-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
https://www.itv.com/news/2018-12-18/school-boys-to-be-told-they-can-have-periods-in-new-transgender-guidelines/?fbclid=IwAR10l9m8e5BHLk0j75Gu11RcCJ8VoBZGPHlmrn63h2Igf_i4Awu6NNJok
Won't be long until this nonsense is included in the the Australian school curriculum under the 'Safe Schools' banner.
One of my mates made the comment that the world had gone so mad, he wishes that "God' would hit the reset button and start again. I reminded him that God was as real as a male period.
Won't be long until this nonsense is included in the the Australian school curriculum under the 'Safe Schools' banner.
One of my mates made the comment that the world had gone so mad, he wishes that "God' would hit the reset button and start again. I reminded him that God was as real as a male period.
Giardiasis said:
This just highlights, by the way, the gender spectrum.
Most biological males play with trucks. Biological females, hairbrushes (generally). Now the boys who do choose to play with hairbrushes may just be cis gendered boys who like hairbrushes. Or they may be biological males beginning to display a stereotypically feminine gender.
Look at that study. It's nit a given that being born with a *smile* means you like playing with trucks, even if that's what most people experience.
Of course it's not a given and it is a spectrum. But this spectrum is not exempt from the bell (normal distribution) curve. In any sample population there are going to be exceptions outside the normal range and there's nothing wrong with that.Coburgtiger said:
However there is a faux-scientific political movement trying to push it further than that and argue that there is no norm and that gender is entirely a social construct. As in, sex has no natural baring on gender at all and hence, we are all naturally born as genderless androgynes and it is the evil society that we live in that alters us from this natural androgynous state as a form of oppression. Such a premise is complete and utter horsesh!t.
Problem is, a surprisingly significant portion of so called educated people with influence seem to be willing to abandon all premise of reason, logic, rational thought and objective, observable fact to embrace this rubbish. From this perspective it has an eerie resemblance to cult like religious practices.
Panthera Tigris said:
Yeah, I actually think none of that is true.
This whole 'people choose their own gender on a whim' thing is the reducto ad absurdum used by conservatives to undermine the real and inherent nature of some people in our society being transgender.
Gender is complicated because it has an inherent biological component, but can be expressed through cultural idiosyncrasies. For instance, a person of masculine gender may biologically have a preference for toys which are more utilitarian than emotive. And this is probably not cultural. However, we will paint a boys room blue, and say pink is for girls, which is entirely cultural, and has actually flip flopped a number of times throughout Western culture.
Basically, there are three components here. Your gender, your sex, and the cultural stereotypes associated with either. Both gender and sex work on a spectrum, but in a lot of cases, a male sex lines up with a male gender, and female with female. This is why so many people don't get it. They think, I have a *smile*, and I like cars, and I like mowing the lawn, and I like hunting, and I feel comfortable talking footy with the blokes, and I'm attracted to women, etc etc etc. Thing is, most of things are cultural stereotypes, some are inherent gender, and one is biological sex.
But even if the above represents most, there's still a lot in the minority, and at the extremes. Which happens with large sample sizes. 1% even of Melbourne's population is about 40000 people. So there are heaps of people with a vagina, who feel all of the above. And there are heaps with a vagina who feel some of the above. Some of those might be trans, some might be cis gendered women who just like a few stereotypically blokey things.
I just wonder why we always feel the need to assume everyone exists the way the majority does, and why we seem to get mad, or upset, or offended, or that all the schools have gone mad and are liberal snowflakes, just because some people have an existence that doesn't match up exactly with our own experiences.
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
The 99% need to recognise the reality that the one percent exist.
It's everyone's reality. You don't get to just ignore the bits you don't like or understand.
I mean, if there's what, 8 billion people in the world, you're basically saying we should ignore 80 million people because they confuse you?
Coburgtiger said:
Not sure L2 is saying they should be ignored, or written out of history.
My take would be that there should be a proportionate response to law/societal change in relation to issues that arise. There is a definite far left agenda to over state and over play the need to restructure society around a tiny cohort within the population. That said kindness/acceptance/safety are among the things everyone in society should feel they can access.
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
Dude, you don't need to change your own gender. It's not compulsory.
Never understood the conservative fascination with what other people do with their genitals, or how they label themselves. Identity politics indeed.
antman said:
False advertising is bad enough, ask Ricky Ponting. Let's not enshrine it by telling biological lies.
KnightersRevenge said:
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
See what happens when you go into bat for L2R2R?
His issue has nothing to do with law, order, or society. It's that transgender people don't exist, or that they're lying.
Coburgtiger said:
No, I think it’s that there’s a disproportionate allowance or accommodation for their relative numbers. I’m not sure what the right answer is but in many ways there’s no better time to be a “minority”.
When is the Royal Mens Hospital going to open? (or am I not being PC) 
Should the Royal Women's Hospital be renamed the Royal Persons Hospital? > 
. ( this should happen to be really PC)
Why is a female Chairperson not called a Chairwoman ? Does she lose her Gender before or during the time she is "Chairing" ? Does it return when she climbs/falls or is pushed off?
Why is a male Chairperson no longer called a Chairman? Has he been "degendered" as per his female namesake?
Surely the only people who could truly be called "Chairperson" is a transitioning Transgender person who has not "fully" achieved their desired outcome.. Once they have completed their journey, they could be either Chairwoman or Chairman depending on whichever gender they have transitioned to. (Please note that I have placed the Chairwoman first in the above sentence, just to be PC) Strictly speaking I should now write that sentence placing the Chairman first & then write the sentence a third time placing the Chairperson first. ???
This PC thing is tiring, I think I'll jusT grab a beer, sit in my easy chair have a nap & reminisce about "The good old days" when people weren't so easily offended by "words"
Should the Royal Women's Hospital be renamed the Royal Persons Hospital? >
. ( this should happen to be really PC)Why is a female Chairperson not called a Chairwoman ? Does she lose her Gender before or during the time she is "Chairing" ? Does it return when she climbs/falls or is pushed off?
Why is a male Chairperson no longer called a Chairman? Has he been "degendered" as per his female namesake?
Surely the only people who could truly be called "Chairperson" is a transitioning Transgender person who has not "fully" achieved their desired outcome.
. Once they have completed their journey, they could be either Chairwoman or Chairman depending on whichever gender they have transitioned to. (Please note that I have placed the Chairwoman first in the above sentence, just to be PC) Strictly speaking I should now write that sentence placing the Chairman first & then write the sentence a third time placing the Chairperson first. ???This PC thing is tiring, I think I'll jusT grab a beer, sit in my easy chair have a nap & reminisce about "The good old days" when people weren't so easily offended by "words"
Speaking of the Good old Days’ just watched Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris. Great flick and it’s all relative. There were no good old days.
Here, indigenous, lgbtq+ and ethnic communities wouldn’t be reminiscing about the good old days, nor would Royce Harts with acl’s.
And although pc has elevated awareness of many ..isms like racism and …tries like bigotry which is obviously great, it has unfortunately been so over embraced by the left that what was once a ‘progressive left’ in this country, we now have this ‘regressive fundamentalist left’ – pious, hypocritical and regressive ..... (full of *smile*). 3rd stage Pc.
It has undermined the basics of what we instinctively understand to be right or wrong.
Here, indigenous, lgbtq+ and ethnic communities wouldn’t be reminiscing about the good old days, nor would Royce Harts with acl’s.
And although pc has elevated awareness of many ..isms like racism and …tries like bigotry which is obviously great, it has unfortunately been so over embraced by the left that what was once a ‘progressive left’ in this country, we now have this ‘regressive fundamentalist left’ – pious, hypocritical and regressive ..... (full of *smile*). 3rd stage Pc.
It has undermined the basics of what we instinctively understand to be right or wrong.
God you guys can sook about nothing.
At its absolute worst political correctness is annoying because you have to watch what you say in public.
At the other end of the spectrum, you might be beaten and abused for holding hands with your partner, or looking brown.
I know which side of the spectrum I'd err on..
Extremes are very rarely useful. But aside from made up strawmen like being annoyed about the word 'Chairperson', most of the 'PC movement' are just asking for basic respect and human rights for all.
Unfortunately, allowing basic rights to all (gay marriage, black people voting, women being allowed to work) is apparently PC gone mad.
At its absolute worst political correctness is annoying because you have to watch what you say in public.
At the other end of the spectrum, you might be beaten and abused for holding hands with your partner, or looking brown.
I know which side of the spectrum I'd err on..
Extremes are very rarely useful. But aside from made up strawmen like being annoyed about the word 'Chairperson', most of the 'PC movement' are just asking for basic respect and human rights for all.
Unfortunately, allowing basic rights to all (gay marriage, black people voting, women being allowed to work) is apparently PC gone mad.
Coburgtiger said:
Sorry CT but you've taken my post the wrong way. I wasn't "sooking up" about PC as such. It was meant to be satirical, I suppose that's one of the problems with the "written word" it's hard to convey that sometimes.
I absolutely respect people's basic human rights, (anyone who knows me will acknowledge this). I truly believe that the vast majority of "humanity" are good people & only want to live a peaceful dignified life.
Extremists of any kind only damage society as a whole.
Extreme PC is just as bad as extreme racism, bigotry etc.
As far as I can recall there is only male & female of most species & both have a "role" to play in nature. The fact that some members of these species don't "fit into" these categories is undeniable.
We have come a long way in the "acceptance" of this, but there is still a long way To go.
The point I was trying to make ( obviously not very well) was that we should be able to refer to someone as a "woman" or a "man" & not have the need to resort to the (imo) absurdity of using the "non gender specific" term "person".
Both sexes bring their particular strengths to our world naturally, that's the way it should be. That fact should be celebrated, not diminished by people who have particular agendas.
Men aren't always the "strong" ones, possibly physically but not necessarily mentally. Some of the mentally strongest people I know/knew are women. On the other hand, some of the kindest most caring folks I know are men.
