Support NeoGAF

[mckmas8808]

If you can't assign POSSIBLE charitable intent to a particular argument, then maybe you don't understand their argument. Please don't read that as yelling, I just wanted to emphasize that word.

And please don't suggest that you can't argue in good faith until you know the person in question. That's not really what that sort of exercise is about, and everyone should be able to consider the most charitable interpretation of an argument regardless of their beliefs. People have been less than charitable to you in this thread, but I shouldn't have to know you to argue your points in good faith. Does that make sense?

It helps to know the person some to understand intent. There's sports radio guys that I listen to all the time. So, over the years I can tell when they are debating something in good faith and when they aren't. With JK, I honestly can't tell. Ultimately, I'll give her the benefit of the doubt that she arguing in good faith, since I don't have any reason to believe she isn't.

- To maybe answer your question, the most charitable intent of her argument could possibly be that she fears for where some teens are going with getting surgery or HRT too soon. And that she believes that young people should speak to professionals for a set amount of time (or until they are adults) before they can get HRT or surgery. Plus she may fear (as a feminist) that too much conflation is happening between cis-gender females and trans females. And while she doesn't hate them at all, would like there to be a clear line between the two (for cases when people are trying to speak to or reach out to "cis-gender" females only).

- The least charitable intent would be to set flames to the current culture war with the LGBTQ community. And to see if she can start a fight between the most hardcore cis-gender females vs. trans females. And in the process become a martyr by setting her career on fire and becoming a leader of some anti-trans movement.

 

[ANDS]

As you all can see, once you ask for EVIDENCE, there is always none.

All these people saying "truths" "nuance" turns out to be liars, all of them.

I don't think she's been intentionally transphobic. I think the pool of people who are proactively bigots is a small one (at least in Western countries).

. . .however her comments can easily be seen as unintentionally transphobic and exclusionary. When you use language like "women menstruate. . ." the point she is trying to make is clear, but the words used are clumsy (for a writer) and easily massaged up into transphobia. It's like the complaints against Trump's travel bans in the mid-2020's and some well heeled progressives sneering "who's gonna clean your toilets Trump!" Well-intentioned, but racist statement from someone not racist who is now being taken as one.

 

[luffie]

I don't think she's been intentionally transphobic. I think the pool of people who are proactively bigots is a small one (at least in Western countries).

. . .however her comments can easily be seen as unintentionally transphobic and exclusionary. When you use language like "women menstruate. . ." the point she is trying to make is clear, but the words used are clumsy (for a writer) and easily massaged up into transphobia. It's like the complaints against Trump's travel bans in the mid-2020's and some well heeled progressives sneering "who's gonna clean your toilets Trump!" Well-intentioned, but racist statement from someone not racist who is now being taken as one.

Absolutely ridiculous.

There's no such things as transphobia if what she's mentioning is a fact. "Transphobia" is also also a non existent word, made up just to lump any argument into accusatory claim.

Anyone that interprets facts as transphobia is insidious and manipulative. It's like me now calling your arguments "MICRO AGGRESSION etc" because you didn't word it well enough. There's nothing you can do about it, because everything depends on me or any other reader to make up their own twisted interpretation.

Your Trump analogy is wrong, it can be interpreted as racist because it's not an absolute fact that cleaners are all mexican/foreigners. But only women menstruate/ovulate, period, there hasn't been a single men ever since recorded history that menstruate.

 

[ANDS]

Absolutely ridiculous.

There's no such things as transphobia if what she's mentioning is a fact.

If the fact that she's bringing up is meant to be exclusionary and othering. . .

Your Trump analogy is wrong, it can be interpreted as racist because it's not an absolute fact that cleaners are all mexican/foreigners. But only women menstruate/ovulate, period, there hasn't been a single men ever since recorded history that menstruate.

It should be fairly obvious why a trans-woman (or a woman who is menopausal) would find the above "exclusionary and othering."

 

[jigglet]

I noticed on resetera all April fools posts were deleted. It’s sad that any sense of humor is gone. Everything is cancelled.

 

[Dr. Claus]

If the fact that she's bringing up is meant to be exclusionary and othering. . .



It should be fairly obvious why a trans-woman (or a woman who is menopausal) would find the above "exclusionary and othering."

Doesn't make it transphobic. Just means the people who get offended by basic scientific fact are fucking stupid.

 

[Elysion]

60s: Beatniks
70s: Hippies
80s: Punks
90s: Goths
00s: Emos
10s: (Gender-)Queers

Every era has its own fads that grips especially younger generations. I think the ‚Emo‘ thing in particular is interesting, since it could be seen as a kind of progenitor of the trans phenomenon, with a similar emphasis on androgyny. The difference this time is that the trans phenomenon has real, long-term, and in many cases irreversible consequences for those who engage in it. There‘s no going back to being a normal man or woman once someone has ‚transitioned‘, these people can‘t just go back to what they were before if they have regrets. The phenomenon of ‚gender dysphoria‘ especially among teenagers is clearly a social contagion facilitated by social media, though it may have real-world, environmental causes (like the prevalence of microplastics, which can mess with hormones; or the ubiquity of pornography which might mess with people‘s brains if consumed at a young age).

There‘s also the fact that there‘s lots of money to be made from people who ‚transition‘ (especially mtf), since they‘re essentially hooked for life on hormones (and regular medical interventions, if they‘ve had genital surgery). I fully expect that, at least in the US, we’ll one day see huge lawsuits from people who were convinced to ‚transition‘ but later regretted it against hospitals, doctors, and drug companies who facilitated this (past lawsuits against US tobacco companies might be a model for this). I hope that promoting this kind of stuff (especially to minors) will one be seen just as déclassé as cigarette ads today (in some countries they‘re even illegal.)

Btw, I wouldn’t be surprised of JKR loses her Twitter account one of these days if her takes are too spicy.

 

[Nickolaidas]

Your current gender is printed on your original birth certificate.

If I was a celebrity in 2022, I'd be receiving death threats for that comment. In 1992, it was still just common sense.

Just because something was ok to believe in the past doesn't mean it's ok to believe now (i.e. societies used to believe not all people deserve to be free).

Now if people wanted J.K. to go to jail or get money stripped from her by the government, that'll be a whole different situation where I'd 100% disagree with.

They wanted to have her fired and would stick to the walls outside the classroom of the university she was teaching demeaning and threatening messages. Does that count as free speech? Do we need to tell anyone who sees 'fuck you's sprayed on their wall next to their desk at work to grow a pair and take it like a chump because 'free speech'?

 

[Nickolaidas]

There is an air of entitlement and narcissism that exists today that I think is greater than any time I've been alive. And society's response to it is making it even worse by capitulating to it.

Throughout most of my life, people disagreed on things, even things they considered very important and learned to co-exist with one another anyway. Now, it's "people who feel a certain way about something are a danger to society and they should not be allowed to exist with us." The narcissism that someone's opinion can be the only right one, and the entitlement that they're entitled to have society cater to their every whim.

We've also reached a point where people will take something irrelevant and frame it as a winning argument to what they're talking about.

For example, we recently had our country in an uproar because three young children (siblings) have died and after a little bit of digging by the police on the third death, it is now 99% possible that the murderer is their own mother who was poisoning them and stuff. So the public got really pissed and their ranted on social media.

And then the idiots started coming out with comments like, "You are so angry with a mother that poisoned her three young children. Where was your anger when the government poisoned the children of the entire country with the poison they labeled as a 'vaccine'?" This is the problem, for me. This, this moronic need to turn every irrelevant fact or occurrence into ammunition for your own beliefs and opinions which sometimes don't have anything to do with the fact/occurrence itself.

Which is why you see an occurrence where a black man slaps another black man in an awards ceremony due to his marriage being complicated, and yet you see it in many webpages being labeled as a symptom of the patriarchy or white oppression.

What. The actual. Fuck.

 

[Varteras]

Ultimately, anyone has the right to express their own opinion, but before distorting the aim of one's job (reporting gaming news) to attack a game because some royalties from it will go to a person who's saying stuff they believe is harmful, they should probably think very hard about where the money they themsleves earn comes from.

In any case, there's a space to do this kind of discussion, and it's called op-eds.

You may absolutely hate J.K. Rowling. You may think her stance is terrible, damaging, or simply stupid. That's fair. But we're not talking about J.K. Rowling here. We're talking about hundreds of game developers working their ass off on a video game about a world they love, which is also a world millions of people (including tons of trans and other LBGT folks) love, and I would be surprised if there weren't many LGBT folks among the developers as well.

By taking such a hostile stance, you're not hitting J.K. Rowling, she's loaded and will live the rest of her life in absolute comfort. The one you hurt the most are the developers of the game, and that's not fair.

Incredibly late responding to this but I wholeheartedly agree. I can't stand the notion that not liking someone's real life viewpoints means you can't enjoy their work. That somehow you're being agreeable with them and enabling them. As you said, Rowling made her fortune and will be famous long after she's gone. Nothing will change that. Just like nothing will change that the actors who played in those movies made a lot of money from adapting her work and are either now stars because of it or it represents arguably the height of their long careers.

It's the same with people who say you shouldn't like Lovecraft's work because he was racist. Well, even if he was, he never made money off his work. His work wasn't appreciated and turned into something worth money until after his death. So, who cares? He never benefited from it. Far worse people will be remembered for a very long time for horrible things they actually did. Not simply said or believed.

The people who stand to benefit most from Hogwart's Legacy being successful have nothing to do with her. As you said, it would be nice if these supposed journalists had the same integrity towards how they make their money and who is signing their checks.

 

[ANDS]

Doesn't make it transphobic. Just means the people who get offended by basic scientific fact are fucking stupid.

You - and Rowling - are not as smart as you think you are.

 

[Ogbert]

You - and Rowling - are not as smart as you think you are.

Yes, she is.

Her works will be read for centuries.

The blue haired drivel peddlers will be gone within a decade. The worm is turning. We've had enough of this drivel. The next generation will not stand for such scientifically illiterate bullshit. Gender politics should be treated with the same disdain as Scientology.

It's a cult.

 

[strange headache]

It should be fairly obvious why a trans-woman (or a woman who is menopausal) would find the above "exclusionary and othering."

A trans-woman will always be a trans-woman, not a woman, but a trans-woman. There is nothing wrong with that, everybody is free to make his own life-choices. I will treat this person with respect just like everybody else, so there will be no "exclusionary or othering" behavior from my part. But I will not be bullied into an illusion. Denying your own past is denying yourself. If said person has a problem with that, then the problem lies squarely with them.

 

[ANDS]

Yes, she is.

Her works will be read for centuries.

The blue haired drivel peddlers will be gone within a decade. The worm is turning. We've had enough of this drivel. The next generation will not stand for such scientifically illiterate bullshit. Gender politics should be treated with the same disdain as Scientology.

It's a cult.

HP Lovecraft is one of my favorite writers and is inarguably one of the most influential authors ever. He was also a bigot and his views on race would have him shunned out of modern society.

. . .you're also (intentionally I'm sure) conflating arguments (or just straight making shit up in your head). Show me a single trans-woman who has suggested they are biologically female, instead of just someone who identifies culturally as a woman.

A trans-woman will always be a trans-woman, not a woman, but a trans-woman. There is nothing wrong with that, everybody is free to make his own life-choices. I will treat this person with respect just like everybody else, so there will be no "exclusionary or othering" behavior from my part. But I will not be bullied into an illusion. Denying your own past is denying yourself. If said person has a problem with that, then the problem lies squarely with them.

. . .same question.

 

[strange headache]

Show me a single trans-woman who has suggested they are biologically female, instead of just someone who identifies culturally as a woman.

The fact that you're already distinguishing between biological and cultural femininity, should answer your own question.

 

[Ogbert]

Show me a single trans-woman who has suggested they are biologically female, instead of just someone who identifies culturally as a woman.

But that's the whole problem.

The entire liberal establishment has decided to reduce a biological category to a 'cultural whim'. If a man can identify as a woman, then anyone can identify as anything. Why not change race*? Or age? Or height?

Hence the nonsense with sports. You should be competing against your biological peers, not those who personally believe that they share that 'gender'. If gender is a subjective badge, it is fundamentally meaningless.

*Of course, pretending to be another race is actually the height of cultural appropriation. So, with perfect Alice in Wonderland logic, progressives demand that subjective belief and feeling *must* be recognised when it comes to your gender. But then, without missing a beat, state that so much as wearing a culturally diverse dress or braiding your hair in an inappropriate manner is deeply offensive.

 

[MisterR]

If he’s running the site he can cover and not cover whatever he wants, and he can write all he wants about why he’s not covering it. I’m guessing lots of people bitching about this are also constantly whining about free speech. I plan on buying the game and am looking forward to it. But I can understand his stance.

 

[Decontamination Silo]

60s: Beatniks
70s: Hippies
80s: Punks
90s: Goths
00s: Emos
10s: (Gender-)Queers

Every era has its own fads that grips especially younger generations. I think the ‚Emo‘ thing in particular is interesting, since it could be seen as a kind of progenitor of the trans phenomenon, with a similar emphasis on androgyny. The difference this time is that the trans phenomenon has real, long-term, and in many cases irreversible consequences for those who engage in it. There‘s no going back to being a normal man or woman once someone has ‚transitioned‘, these people can‘t just go back to what they were before if they have regrets. The phenomenon of ‚gender dysphoria‘ especially among teenagers is clearly a social contagion facilitated by social media, though it may have real-world, environmental causes (like the prevalence of microplastics, which can mess with hormones; or the ubiquity of pornography which might mess with people‘s brains if consumed at a young age).

There‘s also the fact that there‘s lots of money to be made from people who ‚transition‘ (especially mtf), since they‘re essentially hooked for life on hormones (and regular medical interventions, if they‘ve had genital surgery). I fully expect that, at least in the US, we’ll one day see huge lawsuits from people who were convinced to ‚transition‘ but later regretted it against hospitals, doctors, and drug companies who facilitated this (past lawsuits against US tobacco companies might be a model for this). I hope that promoting this kind of stuff (especially to minors) will one be seen just as déclassé as cigarette ads today (in some countries they‘re even illegal.)

Btw, I wouldn’t be surprised of JKR loses her Twitter account one of these days if her takes are too spicy.

The other fads you mentioned are fixed with a haircut and a trip to Macy's. Depending on the level of physical intervention one takes, the queer trend can have ramifications for an entire life. There are societal impacts too. The goth trend did not remove natural women from their own sporting institutions.

 

[ANDS]

The fact that you're already distinguishing between biological and cultural femininity, should answer your own question.

Glad you agree. Does make your argument that somehow you might be "bullied into illusion" kind of silly though. . .

The entire liberal establishment

Oh boy. . .

has decided to reduce a biological category to a 'cultural whim'. If a man can identify as a woman, then anyone can identify as anything. Why not change race*? Or age? Or height?

Still conflating arguments. Again, show me the trans-women banging on the doors of OBGYN's, demanding practitioners state that they can menstruate.

. . .and not for nothing, because - predictably - the point has been lost: my entire argument was pushing back against the absurd point that a statement can't be "racist" if it is a fact (an argument that completely and utterly removes intent to bolster validity).

 

[strange headache]

Glad you agree. Does make your argument that somehow you might be "bullied into illusion" kind of silly though. . .

What are you on about?
The fact that you are making that distinction proves that women and trans-women are not the same thing. Hence the reason why women are women and trans-women are trans-women.

Which is exactly what Rowling has been saying.

 

[Ogbert]

Oh boy. . .

Not an answer.

Again, show me the trans-women banging on the doors of OBGYN's, demanding practitioners state that they can menstruate

Give it time.

Do you:

a) Think Lia Thomas is a woman?
b) Think Lia Thomas should be allowed to compete against women?

 

[ANDS]

What are you on about?
The fact that you are making that distinction proves that women and trans-women are not the same thing. Hence the reason why women are women and trans-women are trans-women.

Which is exactly what Rowling has been saying.

Women and trans-women are all culturally "women." The identification of women in the previous is obviously cis-women that has been shorthanded to "women" because certain terms seem triggering to folks and can lead to conversations that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. For example. . .

Not an answer.

You didn't get one because the question has fuck-all to do with the sub-thread of determining whether JKR was being transphobic in her response to the "people who menstruate" article.

 

[Ogbert]

Women and trans-women are all culturally "women." The identification of women in the previous is obviously cis-women that has been shorthanded to "women" because certain terms seem triggering to folks and can lead to conversations that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. For example. . .



You didn't get one because the question has fuck-all to do with the sub-thread of determining whether JKR was being transphobic in her response to the "people who menstruate" article.

Drivel.

Utter drivel.

 

[benno]

define woman

 

[Umbasaborne]

 

[Dr. Claus]

You - and Rowling - are not as smart as you think you are.

Irony, thy name is ANDS.

 

[Ogbert]

define woman

Adult female. XX chromosomes.

 

[DragoonKain]

You can believe in strict definitions of man and woman and disagree with trans activist opinions and ideas without being "transphobic." There's no logic to it whatsoever. At all. Nothing JK said has ever been transphobic. You can take issue with the term "pregnant people" and not hate trans people. Just as much as you can take issue with some things in the bible and not hate Christians. Or take issue with things taught in the Koran and not hate Muslims.

Activists have tried to broaden the definitions of terms like "transphobia" and "hate" so they can declare anyone they don't like a bad person to try and silence them and also always have ammo to claim victim over everything.

Their logic doesn't ever hold up to scrutiny. The sad part is, cowards have bought in and have spread this nonsense so much that people actually believe good honest people are hateful when they're nothing of the sort. I'll argue JK Rowling cares more about trans people than most in the activist community does. Look at how those people speak about trans people who don't toe the company line or detransitioners.... more vile and hateful words you will never find. Have never seen JK Rowling speak that way about anyone, let alone trans people. That's how you know those people are frauds.

 

[Ladioss]

The blue haired drivel peddlers will be gone within a decade. The worm is turning. We've had enough of this drivel. The next generation will not stand for such scientifically illiterate bullshit. Gender politics should be treated with the same disdain as Scientology.

The key difference here with scientology or previous cultural fads is that our radical constructionists have succesfully seized power in pretty much all important cultural and intellectual, public (and even private) institutions.

If I'm pessimistic, I see in the near future something similar to the West going the way of the USSR under Lysenko, or of the Islamic world at the end of the golden age with the rise of the madrasa system : a scientific system where a politicized, almost scholastic system of racialized and gendered epistemology dominate everything else. Could last for several generations, because of social dynamics and incentives. During this time, Asia becomes the bastion of classical, rational scientific thought.

 

[Dr. Claus]

I think my only criticism here is announcing you won't cover something is arguably worse than just quietly disassociating from it. I feel the JK Rowling thing has been beaten to death here and this thread more or less an echo chamber about that. Speaking as a woman, I'd rather she not represent me or my interests using her fantasy author platform? People followed her because they like a book series she wrote, not because she's a pontifex of serious sex equality issues. Literally nobody asked her.

If some of you don't like trans-people, okay. I'm curious how many of you have knowingly met a trans person with these blazing hot takes. I've got more than a few trans friends, and they are very pleasant and don't act as militant as some of you make them out to be. I don't mind sharing same-sex spaces with them and have. But hey, you do you.

Also FTR, I don't like Reset and I've never signed up on their site or associated with them. I've been on Gaf a decade now. I like this community and I'm okay with these polarizing conversations.

Do you even know what transphobia means? Do you know basic science? Can you understand that someone can promote basic scientific fact without hating a group of people?

I don't think you do, with your mental gymnastics here trying to suggest people "hate" trans people. Seek help.

 

[Radical Dreamer]

Adult female. XX chromosomes.

It's that easy. Yet some motherfuckers can't wrap their heads around that lmao xD

 

[Ladioss]

It's that easy. Yet some motherfuckers can't wrap their heads around that lmao xD

It's impossible when you have been succesfully brainwashed for years with an ideology where objective reality doesn't exist and the nature of what is "real" is purely a social construct - and where progressive social mores heavily penalize you socially and even professionnaly if you dare to question dogma anyway. We are witnessing the succesfull takeover of modern society by a cult.

 

[Fully engaged]

A tomato is a fruit. You may think of it as a vegetable, however, it has the same biological reproduction system as a strawberry plant or an apple tree. There for it is a fruit. Many people think tomatoes are a vegetable. Thinking they are a vegetable, or calling them a salad vegetable is fine.. but they are a fruit. The same goes for cucumbers and eggplants. They may not be sweet, they may not be something you want to make a dessert with... but they are still fruits of plants. This is biology.
Now, no one is going to be angry with any one for confusing a tomato, an eggplant or a cucumber with a vegetable.. But for some reason people get really mad when you tell them these things are actually fruits.. I don't get it..

 

[TMLT]

I wanna go home.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

60s: Beatniks
70s: Hippies
80s: Punks
90s: Goths
00s: Emos
10s: (Gender-)Queers

Every era has its own fads that grips especially younger generations. I think the ‚Emo‘ thing in particular is interesting, since it could be seen as a kind of progenitor of the trans phenomenon, with a similar emphasis on androgyny. The difference this time is that the trans phenomenon has real, long-term, and in many cases irreversible consequences for those who engage in it. There‘s no going back to being a normal man or woman once someone has ‚transitioned‘, these people can‘t just go back to what they were before if they have regrets. The phenomenon of ‚gender dysphoria‘ especially among teenagers is clearly a social contagion facilitated by social media, though it may have real-world, environmental causes (like the prevalence of microplastics, which can mess with hormones; or the ubiquity of pornography which might mess with people‘s brains if consumed at a young age).

There‘s also the fact that there‘s lots of money to be made from people who ‚transition‘ (especially mtf), since they‘re essentially hooked for life on hormones (and regular medical interventions, if they‘ve had genital surgery). I fully expect that, at least in the US, we’ll one day see huge lawsuits from people who were convinced to ‚transition‘ but later regretted it against hospitals, doctors, and drug companies who facilitated this (past lawsuits against US tobacco companies might be a model for this). I hope that promoting this kind of stuff (especially to minors) will one be seen just as déclassé as cigarette ads today (in some countries they‘re even illegal.)

Btw, I wouldn’t be surprised of JKR loses her Twitter account one of these days if her takes are too spicy.

And all weird people in their own way. Although not in a dangerous way. One of my sis in laws cousin was an emo kind of guy, Havent seen him in years so maybe he changed. But he had the hair and dress. Nice guy and all, but kind of off. The guy is among family at a giant dinner (so there's not even strangers there to interact with) and this guy is kind of odd and does his own thing. Everyone is eating dinner at whatever table you can find chatting with people you havent seen all year, and this guy would be doing his own thing alone on a sofa.

One other big difference is that the Gender era is heavily supported by social media so it people on the fringe or seriously want to do it, do it because it's out there.

As you said, the Gender stuff is a permanent kind of thing (unless someone can convert and convert back no problem). The other faddy kinds of personalities (usually starting at teenager age) people often outgrow. You can be a gothy dude (like I saw in the tail end of high school where a bunch of black dressed people huddled together as their own small clique smoking on the sidewalk), but looking at my FB page of friends and scouring to see what other schoolmates are doing, I see ZERO goths. Everyone outgrew it. By the time college and university came around (and getting a job), they noticed you got to cut that shit out and stop dressing in black and acting antisocial. Same goes for all the jocky drop out kinds of people. Fast forward 25 years and they all have normal jobs with normal family pics like it's Family Ties.

 

[luffie]

Still conflating arguments. Again, show me the trans-women banging on the doors of OBGYN's, demanding practitioners state that they can menstruate.

. . .and not for nothing, because - predictably - the point has been lost: my entire argument was pushing back against the absurd point that a statement can't be "racist" if it is a fact (an argument that completely and utterly removes intent to bolster validity).

Lol, you are either an idiot grasping at straws or a troll.

"show me the trans-women banging on the doors of OBGYN's, demanding practitioners state that they can menstruate." - but they demand that you cannot say 'WOMAN MENSTRUATE' . A woman can't even say "what" is a woman anymore.

They also demands that you don't mention "biological woman."

If that is what you are getting at, then you are sexist, misogynistic, you trample at women's right and remove their claim of identity by removing the DISTINCT differences in biology by reducing it to your sexist cultural interpretation.

"my entire argument was pushing back against the absurd point that a statement can't be "racist" if it is a fact" - Yes, yes, a fact cannot be racist nor sexist nor whatever cists or phobic word you can come up with. Then you might as well claim "SCIENCE IS TRANSPHOBIC", because it doesn't change based on your opinion or your sexist opinion on women as a culture.

Your idea that women can be reduced to just a culture(your culture is not other's culture) is sexist, racist, misogynistic. You can go to ERA, they have your "woman culture" waiting for you.

So you are either an idiot, or a racist sexist misogynist. Choose, i suggest the former is better.

 

[ANDS]

Lol, you are either an idiot grasping at straws or a troll.

"show me the trans-women banging on the doors of OBGYN's, demanding practitioners state that they can menstruate." - but they demand that you cannot say 'WOMAN MENSTRUATE' . A woman can't even say "what" is a woman anymore.

They also demands that you don't mention "biological woman."

If that is what you are getting at, then you are sexist, misogynistic, you trample at women's right and remove their claim of identity by removing the DISTINCT differences in biology by reducing it to your sexist cultural interpretation.

"my entire argument was pushing back against the absurd point that a statement can't be "racist" if it is a fact" - Yes, yes, a fact cannot be racist nor sexist nor whatever cists or phobic word you can come up with. Then you might as well claim "SCIENCE IS TRANSPHOBIC", because it doesn't change based on your opinion or your sexist opinion on women as a culture.

Your idea that women can be reduced to just a culture(your culture is not other's culture) is sexist, racist, misogynistic. You can go to ERA, they have your "woman culture" waiting for you.

So you are either an idiot, or a racist sexist misogynist. Choose, i suggest the former is better.

Reading this, all I could hear was the sound of an airhorn going off while someone constantly bangs on an empty detergent bucket. How you didn't get massive douche-chills typing this out is beyond me.

And it's clear that we're not using the same dictionary here (or you're just being spectacularly obtuse) so there really isn't much point to this.

. . .seriously though, I've never seen such a splendid display of word vomit in my life. Hats off to you.

 

[Nickolaidas]

Lol, you are either an idiot grasping at straws or a troll.

"show me the trans-women banging on the doors of OBGYN's, demanding practitioners state that they can menstruate." - but they demand that you cannot say 'WOMAN MENSTRUATE' . A woman can't even say "what" is a woman anymore.

They also demands that you don't mention "biological woman."

If that is what you are getting at, then you are sexist, misogynistic, you trample at women's right and remove their claim of identity by removing the DISTINCT differences in biology by reducing it to your sexist cultural interpretation.

"my entire argument was pushing back against the absurd point that a statement can't be "racist" if it is a fact" - Yes, yes, a fact cannot be racist nor sexist nor whatever cists or phobic word you can come up with. Then you might as well claim "SCIENCE IS TRANSPHOBIC", because it doesn't change based on your opinion or your sexist opinion on women as a culture.

Your idea that women can be reduced to just a culture(your culture is not other's culture) is sexist, racist, misogynistic. You can go to ERA, they have your "woman culture" waiting for you.

So you are either an idiot, or a racist sexist misogynist. Choose, i suggest the former is better.

I get your point, and I can understand it can be frustrating when people do not see what you believe to be in freakin' plain view, but don't you think you are getting a little aggressive here?

 

[StreetsofBeige]

A tomato is a fruit. You may think of it as a vegetable, however, it has the same biological reproduction system as a strawberry plant or an apple tree. There for it is a fruit. Many people think tomatoes are a vegetable. Thinking they are a vegetable, or calling them a salad vegetable is fine.. but they are a fruit. The same goes for cucumbers and eggplants. They may not be sweet, they may not be something you want to make a dessert with... but they are still fruits of plants. This is biology.
Now, no one is going to be angry with any one for confusing a tomato, an eggplant or a cucumber with a vegetable.. But for some reason people get really mad when you tell them these things are actually fruits.. I don't get it..

Because humans have a brain, and because of this humans think their opinion overrules anything in life - even science. And if you go against their opinion they may go hostile.

It's like people claiming the Earth is flat or 1+1 =/= 2. They don't really care what is stated as facts or indisputable evidence. They just do their own thing. I'm sure there's some Star Trek nerds out there thinking they're Vulcan. Even though they were born in Knoxville or Rio De Janeiro, they think they come from another planet.

Some times you just got to let them think what they want, since there's a chance they might go ape shit on you of you disagree or make fun.

(PS. I knew tomatoes are fruits, but didn't know cucumbers and eggplants are too. You learn something new every day!)

 

[Dr. Claus]

Lol, you are either an idiot grasping at straws or a troll.

"show me the trans-women banging on the doors of OBGYN's, demanding practitioners state that they can menstruate." - but they demand that you cannot say 'WOMAN MENSTRUATE' . A woman can't even say "what" is a woman anymore.

They also demands that you don't mention "biological woman."

If that is what you are getting at, then you are sexist, misogynistic, you trample at women's right and remove their claim of identity by removing the DISTINCT differences in biology by reducing it to your sexist cultural interpretation.

"my entire argument was pushing back against the absurd point that a statement can't be "racist" if it is a fact" - Yes, yes, a fact cannot be racist nor sexist nor whatever cists or phobic word you can come up with. Then you might as well claim "SCIENCE IS TRANSPHOBIC", because it doesn't change based on your opinion or your sexist opinion on women as a culture.

Your idea that women can be reduced to just a culture(your culture is not other's culture) is sexist, racist, misogynistic. You can go to ERA, they have your "woman culture" waiting for you.

So you are either an idiot, or a racist sexist misogynist. Choose, i suggest the former is better.

Mate, ANDS is a trolling moron, but you are doing the same exact thing he is with these strawman arguments and false claims of racism/sexism/etc. Take a deep breath.

 

[luffie]

Mate, ANDS is a trolling moron, but you are doing the same exact thing he is with these strawman arguments and false claims of racism/sexism/etc. Take a deep breath.

Yeah, just throwing the same thing at them. I'm chill, we don't have that idiotic culture here.

 

[luffie]

I get your point, and I can understand it can be frustrating when people do not see what you believe to be in freakin' plain view, but don't you think you are getting a little aggressive here?

Maybe, but I'm just using their own rhetoric against them/trolls. Sorry if it sounds aggressive to some. I don't give a damn about trolls.

And for others reading, no, please don't use that/my rhetoric in a real sincere debate.

 

[luffie]

Reading this, all I could hear was the sound of an airhorn going off while someone constantly bangs on an empty detergent bucket. How you didn't get massive douche-chills typing this out is beyond me.

And it's clear that we're not using the same dictionary here (or you're just being spectacularly obtuse) so there really isn't much point to this.

. . .seriously though, I've never seen such a splendid display of word vomit in my life. Hats off to you.

Of course, you can't refute a single thing except spouting sexist remarks. Typical sexist.

"my entire argument was pushing back against the absurd point that a statement can't be "racist" if it is a fact" - Yes, yes, a fact cannot be racist nor sexist nor whatever cists or phobic word you can come up with. Then you might as well claim "SCIENCE IS TRANSPHOBIC", because it doesn't change based on your opinion or your sexist opinion on women as a culture.

 

[sircaw]

Because humans have a brain, and because of this humans think their opinion overrules anything in life - even science. And if you go against their opinion they may go hostile.

It's like people claiming the Earth is flat or 1+1 =/= 2. They don't really care what is stated as facts or indisputable evidence. They just do their own thing. I'm sure there's some Star Trek nerds out there thinking they're Vulcan. Even though they were born in Knoxville or Rio De Janeiro, they think they come from another planet.

Some times you just got to let them think what they want, since there's a chance they might go ape shit on you of you disagree or make fun.

(PS. I knew tomatoes are fruits, but didn't know cucumbers and eggplants are too. You learn something new every day!)

Get your bloody facts straight FFS, it's Klingon here thank you very much.

 

[Arkangelus0]

60s: Beatniks
70s: Hippies
80s: Punks
90s: Goths
00s: Emos
10s: (Gender-)Queers

The worst about this situation, it show how Milenials ,who some are almost 40, never grow up, the same emos become hipsters and gender queers, how sad its people in their 30s start doing fads only milennials do, i want to quote something who i never understood when i was a kid but its important, Tingle from major mask was fucking weird, aounoma make it like a joke for the people 35+ who still believe they are kids, its the same fucking principle with the blue heads

 

[Arkangelus0]

My bad, forgot edit and tine run out, when i say :

how sad its people in their 30s start doing fads only milennials do

I mean only teenagers do, because the blueheads act like they are 14

 

[93xfan]

From the thing that JK said, I personally believe that it's technically correct. But I think she and many others are missing the point on this. Trans people are asking to be treating as the gender that they are identifying as. They are doing that against a system\government\society that either doesn't think being Trans is possible (because some people think it's a mental illness) or think Trans people shouldn't be respected due to it being "wrong".

In that light it's disrespectful to say a Trans woman, isn't a woman. Likes yes, biologically that's correct. But people aren't going to walk around in everyday life saying "trans this" or "trans that". It's easier to just put a sign on a set of doors that say "Men" and "Women". What are you going to say, that a Transwomen can go into the "Women's" bathroom? No, of course not.

So in that light, that's why many Trans and CIS people are upset at J.K. Rowling. She speaks as if she's the authority of the Trans conversation, instead of wanting to play a part of a larger conversation. She writes as if she has to get the last word on the subject. It's very odd. I'd feel equally odd if a white person wanted to be the authority on race relations in America. Like why would a white person (of all people) even want to be an authority on that?

Just take a look at what J.K. says here about surgery and hormones therapy for people under 18 years old. This is nuts!






You call it virtue signaling. And he calls it an explanation as to why he doesn't want to preview the game on the site. Just as you are now giving you opinion on this, should can he. You aren't better than him, nor is he better than you. He literally said on the site that if you want to cover the game, then that's fine. Like he LITERALLY said that.

Rowling is 100% correct. It’s not nuts to point out facts.

Imagine thinking your brand new religion makes any pre-2015 thoughts on gender not just obsolete, but actually crazy.

 

[mckmas8808]

Rowling is 100% correct. It’s not nuts to point out facts.

Imagine thinking your brand new religion makes any pre-2015 thoughts on gender not just obsolete, but actually crazy.

One of the good things about human civilization so far is that the longer we are on the Earth, the more intelligent we've become of ourselves and the everything in the Universe around us. So just because something was so-called "true" pre-2015, doesn't mean we don't elevate our thinking and knowledge on the matter.

500 years ago we thought the Earth was the middle of the solar system with the sun, stars, and other planets orbiting us. Nowadays........we know better.

 

[benno]

One of the good things about human civilization so far is that the longer we are on the Earth, the more intelligent we've become of ourselves and the everything in the Universe around us.

I have recent doubts.

So just because something was so-called "true" pre-2015, doesn't mean we don't elevate our thinking and knowledge on the matter.

What we're discussing is still true. The only thing different is now we have to bend over to stop hurt feelings.

500 years ago we thought the Earth was the middle of the solar system with the sun, stars, and other planets orbiting us. Nowadays........we know better.

So being accepting of men who dress like a 1980's London barmaid and who hang around women's changing rooms is us knowing better?

that coolaid must be delicious

 

[NickFire]

One of the good things about human civilization so far is that the longer we are on the Earth, the more intelligent we've become of ourselves and the everything in the Universe around us. So just because something was so-called "true" pre-2015, doesn't mean we don't elevate our thinking and knowledge on the matter.

500 years ago we thought the Earth was the middle of the solar system with the sun, stars, and other planets orbiting us. Nowadays........we know better.

I agree with what you specifically wrote above. And I submit to you that society is returning to the dark ages in a very specific way. We have completely abandoned the meaning of science (and other foundations of society) in favor of the newest form of a quasi-religion. Trial and error have been replaced by theory and indoctrination, plus shunning of non-believers.