I don't really get why transpeople's delusions (for wa t of better word) get pandered to so much, especially when it comes at the expense of women's rights.

weeeeeelllllll I think you'll find that women are a fair target here as well, there's quite a bit of misogynistic slurs that are fired around and celebrated when this topic is being discussed not to mention the threats are much more often directed at women who disagree with the "TRA" side

:love:

Got me thinking how a lot of people who speak on women rights do not agree with JK Rowling and the ones who do agree with JK Rowling are men who are anti woke (even though they are obsessed with woke) and are anti trans/feminist

Plenty of people who speak on womens rights do agree with JK Rowling though :shrug:

I think there's a hair trigger tipping point on this issue because it's fought so intensely and that's where issues start to creep in, with people asking genuine questions being branded hateful, but also people with genuine gender dysphoria being branded disingenuous... It's an incredibly complex and nuanced topic even before you bring in the concept of gender non-binary (full disclosure; I firmly believe that gender non-binary describes 99.9% of the population and is thus almost entirely meaningless as a descriptor of identity, but that's another debate).

But yes I've seen a lot of people drawn from sincere, through frustrated, and into mocking, which is never great and also doesn't solve anything (it just cements views in place because defensiveness comes into it and people start defending illogical things that they don't even believe).

There are also "elephant in the room" issues such as unintended effect... For example the simple fact that a lot of trans and general gendered thinking (i.e. the behaviours and presentations that make a trans women "like a woman") very often veer into being offensive to women, and encompass offensive stereotypes. People need to be able to speak up about things like that without it being branded transphobic. The very statement that "I know I'm actually [insert category of people] because I'm X, Y, Z and those are traits of [that category of people]" is inherently offensive. That is always going to be a major sticking point.

But not enough but that doesn't take away it's mostly men that that agree with JK Rowling (who are pretending to care about womans rights because it's against 'woke' ) plus some women who are anti woke.

It isn't mostly men, where have you gotten that idea from?

Non binary means you’re neither male or female.

99.9% of the population are not non binary.

Well no, "non binary" people are still male or female, they just think they aren't.

It's what I see :shrug:

It's certainly not what I see, not by a long shot

Absolutely it exists. I saw some YT'er the other day who regularly pops up on my recommended list (I think it's because he's a communist :joker: ) have a video titled something like "Why I used sexism to defeat JK Rowling" and I just thought "No. Dont do that"

Generally, I think you'd have a hard time making a blanket argument that the kind of people fighting for trans rights, would be the kind of people likely to be anti-women or misogynistic in general though, especially as they're the kind of people to be fighting for women's rights if the situations were reversed.

To use all encompassing and facile language to make a point which I know isn't representative of everyone, it has always been the kind of people you believe might be your allies currently, that have historically mocked and derided feminists and feminism. It's opportunism.

I think the issue with the left on this particular issue, is that they are so committed to the human rights of everyone (and rightly so), that as a collective, bulldozing through someone else's fears, rights, and concerns hasn't really hit home, so I don't necessarily agree that it's a misogyny problem (although as above, for some people - yes), I think it's viewed as a rather uncomplicated human rights issue. Which i also have sympathies with, just without the "uncomplicated" part.

What he means is very few people follow stereo-typically gendered roles/likes/dislikes 100% and are usually some kind of a mix of masculine and feminine

There are a large number of feminist philosophers who have been writing about gender and feminism for decades who (loosely) agree with JK Rowling. I will at this point point out that Emma Watson is a young lady with no qualification at all in sociology, politics or psychology and who has written nothing on any of these topics. I'm not saying there aren't academics who disagree with JK Rowling. I am saying that you're wrong in assuming that this is a partisan political issue. It demonstrably is not, and where it is, that's because of lines drawn in the sands of tribalism and not the content of the debate itself. You're seeing conservatives (small c) jumping on the bandwagon for their own reasons and assuming that their views are part of the academic gender-identity debate.

In short though... Just because you haven't done much reading on a topic, you shouldn't assume that your initial perception of a divide is correct.

It's mostly women (by a massive margin) and they come from both sides of the usual political divide. I don't know that there's anything to debate here. You've just got the facts wrong.

From my own POV, I've always seen blatant misogyny pulled up on here (as I have pulled others up, too), and these are now the people that are aligned with your positions. But i agree about women as targets on here, definitely.

I think (really quite sadly, actually) there's been a fair amount of misogyny around this topic from people who I'd never seen any hint of it from before. Again to an extent there's the element of defensiveness and it being a "raw nerve" issue for a lot of people, but it's there and quite clear.

If you brave other areas of social media it gets even more bizarre as you have people declaring themselves feminists on their profile whilst at the same time openly attacking women. Then of course you have the bands of gammon who inexplicably declare themselves trans rights advocates and use it as the "acceptable stick" with which to beat down women who they happen to have completely unrelated issues with. They don't give a stuff about LGBT rights.

I take all your points, I'll just comment on this part here :

Generally, I think you'd have a hard time making a blanket argument that the kind of people fighting for trans rights, would be the kind of people likely to be anti-women or misogynistic in general though, especially as they're the kind of people to be fighting for women's rights if the situations were reversed.

Agree totally however I'm not sure I remember a situation where 2 groups of people's rights have been in such direct conflict with each other before. It feels like this topic has torn people a part who would previously have always been on the same "side" that in itself should show that maybe it's not just a simple black/white, you're mean and we're not type of a topic

Do people ever have fun anymore?

I wasn't even thinking about on TiBB actually I meant in the wider debate, twitter etc

Lol

I've had a migraine issue for the last few months, so my internet usage has been way more limited and intermittent than usual. I guess I've probably just missed a load of it.

Apologies. I initially read the bit where you said "here as well" as "on here as well."

It's still ok to drag a gammon whenever anyone feels like it though.

Thing is though trans rights and women's rights are in conflict, in some cases - transwomen using women's spaces directly contradicts the right to woman-only spaces.

I think the purposeful intent to direct this debate into very limited areas (as I've already gone on about) is the cause of this. As an example, the US is currently in the middle of pretty much banning abortion, which is the height of being anti-woman. A move that was set in place by Trump nominating anti-abortion judges to the supreme court. Then he's at a rally the other night saying he will ban trans competitors from women's sports. Now - in what world does this make any sense?

Both women and trans rights activists are being played by the same people, and rather than coming together to work it through, walls have been built and no one is being heard. I do think that women will have to concede ground, but I think it could and should have been through consultation rather than demands.

Furthermore, I hope That Clears

Good Real Music can relax you.

That's not the point.

The pint is, everyone should be attained the same level of courtesy as the next person.

It's silly to debate these issues whilst using slurs to describe other groups of people.

But what group is being described with the term "Gammon"? I know people like to disingenuously pretend it's all middle-aged white men but that's plainly not true.

Until middle-aged white dudes get the justice that history has denied them, then no one should be able to talk about the rights of others.


Gammon comes from a dickens quote using ham as a describer for the nonsense being spoken, it isn't even racial. That's just been tagged on to claim victimhood, and as it fit quite nicely, it managed to stick.

mmmm well, women never had much of an issue (generally speaking) until the "rules" around what a woman is or can be became so wide that the word is almost meaningless which then pushes the door wide open for any opportunist to walk through. This is what the problem actually is, not that genuine transwomen can use the women's bathrooms, that has been happening for many many years and no one really had any big issue with it, making "trans" such a huge umbrella term not only allows people to abuse the system, it prevents women from complaining about people abusing it

Humbug also comes from a Dickens quote. It means "Bollocks"

Stop oppressing me with dickens quotes :laugh:

incorrect

when Dickens and Bronte used it it was "gammon and spinach" and it was used to indicate humbug, a ridiculous story, deceitful talk.

Gammon is a pejorative popularised in British political culture since around 2012. The term refers in particular to the colour of a person's flushed face when expressing their strong opinions, as compared to the type of pork of the same name. It is defined in this context by the Oxford English Dictionary as "various parasynthetic adjectives referring to particularly reddish or florid complexions" (wiki)

In 2012, Caitlin Moran wrote that British Prime Minister David Cameron resembled "a slightly camp gammon robot" and "a C3PO made of ham" in her book Moranthology.

In 2015, Ruby Tandoh called Great British Bake Off judge Paul Hollywood a "walking gammon joint".

In 2017, children's author Ben Davis tweeted a picture of nine members of a BBC Question Time audience and referred to them as "the Great Wall of Gammon", leading to the term becoming popularised, particularly on social media.
(wiki)

We've had this discussion before. I provided you a source, you cried about the source, so I provided you an article in the spectator and you disappeared.

If you want to create a gammon thread, I'm sure a mod will move the last few posts over, and this thread can be kept for it's original purpose rather than it being derailed.

yes this one: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/gammon

and again it illustrates you are incorrect