|
OwlFancier posted:There is the implicit assumption that lesbian is a more valid (and exclusive) position than trans, though. Well yeah they think cis people are valid and trans people are made up
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 17:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
Communist Thoughts posted:Nah I think that's their argument: the kids aren't competent enough to realise theyr a lesbian not a trans man so give them some time before transitioning (but don't buy them time with blockers because the science is still out, ignoring that what science is IN disagrees with them) Also ignores that parents can consent to treatment on behalf of their children even if the children can't consent themselves, and routinely do so for other lifesaving treatments.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 17:37
|
|
|
Yeah but that's a  as to what the doctors are pushing onto the parent (and it's telling that the terves believe this is what's going on in their case while ignoring it in the real case).It has to be patient-led for outcomes and doctor-led for possibilities.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
One of the Trash Future guys described the British Antisemitism scandal as a British Gamergate and gently caress me if that doesn't describe 90% of British media right now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 17:51
|
|
|
I just don't understand how transphobes put so much energy into something that affects them approximately not at all. They spend more time thinking about the genitals of their imaginary versions of scary trans people than most normal folks spend on people they're loving. It's deranged even before you get on to all the harm they do to actual real people with their lovely behaviour.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 17:52
|
|
|
Same as any culture war poo poo, it's people who go out of their way to get mad about poo poo that doesn't affect them. Some people are just like that. It's the only thing that gets some people off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 17:53
|
|
|
The issue with a lot of discourse around trans issues is I think that there are really two strands that interplay with one another. On the one hand you've got the philosophical debate about what gender is and what creates it and what makes it 'legitimate' and all that jazz, and on the other a more overtly political argument about the rights and recognition and protections that should be afforded trans people. The former is a really important discussion to have and I really don't have so much of an issue with people critically engaging with each other here even where that might cause significant mutual frustration (I don't actually think that someone presenting a trans critical argument in this area is by definition transphobic). However the latter - the rights of trans people to live in safety and without harassment or discrimination - should not be up for discussion. I feel that these two threads get mixed up a lot, and one of the big red flags about terfs tends to be this distinct feeling that they're doing it deliberately. It's a shame, because it so often derails what could be a genuinely interesting conversation about gender.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 17:57
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:I just don't understand how transphobes put so much energy into something that affects them approximately not at all. They spend more time thinking about the genitals of their imaginary versions of scary trans people than most normal folks spend on people they're loving. It's deranged even before you get on to all the harm they do to actual real people with their lovely behaviour. It's good to have an enemy, even better to have one that can't fight back in any meaningful way. It makes you feel important and distracts from the fact that you're completely powerless in the face of Capital or worse, actively aiding it in crushing everyone else for the sake of an easier life.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:The issue with a lot of discourse around trans issues is I think that there are really two strands that interplay with one another. On the one hand you've got the philosophical debate about what gender is and what creates it and what makes it 'legitimate' and all that jazz, and on the other a more overtly political argument about the rights and recognition and protections that should be afforded trans people. The former is a really important discussion to have and I really don't have so much of an issue with people critically engaging with each other here even where that might cause significant mutual frustration. However the latter - the rights of trans people to live in safety and without harassment or discrimination - should not be up for discussion. I feel that these two threads get mixed up a lot, and one of the big red flags about terfs tends to be this distinct feeling that they're doing it deliberately. It's a shame, because it so often derails what could be a genuinely interesting conversation about gender. Maybe what we need are gender communicators, like science communicators, but also paradoxically to make the whole thing less singularly important. Like maybe not have the first thing people ask about a baby be the question you're thinking right now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:04
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Like maybe not have the first thing people ask about a baby be the question you're thinking right now. I dunno if it's an age thing or just a lack of interest in babies thing but I never really gave much a poo poo about that. Congrats you have a baby, I hope you are pleased with the baby, I hope the baby is healthy and does not scream a lot like I did as a baby.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:07
|
|
|
in other news suzanne moore has quit the guardian lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:12
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:The issue with a lot of discourse around trans issues is I think that there are really two strands that interplay with one another. On the one hand you've got the philosophical debate about what gender is and what creates it and what makes it 'legitimate' and all that jazz, and on the other a more overtly political argument about the rights and recognition and protections that should be afforded trans people. The former is a really important discussion to have and I really don't have so much of an issue with people critically engaging with each other here even where that might cause significant mutual frustration (I don't actually think that someone presenting a trans critical argument in this area is by definition transphobic). However the latter - the rights of trans people to live in safety and without harassment or discrimination - should not be up for discussion. I feel that these two threads get mixed up a lot, and one of the big red flags about terfs tends to be this distinct feeling that they're doing it deliberately. It's a shame, because it so often derails what could be a genuinely interesting conversation about gender. Except that the philosophical debate is by and large pretty settled at this point in the philosophical, scientific, medical, and relevant stakeholder communities (i.e. philosophers, scientists, specialist medics, and trans people largely agree about what transness is). WHat's not settled is the idea of gender being separate from birth sex, and gender being mutable and not binary, in the minds of the general public. Treating it like a debate, rather than a piece of education, is just as problematic for gender as it is for racial equality, gender equality, or sexuality. There are nuances, for sure, but I don't think anyone credible in any of those areas disagrees with the basic principles of things like gender not being necessarily the same as birth sex, gender being mutable, trans people being real, non-binary gender existing, etc. Re-hashing it constantly is just disingenuous culture-war bullshit, just like it is for sexuality, just like it is for gender equality, just like it is for race, etc etc etc. Guavanaut posted:Judith Butler manages that, but they're operating at such a high level that it just sounds like nonsense to most people, probably like how academic chemistry papers sound to people who don't really care about science. One of the things I'm hoping to train myself to do if any more of my friends have kids is to ask whether the child is healthy first rather than what's in its nappy. Because I honestly don't need or want to know what bits your baby has. I barely want to know it exists at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:12
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Except that the philosophical debate is by and large pretty settled at this point in the philosophical Clearly you don't know any philosophers. Joke answer aside, there are plenty of right wing philosophers who will challenge even the base assumptions of fields like this, but everyone else thinks they're an rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:15
|
|
|
Even the areas where it has been recognized it's been very recent and has been pretty badly communicated though. And an awful lot of people who stopped studying biology at 16 and think gender studies is made up are getting their information from the sources that are the loudest and easiest to understand, rather than the studies which are mostly from the 90s-2010s (because the Nazis burned all the best early ones).
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:17
|
|
|
Jose posted:in other news suzanne moore has quit the guardian lol will celebrate by having a drink tonight
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:21
|
|
|
Ash Crimson posted:will celebrate by having a drink tonight you have to celebrate the true suzanne more way, get high as balls in amsterdam https://twitter.com/suzanne_moore/status/1236419055642456065 (this is from march when she wrote a column with some terf bollocks, her actual most recent tweet page is a screenshot of Peggy leaving from Mad Men, and her bio is "She left because she understood the value of defiance". her second last tweet is her disliking the guardian's coverage of the yorkshire ripper's death though, so there is in fact a slight chance it is not about her being too transphobic for even the guardian)
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:29
|
|
|
Unhinged poo poo from Gabriel Milland after Moore's departure from the Graun: https://twitter.com/gabrielmilland/status/1328383483631296512?s=20 (He's talking about Owen Jones)
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:35
|
|
|
Angepain posted:you have to celebrate the true suzanne more way, get high as balls in amsterdam She got drunk and posted some mean poo poo about Owen Jones with seemingly no prompting so I'd imagine its another case of "HR won't back me up bullying a person I work with so I'll pretend I suddenly developed a conscience"
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:35
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:Unhinged poo poo from Gabriel Milland after Moore's departure from the Graun: Lol dude just blocked me for asking "they employ Alastair Campbell?" Shook. And it looks like I'm right about it being about Owen Jones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:39
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:Unhinged poo poo from Gabriel Milland after Moore's departure from the Graun: https://twitter.com/joebilsborough/status/1327998974213632001?s=21
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:44
|
|
|
Angepain posted:(this is from march when she wrote a column with some terf bollocks, her actual most recent tweet page is a screenshot of Peggy leaving from Mad Men I mean, if I recall the context correctly, McCann bought out Sterling Cooper. Peggy didn't leave, she stayed right where she was (employment wise) as her workplace got bought out by a giant soulless corporation. It'd be like if Suzanne Moore stayed at the Guardian after it got acquired by Rupert Murdoch.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:45
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:One of the things I'm hoping to train myself to do if any more of my friends have kids is to ask whether the child is healthy first rather than what's in its nappy. Why waste your time trying to train yourself to ask a question that doesn't come naturally to you? thespaceinvader posted:Because I honestly don't need or want to know what bits your baby has. I barely want to know it exists at all. Just go with this and storm out of the room?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:47
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Except that the philosophical debate is by and large pretty settled at this point in the philosophical, scientific, medical, and relevant stakeholder communities (i.e. philosophers, scientists, specialist medics, and trans people largely agree about what transness is). WHat's not settled is the idea of gender being separate from birth sex, and gender being mutable and not binary, in the minds of the general public. Treating it like a debate, rather than a piece of education, is just as problematic for gender as it is for racial equality, gender equality, or sexuality. Yeah I mean I agree with your basic point and it's frustrating to just constantly rehash the same old superficial argument especially when half the people involved have zero interest in actual good faith discussion - absolutely stop inviting TERFs onto question time or whatever. But those nuances you mention are important and the whole subject is so ideologically contingent that I'm not really sure it's possible to settle (philosophically!) 'once and for all' to any meaningful extent because gender is one of the spookiest of all the spooks and its meaning is by no means static, so there's always going to be stuff to interrogate there and we should interrogate it! Like, applying the same principle to race brings up similar issues. There are a hell of a lot of different perspectives on what race is and isn't floating around and it's vital to engage here even where we all agree that non-white people have and continue to experience significant discrimination and this must be resisted all the time. I can disagree with people about what precisely makes 'whiteness', or about the problems with the term itself, while we all acknowledge that baseline context. Failing to have these discussions is dangerous, for example the occasional terminally online type so woke they've looped around and started advocating for ethnostates and dismiss anyone who calls them out as racist. That's an extreme and unrepresentative example, but you can see the same kind of weaknesses in the antisemitism smears towards Labour and Corbyn - people have been told racism is bad but they've never really been encouraged to discuss it, so they're woefully unprepared to defend themselves when the right starts weaponising progressive rhetoric against them (and not to mention recognising internalised racism in their own thinking and overcoming it). I agree that perhaps we should look at it as education rather than debate, but education must be a dialogue to be effective - old school lecturing on what is 'right' and 'wrong' is inadequate. I'm also (in the general sense) kind of instinctively averse to the process of any given piece of knowledge being accepted as self-evidently 'correct', but that's neither here nor there. ThomasPaine fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Nov 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 18:48
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:It'd be like if Suzanne Moore stayed at the Guardian after it got acquired by Rupert Murdoch. Which she absolutely would. I do hope it becomes impossible to be an out transphobe in the British media. Or at least the liberal part of it, asking for The Spectator to be free of bigotry when they still hire open racists seems a bit hopeful
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:03
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:Unhinged poo poo from Gabriel Milland after Moore's departure from the Graun: https://twitter.com/mzaheer88/status/1328397389200314369?s=20
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:05
|
|
|
That's another point I disagree with greenwald on, I want journalists to be cowering in terror from the public, because they're garbo people who write garbo articles all the time and do nothing useful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:05
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:Like, applying the same principle to race brings up similar issues. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM0frCqdlpQ
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:06
|
|
|
Journalists are the "I just want to grill" meme except it's "write any old poo poo that falls out of my sponge brain"
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
All of British press is just Gamergate but done from above. Disingenuous nonsense peddled by bored Privately educated racists that we're all expected to engage with it seriously. The only correct response is bullying and mockery. They don't take you seriously, why should you them?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:That's another point I disagree with greenwald on, I want journalists to be cowering in terror from the public, because they're garbo people who write garbo articles all the time and do nothing useful. throw all of them into a giatn blender including greenwald
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:11
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:That's another point I disagree with greenwald on, I want journalists to be cowering in terror from the public, because they're garbo people who write garbo articles all the time and do nothing useful. Ah but have you considered.. *tears rubber mask off of journalist* "My God! They were members of the public this whole time!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
I don't mean to open up an old argument but I have now gone and read most of the leaked Labour report into AS. I had read bits of it, and read about it, but not put in the time to read most of it. (I had work and childcare). Firstly, my comment about comments in the report being taken out of context was stupid. Perhaps there were comments that were taken out of context but there are so many direct WhatsApp transcripts that it's not relevant. Those WhatsApp transcripts are really appalling. I hope that many of those involved are expelled from the party. I find it hard to understand how one can hate a faction within the party so much that one would rather have the Tories in power. How anyone in Labour who by definition professes to have even moderately leftwing principles would prefer Conservatives to Corbyn is almost inconceivable. The most charitable interpretation to a lot of the chats is that it was likely that Labour under Corbyn would lose, and if the margin was sufficiently large, then he would have to go. I am not sure if some of those transcripts can even be read in that way. It's really depressing. The failure of the GLU to deal with complaints is baffling. I sometimes discuss with my wife (usually about the current govt) if it's incompetence or malice, and I usually plump for incompetence. That said, incompetence in the face of increasing public awareness of AS as an issue in the party starts to look sinister. Mathews knew about the publicity and did very little about it. However, it seems that he did very little with other complaints too, so it may be that he was simply absolutely incompetent and/or lazy. I am assuming that the numbers quoted in the report are accurate, although I am aware that even numbers can be interpreted/derived differently (but with more difficulty than other things, perhaps). The report is about factionalism but is also clearly factional itself, so I am taking it with a pinch of salt. However, even when read with some scepticism it's indisputable that the GLU was at best horribly incompetent and at worst actively malicious. I am beginning to change my view on how Labour treated allegations of AS, and Corbyn's role. It hasn't massively changed my perception of him - well-meaning but ultimately not a very good politician or particularly competent. I never thought that he was personally AS so this doesn't affect that view. I believe that the qualities that got him elected as leader and garnered him a lot of support were ultimately the same qualities that prevented him for expanding beyond that support base and winning elections. Feel free to say I told you so - it's wholly warranted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:29
|
|
|
WhatEvil posted:Unhinged poo poo from Gabriel Milland after Moore's departure from the Graun: https://twitter.com/gabrielmilland/status/1328326571862728704
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
since people were talking about anti-lockdown stuff and just let all the olds die maybe photos of stuff helps? https://twitter.com/keribla/status/1327650839935266818
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:31
|
|
|
Thank you Therattle for proving my theory, telling people to gently caress off is better at radicalising people than sincere engagement.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:32
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:Yeah I mean I agree with your basic point and it's frustrating to just constantly rehash the same old superficial argument especially when half the people involved have zero interest in actual good faith discussion - absolutely stop inviting TERFs onto question time or whatever. But those nuances you mention are important and the whole subject is so ideologically contingent that I'm not really sure it's possible to settle (philosophically!) 'once and for all' to any meaningful extent because gender is one of the spookiest of all the spooks and its meaning is by no means static, so there's always going to be stuff to interrogate there and we should interrogate it! Like, applying the same principle to race brings up similar issues. There are a hell of a lot of different perspectives on what race is and isn't floating around and it's vital to engage here even where we all agree that non-white people have and continue to experience significant discrimination and this must be resisted all the time. I can disagree with people about what precisely makes 'whiteness', or about the problems with the term itself, while we all acknowledge that baseline context. Failing to have these discussions is dangerous, for example the occasional terminally online type so woke they've looped around and started advocating for ethnostates and dismiss anyone who calls them out as racist. That's an extreme and unrepresentative example, but you can see the same kind of weaknesses in the antisemitism smears towards Labour and Corbyn - people have been told racism is bad but they've never really been encouraged to discuss it, so they're woefully unprepared to defend themselves when the right starts weaponising progressive rhetoric against them (and not to mention recognising internalised racism in their own thinking and overcoming it). I agree that perhaps we should look at it as education rather than debate, but education must be a dialogue to be effective - old school lecturing on what is 'right' and 'wrong' is inadequate. There's a big difference between 'not self-evidently correct' and 'not settled' though - germ theory is pretty settled, but you still have to actually learn how it works and trust the science done before to figure it out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:33
|
|
|
NotJustANumber99 posted:Why waste your time trying to train yourself to ask a question that doesn't come naturally to you? Because it's a nicer thing to ask? Like, it's why I stopped saying "ladies and gentlemen" and started saying "folks" instead. Just a little change that might make some people feel better, it doesn't cost me any thing and you end up being a bit more inclusive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:39
|
|
|
Training yourself to do things that don't come naturally to you is usually called "growing up"
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:41
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Because it's a nicer thing to ask? im sorry that you want to be a better, more considerate person OwlFancier posted:Training yourself to do things that don't come naturally to you is usually called "growing up" not being able to say bigoted poo poo is censorship my friend 1985 gorge orwil
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 23:32 |
|
|
Ash Crimson posted:im sorry that you want to be a better, more considerate person It does seem weird how much people really dislike wanting to change anything about themselves, doesn't everyone want to try and be different and at least a bit better every day?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2020 19:44
|
|