Gender poll - new and improved

[monkers]

Doesn't Trump science in my opinion

Peace trumps war. Change my mind.

Science makes no argument beyond saying that in a society without a mix of males and females, the species does not otherwise survive without the intervention of practitioners of medical science.

 

[AuroraSaab]

You mentioned nuance in one of your polls. And had you been engaged with the gender thread you'd know that N and Aurora are outliers, while others are trying to have a reasonable discussion about gender.

I don't think my views are outlying views. Most people seem to be of the view that sex is binary and that in certain circumstances women should have single sex spaces, free from all men regardless of how they identify. Neither are these views unreasonable.

Your statement is not in dispute or a matter of debate. This is only a position of prejudice. Advocacy for the removal of human rights of one group is a form of facism. If this is what you advocate, then the dictionary provides the necessary words to describe these positions. Your persistence with this is demonstration of repeated and ongoing prejudice against a group of people, and your repeated call for removal of their rights positions you within a defined group.

No rights are being removed. You have the same rights as others of your sex. What you seek are additional rights for men like yourself, at the cost of women's rights to single sex spaces.

 

[monkers]

I don't think my views are outlying views. Most people seem to be of the view that sex is binary and that in certain circumstances women should have single sex spaces, free from all men regardless of how they identify. Neither are these views unreasonable.

No rights are being removed. You have the same rights as others of your sex. What you seek are additional rights for men like yourself, at the cost of women's rights to single sex spaces.

So will you will say, and maybe others who thumb your post up because they don't happen to either know or understand the law.

Each of us has the right to self-determination. If people choose to remove that right from certain groups, which is exactly what is advocated by the further right, then they vote to lose that right for themselves. Imagine going out to vote for such a thing.

People of my generation grew up hearing that what happened in 1930s Germany could never happen here - but here we are.

I live in Europe now, though I had been in the UK today, but I would effectively be in a place similar to an asylum seeker here were it not for the fact that I have dual citizenship. As it happens my temporary secondment to my present workplace ends in a few weeks, hence my being busy house hunting. I won't be coming back to the place that Europeans call ''TERF Island''.

Nonetheless, I hope that the UK manages to defend itself against the creeping fascism that advances itself as freedom.

 

[AndyRM]

I don't think my views are outlying views. Most people seem to be of the view that sex is binary and that in certain circumstances women should have single sex spaces, free from all men regardless of how they identify. Neither are these views unreasonable.




No rights are being removed. You have the same rights as others of your sex. What you seek are additional rights for men like yourself, at the cost of women's rights to single sex spaces.

Fair enough. I didn't say your views are unreasonable.

 

[Ianonabike]

Although I have definite views on who's talking bollox, I didn't vote, except for the last jokey option in order to be able to see the results. Only one person says the gender thread changed their mind; it might be interesting if they expanded on that.

 

[AndyRM]

It says "make up", not "change", which is a very different thing.

 

[Ianonabike]

Sure, they're different. My mistake. Helped make up, change, whichever.

 

[icowden]

It says "make up", not "change", which is a very different thing.

It was good enough for Bucks Fizz...

 

[AndyRM]

Sure, they're different. My mistake. Helped make up, change, whichever.

I don't give much of a f*ck to be honest. You're the one who called out whoever voted for that option.

 

[Ianonabike]

I don't give much of a f*ck to be honest.

Yeah, I know you don't give much of a fuck.

 

[AndyRM]

Yeah, I know you don't give much of a fuck.

What makes you say that?

 

[Ianonabike]

What makes you say that?

Is that a trick question?

It was good enough for Bucks Fizz...

From the Wikipedia entry about when "Making Your Mind Up" won the Eurovision Song Contest:
the performance is best remembered for the startling moment when the two male members of the group whipped off the skirts of the two girls, only to reveal shorter skirts underneath

That's got to be a metaphor for something.

 

[AndyRM]

Is that a trick question?


From the Wikipedia entry about when "Making Your Mind Up" won the Eurovision Song Contest:
the performance is best remembered for the startling moment when the two male members of the group whipped off the skirts of the two girls, only to reveal shorter skirts underneath

That's got to be a metaphor for something.

Yes.

 

[Ianonabike]

Now that's established, I'll move along to other questions for anyone inclined to try answering them, such as:

Why is this such a contentious topic?

 

[Ianonabike]

Helen Joyce:
Saying someone has gender dysphoria is like saying their humours are out of balance. That was the ancient Greek theory for what made people unwell, which lasted until the Middle Ages. The four humours were blood, phlegm, yellow bile and black bile, and the treatments were things like bloodletting and purging: they were junk because the theory was junk.

It’s the same with gender medicine. The treatments offered – puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, chest and genital surgeries and so on – are like bloodletting and purging. There isn’t any reason to think they would work.

You could do scientific research on the four humours, if you wanted. You could propose hypotheses and set up trials. And you’d generate data and hypotheses for future research. But this would be falling into the trap that Harriet Hall, a doctor who died in 2023 who was a proponent of rationalist medicine and opponent of quackery, called Tooth Fairy Science. It’s as if you decided that there was a Tooth Fairy, and it would be good to work out how to maximise the amount of money she left.