Gender again. Sorry!

[monkers]

Grayson Perry would tell you to very much F Off. He had quite strong opinions about it. As one of the most famous transvestites in the country I would have thought his opinion would carry some weight.

Trans = Across
Gender = Male or Female

Someone who is transgender wants to be the gender that they are not. Surely that's the only definition?

A man who wants to wear women's clothes but does not wish to be a woman is not in any way transgender.

I'm not taking sides here. I've heard Perry's strong opinions before, but equally there are strong voices that disagree with him. All I'm saying is that there is no universal definition, so care needs to be taken with its use.

The Daily Mail, for example, has form for identifying misdemeanours of cross-dressers as 'transgender offenders' for example, presumably because it serves the political agenda.

Edit to add. Also if a trans person says that their earliest sense of a gender identity is one of incongruence, then it's harder to say that 'their gender has gone across'.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I thought the idea was if someone says they are trans/the opposite sex, then they are? Therefore G Perry isn't trans because he calls himself a transvestite and says he isn't trans. If an arrested person calls themselves trans or self identifies as the opposite to their birth sex, then they are that if you believe 'you are who you say you are', which is why news outlets report them as the name they are charged under.

How can you possibly know from a report in the Daily Mail if the person is a transwoman or transman, or a cross dresser? Surely they are all transwomen if they say they are.

 

[classic33]

How can you possibly know from a report in the Daily Mail if the person is a transwoman or transman, or a cross dresser? Surely they are all transwomen if they say they are.

How can a trans man be a trans woman. Or, is this just more of your warped thinking at work.

 

[monkers]

I thought the idea was if someone says they are trans/the opposite sex, then they are? Therefore G Perry isn't trans because he calls himself a transvestite and says he isn't trans. If an arrested person calls themselves trans or self identifies as the opposite to their birth sex, then they are that if you believe 'you are who you say you are', which is why news outlets report them as the name they are charged under.

How can you possibly know from a report in the Daily Mail if the person is a transwoman or transman, or a cross dresser? Surely they are all transwomen if they say they are.

I'm not too surprised that you couldn't understand. Has there been no briefing from GC central about this?

It's really simple. It doesn't matter to the Daily Mail what words the person uses to self-describe, the DM only needs to use the umbrella term 'transgender' then everyone will think this is a trans woman. It's how propaganda works.

 

[AuroraSaab]

The Daily Mail has a news story. The person shown is clearly male. They are reported in the story as having a typically female name. They are called 'she' throughout. How do you know if this is (according to your metric) a transwoman or a man who is a cross dresser? How do the Daily Mail know? I thought the whole idea was that only the individual gets to decide.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Getting on board

New vulnerable class of folk

'cis'

To use the description 'cis' for normal folk is hetrophobic

 

[monkers]

The Daily Mail has a news story. The person shown is clearly male. They are reported in the story as having a typically female name. They are called 'she' throughout. How do you know if this is (according to your metric) a transwoman or a man who is a cross dresser? How do the Daily Mail know? I thought the whole idea was that only the individual gets to

Getting on board

New vulnerable class of folk

'cis'

To use the description 'cis' for normal folk is hetrophobic

Your stupidity knows no bounds. Go and do something useful like milking a bull.

 

[AndyRM]

Getting on board

New vulnerable class of folk

'cis'

To use the description 'cis' for normal folk is hetrophobic

Riffing on on Elon Musk tweet? Incredible stuff.

Go on then, explain how heteronormative people are vulnerable? I'm willing to bet you're the kind of dolt who thinks it's hilarious to ask "But when is international mens day?" on March 8.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Go and do something useful like milking a bull.

I've herd its possible now, with these self identifying heifers










jokes within jokes

 

[monkers]

I've herd its possible now, with these self identifying heifers

Then get to it.

A quick lesson for you - cisgender does not mean heterosexual - it means something quite different. If your kids were to read your posts, they'd double facepalm at the ignorance on show.

 

[Deleted member 159]

🤦‍♂️. ⬆️⬆️⬆️

 

[monkers]

View attachment 5345
🤦‍♂️. ⬆️⬆️⬆️

View attachment 5346

Oh, so you think you're funny. I think you'll find that plenty of others have a superior gift.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Another victory for common sense, that should not have happened.

Westminster council

Ms Meade had shared gender-critical articles and posts on social media

The council investigation reported that "holding discriminatory beliefs is of significant concern given her position of trust as a social worker".

The tribunal panel said the comments were not discriminatory and that it was "wholly inappropriate that an individual such as (Ms Meade) espousing one side of the debate should be labelled discriminatory


It added: "Freedom of speech inevitably will involve the right to, on occasion, cause offence to some people but it is clear that that does not preclude an individual's ability to express such views."

Westminster City Council told the BBC: "We apologise to Rachel Meade for the way she has been treated and the upset that has been caused. We acknowledge and accept the findings of the tribunal.

Financial compensation will be awarded next month

 

[AndyRM]

I'm not so sure that any of these cases are a victory for anyone, least of all "common sense".

What kind of a numpty do you have to be to think that sharing your thoughts on contentious subjects on social media, when you're in a position of trust, is a good idea?

It must have been pretty grim stuff for one of her "friends" to dob her in.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Personal beliefs should never be used as a weapon to suffocate opinion. This has been attempted by many organisations, individuals who feel offended.

If you can do the job, which in this case long standing employee, it matters not your beliefs you have