Lefties please help me understand
I really don't understand some of your positions. Please could you help me to understand.
Why do you take offence on behalf of other people?
Why do you get triggered if someone insults other groups to you (e.g. You don't mind if someone insults White middle aged man but go ballistic if someone insults off people). I fact you endorse criticism of western culture, white people etc.
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people? Why is it terrible if majorities force minorities to change but good to force majorities to change for minorities?
You get triggered if someone says they don't want drag queens invited to schools to lecture their kids on sexuality. It's a libertarian position to say people can do they they want but you don't need to "transform" children this way? Why do you automatically hear bigotry in such a statement?
Why do you hate associating Islam with terrorism?
If someone says that they don't believe in women at work societies etc. Or anything that is in preference to men, why do you get triggered by this as it's quite a neutral position which requests equal treatment?
Why do you hate the idea that groups might be unequal like races for example, but in some cases love the idea for example if women were proven more intelligent.
What is driving you? What fears or desires? I am genuinely interested as I just don't get it.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Why do you take offence on behalf of other people?
Why do you get triggered if someone insults other groups to you (e.g. You don't mind if someone insults White middle aged man but go ballistic if someone insults off people). I fact you endorse criticism of western culture, white people etc.
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people? Why is it terrible if majorities force minorities to change but good to force majorities to change for minorities?
You get triggered if someone says they don't want drag queens invited to schools to lecture their kids on sexuality. It's a libertarian position to say people can do they they want but you don't need to "transform" children this way? Why do you automatically hear bigotry in such a statement?
Why do you hate associating Islam with terrorism?
If someone says that they don't believe in women at work societies etc. Or anything that is in preference to men, why do you get triggered by this as it's quite a neutral position which requests equal treatment?
Why do you hate the idea that groups might be unequal like races for example, but in some cases love the idea for example if women were proven more intelligent.
What is driving you? What fears or desires? I am genuinely interested as I just don't get it.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 6 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
Why do you take offence on behalf of other people?
Sometimes people are too afraid to speak out for themselves. When people live in fear, sometimes, someone else needs to be a voice for them
Why do you get triggered if someone insults other groups to you (e.g. You don't mind if someone insults White middle aged man but go ballistic if someone insults off people). I fact you endorse criticism of western culture, white people etc.
As above, for some, it's hard to see the plight of others than their own suffering.
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people? Why is it terrible if majorities force minorities to change but good to force majorities to change for minorities?
Why do you have a problem with the concept of genderfluidity. No one is saying you have to refer to someone in a particular way, they just want the right to define their own gender, why does that scare you?
You get triggered if someone says they don't want drag queens invited to schools to lecture their kids on sexuality. It's a libertarian position to say people can do they they want but you don't need to "transform" children this way? Why do you automatically hear bigotry in such a statement?
Why does it matter who teaches your children sexuality? As long as it's factually accurate, why does it matter?
Why do you hate associating Islam with terrorism?
No one is denying association, people want to stop the words becoming synonymous.
If someone says that they don't believe in women at work societies etc. Or anything that is in preference to men, why do you get triggered by this as it's quite a neutral position which requests equal treatment?
Why would you want to deny someone their right to work?
Why do you hate the idea that groups might be unequal like races for example, but in some cases love the idea for example if women were proven more intelligent.
People are trying to find examples of exceptional women, to break the stereotype that men are superior in every sense.
What is driving you? What fears or desires? I am genuinely interested as I just don't get it.
Personally? No real drive, just a basic level of decency. Allowing someone the same opportunities as me isn't really a debate.
Sometimes people are too afraid to speak out for themselves. When people live in fear, sometimes, someone else needs to be a voice for them
Why do you get triggered if someone insults other groups to you (e.g. You don't mind if someone insults White middle aged man but go ballistic if someone insults off people). I fact you endorse criticism of western culture, white people etc.
As above, for some, it's hard to see the plight of others than their own suffering.
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people? Why is it terrible if majorities force minorities to change but good to force majorities to change for minorities?
Why do you have a problem with the concept of genderfluidity. No one is saying you have to refer to someone in a particular way, they just want the right to define their own gender, why does that scare you?
You get triggered if someone says they don't want drag queens invited to schools to lecture their kids on sexuality. It's a libertarian position to say people can do they they want but you don't need to "transform" children this way? Why do you automatically hear bigotry in such a statement?
Why does it matter who teaches your children sexuality? As long as it's factually accurate, why does it matter?
Why do you hate associating Islam with terrorism?
No one is denying association, people want to stop the words becoming synonymous.
If someone says that they don't believe in women at work societies etc. Or anything that is in preference to men, why do you get triggered by this as it's quite a neutral position which requests equal treatment?
Why would you want to deny someone their right to work?
Why do you hate the idea that groups might be unequal like races for example, but in some cases love the idea for example if women were proven more intelligent.
People are trying to find examples of exceptional women, to break the stereotype that men are superior in every sense.
What is driving you? What fears or desires? I am genuinely interested as I just don't get it.
Personally? No real drive, just a basic level of decency. Allowing someone the same opportunities as me isn't really a debate.
Original post by Empirical
Why do you get triggered if someone insults other groups to you (e.g. You don't mind if someone insults White middle aged man but go ballistic if someone insults off people).
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people?
Why do you get triggered if someone insults other groups to you (e.g. You don't mind if someone insults White middle aged man but go ballistic if someone insults off people).
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people?
You are confusing lefties with civilised people. We get offended when other groups are verbally attacked because the reason cited to justify the abuse are often based on xenophobia and racism.
As for transgender. It is about respecting the wishes of the person in question with regard to their chosen gender identity, just as we respect your chosen gender identify.
What you seem to lack is respect for others. You put your own views of society first and are then disgruntled by people who challenge your lack of respect.
Why do you take offence on behalf of other people? Why do you get triggered if someone insults other groups to you (e.g. You don't mind if someone insults White middle aged man but go ballistic if someone insults off people). I fact you endorse criticism of western culture, white people etc. Are you really making a case here that we shouldn't care if others are insulted? Because I think you'd be hard pressed supporting that stance, and as above, I don't think defending people is a trait exclusive to the left. In regards to the latter points, I have yet to see anyone endorsing criticism or western culture, white people, nor even white middle aged men (purely for that trait, at least) as you seem to be proposing.
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people? Why is it terrible if majorities force minorities to change but good to force majorities to change for minorities? Again, I've not seen this as a common point of view, in terms of changing all pronouns. What I have seen, however, is people asking others to respect their own personal preferences, and I don't think it harms you in any way to respect their wishes.
You get triggered if someone says they don't want drag queens invited to schools to lecture their kids on sexuality. It's a libertarian position to say people can do they they want but you don't need to "transform" children this way? Why do you automatically hear bigotry in such a statement? You say it's 'transforming' the children, but in what way? All it's doing is informing them of wider sexualities and/or genders, which won't have a negative impact on them. If anything, it will only make them more open-minded, and more comfortable in their own skin if they do turn out to be LGBT+, which is no bad thing.
Why do you hate associating Islam with terrorism? There is an association, in that some terrorists are Muslims, but what people object to is the assumption that all terrorists are Muslims, or that all Muslims are terrorists, neither of which are true. And the other objection is to Muslims in a wider sense being treated more negatively due to the actions of extremist exceptions.
If someone says that they don't believe in women at work societies etc. Or anything that is in preference to men, why do you get triggered by this as it's quite a neutral position which requests equal treatment? I've not seen people objecting against fair options that prefer men, and as a general stance I refer you to the earlier post; why would you wish to block equality in the workplace, or prevent people from working?
Why do you hate the idea that groups might be unequal like races for example, but in some cases love the idea for example if women were proven more intelligent? I feel like you're trying to make two unrelated points support each other here. No one should support inequality or unequal opportunities, but that's different to your latter point. People celebrate achievements of women, or developments in science, just as much as they support anything else because it's progress for everyone.
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people? Why is it terrible if majorities force minorities to change but good to force majorities to change for minorities? Again, I've not seen this as a common point of view, in terms of changing all pronouns. What I have seen, however, is people asking others to respect their own personal preferences, and I don't think it harms you in any way to respect their wishes.
You get triggered if someone says they don't want drag queens invited to schools to lecture their kids on sexuality. It's a libertarian position to say people can do they they want but you don't need to "transform" children this way? Why do you automatically hear bigotry in such a statement? You say it's 'transforming' the children, but in what way? All it's doing is informing them of wider sexualities and/or genders, which won't have a negative impact on them. If anything, it will only make them more open-minded, and more comfortable in their own skin if they do turn out to be LGBT+, which is no bad thing.
Why do you hate associating Islam with terrorism? There is an association, in that some terrorists are Muslims, but what people object to is the assumption that all terrorists are Muslims, or that all Muslims are terrorists, neither of which are true. And the other objection is to Muslims in a wider sense being treated more negatively due to the actions of extremist exceptions.
If someone says that they don't believe in women at work societies etc. Or anything that is in preference to men, why do you get triggered by this as it's quite a neutral position which requests equal treatment? I've not seen people objecting against fair options that prefer men, and as a general stance I refer you to the earlier post; why would you wish to block equality in the workplace, or prevent people from working?
Why do you hate the idea that groups might be unequal like races for example, but in some cases love the idea for example if women were proven more intelligent? I feel like you're trying to make two unrelated points support each other here. No one should support inequality or unequal opportunities, but that's different to your latter point. People celebrate achievements of women, or developments in science, just as much as they support anything else because it's progress for everyone.
Why do you simultaneously defend Muslims who run societies that happily condemn and kill gay people whilst also trying to make an impression that gay people deserve equal rights? Isn't this mutually exclusive? Shouldn't you treat Muslims the same way you treat middle-aged straight white bankers, who happen to be more closely aligned with your opinions of gay people than what Muslims think of them? Also the phrase "Religion of Peace" is an oxymoron in any context.
Original post by Necro2411
Why do you simultaneously defend Muslims who run societies that happily condemn and kill gay people whilst also trying to make an impression that gay people deserve equal rights? Isn't this mutually exclusive? Shouldn't you treat Muslims the same way you treat middle-aged straight white bankers, who happen to be more closely aligned with your opinions of gay people than what Muslims think of them? Also the phrase "Religion of Peace" is an oxymoron in any context.
Supporting freedom of religion doesn't mean supporting every religious doctrine, just as support of freedom of speech doesn't mean you have to agree with absolutely everything anyone says. There is no exclusivity, there are peaceful Muslims and there are vicious dictator Muslims, they both have the same rights to practice their religion, despite their actions or thoughts on other matters.
Original post by Empirical
I really don't understand some of your positions. Please could you help me to understand.
Why do you take offence on behalf of other people?
Why do you get triggered if someone insults other groups to you (e.g. You don't mind if someone insults White middle aged man but go ballistic if someone insults off people). I fact you endorse criticism of western culture, white people etc.
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people? Why is it terrible if majorities force minorities to change but good to force majorities to change for minorities?
You get triggered if someone says they don't want drag queens invited to schools to lecture their kids on sexuality. It's a libertarian position to say people can do they they want but you don't need to "transform" children this way? Why do you automatically hear bigotry in such a statement?
Why do you hate associating Islam with terrorism?
If someone says that they don't believe in women at work societies etc. Or anything that is in preference to men, why do you get triggered by this as it's quite a neutral position which requests equal treatment?
Why do you hate the idea that groups might be unequal like races for example, but in some cases love the idea for example if women were proven more intelligent.
What is driving you? What fears or desires? I am genuinely interested as I just don't get it.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Why do you take offence on behalf of other people?
Why do you get triggered if someone insults other groups to you (e.g. You don't mind if someone insults White middle aged man but go ballistic if someone insults off people). I fact you endorse criticism of western culture, white people etc.
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people? Why is it terrible if majorities force minorities to change but good to force majorities to change for minorities?
You get triggered if someone says they don't want drag queens invited to schools to lecture their kids on sexuality. It's a libertarian position to say people can do they they want but you don't need to "transform" children this way? Why do you automatically hear bigotry in such a statement?
Why do you hate associating Islam with terrorism?
If someone says that they don't believe in women at work societies etc. Or anything that is in preference to men, why do you get triggered by this as it's quite a neutral position which requests equal treatment?
Why do you hate the idea that groups might be unequal like races for example, but in some cases love the idea for example if women were proven more intelligent.
What is driving you? What fears or desires? I am genuinely interested as I just don't get it.
Posted from TSR Mobile
If you can't call a transgender person 'he' or 'she', then do you call them 'it'?
Original post by TheMightyBadger
If you can't call a transgender person 'he' or 'she', then do you call them 'it'?
Their name? That's always a good way of not being a complete douche when referring to someone if they don't want to use conventional nouns.
Most transgender people will use He or She, depending on which way they are transitioning.
You're referring to genderfluid people who choose not to use the he or she pronouns.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Tubbz
Their name? That's always a good way of not being a complete douche when referring to someone if they don't want to use conventional nouns.
Most transgender people will use He or She, depending on which way they are transitioning.
You're referring to genderfluid people who choose not to use the he or she pronouns.
Most transgender people will use He or She, depending on which way they are transitioning.
You're referring to genderfluid people who choose not to use the he or she pronouns.
What even is "genderfluid"?
libertarian
Many "extreme" SJWs, which I assume you are trying to reference to, are not liberals. They wouldn't even come close to being libertarian.
Original post by TheMightyBadger
What even is "genderfluid"?
People who identify as neither male nor female.
There's this concept that male and female aren't definite.
Original post by Tubbz
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people? Why is it terrible if majorities force minorities to change but good to force majorities to change for minorities?
Why do you have a problem with the concept of genderfluidity. No one is saying you have to refer to someone in a particular way, they just want the right to define their own gender, why does that scare you?
Why do you hate associating Islam with terrorism?
No one is denying association, people want to stop the words becoming synonymous.
Why do you hate the idea that groups might be unequal like races for example, but in some cases love the idea for example if women were proven more intelligent.
People are trying to find examples of exceptional women, to break the stereotype that men are superior in every sense.
My must the majority change their pronouns he and she to avoid offending transgender people? Why is it terrible if majorities force minorities to change but good to force majorities to change for minorities?
Why do you have a problem with the concept of genderfluidity. No one is saying you have to refer to someone in a particular way, they just want the right to define their own gender, why does that scare you?
Why do you hate associating Islam with terrorism?
No one is denying association, people want to stop the words becoming synonymous.
Why do you hate the idea that groups might be unequal like races for example, but in some cases love the idea for example if women were proven more intelligent.
People are trying to find examples of exceptional women, to break the stereotype that men are superior in every sense.
•
No, but many reasonably make the conclusion that gender is arbitrary if the definition can be so easily be manipulated. People are not trying to stop people from identifying how they wish. Until individuals are able to properly define gender, with research, you will continue to find unconvinced people like the OP.
•
People are, unfortunately. Some individuals continue to claim the perfection of their religion, whatever it may be, regardless of anything that suggests the contrary.
•
This would not convince those left unconvinced unfortunately. They can easily use the retort: "well, they're only one person, they do not represent females", and they are right. They do not represent females.
Original post by Tubbz
People who identify as neither male nor female.
There's this concept that male and female aren't definite.
There's this concept that male and female aren't definite.
The state of being male is traditionally defined as bearing an X and a Y chromosome, with a female traditionally defined as bearing two X chromosomes. How does identification come into this?
Original post by _gcx
The state of being male is traditionally defined as bearing an X and a Y chromosome, with a female traditionally defined as bearing two X chromosomes. How does identification come into this?
There's been a little bit of progress in science that your gender isn't designated as simply as XY/XX chromosomes.
If you wish to join the 21st century in their understanding of genders, the World Health Organisation article provides a lot of studies to help clarify what's going on.
http://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html
Think of it in the same way as the flat earth theory. It's outdated and people need to accept that what they used to think was a simplified model.
Original post by Tubbz
There's been a little bit of progress in science that your gender isn't designated as simply as XY/XX chromosomes.
If you wish to join the 21st century in their understanding of genders, the World Health Organisation article provides a lot of studies to help clarify what's going on.
http://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html
Think of it in the same way as the flat earth theory. It's outdated and people need to accept that what they used to think was a simplified model.
If you wish to join the 21st century in their understanding of genders, the World Health Organisation article provides a lot of studies to help clarify what's going on.
http://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html
Think of it in the same way as the flat earth theory. It's outdated and people need to accept that what they used to think was a simplified model.
I think you misunderstood. I'm aware that there are exceptions such as Klinefelter Syndrome etc. that are specified even in that article to be abnormalities/mutations that occur in a particularly small fraction of the population, but in general, the above holds hence I specified "traditionally".
Regardless, while useful, the article provided does not address where identification comes into gender/sex. It still speaks of gender/sex being biologically determined, unless it was linked in response to my first sentence.
Original post by _gcx
I think you misunderstood. I'm aware that there are exceptions such as Klinefelter Syndrome etc. that are specified even in that article to be abnormalities/mutations that occur in a particularly small fraction of the population, but in general, the above holds hence I specified "traditionally".
Regardless, while useful, the article provided does not address where identification comes into gender/sex. It still speaks of gender/sex being biologically determined, unless it was linked in response to my first sentence.
Regardless, while useful, the article provided does not address where identification comes into gender/sex. It still speaks of gender/sex being biologically determined, unless it was linked in response to my first sentence.
For years people have identified as non-binary, it's now that there's a growing evidence base that people can be open about it.
I don't understand why anyone would want to take someone feeling comfortable in their body away from them? It's not exactly difficult to use some's name when referring to them if the concept of more than two gender pronouns is difficult or uncomfortable.
The article does address it, RTFA.
You also must understand that not every one that's "left" is completely liberal. Similar to how people shouldn't always assume that just because someone is slightly right that they're immediately "Racist" or xenophobic.
It depends how extreme you are.
It depends how extreme you are.
Can I ask a question? [ sorry OP]. Why is it unacceptable for the DUP [ who I don't support] to oppose gay marriage and abortion, people criticising them and their beliefs, yet it is acceptable when a very much larger percentage of the population, again due to their religious beliefs, hold exactly the same views? Why the double standards?
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Tubbz
For years people have identified as non-binary, it's now that there's a growing evidence base that people can be open about it.
I don't understand why anyone would want to take someone feeling comfortable in their body away from them? It's not exactly difficult to use some's name when referring to them if the concept of more than two gender pronouns is difficult or uncomfortable.
The article does address it, RTFA.
I don't understand why anyone would want to take someone feeling comfortable in their body away from them? It's not exactly difficult to use some's name when referring to them if the concept of more than two gender pronouns is difficult or uncomfortable.
The article does address it, RTFA.
I don't either?
It does not address self-identification, no. The only mention of self-identification is at the end, where it states that a judge refused to uphold that psychosocial self-identification determines a person's gender. It describes that gender identity is "built" from birth, (which has compelled me to search for the corresponding study) but does not incorporate self-identification, gender fluidity, or gender neutrality, beyond a theory of lack of gender identity at birth, at all within the discussion. Am I missing anything?
Original post by _gcx
I don't either?
It does not address self-identification, no. The only mention of self-identification is at the end, where it states that a judge refused to uphold that psychosocial self-identification determines a person's gender. It describes that gender identity is "built" from birth, (which has compelled me to search for the corresponding study) but does not incorporate self-identification, gender fluidity, or gender neutrality, beyond a theory of lack of gender identity at birth, at all within the discussion. Am I missing anything?
It does not address self-identification, no. The only mention of self-identification is at the end, where it states that a judge refused to uphold that psychosocial self-identification determines a person's gender. It describes that gender identity is "built" from birth, (which has compelled me to search for the corresponding study) but does not incorporate self-identification, gender fluidity, or gender neutrality, beyond a theory of lack of gender identity at birth, at all within the discussion. Am I missing anything?
You've moved on from your original argument, and are no longer arguing the same point.
Your argument was that people see gender as XX or XY, and the research suggests it is not as simple as that, and is indeed a spectrum rather than a 2 box system.
This fact alone gives people the right to identify however they like.
the conclusion that gender is arbitrary
It definitely is, as with religion don't try and inflict it on anyone. Laissez Faire.
Quick Reply
Latest
Posted 1 minute ago
Worried about son who wants to move out, will he be able to afford it?Last reply 1 minute ago
Work experience opportunity related to finance/economiczLast reply 5 minutes ago
Official UCL Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 5 minutes ago
year 13 gyg journal : trying not to become an academic victim 🤡📖Last reply 5 minutes ago
What do you like most about having a Grow your Grades blog?Last reply 8 minutes ago
Northeastern University London Essay CompetitionLast reply 13 minutes ago
Official: Queen's University Belfast A100 2024 Entry ApplicantsLast reply 16 minutes ago
Medical Degree Doctor ApprenticeshipLast reply 16 minutes ago
Official University College London Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 16 minutes ago
Vodafone Cyber Security Degree Apprenticeship 2024Trending
Last reply 13 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 13 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
