Non-Binary?

[lesliedocherty]

You seem to be feeling uncomfortable having people mischaracterise your gender. I wonder if people whose gender makes up more of their personality feel the same way?

After reading all your points you sound like one of the safe space social justice warriors you see on youtube, its the like of these leftie liberal snowflakes that doesn't advance the cause.

 

[SteveHa]

You seem to be feeling uncomfortable having people mischaracterise your gender. I wonder if people whose gender makes up more of their personality feel the same way?

No, I'm not uncomfortable with whatever way other people characterise me at all, any micharacterisation is entirely their problem. However, just has anyone making an active choice about their gender has the right to be called whatever they want, so do I. Or is your argument that the "standard off the shelf" majority should have their rights stripped in order that the minority can have theirs become the norm?

 

[Cobby]

Speaking of crass generalisations this one stood out the most. Are you speaking for all children? Just the children you know? Are you projecting your own experiences as a child onto everyone else?

It is a generalisation (as the language implied), so, it's generally speaking. It was a vague pre-emption against the kind of statement from the right-wing and christian parents, "how am I supposed to explain to my child why those two men are kissing!?", when in reality if you tell them "because they love each other" they will, by and large, simply accept it. It's only an issue when, from mummy and daddy, they have inherited some idea that it's in some way wrong or bad.

It's not a crass generalisation, it doesn't mar anyone, it's just an observation. YMMV.

I think the point you are trying to make is that there is a generational shift in perception, but this is not from children, this is from the student-aged generation and older, and its largely a good thing. But that does not give any brain-washed no-platforming parent-rebelling student or a hyper-active unrepresentative illiberal media the right to close down debate, as you try to do by injecting emotive personal attacks in your poorly argued responses.

I have made no emotive personal attacks, I've made a point of highlighting the opposite. I do find it quite interesting that you characterise my agreement with equal human rights as somehow 'illiberal', as if not wanting society to continue discriminating against marginalized groups is taking away a valid fundamental freedom from you.
But you're right, the language and attitude shift isn't from children, because they take their direction from us. It'll be an amalgam of attitudes from their role models, from older, more conservative folks, to the younger, more liberal folks, but their main input will always be their parents. Nobody is trying to close down debate, least of all me, it's simply a case of trying to help spread understand and limit the spread of conservative bigotries.

It just goes to show that the illiberal agenda you support is, and always will be a minority view and easily dissected with reason. As for a prediction, society will eventually adopt the more conservative liberal changes as it collectively shuffles to the left, and reject the edge case madness like refusing to give a child a gender.

It's very unusual, but it's not "madness", and I tend to agree with you that while gender fluidity will be accepted by the system, it probably won't be accommodated at birth. After decades of sliding to the right, a shift to the left should be embraced.


But we still haven't covered the actual topic of why you think the story in the OP is bad. You touched on the fact that you think it's harmful for the child, but didn't elaborate. I have an inkling of why you think that, but I'm genuinely interested to hear it from you.

 

[Cobby]

After reading all your points you sound like one of the safe space social justice warriors you see on youtube, its the like of these leftie liberal snowflakes that doesn't advance the cause.

I think you're lost. Twitter is that way

---------->

No, I'm not uncomfortable with whatever way other people characterise me at all, any micharacterisation is entirely their problem. However, just has anyone making an active choice about their gender has the right to be called whatever they want, so do I. Or is your argument that the "standard off the shelf" majority should have their rights stripped in order that the minority can have theirs become the norm?

Nope, nor did I imply that. You said there was an issue and seemed unhappy that your desires weren't being met, that's all. Sorry if I got the wrong end of the stick.

 

[quikshop]

like of these leftie liberal snowflakes that doesn't advance the cause.

Fundamentalist liberal was a phrase used in a report at the weekend relating to the National Trust and their imposition of LGBT support on its volunteers under threat of punishment. They've since climbed down having been threatened themselves by core membership, but their initial act to punish volunteers who chose not to wear a rainbow badge was a prime example of the sort of illiberal agenda being peddled by a woefully unrepresentative media.

This would never have been a story or an issue if volunteers had simply been offered a choice to wear the badge for a weekend.

 

[lesliedocherty]

Fundamentalist liberal was a phrase used in a report at the weekend relating to the National Trust and their imposition of LGBT support on its volunteers under threat of punishment. They've since climbed down having been threatened themselves by core membership, but their initial act to punish volunteers who chose not to wear a rainbow badge was a prime example of the sort of illiberal agenda being peddled by a woefully unrepresentative media.

This would never have been a story or an issue if volunteers had simply been offered a choice to wear the badge for a weekend.

Evergreens State College in America traditionally has a day where all black people don't attend campus, symbolic gesture goes back to 60's when a play was wrote where it lets the white people know what its like not to have any black people around, ie menial workers.
This year the black lives matter group decided that on this day 'All White People' were not allowed to attend campus, most liberals tought this was ok, a few who asked WTF were all branded rascist and forced out of school, some still haven't managed to return, campus was closed down for weeks.
Its getting pretty crazy.

 

[quikshop]

Its getting pretty crazy.

It is, but its not possible to compare a fundamentally good organisation getting too politically correct and acting in an illiberal way in its promotion of inclusive rights with race relations in the US.

Inclusivity is essential, but at what point does positive discrimination become repression in itself?

 

[lesliedocherty]

I think its indicative of a current feeling of entitlement and a refusal from the 'left' to hear any opinions other than their own, branding all other voices as racist/fascist/sexist etc.

 

[Cobby]

Inclusivity is essential, but at what point does positive discrimination become repression in itself?

This is a great question; when does adjusting for oppression become oppression itself? When the racism/bigotries inherent in society (both obvious and more subtle) are adjusted for? When society gets close (or reasonably close) to being a genuine meritocracy? It's a bit open ended but it's a good thing to keep the discussion in people's minds.

I think its indicative of a current feeling of entitlement and a refusal from the 'left' to hear any opinions other than their own, branding all other voices as racist/fascist/sexist etc.

It's true there are a lot of unhelpful arguments from both sides of the aisle on these kinds of topics.

There does seem to have been a recent upswing in people being called racist/sexist by people on the left, in online discussion. I mean, there's also been a pretty huge jump in racist/sexist/bigoted behaviour and language from people on the right in the wake of Brexit/Trump. Coincidence maybe?

 

[Clinton]

Sorry for being late to the party and not posting in this thread so far. Here's my contribution:

 

[ADNattan]

That video's the biggest waste of five minutes I've experienced since the England game last night.

 

[Clinton]

C'mon, surely you can be more indignant than that! Even outraged? No?

 

[ADNattan]

Why? It was rubbish, so I stopped watching. Anyone that thinks calling a sports team the Redskins isn't racist, and is on a par with not liking tobacco is clearly reaching.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

I honestly feel that the worlds is far too PC... and is only getting worse... The sooner all this PC crap is removed and folk stop treating others like they're in the wrong because they've made an observation and are deemed as being racist the better.

True Story...

My Brother, is as black as the ace of spades... he used to have a toy Golliwog, he found one at the local charity shop that our Mam was working in, and asked her to take it home and wash it for him so he could give it to his Daughter...

A couple of days later, Social services visited my Mam (as she was a foster parent, and has fostered over 500 kids in 40+ years) for an inspection, the woman saw the Golliwog sat on the sofa and went all belly up on me Mam, "oohh that's racist, you can't have that there, you need to get rid of it"... my Mam took her to the family wall (ton's of photo's of the family) and pointed at my brother and said

"That's my son" (Then points at a picture of his daughter) "That's my granddaughter, and that golliwog belongs to her"

told her to get out of her house, while the stupid woman ranted on about not being able to call it a golliwog...

 

[lesliedocherty]

Why? It was rubbish, so I stopped watching. Anyone that thinks calling a sports team the Redskins isn't racist, and is on a par with not liking tobacco is clearly reaching.

To many snowflakes these days

 

[quikshop]

I watched with genuine sadness as the Taliban destroyed ancient Buddist statues in Afganistan because they found them offensive. I considered the act a simple-minded expression of an intolerant ideology.

How does that differ to the progressive anthem of finding offense where it doesn't exist?

Anyone that thinks calling a sports team the Redskins isn't racist

I think you can choose to be offended by whatever you want in order to feel part of a collective moral outrage within your chosen echo chamber. If the sports team called the Redskins was intended as a mocking reference to those massacred by settlers then it would be deeply offensive to any reasonably minded person. But its not.

The clammer to pull down statues at University campus, rename roads, places and even sports teams because of some perceived offense is as sad and pointless to the majority as the Taliban destruction of historic monuments.

 

[ADNattan]

If the sports team called the Redskins was intended as a mocking reference to those massacred by settlers then it would be deeply offensive to any reasonably minded person. But its not.

I don't agree there I'm afraid. Redskin's a derogatory term. If it was the San Francisco Yellowskins to "honour" the Chinese immigrants in that city, or (to push the comparison as far as possible) the Alabama N-words, is that still alright?

As far as I can see, the people who started the complaints are the Native Americans. I think they're better placed than you or I to decide what terms piss them off.

I'm not offended by it. I think it's rude, I think it's racist, and I think there's a strong argument for changing it on those grounds. But I'm not a Native American, so I'm not outraged.

I just think trying to compare people being pissed off about a slur and a caricature of their racial characteristics being used to make a sports team billions to not liking tobacco (as per that video) is a bit of a reach. As I said.

But then it's easier to shout "OUTRAGED!" "SNOW FLAKE!" "SAFE SPACE!" than have an actual discussion, isn't it?

To many snowflakes these days

Case in point.

 

[SteveHa]

I'm offended by people who go out of their way to be offended. How the hell does one reconcile that?

 

[Clinton]

LOL @SteLacca

The Redskins is a particular case. They were given that name because it was associated with strength and valour, with being warriors. In fact, the team was called the Braves before the name was changed to Redskins (even more fearsome warriors?). If society has moved on and the term now has different connotations then perhaps it's time for the team to think about a rename. But it's not for a whole bunch of non-Native Indians to scream and shout and demand a name change because they are offended by the name.

"Hail To The Redskins", the theme song for the Redskins, is one of the oldest anthems in US sport. Included in the lyrics is this: "Hail Victory! Braves on the Warpath!"

Maybe it's time for a new anthem, something like "Progressives on the Warpath, we don't want victory, we want to be outraged".

 

[STDFR33]

I’m 28 and have had to delete my Facebook account. It was full of lefties that were outraged over everything.


I blame the education system. Luckily I am bright enough to think for myself.


One of the triggers for deleting my account was that the most recent election. If you didn’t vote for Corbyn you were a thick b4stard apparently.


The problem with the terminally outraged is that they just aren’t receptive to a different opinion. I agree with people and I disagree with people. People agree with me and disagree with me. That’s life. When you start shutting people down because you think that voting for Brexit was racist etc etc, you are going to lead a very narrow minded life.

 

[quikshop]

I'm not offended by it. I think it's rude, I think it's racist, and I think there's a strong argument for changing it on those grounds. But I'm not a Native American, so I'm not outraged.

All taken from the first few pages of "How to be a Progressive: The non-offensive guide to being offended".

Step 1: Search the Guardian or Indie for the latest fad faux oppression story
Step 2: Express offence on behalf of said oppressed people or peoples
Step 3: Coat your echo-chamber pious righteousness with liberal covering of passive aggressive
Step 4: Limit yourself to a Twitterati length statement for social media self-flagellation later

 

[ADNattan]

Coat your echo-chamber pious righteousness with liberal covering of passive aggressive

Could you fit any more buzzwords in there? Hand-wringing could sneak in before liberal, but that'd be a squeeze.

There's literally no point having this discussion I suppose. Snowflakes like you are so offended by opinions like mine that you seem to get really angry.

It's fine. People can disagree. You don't have to get so het up.

 

[quikshop]

Could you fit any more buzzwords in there? Hand-wringing could sneak in before liberal, but that'd be a squeeze.

There's literally no point having this discussion I suppose. Snowflakes like you are so offended by opinions like mine that you seem to get really angry.

It's fine. People can disagree. You don't have to get so het up.

Step 5: When wafer-thin intellectual position is exposed, make personal insults remembering to deploy passive aggressiveness as cover to exit "debate"

To add an (illiberal) Tory layer of condescension to my response, comments like "As far as I can see..." and "I just think..." do not establish an intellectual base for you to proclaim the right or wrong of any debate. Whilst your opinion is interesting, all I have done is deconstruct your post to reveal the lack of substance beyond your opinion.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

WTF? LOL!!!

TOP DEFINITION

Snowflake
Referring to someone, usually the Alt-Right, Yiannopoulos, And Nazi Sympathizers (A.K.A. ARYANS), whose immense white fragility causes a meltdown when confronted with the most minute deviation from orthodox White Supremacy. They often cry bloody murder when expected to give the most modest expression of basic human decency.

This is all a continuation of how Snowflake historically refers to people who are against the abolition of slavery.

The ARYANS have attempted to hijack this term to use against progressives and those opposing Fascism. It failed ultimately, because nobody was foolish enough to believe anti-Fascist resisters to be, by any stretch of the imagination, comparable to the snowflakery of the ARYANs and their cheeto-dusted Fuhrer.

But the ARYANS succeeded in poisoning the well on calling people "snowflakes," when it became widely understood that they were using it as a euphemism for the human ashes falling in Nazi Germany when they were burning people. This revelation became particularly useful for decoding the ARYAN tendency of referring to snowflakes as a "Generation." Especially telling is the pseudo-concept of a Snowflake Generation, which operates as a front for the ARYANS' need to mark out groups of people to direct their genocidal lust towards.
There sure is a lot of Nazi-supporting definitions piling up in the last pages of this word, they are all written by snowflakes who can't deal with having lost the popular vote.

by Lascaux Othello February 11, 2017

So calling someone a snowflake is meant to be derogatory and suggests that someone is against the abolition of slavery?

You guys are all slaves to the common grounds of "Copy me" let's jump on the "bandwagon" ... LOL!

Why, i remember about 20 years ago, me and a couple of mates went to Germany for a weekend, found a lovely little "Discotech" and started doing the "big fish, little fish, cardboard box" dance... all stood in a line, within 10-15 minutes the whole place was copying us, they all thought we were doing some "crazy dance s**t" - we all walked out leaving them to it... was funny as hell TBH!

seriously get a grip ladies... LOL! Snowflakes... pmsl what a pathetic and stupid name to call anyone who doesn't have Psoriasis!

 

[quikshop]

So calling someone a snowflake is meant to be derogatory and suggests that someone is against the abolition of slavery?

Well, yes it is derogatory but words get re-purposed all the time, and snowflake is no exception. I am gay... meaning happy and full of the joys of life

You also cherry-picked the "number 1 rated" definition from Urban Dictionary, if you scrolled down the page to the "number 2 rated" definition it would offer the definition relevant its use on this thread.

WTF? LOL!!!

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

Simple fact of the matter is, You guys are STILL all slaves to the common grounds of "Copy me" let's jump on the "bandwagon" ... LOL!

I think folk need to think for themselves instead of being sheep TBH

 

[STDFR33]

Personally, I think 'snowflake' it overused. I prefer the term 'delicate little petal'.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

I prefer Twunt TBH

 

[Cobby]

I honestly feel that the worlds is far too PC... and is only getting worse... The sooner all this PC crap is removed and folk stop treating others like they're in the wrong because they've made an observation and are deemed as being racist the better.

Here's a different way to frame it: Instead of saying PC, replace it with "treating others with basic human respect". because that's really what it's about. For some mystifying reason there are people who are against this and it seems to be almost entirely people who have never suffered oppression or marginalization in any form and who lack empathy for those who have.

Simple fact of the matter is, You guys are STILL all slaves to the common grounds of "Copy me" let's jump on the "bandwagon" ... LOL!

I think folk need to think for themselves instead of being sheep TBH

It's fascinating that you look at the world around you and conclude the people offering basic human respect to others are doing it because of peer pressure and not, you know, because it's what decent human beings do.

 

[SteveHa]

Here's a different way to frame it: Instead of saying PC, replace it with "treating others with basic human respect".

The problem is that those who you suggest be treated with basic human respect demand that respect to the exclusion of all others. Some of us do not want to be gender neutral, we want to identify as what nature gave us. Some of us don't want to be sexually transgressive, we are happy being heterosexuals, though suddenly that seems to be a homophobic state to be.

So, whilst I will treat others with respect, I do not expect to encounter heterophobia for my troubles.

 

[Cobby]

The problem is that those who you suggest be treated with basic human respect demand that respect to the exclusion of all others. Some of us do not want to be gender neutral, we want to identify as what nature gave us. Some of us don't want to be sexually transgressive, we are happy being heterosexuals, though suddenly that seems to be a homophobic state to be.

So, whilst I will treat others with respect, I do not expect to encounter heterophobia for my troubles.

Firstly, human rights are not a pie. Giving more to someone else doesn't mean you get less. Even if you wrongly think that might be the case, you are still arguing against equal rights; you think yourself deserving of more rights, and others aren't deserving of the same rights as you.

Secondly, I would like to see you provide some systemic examples of the marginalized demanding exclusion of rights for others. I won't hold my breath because it's little more than a myth perpetuated by those aggrieved it's no longer acceptable to be openly hostile to minority groups.

Overall I would recommend abandoning this particular position, it's absurd.

 

[SteveHa]

Firstly, human rights are not a pie. Giving more to someone else doesn't mean you get less. Even if you wrongly think that might be the case, you are still arguing against equal rights; you think yourself deserving of more rights, and others aren't deserving of the same rights as you.

Not so. I believe that everyone should have equal rights, whereas the so called oppressed minorities seem to believe that we should all conform to their vision.

Secondly, I would like to see you provide some systemic examples of the marginalized demanding exclusion of rights for others. I won't hold my breath because it's little more than a myth perpetuated by those aggrieved it's no longer acceptable to be openly hostile to minority groups.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...-gender-neutral-unisex-children-a7925336.html

Personally, I want to buy men's clothes.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

One of the most simplest things in life is to treat people with respect no matter what colour, creed or sexuality they are... yet as said previously there are people out there that demand respect for some unknown reason other than they believe themselves to be on a higher pedestal than others... which I believe is utter balls.

I respect those that respect me - I can't respect someone that I don't know, therefore I believe that such folk that demand respect don't deserve it, respect is earned. - simply by jumping on a bandwagon and using symbolic derogatory terms just because someone in the public eye has done so is as far as I'm concerned pathetic... I mean, C'mon if Trump said that snow was blue would you agree with him and tell others the same? doubtful

Respecting people's beliefs are completely different to respecting those people.

 

[Cobby]

Not so. I believe that everyone should have equal rights, whereas the so called oppressed minorities seem to believe that we should all conform to their vision.

*Citation needed

And even without evidence (of which you have none), you are suggesting you don't wish to cede marginalized groups any rights because you think they might dislike you? Do you genuinely believe rights are something that need to be earned? Bestowed by the gracious onto only those you deem deserving?

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...-gender-neutral-unisex-children-a7925336.html

Personally, I want to buy men's clothes.

Cool, please let us know when you can no longer do that and we'll see where we are.

 

[SteveHa]

*Citation needed

And even without evidence (of which you have none), you are suggesting you don't wish to cede marginalized groups any rights because you think they might dislike you?

What part of "everyone should have equal rights" is failing to cede marginalised groups rights? What I won't do is cede them more rights than anyone else just because they are a marginalised group.

As for evidence of my view that they demand more, I was a senior trade union representative in the Civil Service for 20 years, and have not only witnessed, but been on the receiving end of vitriol from minority groups when they don't get more than everyone else. I need no more evidence.

Incidentally, the most marginalised group is the white, male, able bodied, heterosexual male. Why? It's the only group in society that does not have a pressure group representing it.

 

[Cobby]

One of the most simplest things in life is to treat people with respect no matter what colour, creed or sexuality they are... yet as said previously there are people out there that demand respect for some unknown reason other than they believe themselves to be on a higher pedestal than others...

I'm not sure which angle you're now arguing. You were just decrying "PC culture" and now you're saying those people are wrong? I agree, people declaring "Marriage is between a man and a woman" are putting themselves on a pedestal over those in same-sex relationships, refusing to agree they are entitled to the same rights under law as themselves.

 

[lesliedocherty]

Some crazy person tells me they are gender fluid and they are not sure which gender they identify with, and i need to use a different pro-noun as it offends them, absolute whack-jobs.

 

[Cobby]

What part of "everyone should have equal rights" is failing to cede marginalised groups rights? What I won't do is cede them more rights than anyone else just because they are a marginalised group.

As for evidence of my view that they demand more, I was a senior trade union representative in the Civil Service for 20 years, and have not only witnessed, but been on the receiving end of vitriol from minority groups when they don't get more than everyone else. I need no more evidence.

I'm confused, because the crux of your argument, despite what you are now claiming, is clearly *not* that everyone should have equal rights. You have specifically noted that you won't cede them to people you deem unworthy because you believe they want to take your own rights. In addition to not being a pie, Human Rights are not dished out on a value judgement. They are fundamental and should apply to all.

Anecdotes (such as "in my experience") are not evidence of system behaviour; if that's all the evidence you need for being against equal rights, well, that's up to you, but the state can and should require good evidence. Of which there is none to support your claim.

Some crazy person tells me they are gender fluid and they are not sure which gender they identify with, and i need to use a different pro-noun as it offends them, absolute whack-jobs.

Look at it like this: How would you feel if someone kept referring to you as she and her? That's basically how the people you are referring to feel. That's it. Nothing more. It's incredible that it bothers you so much.

(I know I'm presuming your gender here, but given your posts and your clear and solely provocative support of Trump, it's a fair presumption)

 

[Cobby]

Incidentally, the most marginalised group is the white, male, able bodied, heterosexual male.

I wanted to quote this separately just so it can stand on its own as a post. Sure, I laughed out loud when I read it, but I wasn't surprised to see it.

Look at that post. Take it all in. Wow.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

I'm not sure which angle you're now arguing. You were just decrying "PC culture" and now you're saying those people are wrong? I agree, people declaring "Marriage is between a man and a woman" are putting themselves on a pedestal over those in same-sex relationships, refusing to agree they are entitled to the same rights under law as themselves.

I have always and will always be against the PC brigade and it's "sheep" "follow me" culture ... likewise I have and always been one to show respect to others... I think you read my post incorrectly