Is this what society has come to?

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,727
There’s a line between accommodation and promotion. Being colour or sexuality-blind actually helps all of us; indulging people’s wish-fulfilment fantasies doesn’t.
Defining all of what is potentially genuine gender differences as wish-fulfilment fantasy may well be the wrong thing. But yes, I daresay there's a lot of bandwagon-jumping which is making it all the harder for people who are simply built differently to be treated with respect.

And as has been pointed out - it's not actually that difficult to accomodate. I'm pretty sure it's not being "promoted" though. It's just ham-fisted attempts at accomodation.

The "promotion" language thing sounds like a direct equivalent to the russians - who say that stuff we take for granted over here is "promoting" gays - and they lock people up for it.


Edit: I'm not sure a potential "new normal" of kids openly experimenting with how they identify should be viewed as a bad thing - especially as the previous has been oppressive gender conformity and all that goes along with it.

My personal line-in-the-sand would be any kind of medical/surgical intervention before puberty is done and dusted with. Anything else? Fine. Help 'em.
 

Wij

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
18,404
Anything else?

So just on the basis of a simple declaration I should be allowed into a women's refuge? Or any other space where men are excluded for whatever reason? I just say I'm a bird and walk in? I know it sounds like hyperbole but that is exactly what the trans radicals are asking for.

And by trans radicals I must point out, these are usually men. Some of whom go to the bother of putting on a dress or a nappy. Actual transsexuals generally think it's a very bad idea.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,727
teams radicals
How many times do I have to say that I'm not condoning or supporting the "radicals" before it counts @Wij?

Edit:

What I said above:
I'm not sure a potential "new normal" of kids openly experimenting with how they identify should be viewed as a bad thing - especially as the previous has been oppressive gender conformity and all that goes along with it.

My personal line-in-the-sand would be any kind of medical/surgical intervention before puberty is done and dusted with. Anything else? Fine. Help 'em.

It's about kids and treating them non-judgementally. If Brian wants to be Brianne or Stephanie wants to be Stephen, or something in between, between the ages of 12 and a half and fifteen does it A) matter, or is it B) that hard for parents to accomodate it? Or even C) a big deal?

If that was the "norm" then 99.9% of kids'll settle down when they've been through puberty, experimented with whatever they are and feel secure in themselves because they've been treated non-judgementally. The 0.1% may go on for gender reassignment or whatever....
 

Wij

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
18,404
You said anything else is fine. I was clarifying if that includes self-id conferring all the rights a woman would have anywhere in all contexts. If not then say it.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,727
self-id conferring all the rights a woman would have anywhere in all contexts.
No. Of course not.

Why the leap to the most extreme?

edit: Instead of defining what is un-acceptable, is anything I said above acceptable? Re: the kids, in my last couple of posts?
 
Last edited:

Moriath

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
16,209
@Scouse 30 years ago sex =gender general populous accepted that

Its only 5-10% of the population are trying to claim differently and alter everyone elses idea.

You buy into that. Doesnt mean everyone else has to agree with you.
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
Everyones acting like lbgtebee was invented yesterday, all excited about Indias dropping of gay crime.
There have been transgenders, no genders and cross dressers in India since it was created..they are mostly revered, the world has embraced and rejected every form of gender since the dawn of man.
Its the forcing of it on a small timescale and the swinging of rights too quickly that causes problems.
Society is very fragile and societies norms have to be eased into another position, not forced overnight by legislation.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,727
@Scouse 30 years ago sex =gender general populous accepted that

Its only 5-10% of the population are trying to claim differently and alter everyone elses idea.

You buy into that. Doesnt mean everyone else has to agree with you.
You mean the gays?

5-10% of the population, that were criminals and we used to lock them up for it? Right?


The "general populous" is always bob-on. I mean, 100 years ago almost everybody went to church. Because they were the majority it meant they were right. Charles Darwin be damned...
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,727
Everyones acting like lbgtebee was invented yesterday, all excited about Indias dropping of gay crime.
There have been transgenders, no genders and cross dressers in India since it was created..they are mostly revered, the world has embraced and rejected every form of gender since the dawn of man.
Its the forcing of it on a small timescale and the swinging of rights too quickly that causes problems.
Society is very fragile and societies norms have to be eased into another position, not forced overnight by legislation.
Jeesus. I think he's considered this!

I disagree with the "eased into position" though. Gay rights were fought long and hard for.
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
The fnarr fnarrs in these posts.
 

Moriath

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
16,209
You mean the gays?

5-10% of the population, that were criminals and we used to lock them up for it? Right?


The "general populous" is always bob-on. I mean, 100 years ago almost everybody went to church. Because they were the majority it meant they were right. Charles Darwin be damned...
Gays are only one part. Look at you using gays in the wrong way when you mean lgbtq+. ;)
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,510
@Scouse 30 years ago sex =gender general populous accepted that

Its only 5-10% of the population are trying to claim differently and alter everyone elses idea.

You buy into that. Doesnt mean everyone else has to agree with you.

Trans is much less than that. Less than 1%. But apparently the Needs of The Many speech means nothing to these people.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,727
Trans is much less than that. Less than 1%. But apparently the Needs of The Many speech means nothing to these people.
It's not a *need* @DaGaffer. It's simply the preference of the many. But do we totally subvert the needs of the individual for that now?
 

old.user4556

Has a sexy sister. I am also a Bodhi wannabee.
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,163
They need to get a memo out to people having gender reveal parties to rename them sex-reveal parties.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,727
They need to get a memo out to people having gender reveal parties to rename them sex-reveal parties.
I had to look that up. Wow. That's even a thing?!

Some people need to take a long hard look at themselves. Yeah, you're having a kid, most people really really don't give that much of a fuck.

I thought baby showers were bad enough. My missus "caused" great offence by turning down a mate's missus' invite to her baby shower. She did it extremely politely - rather than saying "the idea of sitting around with a load of girls talking about babies is mind-numblingly dull and physically sickening, never mind having to listen to your 'special' ball of puke and shit scream it's lungs out", which is actually how she feels.
 

Moriath

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
16,209
It's not a *need* @DaGaffer. It's simply the preference of the many. But do we totally subvert the needs of the individual for that now?
Same as its not a need of the lgdtq ppl just a preference. But they cant stand ppl exercising their own preferences.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,727
Same as its not a need of the lgdtq ppl just a preference. But they cant stand ppl exercising their own preferences.
I'd argue that referring to someone as they actually are, as opposed to how you see them, is a need rather than a preference. Especially when it's something ingrained in the very core of their being. And it doesn't cost anything to refer to someone in their expressed preferred pronoun, does it.

How many people have you met where this has been an issue for you? If you worked with a guy called Gary but he wanted you to refer to him as Grace would you obstinately stick your heels in and refuse? Or, like my missus did with the post-op transsexual in her company, happily change the pronouns she used and happily carried on with her job - safe in the knowledge that that was all she had to do to make that person feel much happier and more comfortable in their own skin.
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
My uncles ,wifes ,brother..are you keeping up...is 6ft 2 and been dressing as a woman for thirty years, he is quite simply a man in a dress.
In reality hes a woman born in a mans body ..or a man with a womans brain..whatever.
I get on with the human fine, lots of people wont talk to him..they dissaprove, I put transpeople doing their own stuff about 1 millionth in a list of problems for civilisation and in the top ten for entertaining humanity.
All this trans rights is making it much worse for h...imher.
We should just tell people to be nice and fair to them and ridicule people who are not.
Forcing laws is just storing up trouble.
 

Moriath

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
16,209
I dont need to be refered to as a man or male.

Its just scientific descriptions that have been given to someone with testicles.

My step daughter insists she is a they and not a she.

I tend to skirt the subject by refering to her by her name.

You can be whatever you want and be happy with that without demanding everyone refers to you on different terms.

Theres a guy at work who is now a girl. Its weird and taken a long time to automatically call him michelle. But refering to someone by a different name is different from changing the gender identifier that has for centuries been commonly used.

I dont mind calling a guy a girl if he transitions. But all these they them shizzle is just rubbish. We have two sexes, therefore two genders. If you want to sit outside that fine but dont get upset if i call you a woman if you seem to have breasts.
 

old.user4556

Has a sexy sister. I am also a Bodhi wannabee.
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,163
Wow. That's even a thing?!

Sometimes at night I weep, not for humanity, but the fact the mile wide comet still hasn't ploughed into the earth, preferably straight into a gender [sic] reveal party.
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
As tedious as gender reveal parties may see, Im comforted by the fact they are really just another excuse for a pissup in the great British tradition.
 

fettoken

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
9,640
Again, could have sworn this thread due to it's title would have been started by some coffin-dodger (@Jupitus ). It really holds no ground now.
 

Job

The Carl Pilkington of Freddyshouse
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
21,652
Took second..holy crap..he must be one shite runner to get beaten by a real girl.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom