99.99% of elite female athletes. If they talk about biological men who want to compete as women, they don't have to talk about all the women are turned into men by doping.

Cycling has a terrible reputation for doping, but that's because they actually addressed their doping problem and made a serious effort to catch the cheats. Other sports pretend that they don't have a doping problem and it suits them to avoid looking too hard. The doctors who doped Armstrong and Ulrich and Pantani also worked in dozens of other sports, but nobody wants to investigate. Unless you've got a really sophisticated anti-doping programme with biological passports, you inevitably end up in a situation where everyone is doping because clean athletes can't even qualify.

Andreas Krieger is one of the few to go public, but there are thousands of current and former elite female athletes who are living with life-long gender issues as a direct result of doping.


>> No. 39300 Anonymous
15th September 2022
Thursday 2:21 pm
39300 spacer
>>39297
That's a cartoon.
>> No. 39301 Anonymous
16th September 2022
Friday 12:17 am
39301 spacer
>>39299
>Trans World Sport
Nothing to add; just pointing it out.
>> No. 39302 Anonymous
16th September 2022
Friday 1:19 am
39302 spacer
>>39301
>> No. 39303 Anonymous
16th September 2022
Friday 1:21 am
39303 spacer
>>39302

Ignore.

Something went wrong with the image I tried to upload, and I can't be arsed to try again.
>> No. 39304 Anonymous
16th September 2022
Friday 2:20 pm
39304 spacer
LGB Alliance co-founder breaks down in court when asked to define ‘lesbian’

Kate Harris, a co-founder of LGB Alliance, was invited by Michael Gibbon KC, counsel for Mermaids, to reflect on whether some people would have a different understanding of lesbian from the definition given by her organisation.

“That a lesbian can be a man with a penis?” she asked.

Gibbon responded: “Putting it in a more neutral way, that lesbians can include someone who is a woman as a result of gender reassignment.”

Harris, who is a lesbian, was distressed by the exchange, and the judge called for a short adjournment.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/sep/15/lgb-alliance-co-founder-breaks-down-in-court-when-asked-to-define-lesbian
>> No. 39305 Anonymous
16th September 2022
Friday 3:12 pm
39305 spacer
>>39304

I've said it before and I'll say it again, but the existence of trans people simply exposes the truth that some lesbians and fisherfolk just hate men.

Pure and simply, these people can't look past the fact you have a Y chromosome and a trouser snake. You're not allowed to switch sides, because by genetic fact of birth, you are their sworn enemy. They hate trans people because they hate men. It's that simple. They think men are all dangerous rape beasts in a manner not dissimilar to how whites thought the same about black people a hundred years ago.

You don't get male bumder groups going on about women with vaginas wearing jeans and masquerading as blokes, do you. It's only the women. They get away with it because nobody dares question the merits of fishing.

The missing piece of this puzzle is to admit and acknowledge fisherpersons are not egalitarians, they are bigots, and their movement is outdated. Even the so-called "trans inclusive fisherpersons" are just flogging a dead horse, like digital tape cassettes.
>> No. 39306 Anonymous
16th September 2022
Friday 4:16 pm
39306 spacer
>>39305

I think it's very revealing that someone who runs a highly controversial lobbying organisation would break down in tears when challenged on a basic point of disagreement. Maybe it's just a ploy to look like a victim, but I don't think so.

I think they've spent so long in self-reinforcing echo chambers and Twitter insult exchanges that it doesn't occur to them that they might need to actually argue the point. When presented with the very straightforward notion that there might be a categorical difference between a man with a penis and someone who has undergone gender reassignment, they've got nothing to say in response. It turns out that in a court of law, you can't just call a barrister a "groomer" and congratulate yourself on having won. You can't block and ignore a court summons.

It's also interesting that a group of lesbians have seemingly accepted an alliance with the far right, possibly with a non-trivial overlap between the two. I can't begin to understand that bit.

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2020/04/03/lgb-alliance-neo-nazi-homophobia-spinster-death-head-charity-commission/
>> No. 39307 Anonymous
16th September 2022
Friday 6:53 pm
39307 spacer
>>39306

>It's also interesting that a group of lesbians have seemingly accepted an alliance with the far right, possibly with a non-trivial overlap between the two

It's not really as shocking as you'd imagine it to be, it's just yet more proof of the complete hollowness of identity politics. Just because you're a lezzer doesn't mean you can't also be a holocaust denier or something like that.

I thought this was quite well illustrated when they had so many incredulous articles in the Graun a couple weeks back about how Truss' cabinet doesn't have any white men in the front benches, because the virtuous liberal narrative breaks down when encountering the fact that doesn't stop them being to well the right of Thatcher.

Or like that article I saw bigging up some female drone pilot in Ukraine. Totally cynical.
>> No. 39308 Anonymous
16th September 2022
Friday 9:45 pm
39308 spacer
>>39307

>Just because you're a lezzer doesn't mean you can't also be a holocaust denier or something like that.

True; just because you're a member of some hip sexual or gender minority, doesn't mean you can do no wrong. Just remember that human Ken doll Rodrigo Alves, who got booted off Celebrity Big Brother.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2018/aug/25/celebrity-big-brother-rodrigo-alves-ejected-after-racist-language-warning

>Alves was previously reprimanded during an episode aired on 17 August in which he told Dan Osborne, a former star of The Only Way Is Essex, he was not attracted to him as he was “too white”.

Kind of ironic though that it was suddenly a racist remark telling somebody they're too white. Goes to show how touchy the issue has become in the minds of some, when you can't even call Dan Osborne too white. I mean, white straight men are practically the bogeyman of today's identity politics. They're everything that black Jewish disabled lesbian transwomen despise.
>> No. 39309 Anonymous
16th September 2022
Friday 9:52 pm
39309 spacer
>>39307
>how Truss' cabinet doesn't have any white men in the front benches

>> No. 39310 Anonymous
18th September 2022
Sunday 4:10 pm
39310 spacer

Untitled-design-15-1-1392x783.png
393103931039310
Ontario High School Defends “Fetishistic” Large Bust-Wearing Teacher

The Ontario High School at the center of controversy for having a male teaching young students while donning a large prosthetic bust has issued a full defense of the teacher in a newly-leaked email sent to parents.

https://reduxx.info/ontario-high-school-defends-fetishistic-large-bust-wearing-teacher/
>> No. 39311 Anonymous
18th September 2022
Sunday 6:07 pm
39311 spacer
>>39310
I'm all for LGBTQ+ rights and accepting people as they come, but this is just a tad daft.
>> No. 39312 Anonymous
18th September 2022
Sunday 6:35 pm
39312 spacer

Untitled-1-1024x576-1.jpg
393123931239312
>>39311
The source seems a little on the TERFy side, but there's enough pictures of them teaching in the school whilst wearing those comically large fake breasts to show this is lunacy.
>> No. 39313 Anonymous
18th September 2022
Sunday 9:51 pm
39313 spacer
>>39312

In my day, we would have bullied that to death. On balance, I think that things have probably improved, but I can't help feeling a little disappointed with Canadian high school students.
>> No. 39314 Anonymous
19th September 2022
Monday 2:35 am
39314 spacer
>>39311
So where would you draw the line?
>> No. 39315 Anonymous
19th September 2022
Monday 3:12 am
39315 spacer
>>39314

"Big plastic tits" is not a gender identity.
>> No. 39316 Anonymous
19th September 2022
Monday 8:08 am
39316 spacer

Noteddieizzard.jpg
393163931639316
>>39314
This, more than anything else, feels like someone forcing others, children in this case, to partake in their fetish.

Even if we skirt over the fact of whether it's appropriate to wear this in a school, especially without wearing a bra so the nipples are prominent, they're a woodworking teacher so sooner or later those prosthetics are going to get mangled up in the machinery.
>> No. 39317 Anonymous
19th September 2022
Monday 10:27 am
39317 spacer
>>39314
If someone wants to be a woman, that's fine, but it is offensive to women to define them as having giant tits as their most important feature. This geezer's gender identity is not that of a real woman, but of an insulting caricature of a woman.
>> No. 39318 Anonymous
19th September 2022
Monday 1:15 pm
39318 spacer
>>39317

Would we say the same about an AFAB woman with comically large fake boobs? I feel like I never heard anyone question Lolo Ferrari's gender identity.
>> No. 39319 Anonymous
19th September 2022
Monday 2:57 pm
39319 spacer
>>39317

But you see this is where it circles right back around to rigidly defining what a woman is by gender norms and expectations of behaviour and appearance etc. You know, the very things fisherfolk were supposedly fighting to liberate themselves from, but now clutch their pearls so tightly over. And they say the horseshoe theory isn't real.

I can't decide if it just means they're thick or if I should be charitable enough to call it cynicism.
>> No. 39320 Anonymous
19th September 2022
Monday 3:44 pm
39320 spacer
>>39316

I guess I'm very obviously from a different time. When I was at the beginning of secondary school in the late 80s, our English teacher was rumoured to have a gay sexual relationship with our music teacher. It was kind of an open secret both among faculty and us pupils, something we sort of knew but never talked about it, but some very conservative concerned parents then demanded to know what the deal was, because they feared it would set a bad example for us kids. Even then, you couldn't fire somebody just for being gay, but the school had to half-heartedly promise to ensure that we wouldn't be in harm's way. We thought that was a bit excessive, because both of them were quite popular and likeable teachers as such, but there you go.

I'm not insinuating that having a teacher in drag with giant plastic tits is going to scar schoolkids for life. It probably will, but you can't say that these days. But seriously, you have to draw the line somewhere. Especially in our time now, we try to shield kids from anything sexual well past what is actually developmentally sound, and yet, nobody thinks anything of their kids being taught by, again, a guy in drag with giant plastic tits.
>> No. 39321 Anonymous
19th September 2022
Monday 4:05 pm
39321 spacer
>>39318
That's a very interesting point. But I think you'd have heard more complaints if Lolo Ferrari decided to become a primary school teacher.
>> No. 39322 Anonymous
19th September 2022
Monday 7:03 pm
39322 spacer
>>39317
Your mum is an insulting caricature of a woman.
>> No. 39323 Anonymous
19th September 2022
Monday 7:27 pm
39323 spacer
>>39317>>39316
This sums it up really. It looks like Just a weird fetish thing rather than actual interest being female presenting.
And it's exactly the sort of thing that works against the folk that just want to live in their chosen identity nice and quietly in harmony.
>> No. 39693 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 12:35 am
39693 spacer
I don't really know what's going on in Scotland, but this woman was so mad at what their government are doing she got her fanny out.

https://twitter.com/ForWomenScot/status/1605997661148127232
>> No. 39694 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 12:43 am
39694 spacer

Glin.jpg
396943969439694
Oh, and of course fucking Glinner reactivated his Twitter account a couple of hours ago just so he could start ranting about it.
>> No. 39695 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 1:30 am
39695 spacer
>>39693

I can understand getting your fanny out in the heat of the moment, but I can't fathom sitting in your house making a merkin because you're planning on getting your fanny out. I think it hints at the performative nature of this anger.
>> No. 39696 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 3:38 am
39696 spacer
>>39694
>muh chronic masturbator
Fucking woke dickhead. Using buzzwords like that. If it's not enough the right call them 'liberal nazis' it's this guy, calling them chronic masturbators and implying they are 'far right progressives'. Twitterfags are cancer through and through. I mean he likes to sit there and harrass random evangelist christian korean youtubers. No, it's wrong they called the cops on him but why even start that? I can't blame them for wanting revenge on him, petty as that is.
>> No. 39697 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 3:41 am
39697 spacer
>>39696
Or for that matter the word woke. I say kneejerk but felt like it for a change. Also chronic masturbator filtering to chronic masturbaties and 'evangelist christian korean youtuber' filtering to evangelist make it hard to discuss Glinner's blatant trans hate and have people understand what in the helpp you're talking about.
>> No. 39698 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 3:42 am
39698 spacer
>>39697 i n c e l filters to chronic and 'evangelist christian korean youtuber' filtrest to 'evangelist
>> No. 39699 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 7:42 am
39699 spacer
>>39696
He's probably right that they look stinky though. I think what really holds trans rights back in this country is that half of them look like utter creeps. More people would be accepting of trans people if they looked like, say, Stephanie Hirst instead of greasy creepers.
>> No. 39700 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 8:23 am
39700 spacer
>>39699

You don't notice the fit ones.
>> No. 39703 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 9:51 pm
39703 spacer
>>39694

The tragic thing about Glinner's position in all this is that he is just... Frankly, a fucking simp. He's the ultimate white knight "m'lady" niceguy male ally, fir the worst kind of stuck up old-school fishercunts. Who does he think he's impressing? What does he think he's going to get out of it?

I just can't respect that kind of bloke whatsoever, even if you buy the idea that trannos are insidious pedo sex pests, his is still a much more pathetic and servile position to take.
>> No. 39704 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 10:03 pm
39704 spacer
It has been almost 24 hours since Glinner was back on Twitter. In that timeframe he has tweeted or retweeted another post a total of 64 times by my count.
>> No. 39705 Anonymous
23rd December 2022
Friday 10:28 pm
39705 spacer
>>39699
>>39700

There's a new generation of trans women, who are roughly in their early to mid-20s now and who are virtually undetectable. Some of them become open activists or pop up on porn sites or escort ads, but the majority of them go completely stealth. Because why wouldn't you.

A lot has changed in the last fifteen to twenty years in transpeople's ability to transition early, often even before their birth gender's puberty sets in. Naturally if you wait till you're a fully grown lad with all the attributes, then it's always going to be more difficult to pass.
>> No. 39706 Anonymous
25th December 2022
Sunday 3:03 pm
39706 spacer
>>39705
If you go completely stealth isn't that going to lead to some dissonance when it comes to picking partners?
>> No. 39707 Anonymous
25th December 2022
Sunday 3:27 pm
39707 spacer
>>39706

The young folk generally aren't bothered, particularly the sort of young folk who hang about in circles where everyone lists their pronouns in their Twitter profiles. "Disclosure" (i.e. telling a prospective partner that you're trans) was historically a really fraught and dangerous problem, but it's much less of an issue for Gen Z. They know all the right words and they're comfortable having the conversation.

The pace of change is really quite remarkable. I'm not that old, but when I was a kid there was one openly gay lad in my entire high school and he was relentlessly bullied for it. My nephews go to a similar sort of school, but they both have a couple of gay lads in their class and a couple of trans kids in their year. They're ordinary working-class lads, but they're totally comfortable talking about sexuality and gender identity.
>> No. 39708 Anonymous
25th December 2022
Sunday 6:07 pm
39708 spacer
>>39707

When I was in secondary school in the early 90s, we had an English and art teacher who was rumoured to be gay. I say rumoured, it was pretty much an open secret. He was certainly camp enough that it was believable. Although he sometimes talked about having an ex wife and a son, both of whom had broken off all contact with him, because they "didn't agree with his lifestyle". But he never went into more detail about just what that "lifestyle" was they disapproved of. It only much later transpired that he had a multi-year relationship with one of our music teachers. They were known to be very close, we certainly had the impression that they were very good friends, but we wouldn't quite have made them out to be a gay couple. For what it was worth, they also avoided any kind of public displays of affection during school hours.

This was all pretty hush-hush, there were some concerned parents who would make their occasional snide remarks, but nobody talked about it openly. Not in those days.
>> No. 39709 Anonymous
26th December 2022
Monday 10:00 am
39709 spacer
>>39708
Ah, the good old days of Section 28.
>> No. 39710 Anonymous
26th December 2022
Monday 12:12 pm
39710 spacer
>>39709

You could argue that simply being a gay teacher didn't go against Section 28. Because it only banned the "promotion" of homosexuality. But in a climate like that, it was probably difficult to be out and proud.
>> No. 39711 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 11:01 am
39711 spacer

Ey4j-r9WUAUELVK.jpg
397113971139711
>>39710
The breadth with which that word could be interpreted certainly contributed to the climate. The governing party of the day certainly didn't mind everyone knowing they (publicly, at least) disapproved of The Gays.
>> No. 39712 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 1:35 pm
39712 spacer
>>39711

Funny that the Tories in effect did the opposite of taking politics out of education. Banning the "promotion" of homosexuality actually brought pretty substantial political ideology into classrooms.


I happen to agree that police need to be kept out of schools. Just look at how that turns out over at the Septics. There are frequent reports of entire schools being put on lockdown for police searches. Some larger high schools even have their own campus police.

https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/prevalence-police-officers-us-schools

Having police at your school can be a pretty traumatic experience. When I was in year 8, I was hit by a skip lorry while riding my bicycle to school. Not my fault, the driver just plain overlooked me. Luckily I only got some scratches from landing in a roadside flower bed. Anyway, a few days later two uniformed PCs dealing with the matter came to my school and into my classroom and asked to speak to me because they "had some questions". That alone started a murmur among the other kids, but then a few days later a rumour made its way back to me that police were really there because I had been caught stealing. Not really something you want happening to you as a 14 year old.
>> No. 39713 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 1:48 pm
39713 spacer
>>39712

You must have been to a nicer school than me. Having the police come after you would definitely have made you cooler when I was that age.
>> No. 39714 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 2:04 pm
39714 spacer
>>39711
If you desire a coloured for your neighbour, vote Labour.
If you are already burdened with one, vote Tory.
>> No. 39715 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 2:20 pm
39715 spacer
>>39713

My school was really pretty middle class. There just wasn't a lot of crime. The only real incident I remember was that a friend of a friend got a suspended sentence in year 12 for stealing a leather jacket from a shop. But he was a wrongun anyway. A few years later, somebody told me that he got nicked for selling large amounts of ecstasy pills among the local rave scene.
>> No. 39716 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 3:48 pm
39716 spacer
>>39715
>But he was a wrongun anyway. A few years later, somebody told me that he got nicked for selling large amounts of ecstasy pills among the local rave scene.
What's wrong with that?
>> No. 39717 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 5:23 pm
39717 spacer
>>39716

He got caught.
>> No. 39718 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 6:33 pm
39718 spacer

ar0e9j34foms.jpg
397183971839718
>>39716
>>39717
>> No. 39719 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 6:50 pm
39719 spacer
Yeah, ecstasy is great and everything, but let's face it, if you're selling it in bulk before you're out of Sixth Form you're probably a piece of shit. Let's not kid ourselves. However, that's not to say I think drugs are evil or otherlad's acquaintance should have been locked in a oubliette until his hair turned grey.
>> No. 39720 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 7:19 pm
39720 spacer
>>39719

Otherlad here. That friend of a friend wasn't selling the pills while still in school. Not that anybody knew anyway. It was a few years later when we were all about 20-21.

And I don't think it's glamorous to make a living selling bulk party drugs. Whether you're still in school or not. People do die from ecstasy.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/aug/01/isobel-jones-reilly-inquest-ecstasy-party
>> No. 39721 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 7:25 pm
39721 spacer
>>39720

It's not glamorous to make a living cleaning toilets either. Why do people always say it's not "glamorous" anyway? Whenever someone's talking about something they disapprove of (whether they're trolling or not), it's always that word. Nobody ever claims it is glamorous, this isn't the roaring twenties, nobody aspires to live a glamorous lifestyle, other than a few maiden aunts.
>> No. 39722 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 7:48 pm
39722 spacer
>>39720

>People do die from ecstasy.

Just ask the Essex boys.
>> No. 39723 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 8:50 pm
39723 spacer
>>39310
>>39312
>>39312
I heard this guy is actually protesting the schools position by pushing it to the extreme of farce.
>> No. 39724 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 9:00 pm
39724 spacer
>>39723

Yes, it's well known in the otherplaces. He was against the indoctrination of his pupils regarding alphabet people, got threatened with the sack so came back to work as a parody troon. But Poe's Law struck and nobody knows what is going on.
>> No. 39725 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 9:39 pm
39725 spacer
>>39721

>It's not glamorous to make a living cleaning toilets either.

But when was the last time a toilet patron died from a poo overdose.



Something tells me Google probably has a picture of just that.
>> No. 39726 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 9:43 pm
39726 spacer
>>39725

People die from pooing all the time. I can't find any accurate statistics but it's more than from ecstasy by a long shot.
>> No. 39727 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 11:03 pm
39727 spacer
>>39726

My dad nearly died from having a poo. Strained too much, blacked out, slumped forwards, twatted his head on the towel rail, ended up in A&E with a bleed on the brain. Serves him right, the daft twat. Should have had some bran flakes.
>> No. 39728 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 11:05 pm
39728 spacer
>>39727

I don't think it's glamorous, not eating bran flakes.
>> No. 39729 Anonymous
27th December 2022
Tuesday 11:24 pm
39729 spacer
>>39727

Elvis Presley died while on the crapper. I was in Memphis and took the tour of Graceland, and they show you the exact spot in the house where it happened. IIRC it was in the ensuite bathroom off the master bedroom. As he lost consciousness, he slumped over and fell on his stomach halfway into the bedroom. There's a velvet rope that prevents you from actually going into the bathroom or sitting on the toilet bowl, but they let you see enough to get a general idea of what happened in there.

Not sure I'd want people to see where I died while having a poo.
>> No. 39730 Anonymous
28th December 2022
Wednesday 11:28 am
39730 spacer

Screenshot_2022-12-26_at_13.53.27.png
397303973039730
Cancer survivor who had double mastectomy scared of public toilets after being mistaken for a man

https://www.itv.com/news/central/2022-12-26/cancer-survivor-challenged-at-public-toilets-after-being-mistaken-for-a-man

I guess that answers what Bellamy from Heartbeat is up to these days.
>> No. 39731 Anonymous
28th December 2022
Wednesday 12:43 pm
39731 spacer
>>39730

Right. The boobs did it. Nobody mistook her for a man before.
>> No. 39732 Anonymous
28th December 2022
Wednesday 2:38 pm
39732 spacer
>>39730
The fuck is wrong with these people trying to police somebody going into a public loo? Am I going to have to start whipping my schlong out in front of people so I can go have a shite in peace?
>> No. 39733 Anonymous
28th December 2022
Wednesday 2:49 pm
39733 spacer
>>39732
She's a beefy lesbian so it's not hard to see why she gets mistaken for a bloke, especially after the mastectomy.
>> No. 39734 Anonymous
28th December 2022
Wednesday 3:06 pm
39734 spacer
>>39732

It's because men are well known to be twice as likely to rape you in a public toilet than their baseline rape threat level, even more likely than the commonly understood rape hotspots of dark alleys or Hollywood casting interview. Men just can't control their lust when they can smell stale shit, piss, and week old tampons. Which means it is extra vital to police the genital anatomy of people in public toilets- The consequences of letting a man into them could be disastrous. If that means some collateral damage, then so be it.

The film Zootopia does a very good job of analogising this through the predator prey metaphor. It's not even subtle, the rabbit is a bigot who secretly desperately wants to be raped by the fox, both to justify her prejudices and to satisfy her darkest fetish. You see, even anthropomorphic animals live in a society.
>> No. 39735 Anonymous
28th December 2022
Wednesday 5:53 pm
39735 spacer
>>39732
"I didn't flash her, constable. I was allowing her to verify I was using the correct toilets."
>> No. 39736 Anonymous
28th December 2022
Wednesday 6:17 pm
39736 spacer
>>39729
There are worse things to die on the bog from than a deadly shit. Consider Michael Hutchence, who, in the words of a great documentarian, made a hundred million quid dying wanking on the loo.
>> No. 39737 Anonymous
28th December 2022
Wednesday 10:29 pm
39737 spacer
>>39736

>made a hundred million quid dying wanking on the loo.

It was mainly Paula Yates who started the rumour that he died from autoerotic asphyxiation.

He was high as a kite on half a dozen illegal and prescription drugs and alcohol when it happened. God knows what he was really thinking.
>> No. 39738 Anonymous
29th December 2022
Thursday 2:37 pm
39738 spacer
>>39736
S U I C I D E ...it might be messy but it's money for free.
>> No. 39785 Anonymous
6th January 2023
Friday 9:56 pm
39785 spacer
>More than 1.3 million people in England and Wales identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual, census data has revealed for the first time.

>For people aged 16 and over, more than 1.5% - 748,000 - identify as gay or lesbian, and 624,000 (1.3%) as bisexual. Some 165,000 people identify as "other" sexual orientations. And 262,000 people (0.5%) said their gender identity was different from their sex registered at birth.

>48,000 (0.10%) identified as trans men, with the same number identifying as trans women. 30,000 (0.06%) identified as non-binary, an umbrella term for those who do not identify as exclusively male or female. 18,000 (0.04%) wrote down a different gender identity.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64184736
>> No. 39786 Anonymous
6th January 2023
Friday 10:36 pm
39786 spacer
>>39785
Those numbers don't seem to add up.
>> No. 39787 Anonymous
6th January 2023
Friday 10:43 pm
39787 spacer
>>39786
118,000 stated that their gender identity differs from the sex they were born but didn't elaborate further.
>> No. 39790 Anonymous
8th January 2023
Sunday 5:37 pm
39790 spacer

File
removed
>>39787

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 39791 Anonymous
8th January 2023
Sunday 6:03 pm
39791 spacer
>>39790
Facebook, now.
>> No. 39871 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 3:06 pm
39871 spacer
You know, it's just dawned on me that there's one massive thing that is being overlooked in the debate about the acceptance of transwomen. It's this: women are completely batshit.

If you look at parenting forums, for example, then women will pour absolute vitriol over one another other matters such as whether their child was breastfed or bottlefed and whether they had a vaginal birth or a caesarean section. Women don't get along with each other because they're absolute batshit and will divide themselves along absolutely trivial lines so, ironically, by being full of hatred towards transwomen they're actually treating them the same way they'd treat other women in general.
>> No. 39872 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 3:53 pm
39872 spacer
>>39871

So what you're saying is, TERFs are the ultimate allies?
>> No. 39873 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 4:01 pm
39873 spacer
>>39872
All I'm saying is that we can't expect women to accept transwomen when women don't accept other women in the first place.
>> No. 39874 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 4:07 pm
39874 spacer
>>39873

I think it's fair to say people don't accept other people, of we're going to make it that broad.

This is why I identity as a fox. Humans are shit. Being a furfag is an expression of misanthropy.
>> No. 39875 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 4:19 pm
39875 spacer
>>39874
>This is why I identity as a fox.

You identify as a fox because you're mentally ill and looking for an echo chamber instead of tangible solutions to your problems. You weren't born into the wrong body.
>> No. 39876 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 4:25 pm
39876 spacer
>>39875

He's as much a fox as you are the same person you were yesterday, identity is an illusion.
>> No. 39877 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 4:55 pm
39877 spacer
>>39875

He identifies as a fox because he wants to get shagged up the arse by a load of autistic lads in a budget hotel.
>> No. 39878 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 5:26 pm
39878 spacer
>>39875

Nah I do it to wind up people like you tbh
>> No. 39879 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 5:43 pm
39879 spacer
>>39878

Admit it m8, it's all about the butt stuff.
>> No. 39880 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 6:09 pm
39880 spacer
>>39879

That's racist. Not all foxes are 24/7 anal maniacs.

I mean I do like it but still.
>> No. 39881 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 7:40 pm
39881 spacer
>>39880

*caniacs.
>> No. 39882 Anonymous
4th February 2023
Saturday 11:00 pm
39882 spacer

6f7.jpg
398823988239882
>>39880
>> No. 39883 Anonymous
5th February 2023
Sunday 12:49 am
39883 spacer
>>39882
Not entirely sure what is going on here, but at the same time, there are enough furries in the picture that I'm not sure I want to know.
>> No. 39903 Anonymous
12th February 2023
Sunday 8:21 pm
39903 spacer
>Police have launched a murder investigation following the death of a teenage girl in a park in Warrington.

>Brianna Ghey, 16, was found with multiple stab wounds on a path in Linear Park, Culcheth at about 15:15 GMT on Saturday and died at the scene.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64614832

Macabre, but it'll be interesting to see how this one plays out in the media. So far only The Mail are reporting that Brianna was evangelist christian korean youtuber and may have been the motivation for the attack.
>> No. 39904 Anonymous
12th February 2023
Sunday 8:35 pm
39904 spacer
>>39903

The comments section on The Mail seems to be genuinely sympathetic.

>>39883

Thirteen people gave that pizza a dash of special sauce.
>> No. 39905 Anonymous
12th February 2023
Sunday 8:48 pm
39905 spacer
>>39904
>The comments section on The Mail seems to be genuinely sympathetic.

I would say with The Mail that they do have a habit of completely rewriting articles on the same URL as more information comes in, so the initial/top comments don't always reflect what the article is about anymore if they change the narrative.

That said, the most recent comments are also very sympathetic. I don't know if that's because Brianna looks passable as a girl from the photos shared of her because that seems to be a big factor in how people view transpeople; if it was one of those transwomen who look like a greasy bloke in a wig that Glinner was getting mad about the other week I imagine it'd be a completely different reaction.
>> No. 39906 Anonymous
12th February 2023
Sunday 9:09 pm
39906 spacer

index.jpg
399063990639906
>>39905

Even if it was an ugly gorilla transbian, I think they would still be largely sympathetic; they are ultimately just the innocent victim of a horrible crime either way. Where the Mail readers would lose sympathy is if it was implied that they are in themselves somehow a wrong 'un; not merely a tranno but rather a women's bathroom poacher, a children's author harasser, and women's prison conspirator. In general I don't think the Mail lot are prone to blind hatred, just gulible to the idea certain people/groups deserve hatred.

And speaking of which, I was thinking about bumping this thread to ask what we reckon about Nicola Sturgeon's ongoing gender voodoo based turmoil. Is it going to be enough to tear her down, or perhaps even the SNP itself? I personally don't have strong feelings either way about the gender recognition bill itself, but then nor, I suspect, does she. She just wanted something to make a good wedge out of to show the evil English trampling hard-won Scotch freedoms, and failed to anticipate just what kind of a hornet's nest she was kicking by invoking gender idpol. Really I'd have thought she'd know better.

I've been thinking about it though, because it has meant loads of gobshites have been on Radio 4 talking about MUH WOMEN'S PRISONS, which to me always rung as a completely bad faith argument. It not only seems to implicitly acknowledge that women prisoners indeed do have it easier, and that there's nothing wrong with that; but it also tends to be made by the sort of people who would under absolutely no other circumstance be caught dead arguing in favour of the rights of... You know. Prisoners. People who are by definition criminals. Violent offenders and thieves and what have you.

Then again. Maybe she just feels strongly about it because she looks so much like a bloke.
>> No. 39907 Anonymous
12th February 2023
Sunday 9:12 pm
39907 spacer
>>39906
>She just wanted something to make a good wedge out of to show the evil English trampling hard-won Scotch freedoms, and failed to anticipate just what kind of a hornet's nest she was kicking by invoking gender idpol. Really I'd have thought she'd know better.

Exactly this. She knew that Westminster would push-back against it, thinking she could then channel that into anti-English sentiment and force another referendum. It shows a staggering lack of political nous. I don't think she gives a fuck about trans people, either.
>> No. 39908 Anonymous
12th February 2023
Sunday 9:38 pm
39908 spacer
>>39906
>It not only seems to implicitly acknowledge that women prisoners indeed do have it easier

I know someone who won a contract to do electrical work in prisons years ago. He said he was always given far more warnings to be on his guard at women's prisons, things like giving his van a thorough checking over for sabotage before he left, because female prisoners can be far more unhinged than male ones.
>> No. 39917 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 1:47 pm
39917 spacer

up7osqeddzha1.png
399173991739917
Okay I know rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk and Twitter are hypersensitive to this sort of thing, but a couple of news outlets having a line mentioning her birth name is apparently trans erasure.
>> No. 39918 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 2:02 pm
39918 spacer
>>39917
She probably means how so many outlets shied away from mentioned she was evangelist christian korean youtuber when it was first reported, which resulted in a bizarre BBC News piece that quoted the police were not investigating it as a hate crime but left you wondering why they would in the first place.

As for deadnames, hack media who publish material considered offensive but isn't newsworthy don't need to be defended.
>> No. 39919 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 2:21 pm
39919 spacer
>>39917
>Ghey

Is this a legitimate surname? It reminds me of the MySpace scene kid fad of fucking with spells (i.e .cool -> kewl) and I'm sorry to say that she looks the type, albeit it too young for that crowd.

Anyway, a kid has been stabbed to death by two other kids and that is a tragedy.
>> No. 39920 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 2:35 pm
39920 spacer
>>39918
>As for deadnames, hack media who publish material considered offensive but isn't newsworthy don't need to be defended.

Is it really offensive though? The Mail, for example, have since taken the line out with her birth name and replaced it with "Brianna had been born a male but is believed to have been living as a female for a number of months."

I get how deliberately calling a transperson by their deadname to their face would be offensive, but in this case it seems like saying "they were born x" is a way of informing people who may only have known her before she'd transitioned. If someone I went to school with was murdered and I didn't know they'd transitioned I might not join the dots and realise it was them, but if it included the name they were born with then I probably would.
>> No. 39922 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 3:22 pm
39922 spacer
>>39908
>female prisoners can be far more unhinged than male ones

I'm not sure if being trapped in a confined space with a load of sex-starved mentalists has the deterrent effect your envisioning.

About 10 years ago I had a gay friend argue that heterosexual men really aren't so much a sexuality as people with an extreme fetish for women. I've yet to find any compelling evidence otherwise.
>> No. 39923 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 3:46 pm
39923 spacer
>>39922

>heterosexual men really aren't so much a sexuality as people with an extreme fetish for women

On the other hand, what's to stop somebody from arguing that homosexuality is just an extreme knob fetish.
>> No. 39924 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 5:45 pm
39924 spacer
>>39917
As predictably as ever, when this was first posted on the DM's Facebook it was full of thoughts and prayers. Once it was reposted with the updated info that she was trans, it's turned into the usual screaming rabble. The woke are to blame ect.
>> No. 39925 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 5:58 pm
39925 spacer
>>39920
She was 16, who the fuck knew her before she transitioned? I read they contacted her dentist to find out her deadname. They are scum.
>> No. 39926 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 6:00 pm
39926 spacer
The Brianna Ghey stuff is so depressing. I think trans rights are important, but I can see a sort of logic behind those people protesting drag queen story hour. I don't agree with the logic, but you can see why some thickos might think a man portraying themself as a hypersexual woman is damaging to kids. But some 16 year old girl getting blamelessly stabbed to death by two scumbags, and people still defending the GC/anti-trans crowd. Really sad.
>> No. 39927 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 6:13 pm
39927 spacer
>>39926
Drag practitioners don't claim that drag is inherently sexual, though. They're just funny characters and whether they are for adults or not is dependent on context - and yes I'm going to whip out the comparison to panto dames again.
>> No. 39928 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 7:04 pm
39928 spacer
>>39927
I figure the majority of folk who protest drag queen story time, could have done with having exactly that in their own childhood.
>> No. 39929 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 7:29 pm
39929 spacer
>>39928
Nobody goes to the library anyway.
>> No. 39930 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 8:22 pm
39930 spacer

sashagreyreadstothechildren.jpg
399303993039930
>>39927
>Drag practitioners don't claim that drag is inherently sexual, though.

Why would you dress as a bird to read a storybook? What are the kids getting out of this when they have no concept of the gender norms it's parodying? It's like in that episode of KotH where Bobby doesn't get the humour of the kids dressing in drag but his dad does despite Hank being a Texan. It's completely inexplicable behaviour for someone to adopt or for someone to take their kids to outside of either autogynephilia or being controversial for its own sake.

And anyway Sasha Grey beat them all to it no matter what it is they're trying to do.
>> No. 39931 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 8:43 pm
39931 spacer
>>39925
I'm sure I saw somewhere that she started her sex change a few months before she was stabbed. In other words, we could well be talking about a woman who spoke with a man's voice. Besides, everyone has people who know them. Come on. Her neighbours knew her.
>> No. 39932 Anonymous
13th February 2023
Monday 8:52 pm
39932 spacer
>>39930

Blokes in dresses are pretty much our oldest theatrical tradition. It's just what the English do when we want to create an atmosphere of anarchy and merriment and has been since time immemorial.

Why do the people of Ottery St Mary run through the streets carrying burning barrels? Why do people chase cheese down Cooper's Hill? We don't know, we just do it because we've always done it.
>> No. 39935 Anonymous
14th February 2023
Tuesday 10:40 am
39935 spacer
>>39932
It's like these people have never been to the panto.
>> No. 39936 Anonymous
14th February 2023
Tuesday 1:29 pm
39936 spacer

225130091_10158375557219010_7489139414034240505_n.jpg
399363993639936
>>39935
To be fair who does go these days.
>> No. 39937 Anonymous
14th February 2023
Tuesday 2:11 pm
39937 spacer
>>39936
Joe Pasquale? What's he doing in my garden?
>> No. 39938 Anonymous
14th February 2023
Tuesday 3:49 pm
39938 spacer
>>39935
>>39932

So is a drag queen story time actually a thing that's a bit like a panto? Like a fairy godmother sort of thing? Is that the point?

Because I mean, the thing is, I get why people are a bit weird about it. I never really understood it but I'm a pretty permissive and tolerant person so I wasn't that bothered, but I still always thought "But why? What do drag queenss add to it? What's the purpose of that?" in a similar way that I would if you had, let's say, a "local housing authority joiner storytime" or something.

If they're doing it in a funny comedic way and putting on a bit of their act fair enough, but I'm sure enough people only recognise the word drag to mean "a bloke dressing as a woman" in the most literal, perfunctory descriptive sense and wonder what on earth that has to do with reading kids stories; hence the assumption there must be something dodgy about it.
>> No. 39939 Anonymous
14th February 2023
Tuesday 3:52 pm
39939 spacer
>>39938
A lot of the grievances seem to be directly imported from America.

As for why drag queens specifically are doing it, they're the current capitalist fad.
>> No. 39941 Anonymous
14th February 2023
Tuesday 4:31 pm
39941 spacer
The people saying the murder of that young girl claiming it "defniitely wasn't anything to do with her being evangelist christian korean youtuber" are profoundly naive. People don't get randomly stabbed, there's always some reason or another. Occam's razor and all that, given that she's not a 17 year old black Londoner from the wrong postcode, forces me to assume it was something to do with her gender identity.
>> No. 39942 Anonymous
14th February 2023
Tuesday 4:43 pm
39942 spacer
>>39938

>So is a drag queen story time actually a thing that's a bit like a panto? Like a fairy godmother sort of thing? Is that the point?

Drag is an innate part of panto and they're both cut from the same cloth - silly, over-the-top, poking fun at everything, but in a gentle sort of way. It's quite hard to summarise a complex and ancient cultural construct, but drag gives a performer license to be a court jester. The performer has declared that they're going to be subversive and silly by dressing up in a caricature of female attire, so we give them permission to be silly.

Drag used to be mainstream in a way that we've slightly forgotten. Variety TV from the 70s through to the late 90s was filled with people performing in drag of one sort or another - Lily Savage, Dame Edna, Hinge and Bracket, Les Dawson, Dick Emery, Stanley Baxter, Kenny Everett, even the Two Ronnies. It belonged to the old British tradition of innuendo, seaside postcards, Carry On films.

It fell out of fashion in large part because we thought we had moved on; we stopped finding it funny because we stopped finding it shocking. Even in the gay community, drag had become quite old-fashioned by the 2000s, something you'd find at a gay pub full of middle-aged men.

I think that the resurrection of drag (and the backlash against it) is part of a newly emerging kind of puritanism. We're not bigoted as a culture, but we've become incredibly touchy and squeamish. We're OK with gay blokes on telly as long as they're basically a bit sexless and neutered; the young folk have all got fifteen different pronouns and isms, but they panic if someone makes a knob joke because it's a bit too real for them. Anxiety about gender and sexuality is quite natural, but we've decided that all of the old safety valves we use to release that anxiety are unacceptable because we feel like we're supposed to be anxious. Over the last decade or so, we've started to see fun as being inherently threatening.
>> No. 39943 Anonymous
14th February 2023
Tuesday 4:50 pm
39943 spacer
>>39941

The police are investigating the possibility that it was a hate crime, but they have stated that they haven't found any evidence yet to suggest that it was. It's entirely possible that it was a transphobic attack, but it's equally possible that it was motivated by romantic jealousy or a petty disagreement or a million other things. Unfortunately, kids stab each other for all sorts of reasons - even middle-class white kids from affluent suburbs.
>> No. 39952 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 12:00 am
39952 spacer
>>39942
>I think that the resurrection of drag (and the backlash against it) is part of a newly emerging kind of puritanism

No it's obviously an American import. Nobody would be reading books to children or protesting about it if it wasn't all just about Bristol trying really hard to be cool.
>> No. 39959 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 8:58 am
39959 spacer
>>39952
We've had drag in one form of another since Shakespeare, seems a bit weird to call them reading books in particular an American thing. They didn't invent actors performing while holding the script.
>> No. 39961 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 9:22 am
39961 spacer
>>39959
Drag queen story hour is specifically an American import.

You've only got to look at the LARPers in BLM UK to know that some here cringeworthily ache to be American as they think it's cool.
>> No. 39962 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 9:35 am
39962 spacer
>>39961
Given that we exported "Drag queens reciting, singing, acting, doing comedy, interacting with the audience and simply existing" to them in the first place it seems odd to make a distinction that "Drag queens - but reading!" is particularly American.
>> No. 39963 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 9:51 am
39963 spacer
>>39941
I wasn't going to post about this because it's all speculation at the moment and I didn't want to be one of those people pushing a narrative or using the death of a teenage girl to push my agenda, but now you've broken the ice...

>forces me to assume

uwotm8

No one is forcing you to assume anything. In fact, there is absolutely no time pressure on understanding what happened in an active investigation of a two day old murder by people unrelated to the case.

Those Damien Harris tweets of emails to the school about bullying, the videos of a girl being beaten up? Not her, just indicative of a generic bullying problem existing. People are desperate to push a narrative on this and it makes the trans ally movement look like a bunch of silly buggers.

I feel terrible for the girl and her family, but the way people like you are reacting just makes me think the trans ally movement is comprised of twits.

I desperately hope that this wasn't motivated by her gender, because it's quite ghoulish how keenly intent people (like you) are to portray her as some sort of cause celebre before the facts are out.
>> No. 39964 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 10:32 am
39964 spacer
>>39963

They're investigating it as a "possible hate crime" now which doesn't really mean any more than them saying "we have no evidence it was a hate crime" when they hadn't been able to gather any evidence at all. Doesn't mean it was or it wasn't, or that they think it was or wasn't, just that they haven't done sufficient investigating yet because it's only been two days and they're not the court so it's not their place to decide anyway.
>> No. 39965 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 10:52 am
39965 spacer

GettyImages-1461671833.jpg
399653996539965
Seems Nicola has gone, not because of dodgy accounting but because she played culture warrior. Who will be the next victim?
>> No. 39966 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 10:59 am
39966 spacer
>>39964
I meant to make this point - you're spot on, I'm not sure why some people are so eager to assume one way or the other.
>> No. 39967 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 11:46 am
39967 spacer
>>39965
Her neck is getting thicker and it makes her look more like an English politician than a European one.
>> No. 39968 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 1:36 pm
39968 spacer
>>39965
They were on about Sturgeon on Jeremy Vine and at least three-quarters of calls were banging on about the Gender Recognition Act or that rapist pretending to be trans to be sent to a women's prison.
>> No. 39969 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 1:51 pm
39969 spacer
>>39968

I knew it would bring her down one way or another. Honestly fuck knows what she was thinking in making that her place to go dogging, it's baffling. Surely she was well aware how toxic that whole debate is.
>> No. 39970 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 1:52 pm
39970 spacer
>>39969

Oh bravo mods. Fair play.
>> No. 39971 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 2:33 pm
39971 spacer
>>39970

Who are you? Stewie Griffin?
>> No. 39972 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 3:29 pm
39972 spacer
>>39969
What's this new word filter? Is it her place to go dogging, that is, a small mountain upon which a death occurs?
>> No. 39973 Anonymous
15th February 2023
Wednesday 3:30 pm
39973 spacer
>>39970
You're right. It's beautiful.
>> No. 39976 Anonymous
16th February 2023
Thursday 6:56 am
39976 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMSuzBb7qIY

Fisherthem feels like wordfilters leaking into real life. Sam Smith looks like he's morphing into either Bam Margera or George Galloway.
>> No. 39977 Anonymous
16th February 2023
Thursday 11:21 am
39977 spacer
>>39976
>he's
A good day to you, Sir!
>> No. 39980 Anonymous
16th February 2023
Thursday 2:57 pm
39980 spacer

5monkeys.jpg
399803998039980
>>39977
>A good day to you, Sir!
It starts a s a joke
>> No. 39981 Anonymous
16th February 2023
Thursday 3:17 pm
39981 spacer
>>39977
Is that not a valid contraction of "he is"?
>> No. 39982 Anonymous
16th February 2023
Thursday 3:42 pm
39982 spacer
>>39981
Sam Smith is non-binary and uses the pronouns "they/them" is the joke I think.
>> No. 40123 Anonymous
14th April 2023
Friday 12:01 pm
40123 spacer
Rishi Sunak says no one with a penis can be a woman

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-says-no-one-with-a-penis-can-be-a-woman-fcv6cb0kc
>> No. 40124 Anonymous
14th April 2023
Friday 12:14 pm
40124 spacer
>>40123
But can a man with Lee Anderson's hand up his arse really be a PM?
>> No. 40125 Anonymous
14th April 2023
Friday 4:19 pm
40125 spacer
>>40123
Well that can't be right. By that measure, Sarah Vine isn't a woman because she's got Michael Gove.
>> No. 40288 Anonymous
5th June 2023
Monday 10:26 pm
40288 spacer
>#CBeebies indoctrinating toddlers into the ideological concept of changing from a boy to a girl. “Not all fish can change gender but quite a few can.” @BBC @CBeebiesHQ send in the clownfish for Pride month to target children and yet again fail in their safeguarding responsibility.

https://twitter.com/SafeSchools_UK/status/1665415782971441153

They're indoctrinating children with fish.
>> No. 40292 Anonymous
6th June 2023
Tuesday 1:28 pm
40292 spacer
>>40288

I wondered about my gender identity when I was a kid a few times, din't do me no harm. I still think all this gender bollocks is largely pointless.
>> No. 40293 Anonymous
6th June 2023
Tuesday 2:14 pm
40293 spacer

gif.gif
402934029340293
>>40288

THEY'RE TURNING THE FISH TRANS!
>> No. 40294 Anonymous
6th June 2023
Tuesday 2:17 pm
40294 spacer
>>40293
Nothing more unnatural than nature.
>> No. 40295 Anonymous
6th June 2023
Tuesday 2:18 pm
40295 spacer

frogs.png
402954029540295
>>40293
Alex Jones was right again!

https://www.newsweek.com/female-frogs-estrogen-hermaphrodites-suburban-waste-369553
>> No. 40359 Anonymous
21st June 2023
Wednesday 8:33 pm
40359 spacer
>Pupil who questioned classmate ‘identifying as a cat’ called ‘despicable’ by teacher

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/06/18/pupil-teacher-despicable-identifying-cat-evangelist christian korean youtuber/

>School that allowed child to identify as cat faces government investigation

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/06/20/rye-college-children-neo-pronouns-cats-moons-rishi-sunak/

>Schools let children identify as horses, dinosaurs... and a moon

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/06/19/school-children-identifying-as-animals-furries/

>GB News presenter defends mocking children ‘identifying as cats’ after bizarrely dressing up as feline

https://The Metro is owned by the Daily Mail./2023/06/20/gb-news-michelle-dewberry-defends-mocking-child-identifying-as-cat-18979894/

>Keir Starmer: ‘Clearly ridiculous’ for children to self-identify as cats

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/06/21/keir-starmer-children-self-identifying-as-cats/

Anyone else looking forward to Sunak and Starmer arguing about furries doing the next general election campaign?
>> No. 40360 Anonymous
21st June 2023
Wednesday 8:51 pm
40360 spacer
>>40359

I'm impressed by how much mileage The Telegraph are getting out of one (quite possibly apocryphal) nutter.
>> No. 40361 Anonymous
21st June 2023
Wednesday 9:04 pm
40361 spacer

Screenshot_20230621_210250_com.android.chrome_edit.jpg
403614036140361
>>40360
They're not the only ones.
>> No. 40362 Anonymous
21st June 2023
Wednesday 9:38 pm
40362 spacer

furrylad.jpg
403624036240362
>>40359

>Keir Starmer: ‘Clearly ridiculous’ for children to self-identify as cats

Well he's got my vote. Down with the felinid untermensch, this is a country that believes in canid supremacy.
>> No. 40453 Anonymous
25th June 2023
Sunday 10:56 am
40453 spacer
This is the type of question you'd expect Chris Morris to be asking politicians. Can we get Starmer to opine on Herman the Tosser next.
>> No. 40474 Anonymous
30th June 2023
Friday 11:41 am
40474 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoulC-h4yB4

I'm not surprised at Piers Morgan being the usual self-righteous cunt. But I had no idea that Talk TV is such a shit Fox News tribute act.
>> No. 40475 Anonymous
30th June 2023
Friday 1:20 pm
40475 spacer
>>40474
I'm not watching it. I don't need to, because this shit's ten years old by now. I feel like I'm stuck in a timewarp, apart from all the shit that's getting worse. IE, the Labour Party, the economy and the fact this shite's on TV now, not some braindead's YouTube channel.
>> No. 40476 Anonymous
30th June 2023
Friday 1:37 pm
40476 spacer
>>40475
Terminally online people are sick to death of it, but for many people it's fresh and new, and it pops up everywhere each time a new demographic discovers it. It's the political equivalent of "All your base are belong to us." If we're really unlucky, mainstream society will discover soyjaks just as AI technology becomes good enough to make one present these shows.
>> No. 40477 Anonymous
30th June 2023
Friday 1:57 pm
40477 spacer
>>40475

You're right in that Talk TV is a deep rabbit hole which panders to the same kind of right-wing agenda setting as Fox News in Septicland.

Morgan has always been a condescending bigot, a bit like a watered down Jeremy Kyle for the middle class. But he seems to have taken to this like a duck to water.
>> No. 40478 Anonymous
30th June 2023
Friday 2:37 pm
40478 spacer
>>40477
>Morgan has always been a condescending bigot, a bit like a watered down Jeremy Kyle for the middle class.

Isn't that Jeremy Vine's job?
>> No. 40479 Anonymous
30th June 2023
Friday 2:38 pm
40479 spacer
Piers is looking increasingly like an old illustration of Humpty Dumpty
>> No. 40481 Anonymous
30th June 2023
Friday 3:00 pm
40481 spacer
>>40480
Why can't evangelist christian korean youtubers wash their hair? It really bothers me.
>> No. 40482 Anonymous
30th June 2023
Friday 5:12 pm
40482 spacer
>>40481

Autistic people are about ten times more likely to suffer from gender identity disorder than the general population.
>> No. 40483 Anonymous
30th June 2023
Friday 7:32 pm
40483 spacer
>>40482

Any point waiting for Elon Musk to change his pronouns?
>> No. 40484 Anonymous
30th June 2023
Friday 7:46 pm
40484 spacer
>>40483

He's already had gender-affirming surgery.
>> No. 40485 Anonymous
1st July 2023
Saturday 5:01 am
40485 spacer
Lana Wachowski is quite fit, but Lilly Wachowski looks like Stephanie Sterling's dad. I wonder if that causes friction.
>> No. 40486 Anonymous
1st July 2023
Saturday 10:07 am
40486 spacer

10xp-Wachowski-superJumbo.jpg
404864048640486
>>40485
Googled them and most of the pictures were from before the second one transitioned, so my initial thought was "I didn't realise she was dating Dara O'Briain".

I think the jaw line doesn't help. It reminds me of when I watched a school production of Beauty and the Beast where they made the big fat lass play the clock.
>> No. 40487 Anonymous
1st July 2023
Saturday 6:56 pm
40487 spacer
>>40485
>>40486
You heard the story of 'what happened to Larry Wachowski'? Apparently he went in for some BDSM with a 'boundary pushing' dominatrix who during bdsm sessions would use ketamine to condition Larry (or Barry, whichever it is) into servitude. There's a creepy, concise story somewhere on rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk if you want to look for it. The Rolling Stone article is a good starting point, with enough names to start searching.

Briefly looking through now also brings up some interesting stuff about paganism within the Hollywood circles, but I imagine that's a bit too out there for the most of you.
>> No. 40488 Anonymous
1st July 2023
Saturday 7:15 pm
40488 spacer
>>40487

Oh wow, someone's into bondage and ketamine, I am deeply shocked.
>> No. 40489 Anonymous
1st July 2023
Saturday 7:34 pm
40489 spacer
>>40488
>I am deeply shocked
I would expect, so unless ketamine injectioned orgasms coupled with extreme submission to a sadisticly torturous, mind-fucking dominatrix is a walk in the park for you.
>> No. 40490 Anonymous
1st July 2023
Saturday 7:40 pm
40490 spacer
>>40485
Do you think she chose Lana because it's anal spelt backwards?
>> No. 40491 Anonymous
1st July 2023
Saturday 7:45 pm
40491 spacer
>>40489
If a woman smacked my bottom and called me a naughty boy so hard that I considered getting a sex change, I probably wouldn't go back for more. Call me a square if you must, but if you feel that strongly, why not put her in touch with Al Murray and bring about the satirical pub landlord waifu the world is crying out for?
>> No. 40492 Anonymous
1st July 2023
Saturday 8:04 pm
40492 spacer
>>40489

>ketamine injectioned orgasms coupled with extreme submission to a sadisticly torturous, mind-fucking dominatrix is a walk in the park for you

GBL and deep fisting is more my scene, but ketamine and flogging sounds like a good laugh.
>> No. 40493 Anonymous
2nd July 2023
Sunday 1:02 am
40493 spacer
>>40487
That dominatrix should have BDSM'd her into making a second good film.
>> No. 40703 Anonymous
7th August 2023
Monday 7:32 am
40703 spacer
>Amanda Abbington insists she’s not transphobic as Strictly Come Dancing fans threaten to boycott show

>The actress, 49, was the first contestant announced for the glitzy BBC dance show this year. However, it didn’t take long for Amanda to find herself in hot water as Strictly superfans discovered social media posts she wrote about drag queens. Earlier this year, Amanda sparked controversy when she reacted to footage from a Caba Baba Rave, a baby sensory and cabaret show for parents and their babies aged 0-2 years old. Following a video of the rave showing a person dancing in boots and a bondage harness, Amanda tweeted that the show was ‘not for babies’ and said that ‘if you think it is, there is something fundamentally wrong with you’.

>In a follow-up tweet, she penned: ‘I lost quite a few followers for saying that a semi-naked man in thigh-high boots dancing in a highly sexualised way shouldn’t be performing in front of babies and it tells me everything I need to know about where society is heading. How do you not agree with me on this?’After being accused of transphobia, she added: ‘I never mentioned the trans community! How on earth is my post transphobic. I’m saying you do not perform that kind of act in front of BABIES. It’s abhorrent’, she blasted.

>Amanda has now left Twitter completely, with her account having also been deleted three times.

https://The Metro is owned by the Daily Mail./2023/08/06/strictly-2023-star-amanda-abbington-insists-shes-not-transphobic-19287119/amp/
>> No. 40704 Anonymous
11th August 2023
Friday 9:09 pm
40704 spacer
>>40703
I'm not sure what the issue is here. They're babies. Their brains aren't fully formed, and they're too busy eating, crying, shitting their nappies and spewing down their parents shoulders to care about anything else.
>> No. 40705 Anonymous
11th August 2023
Friday 10:37 pm
40705 spacer
>>40703

>Following a video of the rave showing a person dancing in boots and a bondage harness, Amanda tweeted that the show was ‘not for babies’ and said that ‘if you think it is, there is something fundamentally wrong with you’.

What kind of world are we living in where a statement like that gets you cancelled.

Our society tries to shield babies and children from all kinds of harmful influences, from the age of sexual consent to the minimum age to buy pornography or alcohol or to go to a strip club. But somehow it's ok to expose two year olds to "a person dancing in boots and a bondage harness".

Fuck, I don't understand this world anymore. Goes to show that twitter is nothing but a festering sore on society's arse.
>> No. 40706 Anonymous
12th August 2023
Saturday 12:22 am
40706 spacer
>>40705
I'm not sure how you can blame twitter. Twitter is run by people, tweets are made by people, responses to tweets whether it's your emotional feeling or your actions or the newspaper articles reporting on tweets, or the actual literal responses to tweets, are all made by people. We did this. Social media isn't the problem, drugs aren't the problem, opinions aren't the problem, physical force mediated be a means of conveying by the state isn't the problem, it's how we choose to use it. You, me, I, we, he, she, he-she, they, them, they're, it's us. We're the problem.
>> No. 40707 Anonymous
12th August 2023
Saturday 12:30 am
40707 spacer
>>40706

But that was precisely my point. It's the people who tweet that turn twitter into the kind of garbage that it is.
>> No. 40708 Anonymous
12th August 2023
Saturday 12:36 am
40708 spacer
>>40707
Sorry mate, I misunderstood, it is friday night after all. At least I hope it is. But also don't forget that the enabler is as guilty as the alcoholic, from a certain point of view.
>> No. 40709 Anonymous
12th August 2023
Saturday 1:31 pm
40709 spacer
>>40708

>the enabler is as guilty as the alcoholic

I'm not disagreeing with you. I hope that Musk runs twitter/now X completely into the ground so that it disappears entirely.

Then again, the genie is out of the bottle and it's not just twitter you'd have to shut down. Facebook's impact may have been waning the last few years, but you've got enough other platforms that enable people to do almost the same things as twitter or facebook. It's all just narcissistic self-important attention whores polluting all of social media with their drivel.

Good thing .gs is entirely different.
>> No. 40710 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 8:21 am
40710 spacer
>A lesbian speed-dating event is at the centre of a transphobia row after the organiser insisted that only 'adult human females' can attend. It follows outrage from attendees at the popular weekly £15-a-head event, held in Bloomsbury in London, after trans women tried to join.

>Last week, Jenny Watson, a town planner who runs the nights, posted on her website to share her rules. 'If you are male, please refrain from coming to the events, you are not a lesbian,' she wrote.

>Ms Watson told The Mail on Sunday: 'Last year, a person turned up sporting a purple latex outfit… and an erection. Another time, a trans woman came into the female toilet and pushed their body at a woman who was upset and told me after. It got me thinking that this isn't fair on women.' Ms Watson, 31, added: 'evangelist christian korean youtuber individuals deserve respect. But there is a need for protection of sex-segregated spaces for lesbian women.'

>Members of an activists' group reported Jenny to her London council employers as transphobic for insisting on social media that only 'adult human females' should attend. They also accused her of being transphobic for saying that 'lesbians don't have penises'.

https://archive.ph/SHtAo
>> No. 40711 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 12:04 pm
40711 spacer
>>40710

>only 'adult human females'

Seems a bit unfair to exclude gender fluid manatees.


>Members of an activists' group reported Jenny to her London council employers

And this is where cancel culture is latently pernicious. This speed dating event had nothing to do with her capacity as a town planner for the City of London. It is something that she was organising in her free time. Often enough, people get reported to their boss for entirely unrelated things that have nothing to do with their job performance, where social justice warriors who lack any sense of proportion are seeking to get somebody fired from their gainful employment because they've said or done something elsewhere that isn't approved canon.

https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/posts/news-and-media/cancel-culture-in-the-workplace/

https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/07/14/25-times-cancel-culture-was-real/


I don't fucking care if a till worker is racist or homophobic in their personal life. Ideally, they would be a better human being than that, but they're there to scan my items and take my money, and as long as they do that faultlessly, they can say, do or think whatever they like outside of their job. There are probably other types of jobs where your personal views do matter, but even in that case, you have to ask if somebody is really unfit for their role just because of one bad thing they said or which was misconstrued, or if you're just pandering to the interests of some delusional trigger-happy SJWs.
>> No. 40712 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 1:54 pm
40712 spacer
>>40711
>gender fluid manatees.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbAqDch5E5M

Facebook seems to think I'm really interested in comic book memes, football, African humour, Disney and anti-LGBT mayerial.
>> No. 40713 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 2:32 pm
40713 spacer
>>40711
I don't understand how this is still a common occurrence despite the overwhelmingly majority of people being at least somewhat aware of the dangers of the internet AND viewing destroying someone's life over online arguments as morally reprehensible. We knew to hide our identities online and websites permabanned doxxers back when we were teenagers so I don't understand why people still use real names online and doxxing groups don't get mercilessly destroyed like daft militant wog cells.

And yet the major debate seems to be that we should attach real identities to access to the internet, the police don't arrest anyone that reports online naughty words on suspicion of stalking and sites like rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk that centralise data still exist. Then again I'm posting on an imageboard so really it's only a matter of time until I'm on the front page of the Daily Mail.
>> No. 40714 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 3:11 pm
40714 spacer
>>40712

I don't think pregnancy, unwanted or not, is a real worry for her.

Then again, maybe fattychaserlad will be interested.


>>40713

I think that calls to get someone fired from their job often come from people whose grasp of reality was shaped inside gender and women's studies or sociology seminar rooms. And who haven't had a real job in their life that would make them appreciate how existential gainful employment is for most people. I don't think it's a line that many people cross lightly who have ever been fired from a career job.


>so I don't understand why people still use real names online and doxxing groups don't get mercilessly destroyed like daft militant wog cells.

Doxxing IS illegal in the UK. There isn't one single anti-doxxing law, but the offences can range from harrassment to stalking as well as computer misuse statutes and privacy violations.

Countries like the Netherlands and Germany are a bit more forward thinking, with Germany having adopted a penal code section against "dangerous dissemination of personal data", and the Netherlands now close to enacting a bill making doxxing a crime that could be punishable by up to a year in prison.
>> No. 40715 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 4:00 pm
40715 spacer
>>40714
>I think that calls to get someone fired from their job often come from people whose grasp of reality was shaped inside gender and women's studies or sociology seminar rooms

I think it's mainly an American import. There are subs like r/byebyejob dedicated to this sort of thing. Wherever you go on Rėddit there are always scores of people aching to pile on someone. They get off on casting judgement on people. I don't know whether it's a hangover from their puritanical roots or if it's an outlet for their repression, but there is a constant undercurrent of sanctimoniousness there which will erupt to the surface any opportunity it gets.
>> No. 40716 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 4:44 pm
40716 spacer
>>40714
Yes we're all well aware that tracking down a TERFs address and sending her death threats is illegal but that doesn't mean it's enforced. Hence my astoundment that the police have no interest in addressing what has been long-recognised on the internet as the most serious of issues.

>>40715
>There are subs like r/byebyejob dedicated to this sort of thing

What is wrong with rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk and why does it get such a free pass with people? I feel like even now it's managed to be a worse and more toxic community than 4chan but some people I meet are pretty open that they browse rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk. Yeah it doesn't have the same 'ironic' racism and rules 1&2 apply but it's just as abysmal.
>> No. 40717 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 8:31 pm
40717 spacer
>>40711
I'm curious as to why you think people should be able to do and say things like that without consequence. I get the whole "the internet isn't real life" thing, but this was very literally over a real life event. She's a public servant. The council need to be able to deliver services without fear or favour. Effectively denying the legitimacy of an entire slice of the population is fundamentally incompatible with that.

You have a right to be a bigot. The people you work with have a right to know you're a bigot, and to act on that as they deem fit. You can argue over the right to hold objectionable views, but ultimately they cause and contribute to very real harm to the people on the wrong end of it. For instance, as a result of campaigns in Italy led by people who think as this woman does, same-sex parents have lost the right to be identified on their children's birth certificate. That has significant implications for their rights as parents and the rights of the child.
>> No. 40718 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 8:57 pm
40718 spacer
>>40717
>The people you work with have a right to know you're a bigot, and to act on that as they deem fit

You've got to pay attention to the details when trying to get peoples' knickers in a twist. Anyone reading this will immediately question how you plan on reading thoughts and realise it's a tricky post. You've got to read the rudgwicksteamshow.co.uk sub - one of the posts shows how you do it but laying out a narrow framework of rights first.

Plus the conservatives are in power so she'll be fine.
>> No. 40719 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 9:17 pm
40719 spacer
>>40717

>I get the whole "the internet isn't real life" thing, but this was very literally over a real life event. She's a public servant.

Tell me again how bad and misconstrued communication in the run-up to a speed dating event which she organised in her free time makes her unfit to be a public servant, and as a city planner no less.


>but ultimately they cause and contribute to very real harm to the people on the wrong end of it.

Yeah.... off... is the direction I'd kindly ask you to fuck.

I sure as shit don't want to live in the kind of world that you envision.
>> No. 40720 Anonymous
13th August 2023
Sunday 9:33 pm
40720 spacer
Wait, is only wanting women at a lesbian speed-dating event bigoted? I can't keep up, I don't know what the rules are anymore.
>> No. 40721 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 5:33 am
40721 spacer
>>40718
>Anyone reading this will immediately question how you plan on reading thoughts and realise it's a tricky post.
It turns out it's pretty easy to read someone's thoughts when they write them down for everyone to see on a social platform with their name attached.

>>40719
>Tell me again how bad and misconstrued communication in the run-up to a speed dating event which she organised in her free time makes her unfit to be a public servant, and as a city planner no less.
You're right, it's so easy to misconstrue people online. When someone says trans women can't be lesbians, it's so easy to misunderstand that as saying that trans women can't be lesbians. I'm also not sure why it being in her free time makes a difference.

>>40720
>Wait, is only wanting women at a lesbian speed-dating event bigoted?
No, but then you already know that isn't what she said.
>> No. 40722 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 8:17 am
40722 spacer
>>40721
>No, but then you already know that isn't what she said.

What did she say then? What's the non-transphobic way of saying you don't want people wearing latex outfits showing off that they have a throbbing erection at your lesbian speed dating event? Is this one of those "you haven't precisely followed the acceptable wording so you deserve to be cancelled" moments?
>> No. 40723 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 9:01 am
40723 spacer
>>40721

Sigh.

Fine then.
>> No. 40724 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 1:50 pm
40724 spacer
>>40722

> "you haven't precisely followed the acceptable wording so you deserve to be cancelled" moments?

Not him, but sadly, this is what it often boils down to.

Cancel culture is totalitarianism not by a government, but by the people.
>> No. 40725 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 2:40 pm
40725 spacer

1589316066998.jpg
407254072540725
I wish you were all dead.
>> No. 40726 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 3:16 pm
40726 spacer
>>40725
If only there was some way of hiding the one thread you don't like.
>> No. 40727 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 4:01 pm
40727 spacer
>>40726
Yeah, if only. I haven't been able to hide threads in years, pal.
>> No. 40728 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 4:08 pm
40728 spacer
>>40727
Next you'll be telling me you can't delete posts or upload WebP images.
>> No. 40730 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 4:11 pm
40730 spacer

block.png
407304073040730
>>40727
You sound like the type of person to return a computer because it doesn't come preinstalled with word processing software.
>> No. 40731 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 4:13 pm
40731 spacer

thread-hidden.jpg
407314073140731
>>40727

>I haven't been able to hide threads in years

Works fine both with Chrome and Firefox.


Don't tell me Safari can't do it. Serves you right for buying overpriced Apple products.
>> No. 40732 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 4:14 pm
40732 spacer
>>40731
Did you refresh the page to see if it remained hidden?
>> No. 40733 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 4:24 pm
40733 spacer

Grandma-Finds-The-Internet.jpg
407334073340733
>>40730

Who the fuck has 39 tabs open in their browser.

I don't even manage that during an all-night wank session.
>> No. 40734 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 4:28 pm
40734 spacer
>>40732

Ah... you've got me.

I guess it's because I don't normally get so annoyed by a thread that I feel the need to hide it.
>> No. 40735 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 4:37 pm
40735 spacer
>>40732
Yeah, and it didn't and now it is. So I don't know what that's about.

>>40730
Just because your mum asked you to set up her laptop one time don't think you know more about computers than I do.
>> No. 40736 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 4:41 pm
40736 spacer
I think the only logical conclusion is purple is a chubby chaser and he wants the hide function to remain broken so that whenever the BBW thread on /x/ gets bumped everyone using /*/ has no choice but to view it. He's trying to shift the Overton window on what you consider to be a palatable weight for a woman.
>> No. 40737 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 6:04 pm
40737 spacer
>>40736

>He's trying to shift the Overton window on what you consider to be a palatable weight for a woman.

Meh. Seems more like aversion therapy at this point.
>> No. 40738 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 6:29 pm
40738 spacer
>>40722
>What did she say then?
She doesn't want trans lesbians at her lesbian dating event, because apparently trans lesbians aren't real lesbians.

>What's the non-transphobic way of saying you don't want people wearing latex outfits showing off that they have a throbbing erection at your lesbian speed dating event?
If her objection was to people turning up in skin-tight latex, I'm sure she would have just imposed a dress code. But it seems pretty clear that's not the part of it she wasn't happy with.
>> No. 40739 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 6:30 pm
40739 spacer

4A1412FC00000578-0-image-a-110_1520732891634.jpg
407394073940739
>>40737
Left or right?
>> No. 40740 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 6:32 pm
40740 spacer

tabgroups.png
407404074040740
>>40733
>Who the fuck has 39 tabs open in their browser.
Amateurs, that's who.
>> No. 40741 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 6:41 pm
40741 spacer
>>40739

I want to say left, but she actually looks a bit unwell.

Some people look healthier chubby. But it doesn't mean they're attractive as such.
>> No. 40742 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 6:52 pm
40742 spacer

Claire-Richards-594460.jpg
407424074240742
>>40741
Which Claire from Steps?
>> No. 40743 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 7:07 pm
40743 spacer

weep.png
407434074340743
>>40740
Rookie numbers. Don't even group them, just embrace the chaos.
>> No. 40744 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 7:28 pm
40744 spacer
>>40739
>>40742
This is like a Voight-Kampff test for .gs users.
>> No. 40745 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 7:56 pm
40745 spacer
"On a tabloid website, you come across an article an article about a woman losing 5 stone in a year with minor changes to her diet."

"What kind of a sick test is this!?"
>> No. 40746 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 8:01 pm
40746 spacer
>>40738
Are you suggesting she would be okay if futanari attended in skin-tight latex that sported their incomprehensibly large futa-wangs?

I get it really, she didn't want transwomen attending because for whatever reason MtF lesbians behave like an absolute menace and CIS-lesbians should be able to have a space they can feel safe to scissor in peace listening to Texas. For some reason this is a huge issue for the lesbian community and I don't really think they're more transphobic than the general population.

>>40739
Do you think she would've been far happier if she'd never had minor celebrity status in the first place? Seems like she's had surgery for those stretchmarks and is on the anorexia phase of desperate stardom. The whole thing is just getting a bit tragic for me considering she seems like a good girl.

>>40742
Left. Can we have a different fetish now? It's socially irresponsible for .gs to endorse this when 25.9% of the population is obese. Not overweight but obese.
>> No. 40747 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 8:20 pm
40747 spacer
>>40746

>Do you think she would've been far happier if she'd never had minor celebrity status in the first place?

She was doggedly determined to be a celebrity despite having no obvious talent. You have to give her that. She worked hard to be where she is now, given what she started with. She even brought her own family into it with Gogglebox.

People like Rachel Riley, on the other hand, get everything handed to them, because of their looks, let's not kid ourselves. Rachel Riley may have double the IQ of Scarlett Moffatt, but her actual talent as a presenter is almost as slight.
>> No. 40748 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 8:27 pm
40748 spacer
>>40746
She's back to being fat again. She lost the weight for a fitness DVD about seven or eight years ago but quickly put it back on.
>> No. 40749 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 8:48 pm
40749 spacer

>> No. 40750 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 9:02 pm
40750 spacer
>>40749
I think crying women might be a step too far, even for this lot of perverts.
>> No. 40751 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 9:13 pm
40751 spacer
>>40749

>WARNING

>This clip contains nudity


Bit of a letdown there.
>> No. 40752 Anonymous
14th August 2023
Monday 9:40 pm
40752 spacer

article-2449449-188E482C00000578-428_634x424.jpg
407524075240752
>>40748

Managing to keep your weight down is almost harder than spending a few weeks or months shedding it. Because you'll only stay slim if you permanently change your entire relationship with food.

But oh well.
>> No. 40755 Anonymous
15th August 2023
Tuesday 11:22 pm
40755 spacer

EDgmani-20200511090046987.jpg
407554075540755
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-66516252


>Father Ted writer Graham Linehan comedy show cancelled over gender views

>A comedy show featuring Father Ted writer Graham Linehan in Edinburgh has been cancelled due to complaints.

>Leith Arches said it had pulled the gig because it did not support the comedian, and his views do "not align with our overall values".

>The writer has been been an outspoken critic of evangelist christian korean youtuber self-identification.
>> No. 40756 Anonymous
15th August 2023
Tuesday 11:55 pm
40756 spacer
>>40755
Oh thank god. Can you imagine the harm it would do to people and the nation if we allowed views like that a platform?
>> No. 40757 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 8:23 am
40757 spacer
>>40756
You're being sarcastic but it's true. If I'd known where Andrew Doyle was he could have ended up the victim of a terrible acid attack.
>> No. 40758 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 10:11 am
40758 spacer
>>40757
As opposed to one of those non-terrible acid attacks I assume.
>> No. 40759 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 10:28 am
40759 spacer
>>40758
How do you read anything without constantly making sarcastic remarks to yourself if you bristle at that, very low, level of descriptive language?
>> No. 40760 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 10:39 am
40760 spacer
>>40759
How do you read anything without constantly feeling upset if you bristle at that, very low, level of minor pedantry?
>> No. 40761 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 11:37 am
40761 spacer
>>40756
They do have a platform. He's on Twitter, he has a regular webshow, we have major politicians weighing in on the evangelist christian korean youtuber issue regularly. The transphobic outcry against the SNP's reformed rules for self identification was on all the news stations for days if not weeks.

A venue deciding they don't want hate speech at their venue is not deplatforming, it is completely within their rights. When you look at Linehan's twitter, literally 100s of Tweets a day, all mocking trans people, denying their right to exist, spamming photos of underage people who had mastectomies, would you want your inclusive venue to be involved with that?
>> No. 40762 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 11:50 am
40762 spacer
>>40761

This. It's your right as a venue to back out if somebody's publicly expressed and well known views don't align with yours. Especially when they're decidedly controversial. It's not a violation of free speech.
>> No. 40763 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 12:32 pm
40763 spacer
>>40760
Did you just try to "that's what you are, but what am I?" me? Are we going to get into a fight over who plays with the marble run at break time next? Because I'll tell you this much, over my dead body you're getting anywhere near that beautiful, technicolour, pipe dream.
>> No. 40764 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 12:50 pm
40764 spacer
>>40761
>>40762
Nobody mentioned free speech. You can list all the ways such views are expressed all you like, it doesn't change the fact that you're walking a very fine line by having the wrong thoughts. You can further argue that you can have all the thoughts you like as long as you don't express them, but I trust you enough to expect you won't.

Comedy is a massive tool for social change, I know that, you know that, everyone who isn't thick as pigshit knows that. Comedy was used as a vehicle to end/reduce (delete as political belief requires) racism over the course of decades. People watch portrayals of black people in old media and act like it's evil now, the black guy being stupid, dumb, expendable, often called racist names, but his very presence in the media normalised the existence of black people enough (no I'm not going to rephrase that, don't take issue with the phrasing) to allow later representations where the black guy was almost normal, if a bit one dimensional. These days you can have a black leading man. And that is largely in part due to the presence of the black minstrel rolling his eyes, shaking his hands, and screaming lawdy lawdy in any 1950s movie ever.

Queer centric, even if queer bashing comedy in the UK in the 70s and 80s very strongly paved the way for modern gay rights by the same model. Laugh at, laugh in the presence of, laugh with.

Comedy is a powerful vehicle for social change. Nobody sits down and reads white papers on trans issues, nobody sticks a replay of PMQs on while they're having their dinner. Nobody reads the twitter digest with breakfast (I'm sure at least one of you does).

Here's the rub, not all social change is going to be a change you agree with. In fact, by definition it can't be something you always agree with otherwise it wouldn't be change or you would be the most statistically abnormal group in your national area. Nobody is going to stop you pulling up the ladder on using comedy to get your social change in through a normal person's mental defences, people tried to stop the normalisation of blacks and queers and women, but they always failed because we as a people decided impartiality, mental free trade was more important than mental protectionism. You can stand for silencing the opposition if you like, and this time you might even win, we're a much less liberal society than we used to be. Fascism is creeping in, dissenting voices are banned at a level of power above my wallet, your wallet, his wallet, and while I'm sure "owner of a large venue" isn't a great degree of power above your wallet, it's still a level of power above your wallet.

If you do manage to win though here's what's going to happen. You and I will have less in common all across the country. When it comes to PMQs, my guy is going to call your guy the devil or the Islamic equivalent, and your guy is going to call my guy Hitler or the modern equivalent. Because you and I have no common ground, you're going to identify with your guy and I'm going to identify with my guy. If that happened today we'd both look at it and say what a load of bollocks, but if you win, if you force us apart, then we're going to have American style political divides across the country within the decade. And we don't have the land space America does. It won't be nearly as pretty.

The bonus kicker is all good comedy is based on truth. If you're so sure your position is right you shouldn't be scared, because comedy done in opposition to your position will be less powerful than your own comedy, because yours will be based on truth while ours will be based on lies. While large venues will always sell out to almost any act it's the repetition of the jokes that cause social change. Truth based jokes require less set up, and so are easier to retell, therefore retellings tend to be more successful both in the retelling and the receiving. I know I mentioned wallets earlier, it was poetic, there's one thick cunt who likes to pick up on things like that.

I don't particularly care which way it goes, I'm hoping to die in a nuclear blast some day soon. I'm sure you don't either, it's just nice to feel nice, to support "rights" even when they're so bizarre and unnecessary as to be outrageously superfluous. Maybe that was unfair to say, but I'm really struggling to see your point on that issue, which is separate from the deplatforming of certain opinions and manners of speech. You want to make it illegal to murder, harass, sack, or throw stones at evangelist christian korean youtubers? Great, I support that too. I'm pretty sure we already have those laws though. If you want to make it illegal to say evangelist christian korean youtubers on the internet I'm afraid I don't support you. You want to change something about obscure administrative laws which make it really hard to get legally recognised as a woman even after you chop your cock off? Well I'm not touching that with a barge pole, but good luck to you as long as it doesn't involve putting convicted rapists with penises in women's prisons or forcing women only spaces to be forced to include trans women. You want me to make no distinction between women and trans women? That's not my call, I'm not a woman, and chopping my cock off doesn't make me so if other women still feel intimidated by me. You can't have womens' spaces. It's not on. I'm sure I'm imagining all these positions you don't hold and your actual position is some carefully tailored unopposable position which only foaming at the mouth rabid Hitler impersonators could dream to dare to challenge, but please let's not.

As for your question, I would book whoever could put bums on seats. If you as a society chose to run me out of business because you don't agree with the other half of society, well, see above.

>>40762
I know I caught you in the initial quote but I want to mark this paragraph as separate.
>This.
You sycophantic Richard Hammond-esque Stewart Lee watching insipid cunt.
>> No. 40765 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 12:51 pm
40765 spacer
>>40763
I'll let you play with the teacher's balls at dinner time if it's all the same to you mate.
>break time
Whatever next?
>> No. 40766 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 1:03 pm
40766 spacer
>>40755
Father Ted was great, but Linehan has absolutely lost the plot.
It's like he exists on the steam boiling up within his ears, and if he calmed down for just a moment he'd shrivel.
>> No. 40767 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 1:09 pm
40767 spacer
>>40764
I'm not reading any of that, and I'm not either of the lads you're replying to, but I hate right-wingers without exception. These cunts have spent my entire adult life ruining my country and have the temerity to blame every other poor bastard for the hastle. I don't care what happens to these people. I hope a micro-meteorite hits Graham Linehan's gas boiler and blows up his whole house, so the idea I should care that he can't call innocent people paedos on that specific stage is just taking the piss. I want the Home Office would deport the workshy prick, I don't know where he gets the balls to try to make my country more shit on a daily basis when he's not even from here.

>>40765
Alright, I tried getting jocular, but clearly you're just a misery guts.
>> No. 40768 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 1:14 pm
40768 spacer
>>40767
Quod erat demonstrandum.
>> No. 40769 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 1:27 pm
40769 spacer
>>40764

Goodness, what a tractate.

I guess the gist of what you're saying is that you shouldn't hinder people from having and sharing unpopular or discriminatory racist or homophobic views, because they can help spark social change, and social change is always good.

That's a horrible concept, at least when you say things like

>These days you can have a black leading man. And that is largely in part due to the presence of the black minstrel rolling his eyes, shaking his hands, and screaming lawdy lawdy in any 1950s movie ever.

No. Just no. Fucking no. Minstrel shows were racist, and there was nothing good about them. You have "black leading men" and women today, not because minstrel shows helped the idea of having a black person as a lead on stage or in a film. We have diversity that allows black performers to be taken seriously today because we've increasingly done away with racist stereotypes and hate speech that hindered their advancement.

I guess what you're attempting with your post is ultimately a libertarian view point that nobody should be abridging free speech and freedom of artistic expression, and then accept the consequences as "social change" that you may not agree with but which will be good, for its own sake of social change that cannot be stopped anyway. But that's just not the way it works. Just look at Trumpism, the Alt-Right and post-truth for that matter. A lot of it is borne out of the idea that even if you're absolutely batshit crazy, nobody has a right to keep you from spreading your batshit craziness and gaining a following which, if not kept in check, could ultimately seriously endanger minority rights. It's well documented that there was a significant increase in hate crime against minorities during Trump's presidency. Mainly because a lot of his followers, emboldened by a President who wasn't giving a fuck about commonly accepted socially progressive norms, mistook post-truth free speech as a permission to be racist or homophobic again and roll back decades of civil rights movements.
>> No. 40770 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 1:32 pm
40770 spacer
>>40769
I'm sorry.
>> No. 40771 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 1:55 pm
40771 spacer
>>40768
You do see the issue in calling somone "insipid" because you've assumed they like Steward Lee's stand-up and then spouting your rote memorised Latin phrase. Because that's unimaginably more insipid that laughing at a comedian.

As for your weird claim that "all good comedy is based in truth", that just isn't true. Is SpongeBob SquarPants "based in truth"? What about Blindboy Boatclub sings about the moon making him shit his pants? Or a man screaming "door's stuck!" while pinned against one in a Counter Strike match? The truth is that your statement is so vague as to be meaningless, it sounds almost pithy, but in reality it has no value.

And as for your spiel about how we some kind of comedy pluralism; no. We can do that when Lord Rothermere, the Barclay Brothers, Rupert Murdoch and the rest of them start at it. Maybe the likes of Andrew Doyle and Mark Dolan (the latter of whom is definitely pretending to be right-wing, for money) can donate half of their GB News slots to left-wing voices, who aren't actively taking a Brillo pad to country's last vestiges of hope and decency. Why should we, IE, anyone who isn't a right-winger, accomodate them when they spend every waking moment telling everyone else to go fuck themselves? Give a little, get a little. But me? I'm not giving them sod all, because they've already taken more than enough and I've had it up to here with their whinging.
>> No. 40772 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 1:58 pm
40772 spacer
>>40771
>Is SpongeBob SquarPants "based in truth"?
No, but when was the last time you recounted an anecdote from spongebob to a mate in work? Then again, I've never watched it but horrible boss and idiotic colleague does seem rather universal.
>> No. 40773 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 2:25 pm
40773 spacer
>>40761
"I'm being silenced" says man who fired off 200 tweets on fucking Christmas Day about how awful trans people are in new interview, exclusive to all papers and TV news outlets.
>> No. 40774 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 2:32 pm
40774 spacer
>>40773
You're really good at making people want to put Texas on the cd player and open their wrists in the bath. Maybe you should tweet at him.
>> No. 40775 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 2:47 pm
40775 spacer
Why would you want to do a controversial comedy show in Edinburgh of all places? Seems like Linehan's being a bit daft.

>>40769
Statistics on x causing y is horribly abused for whatever political bent you want to show - the alleged rise in homophobic attacks because of Brexit being a classic example we had.

On the comedy point I'm not sure if you understand what comedy is. You can't make comedy that doesn't challenge barriers and push norms, otherwise you're just doing subtle wordplay and slapstick. Both Britain and (to a lesser extent) the US are funny countries where the population has a long history of taking the piss out of everything and generally tolerating dissent - and that mostly works. The alternative European model doesn't really warrant thinking about - not least because a every Hungarian knows a good joke about Scotsmen because they just changed the greedy character in their jokes from a Jew to a Scot.

>>40771
>Is SpongeBob SquarPants "based in truth"?

PHILISTINE! Spongebob follows absurd takes on relatable modern life and pop-culture. Sponges don't work at McDonalds for greedy crabs but people do, Squid aren't tedious bores who criticise art for the colour of someone's shoelaces but I think you get the picture.

It even has an episode where Spongebob (who lives in a pineapple under the sea) builds an offensive comedy routine around his squirrel friend being a backwards hillbilly. But then he realizes that the way to manage humour is to shift to multiple targets and everyone has a good laugh at themselves. And the comedy circuit is absolute dominated by the centre-left. Even Al Murray was famously an act taking the piss out of his audience.

On the television the same is true even on networks owned by Rupert Murdoc where Fox challenged American political discourse around the moral majority with the Simpsons. Seth MacFarlane actually got asked about this once and he found that Rupert doesn't care so long as you make money.
>> No. 40776 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 2:55 pm
40776 spacer
To illustrate my point about Trump from earlier, this is what happens when you let unfettered batshittery go unchecked in the name of free speech:

https://www.atlantanewsfirst.com/2023/08/09/trump-hurls-attacks-fulton-county-district-attorney-ahead-anticipated-indictment/

>The former president, who could be days away from charges in Georgia, accused the DA of being ‘racist,’ having an affair with a defendant

Hooray for free speech, eh.

It's not that it's a bad concept in itself. It's one of the most essential backbones of a true democracy. But you have to be able to do something about the idiots who abuse it and just want to watch the world burn.
>> No. 40777 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 2:59 pm
40777 spacer
>>40776
Nobody mentioned free speech. You're getting lines. 10 lines of nobody mentioned free speech. Go on now, off you pop and don't come back until you've learned your lesson.
>> No. 40778 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 3:01 pm
40778 spacer
>>40776
Why would you stop an idiot making libellous statements?
>> No. 40779 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 3:08 pm
40779 spacer
>>40775
>Sponges don't work at McDonalds
You've not been to a McDonalds recently then I take it.
>> No. 40780 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 3:36 pm
40780 spacer
Anyone remember that Doug Stanhope routine about the lengths he'd go to in order to prove he's non-racist enough to get the proverbial "g-word pass"? I bet he'd get crucified for that these days, so I suppose it's a good job he's dropped off the radar over the last decade or so.

It reminds me of Frankie Boyle, who is a giant arsehole, and I think he knows he's a giant arsehole. The reason I know he's a giant arsehole is because he pivoted from telling extremely offensive jokes, to writing hyper-virtuous opinion pieces in the Guardian. That tells me he feels guilt over the offensive jokes, and needs to prove himself, it tells me he's insecure about whether his comedy was good enough to stand up past the offensiveness. It tells me the intention behind those jokes wasn't in the right place.

So even though Doug Stanhope actually is a bit of a nutter tinfoil half crypto-rightoid libertarian type, his more offensive material stands up better. He's not trying to atone for it. You can engage with it and judge for yourself whether it was offensive, whereas with Boyle the author has already conceded that he is guilty.

Trans people won't be truly integrated and accepted to society until we can have those kinds of comedy routines about them.
>> No. 40781 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 3:51 pm
40781 spacer
>>40780
>Negroes won't be truly integrated and accepted to society until we can have minstrel shows.
This is dumb and so are you.
>> No. 40782 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 3:57 pm
40782 spacer
>>40781
You're right, drag shows should be illegal.

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 40783 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 4:00 pm
40783 spacer
>>40782
Astonishingly dumb.
>> No. 40784 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 4:04 pm
40784 spacer
>>40780

Even very controversial comedians like George Carlin or Bill Hicks drew the line somewhere. They were offensive and sometimes deliberately bad taste, but you didn't hear them tell hateful jokes against minorities.

That said, Eddie Murphy got away with some incredibly outrageous stuff back in the day that would get him cancelled in a split second today.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-lnF0wyNBQ
>> No. 40785 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 4:17 pm
40785 spacer
>>40784

Eddie Murphy was, of course, straight up ripping off Richard Prior, and his stuff is so outright homophobic and sexist that it's amazing he hasn't been completely un-personed. I suspect it's only the fact they were both black giving them a lifeline on the matter.

>>40781

That's an astonishingly wide misinterpretation for someone confident enough to call another dumb.
>> No. 40786 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 4:34 pm
40786 spacer
>>40785
Not a misinterpretation, see >>40764
>> No. 40787 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 4:53 pm
40787 spacer
>>40786

Why should I look at another post by somebody else in order to understand if you misinterpreted me in my post, you thick cunt?

The comparison to minstrel acts is not a correct comparison. Making a false analogy does not disprove the point I made, hence you must have misunderstood, assuming it was made in good faith. But I suspect not.
>> No. 40788 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 4:56 pm
40788 spacer
>>40785

>Eddie Murphy was, of course, straight up ripping off Richard Prior

To be fair, Richard Pryor was Eddie Murphy's inspiration to get into stand-up comedy in the first place. He wasn't ripping off Pryor, he way paying homage.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvGA7DNmxmw

I'm pretty sure Eddie Murphy wouldn't say the same things on stage today as he did in his Delirious special from 1983. And rightly so.

And I'm far from siding with >>40780, but one problem that stand-up comedy has nowadays is that people will take offence at even the most minute things you'll say. It's a good thing that audiences today wouldn't put up with outright racist or homophobic jokes anymore, but even if you leave out all the things that are commonly accepted as no-gos by the majority, you'll still have a handful of people who will take one or two things out of context and go completely apeshit on you on social media.

Classic stand up from the 80s to 2000s holds up and is still funny today because it was allowed to go places, and be raw and offensive not in a hateful way, but in a way that was inspiring people to think. I think we've lost a good deal of that in the last few years.
>> No. 40789 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 5:01 pm
40789 spacer
>>40787

Because it's a relevant part of the conversation, genius. You're right though, Graham Linehan going on stage isn't the same as a minstrel show. Minstrel shows weren't necessarily put on by people with a nasty agenda, just those going along with the zeitgeist. Linehan is worse.
>> No. 40790 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 5:11 pm
40790 spacer
>>40780

>It reminds me of Frankie Boyle, who is a giant arsehole, and I think he knows he's a giant arsehole. The reason I know he's a giant arsehole is because he pivoted from telling extremely offensive jokes, to writing hyper-virtuous opinion pieces in the Guardian. That tells me he feels guilt over the offensive jokes, and needs to prove himself, it tells me he's insecure about whether his comedy was good enough to stand up past the offensiveness. It tells me the intention behind those jokes wasn't in the right place.

Frankie Boyle has always been a massive leftie. If you think he's a horrible person, I think you've missed the point. He doesn't say horrible things to be cruel, he talks about horrible things to force people to confront the horribleness of our society. He might miss the mark sometimes, but there's a clear social conscience behind his work.


>> No. 40791 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 5:17 pm
40791 spacer
>>40789

Indeed, and I'm not defending Linehan. But my point is more that how can you judge the material before you've seen it?

Obviously we all already know Linehan's feelings on the matter, but that doesn't mean he might not be capable of making good comedy out of it. Either way- If a group is treated as a sacred cow, and material about them is rejected outright on principle and rather than on substance or merit, it upholds an obvious barrier to full acceptance and integration of that group, that contributes to polarisation. My view is that Linehan's offensive comedy deserves to be judged by the offensive comedy, not by prejudgements about the man; and doing so only pushes those who might seek to enjoy and propagate comedy as an outlet for hatred into each other's arms.

In a strong society Linehan would face no opposition, we would simply let him do his routine, and learn that nobody liked it, because it was shit. But in a weak society we fear what he has to say and must seek to silence it.
>> No. 40792 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 5:23 pm
40792 spacer
>>40790

>I think you've missed the point. He doesn't say horrible things to be cruel, he talks about horrible things to force people to confront the horribleness of our society.

For a time I did give him the benefit of the doubt in thinking that. But I think that's something of a post-hoc justification, and really in the early days he was more of an imageboard edge-lad like most of us might have been 15 years ago. Well, like I still am, that's why I'm arguing in support of offensive comedy here in the first place. I'm a giant leftie but I resent the squeamishness of modern sensibilities where we grant mere words such power.

It's basically that thing, I can't remember who it's a quote from or what, but like how the dictatorships of the last century couldn't tolerate criticism. They project strength and control, but their fragility is revealed in the way it must be expressly forbidden that people speak ill of the leaders. The strength of Western liberal democracy capitalism, for all its faults, is that you can say what you like about it and our politicians, and it doesn't need to throw you in a gulag.
>> No. 40793 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 5:23 pm
40793 spacer
>>40791
It's not about sacred cows, this is you saying "We haven't heard Goebbels's most recent speech, so despite the content of all his other speeches and him not giving any indication of having changed, we need to hear him out". No, we don't, and no, no venue has to give him a platform if they don't want to.
>> No. 40794 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 5:30 pm
40794 spacer
>>40791

This is a private business arrangement between a venue and a promoter. That venue has broad rights to reject any booking that it doesn't like, limited only by discrimination law. A venue has the right to say "this isn't the sort of show that our venue would like to be associated with" and, unless they're in breach of the Equalities Act, their only judgement will be in the court of public opinion.

You have the right to disapprove of this venue for rejecting the booking, someone else would have the right to disapprove if they had taken the booking, but the venue have the ultimate right to choose for themselves and the responsibility to live with whatever reputational consequences ensue.
>> No. 40795 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 5:42 pm
40795 spacer
>>40793
>>40794

Of course any venue has a right not to host somebody. If I had a music venue you wouldn't catch me booking GG Allin for instance. But that is, and you know it is, sidestepping the point- They only reason they don't want to host it is because they knew the uproar it'd inevitably cause from virtuous pitchfork mobs on twitter, I doubt it has anywhere near as much to do with their personal feelings about the content of Linehan's routine as you'd like to imply.

>You have the right to disapprove of this venue for rejecting the booking

Yeah, and that's what I'm doing.

I suppose you could say I'm being cynical, but to me it just looks like cowardice and deference to those who are essentially just the opposite face of the coin to the Daily Mail christian conservatives who got Jerry Springer: The Opera taken off TV.
>> No. 40796 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 6:51 pm
40796 spacer
>>40795

>They only reason they don't want to host it is because they knew the uproar it'd inevitably cause from virtuous pitchfork mobs on twitter

Again, you can't fault them for seeing that coming and drawing the consequences before it can do irreparable damage to their reputation as a venue. Like it or not, they've got a business to run. Nobody will give them a medal for standing up to social media mobs by hosting a controversial act who's going to piss everybody off.


> I doubt it has anywhere near as much to do with their personal feelings about the content of Linehan's routine

It may or it may not. Maybe they're business minded enough that they really don't care as long as their acts don't offend anyone and reflect badly on them. Or they actually subscribe to diversity and wokeness. But what difference does it make. The end result is the same in both cases.
>> No. 40797 Anonymous
16th August 2023
Wednesday 7:11 pm
40797 spacer
>>40788
Bigotry is fine in comedy if your profile is big enough. The most recent Gervais and Chappelle shows are full of anti-LGBT sentiment. With Chappelle it's from a perspective of "telling it how it is", with Gervais it's knowingly bigoted but he's pretending it's ironic so it's fine. All these comedians talking about being silenced, at the same time they're getting paid millions of dollars for a 90 minute stand up set for Netflix watched by tens of millions of people. Not really being silenced when you've got that sort of reach.
>> No. 40798 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 12:35 am
40798 spacer
>>40791
>In a strong society Linehan would face no opposition, we would simply let him do his routine, and learn that nobody liked it, because it was shit. But in a weak society we fear what he has to say and must seek to silence it.
So we live in a weak society that wishes it was strong. How many benders and shirtlifters and men in dresses need to die preventably before we acknowledge our society's weakness? And why can't we just acknowledge it now and save them?
>> No. 40799 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 12:42 am
40799 spacer
>>40798

How many deaths will his jokes cause?
>> No. 40800 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 12:47 am
40800 spacer
>>40798
He's not causing their deaths, he just disagrees with them. That should be okay too.
>> No. 40801 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 11:18 am
40801 spacer

DeT0QpwX0AYi9sx.jpg
408014080140801
>>40799
>> No. 40802 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 8:16 pm
40802 spacer

image_2023-08-17_211537502.png
408024080240802
>>40799

This is an interesting topic to me. I consider myself staunchly free speech, but even I will concede that incitement to violence should be criminal. If I were to tell you "go and kill this person", and you do, then I should at least be investigated for criminal liability. On the other end of that scale, there is a (fisherperson-derived?) argument that any derisive speech (even jokes) can devalue the lives of a target and make way for an environment that lends itself to increased violence. It's plausible, but this really depends on the context.

Two contrasting examples: I remember a professional trainer at work wrinkling her nose at a joke to do with women being bad drivers. The causal chain in her view was something like: derisive joke -> emphasise bad qualities -> devalue or dehumanise the subject -> an environment where the subject is seen as inferior -> less protection of rights and therefore greater susceptibility to victimisation including violence. This struck me as a laughably huge leap, something that needs quite a bit of evidence to back up.

Yet when that Daily Mail journalist referred to people on capsizing boats as cockroaches, I can absolutely see how that would create an environment that influences popular opinion and policy to be less sympathetic towards a group, maybe leading to a greater willingness to accept their death. Even here, though, I would defend the right of the journalist to express whatever opinion they like, as the same free speech allows us to clap back and argue for their rights.

My mind isn't fully made up on this, other than that I think if you make the argument that a joke endangers people, you need it to be pretty well-evidenced, otherwise I would say that free speech is the greater virtue. Wot u reckon m8s?
>> No. 40803 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 8:46 pm
40803 spacer
>>40799
How many would be acceptable to you?
>> No. 40805 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 8:50 pm
40805 spacer

FGMFeIdVIAEKDqy.jpg
408054080540805
>>40802
>This struck me as a laughably huge leap, something that needs quite a bit of evidence to back up.

Here you go, lad.
>> No. 40807 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 9:14 pm
40807 spacer
>>40802
>Even here, though, I would defend the right of the journalist to express whatever opinion they like, as the same free speech allows us to clap back and argue for their rights.
Not to pile on against you or anything but this whole notion of "free speech" that gets bandied about is fairly nonsensical. You and I can't be heard by as many as read those papers, so our speech is effectively curtailed. Even those journalists can't say what they want, while they are picked because the chain of command knows they'll say what Murdoch ultimately wants them to say, they also can't change their mind and go against that without losing their job and credibility in their area of employment. Much the same as you and I can't tweet to as many people as Linehan can, and nor will those venues let us go on stage. When people argue about rights to free speech it's taken as a presupposition that it's an equal and open arena when it's just not and never has been.
Venues potentially deplatforming guests out of fear of the mob does leave a bad taste in the mouth but it's pretty negligible next to the deeply biased and non-free media funded by conservative and right-wing think tanks. It would be great if we could have the "strong society" mentioned previously but we don't have it, pretending we do won't create it, and while we're doing that, dangerous people will, are and have been taking advantage to consolidate power.
>> No. 40809 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 9:32 pm
40809 spacer
>>40805

That's a good illustration of the theory, yeah, but it's not the evidence itself. Shaping it like a pyramid doesn't prove that one step is foundational for another, or that they have any causal relationship to eachother.

What I'm asking for is the evidence that justifies the theory, or at least fitting examples. I can think of historical cases where people have been derided as the butt of jokes amidst an atmosphere of conflict or severe harm (e.g. caricatures of Jews in pre-Nazi Germany), but I can also think of instances where groups have been derided but are relatively well protected from violence and exclusion (e.g. ruling classes facing public satire).

It also says in your image, "while every biased attitude or act does not lead to genocide, each genocide has been built on the acceptance of attitudes and actions described at the lower levels of the pyramid". I mean, is that true? Did the Hutu hacking the Tutsi to pieces in Rwanda begin with biased attitudes and microaggressions? If it did, was that a major contributory cause, or did it owe more to the politically unstable situation left by the Belgians?

It's not like I'm dismissing the possibility outright, but it strikes me as a bit nuts to take this sort of thing as self-evident. Nasty words and violent action are two very different things that as far as I can tell only have a bit of a correlation.
>> No. 40812 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 10:02 pm
40812 spacer

5d0245a92100009518ef245f.jpg
408124081240812
>>40802
>I consider myself staunchly free speech, but even I will concede that incitement to violence should be criminal. If I were to tell you "go and kill this person", and you do, then I should at least be investigated for criminal liability.

I suppose it all depends on how much of a causal link you really want to follow on this and the level of abuse you want to follow from that judgement. Following the Rwandan Genocide the UN published a lot of causal chains like >>40805 based primarily on radio broadcasts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_T%C3%A9l%C3%A9vision_Libre_des_Mille_Collines

But now when Kagame isn't leaking nudes of his opposition he's using the strict sentences to quash domestic criticism because everything is genocide. It sounds like an NWO conspiracy theory but honestly the abuse that goes on with speech laws mirrors anti-terror laws.

>>40807
>You and I can't be heard by as many as read those papers, so our speech is effectively curtailed

Bit of a leap that one. You're raging against the oligarchy which is all well and good but the press being bought to spread messaging seems insignificant compared to the abuse you seem to not care about. It also clearly hasn't led to the toppling of our democracy even when we've faced far worse times and, broadly, I'd find that the media toes a centrist line outside of outright cranks on GBBs - especially when we considered every panel show in the UK.

I mean I don't see what heavy press regulation is going to work when a representative system will always reinforce oligarchy by its design. The people defining the acceptable messaging will always be the people who hold power by mobilising party/self resources and they will tend to secure political dynasties because we have a representative class entrenching power.
>> No. 40813 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 10:28 pm
40813 spacer
>>40812
>the press being bought to spread messaging seems insignificant compared to the abuse you seem to not care about.
Murdoch being able to push his agenda on millions if not billions daily seems insignificant compared to Linehan not getting to perform at his choice of venue? The mind boggles.
You're missing the point really anyway - it's not possible for everyone to have an equal voice in the media. There isn't the ink or data for it. Logistically it's impossible, some people will be listened to more than others by the nature of things. Starting from there to pretend there's such a thing as free speech and that a very public person with many thousands listening to them is somehow being treated unfairly is fundamentally disingenuous.
>> No. 40814 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 10:50 pm
40814 spacer
>>40813
>Murdoch being able to push his agenda on millions if not billions daily seems insignificant compared to Linehan not getting to perform at his choice of venue? The mind boggles.

If this is the biggest threat you can imagine from gagging voices then you really are just blinded by my team against your team bullshit.

>You're missing the point really anyway - it's not possible for everyone to have an equal voice in the media. There isn't the ink or data for it. Logistically it's impossible, some people will be listened to more than others by the nature of things. Starting from there to pretend there's such a thing as free speech and that a very public person with many thousands listening to them is somehow being treated unfairly is fundamentally disingenuous.

Then listen to random voices in the population. Agitate for a lotacracy and let opinions compete in a marketplace of ideas. The entire reason the press can be so easily captured is that nobody reads newspapers anymore.

Or go brick in the windows of anyone who watches a theatre show of a man whose name was vaguely recognised at best before he became a culture war issue.
>> No. 40815 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 10:57 pm
40815 spacer
>>40814
It's not the biggest threat I can imagine but one of these things has already demonstrably done and continues to do extensive harm and the other is you getting your knickers in a twist about imagination.
>Then listen to random voices in the population.
That wouldn't change the fact I don't have time to do that, nobody does. This is a problem with physical reality, not something that can be solved in a meaningful sense. Your insisting otherwise notwithstanding.
>> No. 40817 Anonymous
17th August 2023
Thursday 11:26 pm
40817 spacer
>>40815
>It's not the biggest threat I can imagine but one of these things has already demonstrably done and continues to do extensive harm

So just like state sanctioned gagging of opposing voices then. I don't know whether your being deliberately obtuse or you're just the European equivalent of a mid-western American oblivious to the outside world.

>That wouldn't change the fact I don't have time to do that, nobody does. This is a problem with physical reality, not something that can be solved in a meaningful sense. Your insisting otherwise notwithstanding.

Your listening to a random voice right now.
>> No. 40818 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 12:07 am
40818 spacer
>>40803

As many as you can prove. i.e there won't be any

We are well aware that people in minority groups such as LGBT, trans, etc have a higher risk of suicide, but what is almost always ignored is that that goes directly hand in hand with socio-economic conditions of deprivation and other (sometimes undiagnosed, sometimes not, most often completely untreated) mental health conditions (which arguably are related to the former again).

We have the causal chain backwards and honestly it's quite revolting. These people are constantly made martyrs of to prove a point in some posho twat's "I'm more progressive than you" posturing.
>> No. 40819 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 12:12 am
40819 spacer
The International Chess Federation (FIDE) says it is temporarily banning evangelist christian korean youtuber women from competing in its women's events.

The FIDE said individual cases would require "further analysis" and that a decision could take up to two years.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-66538328

We're through the looking glass, lads.
>> No. 40821 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 12:57 am
40821 spacer
>>40819
You have to admit that it's an interesting move for a game where a pawn can become a queen.
>> No. 40822 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 3:30 am
40822 spacer
>>40809
>Did the Hutu hacking the Tutsi to pieces in Rwanda begin with biased attitudes and microaggressions? If it did, was that a major contributory cause, or did it owe more to the politically unstable situation left by the Belgians?
I'll bet if the answers to these questions are known, someone on the internet will have written about it on the internet. If only there were some way of finding information on the internet. Someone should come up with one of those, they'd make thousands.
>> No. 40823 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 8:51 am
40823 spacer
>>40822

You can't just Google the causes of a complex event and accept the top hit, it obviously takes more research than that. My point in asking the question isn't to forgo effort on my part but to open up a discussion: does this example make the case that jokes, rhetoric, satire, nasty words etc. actually aren't a causal factor in enabling violence against certain groups?

I've indicated my belief as based on my (admittedly limited) knowledge of the Rwandan genocide: I suspect that one of the biggest triggers was the withdrawal of UN peacekeepers and the preceding actions of the Belgian government which IIRC had the population identify as one or the other in a census. I think that the nasty rhetoric was an outgrowth of that political context rather than the other way around. Otherlad posted the interesting example of RTLM, a radio station that apparently aired opinions criticising the peace talks before the genocide, but even this was funded by wealthy Hutu nationalists with their own agendas like Félicien Kabuga.

My broader suspicion is that generally, nasty rhetoric about groups and actual, direct violence only correlate and that there are other factors more important in explaining why violence happens. Fair enough if you don't accept that reasoning or you think that's a crap example, but you can at least say why.
>> No. 40824 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 11:22 am
40824 spacer
>>40823
>does this example make the case that jokes, rhetoric, satire, nasty words etc. actually aren't a causal factor in enabling violence against certain groups?
No. There, I'm glad we could clear that up without resorting to pretending decades of scholarship and centuries of examples didn't exist.
>> No. 40825 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 11:36 am
40825 spacer
>>40819
Yeah, but those players born as men went through male puberty, and so the higher levels of testosterone result in increased development of their chess muscles, heightened bead sensors and more active 2-Ke2 receptors.
>> No. 40826 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 11:40 am
40826 spacer
>>40825
There are two chess categories: open to all and women.

Women's chess only exists because they're unable to compete with men. Letting people born male compete against them is like when able-bodied people cheat to enter the Paralympics.
>> No. 40851 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 12:21 pm
40851 spacer
>>40826

The empirical data is actually far less straightforward than that.

https://slate.com/technology/2020/12/why-are-the-best-chess-players-men.html
>> No. 40852 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 1:52 pm
40852 spacer
>>40823

>My broader suspicion is that generally, nasty rhetoric about groups and actual, direct violence only correlate and that there are other factors more important in explaining why violence happens.

I agree, and I think the opposite position largely boils down to the "playing GTA causes kids to turn into mass shooters, ban videogames" kind of logic even if I am to let the frankly absurd false equivalence between the Rwandan fucking genocide and making jokes about bumders go.

It's an easy, seemingly obvious thing to point your finger at and blame, and I believe that the emotions driving it are genuine, good faith desires to do something about it. But it is nevertheless misguided. At best it's wasting time and effort for nothing, at worst it's letting the real causes go unaddressed and ultimately doing more harm.
>> No. 40854 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 2:13 pm
40854 spacer
>>40852

I went to see a therapist for a while who actually insisted there was a link between violent video games and violent behaviour in young people. He was in his early 60s, a year or two from retirement, and he was a bit of a luddite, so I guess somebody like that was bound to have a different view on it than somebody who understood young gamers a little better.

A friend's 16 year old son is an absolute gaming fanatic, and I've heard him say that he really likes first-person shooters too, but he seems pretty well adjusted and doesn't have any noticeable violent tendencies. He can be a bit jittery though, even for a teenlad.

I don't think there's a deterministic, direct link between "nasty rhetoric" and violence, but that doesn't mean that that kind of thing should be tolerated. Because for some people, hate speech which they absorb from their peers and others can normalise the idea of violence against minorities, and with a certain disposition, it could make it more likely after all that somebody will become violent. And that still doesn't take into account that hate speech itself can be a form of violence, because not all violence is physical.
>> No. 40855 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 4:18 pm
40855 spacer
>>40854
It seem disingenuous to ignore one form of osmosis but not the other. If you're playing GTA and your mate says it would be cool to kill prostitutes for real and you do it then who is really at fault? You would be because you chose to kill someone.
>> No. 40856 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 4:41 pm
40856 spacer
>>40855

I'm not sure playing GTA normalises violence the same way as being around people who hate minorities. I never really played computer games, but I'd reckon that most of them know the difference between the fictional world of a computer game and reality where you can get nicked just for pulling a gun on somebody even without shooting. But that's going to be much more difficult if the actual people around you are racist and/or homophobic. Before long, their reality wil become yours. Which, again, could technically also be true if your friends are all gamers who like to play violent games. But far fewer people will think it's ok to kill prostitutes just because you can do that inside a violent video game with no consequences.
>> No. 40863 Anonymous
18th August 2023
Friday 9:29 pm
40863 spacer

chess girls.jpg
408634086340863
>>40821
Pawns are girls too. All chess pieces except the king are girls. This has been addressed on other sites.
>> No. 40864 Anonymous
19th August 2023
Saturday 7:33 pm
40864 spacer
>>40856
IIRC there is some actual research that shows that people are generally able to distinguish between video games and reality, and compartmentalise video game violence appropriately.
>> No. 40865 Anonymous
19th August 2023
Saturday 7:40 pm
40865 spacer
>>40863
I always wonder how these bigots play chess. Do they talk about a pawn pretending to be a queen to attack other pieces? If they don't have a spare queen and use an inverted rook, do they talk about how it doesn't really pass as a queen?
>> No. 40866 Anonymous
19th August 2023
Saturday 10:07 pm
40866 spacer
>>40863

>All chess pieces except the king are girls.


There are no female knights. They'd be called dames.

Checkmate.






I'll get my coat.
>> No. 40867 Anonymous
20th August 2023
Sunday 5:38 am
40867 spacer
>>40866
>They'd be called dames.
In a game that starts with a pair of queens? They'd fit right in.
>> No. 40868 Anonymous
20th August 2023
Sunday 11:44 am
40868 spacer
>>40867

Maybe we should ask the chess pieces themselves what they identify as. After all you shouldn't just assume gender. Even if they'll just tell you they identify as chess pieces.
>> No. 40869 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 12:44 pm
40869 spacer

FxoFOKaWYAAW2IR.jpg
408694086940869
A children’s book about Pride featuring men in bondage gear was shown to four-year-olds in a pre-school, it has emerged. Parents had raised concerns with staff at Genesis Pre School in Hull after it was brought to their attention that children were being exposed to the images.

A staff member had checked with parents of the nursery pupils if they were happy with the contents of the book Grandad’s Pride to be shown to their children, but one flagged images of “partially naked” men in “leather bondage gear” as concerning. A member of staff then defended the images, arguing the children would not understand the erotic and sexualised depictions.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/08/21/pride-book-men-bondage-wear-shown-children-pre-school-hull/

Are you really a bumder if you don't wear bondage gear in public?
>> No. 40870 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 1:42 pm
40870 spacer
>>40869

>arguing the children would not understand the erotic and sexualised depictions.

There was a time when that was the exact reason why it was thought that children shouldn't be shown something like that.

Nothing against bumders, but your bumderness should not give you carte blanche to sexualise children. Which is what you are doing with this.
>> No. 40871 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 1:59 pm
40871 spacer

th(2).jpg
408714087140871
>>40870

How do you feel about this slattern, wantonly and provocatively displaying her ankles in public?
>> No. 40872 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 2:04 pm
40872 spacer
>>40871

Good grief, I would obliquely inquire as to her matrimonial prospects, if you understand my meaning.
>> No. 40873 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 2:07 pm
40873 spacer
>>40869

I see stuff like this and shake my head, and while I'm not a bumder, being a furry puts me quite bumder/trans adjacent The poofs and trannos don't like to acknowledge us as equals, but the fact Glinner is gunning for us too is a sign of our legitimacy, and I understand the feeling bumders must have whenever something like this comes up. It's just... Why would you. It's a bloody kids book. You are already getting your chance to propagandise directly to 4 year olds, you can at least sanitise the fucking bondage gear a bit.

There's some cunts out there who are just either downright thick and socially oblivious, or else they are fanatics with a chip on the shoulder. But sadly, there's others who seemingly exist only to give the Daily Mail lot ammunition. The trans community absolutely does have its groomers, much like the furry community undeniably does have its zoophiles, and the bumder community has its paedos. It's just the truth. I detest those people and loathe the "guilt by association" where people will judge an entire community by it's worst members, but nevertheless they are out there, they do exist, so I can't say I don't understand why people end up making those judgements either.

So you don't know what the intentions were here- The artist might have just been an idiot who didn't think about it, but he might also have been the kind who genuinely does get a bit exited at the prospect of normalising his sexual proclivities in kid's books. Thing is our society crossed the point of tolerating homosexuality a good while ago, but it'll be a cold day in hell before we tolerate any real kind of sexual openness around kids.

This is why political parties have purges though innit. You try paint yourself nice and electable, but you know it'll all go to shit when old uncle Jez starts shouting about Jews and sympathising with Russia and so on. Maybe the LGBT organisation needs a purge.

>>40866
>>40868

They're neither though, they're bits of wood (or marble if you're a posho) carved into abstract representations of feudal hierarchy. King and Queen in this context are no more indications of gender than the grammatical "genders" in other languages. They are just categories. There's plenty of cases of a male animal's name being in a "female" grammatical category, for example. Nowt to do with cocks and fannies, just whether you refer to it with and il or an el on the end of your adjectives, or whatever it is.

And you think we're dead cleaver in English not having nowt complicated like that, so nobody has to worry about if their calculator actually identifies as die der or das, but we even used to have cases. Dost thy wear wigs? Shalt thou wear wigs? Pray thee wear wigs. Simpler than foreign wierdness but it's the same principle.

Anyway I'm rambling because I have actual stuff to do but I don't want to. Soz.
>> No. 40874 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 2:08 pm
40874 spacer
>>40871

What a harlot. How can she cheapen herself that way. I'm shocked her husband lets her leave the house like that.
>> No. 40875 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 2:29 pm
40875 spacer
>>40873

> you can at least sanitise the fucking bondage gear a bit.

Absolutely. It's one thing to normalise LGBTQA+log(sin α²) to children. As a concept in itself, I guess you can't turn back time, it's out there in the world, no point pretending it doesn't exist when a child has two legally married dads or mums. But sexual orientation is one thing, sexuality and sexual fetishes is another. And blurring the lines between the two can harm children in a way that simply being a gay or lesbian parent doesn't normally.


>The trans community absolutely does have its groomers, much like the furry community undeniably does have its zoophiles, and the bumder community has its paedos. It's just the truth.

From the beginning of the gay rights movement, that movement was piggybacked and subverted by paedos attempting to have their sexual preference normalised the same way as homosexuality. And not all attempts to lower the gay age of consent were driven by the altruistic idea that teenagers shouldn't be disadvantaged over their heterosexual peers in exploring their own sexuality. A few radical voices in that movement wanted to abolish the age of consent altogether. And probably not so a ten year old wouldn't have to worry about showing his knob around.

Exposing children to sexually explicit material, and a person clad in bondage gear should count as sexually explicit, is now illegal, most of it under online grooming statutes. And rightly so. And I see no reason why the gay community should enjoy exemptions. Not even in the form of underhandedly slipping that material into a children's book. You shouldn't get to normalise your sexual fetishes to children just because your sexual identity and preference enjoy the protection of the law in our times.
>> No. 40876 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 2:37 pm
40876 spacer

maxresdefault.jpg
408764087640876
>>40870
It feels like the type of thing someone working in a nursery shouldn't be making the final decision on. If it was a child psychologist or someone then fair enough, but if we're trusting Becky with a BTEC in childcare to make judgements on whether toddlers should be shown illustrations of men in bondage gear and the lasting effects of this when she's on little more than minimum wage then something is fucked.

>>40873
The author doesn't look like someone you'd want influencing children.
>> No. 40877 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 3:10 pm
40877 spacer

Image-empty-state.jpg
408774087740877
>>40876

>Harry Woodgate (pronouns: they/them)

Sigh.
>> No. 40879 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 7:24 pm
40879 spacer

grandads-camper-by-harry-woodgate-andersen-press-8.jpg
408794087940879
>>40878
From what I can tell from a quick Google, the premise of the book is "let me regale you with tales from the summer I spent receiving hot beefy loads from your biological grandad."
>> No. 40880 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 8:24 pm
40880 spacer
>>40879

Oof. So gramps was only using our hero for a hot white summer boytoy fling? No wonder he didn't stick around for the kid either.

I suppose it is admirable to show kids the harsh realities of the world rather than keep them sheltered.
>> No. 40881 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 9:09 pm
40881 spacer
>>40869
When did pride become about celebrating diversity? Pride is about coming out as a specific community and being proud of who you are. It's not exactly opposed to diversity in itself but there's a group culture and history it celebrates with everyone else looking at it from the outside as gay-Christmas.

Why does everything have to be the state ideology these days?

>>40877
That's the bibliography of a shyster if I've ever seen one. Nothing that indicates making children's books that children actually want to read, instead of dragons and wizards you get grandpa regaling tales of mundane romance that win awards with adults.

>>40876
>If it was a child psychologist or someone then fair enough

Given history I think those are the worst possible people to decide what children should be exposed to. Imagine getting excited about climbing inside a child's mind - outright sinister.

Meanwhile nurseries are incredibly conservative institutions just because of the risk assessments involved - in this case they actually engaged with the parents on what was acceptable which is a fine mark in my book. On the opposite end they got rid of black sheep just in case someone might complain one day in the future.
>> No. 40882 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 9:32 pm
40882 spacer
>>40871
Is that Lucy Letby?
>> No. 40883 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 9:38 pm
40883 spacer
>>40876
>Granddad's Camper
Camper than whom, exactly?

>>40873
>Dost thy wear wigs?
You can't say this one; "thy" means "your". The question would be, dost thou wear wigs?
>> No. 40884 Anonymous
22nd August 2023
Tuesday 10:26 pm
40884 spacer
>>40883

Yeah, I realised I fucked it up after posting. I'm no middle English expert obviously. Point being you'd have multiple variations of the simple modern words you/your depending on the context, if you were asking someone, instructing, observing, etc.
>> No. 40885 Anonymous
23rd August 2023
Wednesday 4:39 pm
40885 spacer
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2023/08/gop-official-protests-trans-rights-by-displaying-16-foot-penis-sign-in-front-of-children/

>GOP official protests trans rights by displaying 16-foot penis sign in front of children

Sounds like a shit AI-generated ragebait headline.
>> No. 40925 Anonymous
2nd September 2023
Saturday 12:42 am
40925 spacer
https://nypost.com/2023/08/31/elon-musk-blames-elite-la-school-for-brainwashing-trans-daughter/

>Elon Musk blames elite LA school for brainwashing ‘communist’ trans daughter into hating him for being rich

u wot m8t
>> No. 41297 Anonymous
28th November 2023
Tuesday 7:54 am
41297 spacer
>Two teenagers accused of murdering Brianna Ghey showed a "preoccupation" with "violence, torture and death", a court has heard.

>Opening the trial, Deanna Heer KC, prosecuting, said messages recovered from the phones of girl X and boy Y showed a "preoccupation" with "violence, torture and death".

>She said: "If that was not an unusual way for two teenagers to speak to one another, the messages demonstrate also how, over time, they encouraged one another to think about how they would actually carry out a killing. The messages show how they planned together to kill Brianna in just the way that she was in fact killed."

>In November 2022, they discussed killing a child referred to as boy M, the court heard. In one message, girl X said: "If I do end up killing boy M, I have a really sharp blade, the same one that Sweeney Todd uses. "If we kill boy M can I keep some things, a couple of teeth and an eye."

>Ms Heer said in December, girl X sent boy Y a video which was apparently an advert for an underground site for people who like rape, snuff, torture and murder. Girl X told boy Y: "I love watching torture vids. Real ones on the dark web," the jury heard. The court heard on 1 January, boy Y sent girl X a photo of a hunting knife and told her: "Spent my money. I bought a knife." Ms Heer said it was that knife which was used to kill Brianna six weeks later.

>The court was told in December last year, girl X messaged boy Y telling him she was "obsessed over someone" called Brianna but did not have feelings for the teenager. After she sent pictures of Brianna to him, boy Y questioned her gender and made slurs. Ms Heer said on 23 January girl X messaged boy Y telling him she had given Brianna ibuprofen gel tablets that "should have been enough to kill her". The court heard how girl X also claimed to have killed two people in messages to boy Y, but there was no evidence she had.

>Ms Heer said they spoke in messages about other people they wanted to kill and by 26 January had compiled a list of at least four people, as well as Brianna. The court heard girl X created a fake Instagram account to contact one of their targets, referred to as boy E, but it was blocked. In a message read to the court, girl X told boy Y: "If we can't get boy E tomorrow we can kill Brianna." Boy Y said in a reply he wanted to see if Brianna would "scream like a man or a girl". In one message, girl X said: "I want to stab her at least once even if she's dead jus coz its fun lol."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-67543984

Fucking edgelords, man.
>> No. 41305 Anonymous
12th December 2023
Tuesday 2:50 pm
41305 spacer
Enoch Burke looks set to remain in Mountjoy Prison for the Christmas period after he again refused to undertake to comply with a High Court order to stay away from Wilson’s Hospital School.

After Mr Justice Mark Sanfey asked him several times at a hearing on Tuesday if he would comply with the order, Mr Burke said compliance with it would equate to “giving up” his religious beliefs and would be an endorsement of “evangelist christian korean youtuberism”.

Mr Burke said he has now spent more than 200 days in prison with drug dealers and murderers over his refusal to accept a direction from the school to address a student by a different pronoun. Mr Justice Sanfey told the teacher the court was only concerned with whether he is prepared to purge his contempt and give an undertaking to the court to stay away from the school, which would secure his release.

Mr Burke was jailed for the second time last September after the school’s board asked the court to jail the teacher over his deliberate failure to comply with a permanent injunction, granted last July by Mr Justice Alexander Owens, restraining him from attending at the school. The board claimed Mr Burke had attended at Wilson’s Hospital campus every day since the 2023-24 school year commenced in August.

The school board alleges Mr Burke’s presence at the school caused “severe disruption for staff and students”. That claim is denied. In September, Mr Justice Mark Heslin ruled that Mr Burke had “flagrantly breached” the orders requiring him to stay away from the school and ordered that he be committed to prison “indefinitely”, until he purges his contempt.

Mr Burke is separately appealing a decision by the school to dismiss him from his post as a German and history teacher. He has argued he is in prison because of his opposition to “evangelist christian korean youtuberism” and that Mr Justice Owens’s order is invalid. Mr Burke has also accused the courts of failing to recognise his constitutional rights to religious freedom. He claims his rights were breached when the school instructed him to refer to a male student using they/them pronouns.


https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2023/12/12/enoch-burke-to-remain-in-prison-for-christmas-after-again-refusing-to-stay-away-from-school/

What is it with Irish people and ruining their lives because they're doubling down on their views about evangelist christian korean youtubers?
>> No. 41306 Anonymous
12th December 2023
Tuesday 3:08 pm
41306 spacer

2522be67864eec830fb60093816d8f5a.jpg
413064130641306
>>41305
Is this the real reason the government plays to the culture war, so that everyone gets sacked but still turns up to work out of principle?
>> No. 41307 Anonymous
12th December 2023
Tuesday 3:24 pm
41307 spacer
>>41305
He really is an entire architecture firm of his own misfortune.
>> No. 41308 Anonymous
12th December 2023
Tuesday 3:27 pm
41308 spacer
>>41305
The culture war has made me notice something: it’s actually really, really easy to refer to anyone without using any gender pronouns at all. I, too, think that they/them pronouns are bollocks, but I just don’t use any pronouns for such people and it’s absolutely fine. I see it happen in news stories too. It really isn’t that hard to get away with.
>> No. 41309 Anonymous
12th December 2023
Tuesday 3:34 pm
41309 spacer
>>41308
Yeah, but he's a Christian so he's loving this. He's just like all those definitely not made up Roman Christian martyrs, IE, annoying and wrong.
>> No. 41310 Anonymous
12th December 2023
Tuesday 3:50 pm
41310 spacer
>>41308
How does a non-binary samurai kill people?

they/them
>> No. 41311 Anonymous
12th December 2023
Tuesday 10:49 pm
41311 spacer
>>41310
What makes them so effective is that the slash is usually silent.
>> No. 41330 Anonymous
19th January 2024
Friday 10:43 am
41330 spacer

GEKmtgKWcAAE8f4.png
413304133041330
>In a surprise result for the ruling Labour party, Ian Sharer has won the Cazenove ward by-election for the Conservatives with 53.6 per cent of the vote. The Liberal Democrat-turned-Tory took the seat from Labour, whose candidate Laura Pascal placed second with 30.9 per cent.
>It caps a turbulent week for Pascal, who was suspended by Labour following an allegation of transphobia, only to be reinstated hours before polls opened.
https://www.hackneycitizen.co.uk/2024/01/19/cazenove-by-election-conservatives-score-upset-swipe-seat-labour/

Reality is a .gs shitpost. We can now look forward to the next election being fought on trans issues.
>> No. 41331 Anonymous
19th January 2024
Friday 5:32 pm
41331 spacer
>>41330
Well I read that the Jews hate LTNs, a quarter of the ward is Jewish and they've voted in their Jewish mate who has now stood for all three main parties.
>> No. 41334 Anonymous
22nd January 2024
Monday 1:55 pm
41334 spacer
>>41330

I'm fairly certain the only relevant trans issue was transport.

The ULEZ has passed off enough people that it is becoming relevant as a single issue in London. So the Low traffic neighbourhood policy paired with the fact that Khan is Labour taints the whole party by association and will have been far larger factors I imagine.
>> No. 41335 Anonymous
22nd January 2024
Monday 3:36 pm
41335 spacer
>>41334

Ian Sharer had been a Lib Dem councillor in that ward for 16 years. Labour took his seat in 2018 and he came within a gnat's fart of winning it back in 2022. He defected to the Tories over the LTN proposals, but that wasn't really a decisive issue - he's known and liked in the area, he ran an effective face-to-face campaign and he brought most of his supporters with him. Labour lost a perfectly winnable seat, because all of the argy-bargy over trans issues meant that they didn't actually get around to running a campaign.

The lesson is that policies don't win elections, but they frequently distract from what actually does win elections - pressing the flesh, earning trust one person at a time, mobilising your support, convincing people to care.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cazenove_(ward)
>> No. 41338 Anonymous
2nd February 2024
Friday 2:10 pm
41338 spacer

80770357-13037291-image-m-15_1706871152622.png
413384133841338
Do you reckon having a sticky out left ear is a sign of criminality?
>> No. 41339 Anonymous
2nd February 2024
Friday 9:06 pm
41339 spacer
>>41338
Wasn't she convicted of only one crime? One crime don't make you a criminal now, does it?
>> No. 41340 Anonymous
3rd February 2024
Saturday 4:05 am
41340 spacer
>>41338

It's possible.

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/18/troubling-study-says-artificial-intelligence-can-predict-who-will-be-criminals-based-on-facial-features/

>TROUBLING STUDY SAYS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CAN PREDICT WHO WILL BE CRIMINALS BASED ON FACIAL FEATURES
>> No. 41341 Anonymous
3rd February 2024
Saturday 1:49 pm
41341 spacer

H2XWCVRSDCVMQUDET3C6BLI6MM-4166163017.jpg
413414134141341
>>41340
Without bothering to read the article, I'd imagine class, genetics and upbringing would have far more to do with criminality than specifically facial features. Cart before the horse or whatever the saying is.
>> No. 41342 Anonymous
3rd February 2024
Saturday 1:56 pm
41342 spacer
The only factor in whether or not someone is likely to break laws is if they live in a society which has them.
>> No. 41343 Anonymous
3rd February 2024
Saturday 2:07 pm
41343 spacer

Whoa-Bill-Ted.gif
413434134341343
>>41342

(A good day to you Sir!)
>> No. 41368 Anonymous
21st February 2024
Wednesday 5:49 pm
41368 spacer
>>41340
Unless it can detect Martin Shkreli I'm not interested.
>> No. 41411 Anonymous
5th March 2024
Tuesday 8:33 pm
41411 spacer
Spanish soldiers change gender to gain benefits intended for women

Spanish soldiers and policemen are changing their gender in order to access benefits intended for women, an investigation has found.

Spain’s Left-wing government introduced a self-ID law in 2022 that made it simple to transition formally, while at the same time boosting benefits for women in the military and security forces. Since the change was introduced, 41 men have become women in the Spanish territory of Ceuta in North Africa. Only four of that number have changed their names. According to a report in online newspaper El Español, the vast majority of the 37 newly registered women are employed by the military or the police.

Roberto Perdigones, an army corporal who registered as female in the last year, now earns more money and lives in superior accommodation. “On the outside I feel like a heterosexual man, but on the inside I am a lesbian. And it is the latter that counts. This is why I made the legal change to become a woman,” Corporal Perdigones, who continues to sport a beard, told El Español. Sources close to Ceuta’s security forces said male officers are changing their legal gender in the hope of gaining promotions.

Corporal Perdigones said “positive discrimination” was an incentive for becoming a woman. “For changing my gender, I have been told that my pension has gone up because women get more to compensate for inequality. I also get 15 per cent more salary for being a mother,” he said. The corporal explained that he was planning to sue for shared custody of his 16-year-old son because he thought his new gender status will give him a better chance in the courts.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/05/spanish-soldiers-change-gender-benefits-for-women/
>> No. 41412 Anonymous
5th March 2024
Tuesday 8:52 pm
41412 spacer
>>41411

I recall reading something about how Spain in particular really does the "positive discrimination" stuff a whole lot more than most places. Like, it's a real and genuine thing there, not just manosphere bollocks like it is in most places. In this country I don't think there's much concrete financial, material incentive to "become a woman" in bad faith like that, outside of maybe social currency, which is inherently a lot more subjective.

I do think a lot of genuine (i.e earnest and acting in good faith) trannos are doing it to escape the societal expectations of being a man, whether consciously or not. They never managed to measure up to our typical expectations of masculinity and I can see why it'd be easy to confuse that with not being a man and feel that you have no alternative, if you never developed that ability to disregard what people think about you.
>> No. 41413 Anonymous
5th March 2024
Tuesday 9:49 pm
41413 spacer
>>41412

>I do think a lot of genuine (i.e earnest and acting in good faith) trannos are doing it to escape the societal expectations of being a man, whether consciously or not.

I don't think that's true very often for male-to-female trans people, because it's incredibly fucking hard to live as a transwoman and I doubt many people would choose it if they had any other option. I do think it might apply to a lot of female-to-male trans people - in a previous era, a lot of them might have identified as tomboys or butch lesbians, or just a woman who isn't a girly-girl.
>> No. 41414 Anonymous
6th March 2024
Wednesday 1:06 am
41414 spacer
>>41412
>“On the outside I feel like a heterosexual man, but on the inside I am a lesbian. And it is the latter that counts. This is why I made the legal change to become a woman,” Corporal Perdigones, who continues to sport a beard, told El Español.

I hope they promote him her just for showing the capacity to work around the system and thumb her nose at society to get what she wants. Like those tests in Men in Black.

>>41412
The Spanish military is notorious for taking the piss. You wouldn't get it here because everyone would have to take it seriously, lads wouldn't do it and just have a massive teary about it while everyone else would have a teary too for different reasons.

Return ] Entire Thread ] First 100 posts ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password