Gender again. Sorry!

[multitool]

You have spectacularly missed the point.

You then who teach others, will you not teach yourself? While you preach against stealing, do you steal?
You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery?

People who exude violence and hatred are in no position to criticise others who exude violence and hatred.

No. You've missed the point.

I'm criticising Keen.

 

[AuroraSaab]

It's less whataboutery and more pot-kettle-black.

That particular transactivist isn't just some random poster though, are they? It's Beth Douglas of the Scottish Greens, co convenor of their LGB etc group the Rainbow Greens. Regularly on TV and interviewed. The person for whom MSP Alex Cole-Hamilton said 'This is for Beth' when self-ID was passed. The person who poses threateningly with hatchets on social media and is still feted by Scottish politicians.

You constantly present Kellie Jay Keen as a mainstream voice. She's popular and has a platform certainly. She isn't an elected officer of a mainstream party like the Greens though. She isn't feted by politicians like Beth Douglas.

Can you imagine if an elected officer of any party posted similar things about trans people? Pictures with a hatchet? Threats of violence?

 

[multitool]

I'll say again. The twitter account posting that clip of Keen is irrelevant. It's not a zero sum game

Nevertheless it is totally unsurprising that you leapt on it because it offers you the opportunity for your usual dishonest tactic of whataboutery.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I blame trans women for this



View: https://twitter.com/HMIPrisonsnews/status/1621458182735290368?s=20&t=OqSSfO8Tw39DWdEG0_ZqSQ

And adding men to that environment, where women are already vulnerable and distressed, wouldn't be helpful. 'Women's prisons are crap already' is not much of an argument for adding males to the mix.

 

[multitool]

Lol. Yes, trans women are the real problem.

Just as rapists will give up rape if only we were to deny them the ability to go through a 6 month process of gender transitioning with penalties for fraudulent claims, in order to get a certificate that they don't need to enter women's spaces anyway.

Yes,you are right 👍

 

[AuroraSaab]

I'll say again. The twitter account posting that clip of Keen is irrelevant. It's not a zero sum game

Nevertheless it is totally unsurprising that you leapt on it because it offers you the opportunity for your usual dishonest tactic of whataboutery.

I haven't condoned KJK's hyperbolic use of language. You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about her though without being willing to acknowledge that her rhetoric is one (loud-ish) voice amongst many, whereas Beth Douglas is an actual elected official in an influential political party.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Lol. Yes, trans women are the real problem

I didn't say they were. I said adding them wouldn't help.

 

[multitool]

Why are you bringing up Beth Douglas? What has she got to do with this?

 

[monkers]

I see the thread has resorted to type with one poster resorting to weaponising a game of Top Trumps Transphobia.

This is not what debate or discussion looks like. And now people who engaged with the discussion are being drowned out by noise,

I'm not engaging with propaganda or propagandists.

This thread is now toxic in my opinion.

 

[multitool]

I find it bizarre. I post a clip of Keen using fascist language. AS has several choices. She could condemn Keen, she could condone Keen, or she could not respond.

But instead she starts going off about some irrelevant trans woman called Beth.

 

[Unkraut]

Yeah, thanks Donald.

I read Marx at university who made criticisms of Victorian capitalism. I agree with some of what he said, but that doesn't make me a Marxist.

You may consider yourself too long in the tooth to change your views.

If we go over to the climate change thread, I'm sure I will be told that 'the science is settled'. That's not healthy either.

I think that transgenderism particularly with regard to children is moral wickedness. Transgresses a moral absolute. If I am right then this is not up for negotiation. You could of course try to argue it is a moral good, but I would counter this for both religious reasons and increasingly more medical secular reasons.

Honestly is that a sound basis to decide the lives of others.

Should we be deciding the lives of others? Especially children.

His decision to begin transition was a misjudgement on his part. So it isn't just children who can misjudge.

The permanent damage is a good reason to question transitioning being something good.

Some gender confirmation surgeries do not conclude with a favourable outcome, just like other surgeries.

I listened to an evangelical and clinical psychologist (rare combination!) who had read all the literature on this who alluded to a Swedish study of post-transitioners concluding that the suicide rate amongst them was 19 times that of the general population. That needs to be part of the discussion, and the testimony of traumatised detransitioners. It seems to me currently they are dumped by activists as being an inconvenient truth.

You weren't aware of it but it's plain silly to suggest it didn't exist.

Fair comment. Malakoi, soft or effeminate men, existed in ancient Greek culture. Shrier posed the question though that if the number of transgender today reflects the number decades ago, why are those over 40, and especially women, not deciding to use their new freedom to transition? Why didn't psychologists encounter more people showing signs of dysphoria?

I think or at least hope this is a modern fad that will pass, but I fear it will have done no end of damage before it does so.

 

[Mr Celine]

What I find particularly irksome about this thread is the ignorance of and patronising attitude towards North Britain in relation to the Scottish Parliament's recent act.

Want your son to go to the same girls school as your daughter for A-Levels? Just apply for a GRC and get him to pretend he's a girl for a couple of years.

A-Levels?

We had got to a more pleasant place where it seemed that there was broad agreement that the Scottish GRC bill may present some legal issues, some of which could be detrimental to woman and it might be an idea to look into those before it is passed.

The act has been passed. And what do you think the Scottish Parliament were doing if not considering 'some legal issues'?


But the post that really nipped ma heid was this -

Calimero hasn't been shown in the UK, despite it being dubbed in English. The exception, possibly, being picked up on satellite TV. Wikipedia doesn't say it has been shown in the UK.

You poor sassenachs clearly never experienced the cultural delight that was STV's Glen Michael's Cartoon Cavalcade, which regularly featured Calimero.

This was regular Sunday breakfast TV in the 80's. (Sunday breakfast back then being a 3 pm bottle of Irn Bru and some paracetamol).

 

[monkers]

You may consider yourself too long in the tooth to change your view.

If we go over to the climate change thread, I'm sure I will be told that 'the science is settled'. That's not healthy either.

I think that transgenderism particularly with regard to children is moral wickedness. Transgresses a moral absolute. If I am right then this is not up for negotiation. You could of course try to argue it is a moral good, but I would counter this for both religious reasons and increasingly more medical secular reasons.

I did not intend insult with my 'too long in the tooth' comment, but you had made a remark related to age. My comment reflects that, also I'm getting on myself and self-aware enough of what that means for me too. If you found that hurtful, then I apologise, but any hurt was without intent.

You seem to following the line of our Dutch friend about science. I have asked where him where I just ignore any science that I don't like as his claim. I politely asked for one example because I'm not aware that is true. It seems the cat now has his tongue - we'll see.

I'm keen to avoid slagging matches with anyone. Most of my stuff centres on what the law is, what it isn't, and what parliament has intended. After all that is what makes our nation 'sovereign' as flawed as the model undoubtedly is. That's a political debate for another day perhaps.

I'm keen not to insult your own sense of morals, moral duty, or religious belief. These are deeply personal and are to be respected. What I will say to you is that your own moral code relates to your own behaviours in life, they and therefore you are not in a position to decide what others may or may not do. We live in a collective, but not a hive mind, a national community in sovereign nations. In EU member states, member states are sovereign with a variety of moral codes, a range of religious beliefs, and of legal systems.

Citizens of sovereign states live as compatriots. Citizens of EU member states live as compatriots. Sadly the UK is outside that system. You and I are not longer compatriots. That saddens me but I digress. We ought try to live as 'critical friends' rather than enemies.

We do not share all views and opinions, but the moment where we say that one set of views are immutably incorrect, or that our moral code or religious belief holds preponderance over the other, then we have lost our sophistication, and even our humanity.

It is our access to language and need to live in communities that make us human.

Accordingly I'm not engaging in toxic battles with anyone. It's not some form of academic snobbery, denial, or unwillingness to engage. My position is that I live under the law, and I recognise for better or worse, that it is universal within our own nation, even where my personal view is that the law is imperfect, and invariably it is.

Climate change is rather off-topic. I could just listen to the scientists but I don't. I will never know what they know. I tend to instead listen to the majority and collective voice of the specialist climate scientists. I also work on two principles, that we tribal elders as it were bear a huge responsibility for the future of the young, and we should not gamble with it. I also work with the principle of do no harm, greening of the environment will do no harm if we use our intelligence. On the other hand, if we ignore the majority of climate scientists and continue our present course, and we later find they were wrong [edit: of course I meant right - I'm a plank sometimes], we can not turn back. It's not a gamble I will take, however people are free to speak on this. Speech can be free, but it is not without consequence as we have a responsibility to not harm others with what we choose to say.

I've providers explainers of the experiences felt by trans people that I know. I've done so because as far as I know there are no trans people reading this thread, though there may be. The forum shows that the number of guests reading the forum is greater than the number of members, so this is a public space. Something we might need to be aware of.

I worked as a teacher, and a lecturer but not in law, my views of the law are strictly amateur, though I do work at being as accurate as I can be and as well considered as I can be given my limitations. If I make errors I am open to criticism of the errors, though I expect that to be free of abuse. It is frustrating for me when I see court judgements being misinterpreted by the press and people who exist just to 'win' the argument. The purpose of discussion is not to win, but to explore, and it should be done respectfully away from campaign propaganda.

That is my view, but it does not trump others. When I choose to recuse as I have done, that is a right that ought be respected rather than criticized.

 

[monkers]

His decision to begin transition was a misjudgement on his part. So it isn't just children who can misjudge.

''The permanent damage is a good reason to question transitioning being something good.''

I gently say then you have missed much of my point completely. N was not encouraged, recruited, or groomed by trans people to be one of them. I witnessed the exact opposite. N is not a child though as I made very clear, so I accept that limitation to my piece.

The allegation that trans people are 'child groomers' is a particularly disturbing one. If it is true, then can we see the evidence - or is this evidence of my science denial?

 

[winjim]

I see the thread has resorted to type with one poster resorting to weaponising a game of Top Trumps Transphobia.

This is not what debate or discussion looks like. And now people who engaged with the discussion are being drowned out by noise,

I'm not engaging with propaganda or propagandists.

This thread is now toxic in my opinion.

Just head over to twitter. You'll see all the same points being made in exactly the same order, there's just a slight delay over here. Gives one time to prepare a counterargument I suppose.