JK Rowling Manx Flag Controversy

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, offshoremanxman said:

Another good one today. Someone compelled to apologize for something that hadn’t even happened at the time. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-62061739

The whole thing is fairly odd, not least the belief of the BBC that 'father' is a pronoun - never mind the whole complicated business as to how you should refer to trans parents.  But this really struck me:

She went on to say Friends also "did not have enough representation of black people" and that she was "clearly part of systemic racism in our business".

"I was unaware of that, which makes me feel stupid," she said, adding: "That was a very valid, extremely difficult criticism which still... I get emotional about.

"If I knew then what I know now, there are certain things I would have changed. But I didn't know them and I have since learned."

Now if there's one thing that Friends was relentlessly mocked for at the time it was first broadcast, it was that it managed to make New York City, which was less than 45% white at the time, look like it was in the rural Midwest as far as the faces on screen went.  So to have been unaware of that shows just how detached from reality people in the media were.

[HeliX]

2 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

The whole thing is fairly odd, not least the belief of the BBC that 'father' is a pronoun - never mind the whole complicated business as to how you should refer to trans parents.  But this really struck me:

She went on to say Friends also "did not have enough representation of black people" and that she was "clearly part of systemic racism in our business".

"I was unaware of that, which makes me feel stupid," she said, adding: "That was a very valid, extremely difficult criticism which still... I get emotional about.

"If I knew then what I know now, there are certain things I would have changed. But I didn't know them and I have since learned."

Now if there's one thing that Friends was relentlessly mocked for at the time it was first broadcast, it was that it managed to make New York City, which was less than 45% white at the time, look like it was in the rural Midwest as far as the faces on screen went.  So to have been unaware of that shows just how detached from reality people in the media were.

I suppose it's easier to be blind to that sort of thing when the whole industry is doing similar.

[AcousticallyChallenged]

6 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

Free speech is free speech. Nobody should live in fear of internet pitchfork mobs taking down their rights to work just because they heard something they didn’t agree with - that’s basically censorship enforced by mob rule. It’s all getting a bit like Matthew Hopkins and this 16th Century witch-hunts. If you say you’re not a witch then clearly .. you're a witch.

Alas, no such thing as free speech here.

There's freedom of expression in the Human Rights Act, which under Manx law dictates:

Quote

The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime,

So, where does it fall if someone is spouting that which could be seen as not fulfilling those duties and responsibilities?

[Steady Eddie]

8 minutes ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

So, where does it fall if someone is spouting that which could be seen as not fulfilling those duties and responsibilities?

You need to give it a rest Citizen Smith. It’s just embarrassing reading the stupid right-on leftist rubbish you post. The only people who you seem to think have freedom to speak is you and everyone else needs to shut up so as not to offend you and your moronic wokey friends who might have a damn good cry about it all on Twitter 😂

[jackwhite]

1 minute ago, Steady Eddie said:

You need to give it a rest Citizen Smith. It’s just embarrassing reading the stupid right-on leftist rubbish you post. The only people who you seem to think have freedom to speak is you and everyone else needs to shut up so as not to offend you and your moronic wokey friends who might have a damn good cry about it all on Twitter 😂

You another creepy Twitter stalker? 

I was just going to unhide mine too!

As soon as I get that message outing me I will. 

[AcousticallyChallenged]

2 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said:

You need to give it a rest Citizen Smith. It’s just embarrassing reading the stupid right-on leftist rubbish you post. The only people who you seem to think have freedom to speak is you and everyone else needs to shut up so as not to offend you and your moronic wokey friends who might have a damn good cry about it all on Twitter 😂

Oh bless you. How do you deal with such embarrassment? It must be really hard for you.

I never knew that letting people piss in peace is 'being woke'. It's amazing what you can learn from those that think everyone else's business is theirs.

[Steady Eddie]

3 minutes ago, jackwhite said:

You another creepy Twitter stalker? 

I was just going to unhide mine too!

As soon as I get that message outing me I will. 

What message? I don’t stalk anyone on Twitter all you pronoun idiots are the same with your whining and your lecturing it’s like you all read the same script. If I ever see a Twitter account on which someone declares their pronouns then that’s certainly not on my reading list as I know it’s likely some childish woke asshole who uses a lot of unintelligible terms, acronyms and dumb flag emojis.

[AcousticallyChallenged]

2 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said:

What message? I don’t stalk anyone on Twitter all you pronoun idiots are the same with your whining and your lecturing it’s like you all read the same script. If I ever see a Twitter account on which someone declares their pronouns then that’s certainly not on my reading list as I know it’s likely some childish woke asshole who uses a lot of unintelligible terms, acronyms and dumb flag emojis.

Is it the fear of the unknown that makes you so angry? Or do you feel impotent for not being able to get your head around people having different experiences to you?

Or are you just a bit of a boomer?

[jackwhite]

18 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said:

What message? I don’t stalk anyone on Twitter all you pronoun idiots are the same with your whining and your lecturing it’s like you all read the same script. If I ever see a Twitter account on which someone declares their pronouns then that’s certainly not on my reading list as I know it’s likely some childish woke asshole who uses a lot of unintelligible terms, acronyms and dumb flag emojis.

I didn't say the awaited message was from you, just asking if you're also a stalker. We already have one on here. 

Ah I understand mate, I tend to do the same with any account that uses the word 'woke' as if it's an insult, given it's true meaning.

[The Phantom]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/triathlon/62063359

Tri-athlon should be the natural home of the third gender/trans etc. 

[Hoops]

10 hours ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

And yet, you manage to be wrong by orders of magnitude. The actual quoted figure is closer to around 1.7%. Even using your figures, that’s ~13,000 people out of the UK population, closer to a million if you believe the 1.7% figure, as an example. How would the anyone feel if the UK’s view of their population was “fuck them, they can suffer”, whilst actively campaigning for such?

Of course, citing someone who entertains an audience with Joe Rogan isn’t necessarily the strongest point I’ve heard either. 

Have a read of this, it explains more why biological sex, which I presume you’re defining as denoting between XX and XY chromosomes, isn’t the be all and end all you seem to be treating it as. 

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/

We'll have to agree to disagree on the figures.

How about the Freedom of Information request FOI 200827019?

In march/april 2018, of 139 known transgender people in prison, 63 were in custardy for one or another offence of a sexual nature, committing a total of 111 offences.

Of those, 31 were for rape, 23 for child pornography, 13 for sexual assault, 13 for causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity etc etc. This figure does not include past offences.

I am not for a second going to suggest that trans people are more likely to commit offences of this nature then non-trans, we all know how predatory some men are, they shame us all. And I can well imagine some of those predators are hiding behind the trans identity to commit these crimes, as they did as football coaches, priests, care workers. But it comes to the heart of the argument about women's safe spaces and people self-identifying as trans.

[AcousticallyChallenged]

1 minute ago, Hoops said:

We'll have to agree to disagree on the figures.

How about the Freedom of Information request FOI 200827019?

In march/april 2018, of 139 known transgender people in prison, 63 were in custardy for one or another offence of a sexual nature, committing a total of 111 offences.

Of those, 31 were for rape, 23 for child pornography, 13 for sexual assault, 13 for causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity etc etc. This figure does not include past offences.

I am not for a second going to suggest that trans people are more likely to commit offences of this nature then non-trans, we all know how predatory some men are, they shame us all. And I can well imagine some of those predators are hiding behind the trans identity to commit these crimes, as they did as football coaches, priests, care workers. But it comes to the heart of the argument about women's safe spaces and people self-identifying as trans.

 

Nowhere does it say whether the perpetrators were identifying as male or female.

Bear in mind that, per gov.uk, the overall average is 49% of prisoners are sentenced for violent or sexual crimes. Based on your cited FOI request, the figure for trans people is 45%. Of course, the figure for trans people could still be artificially high. As the FOI request states, there is a bias in the data towards those with longer, therefore, likely more serious, sentences.

Now, let's look at the figures in some more depth. 63 people out of 200,000 to 500,000 estimated trans people in the UK convicted for sexual offences. Or, 0.0315% of the trans population, assuming the lower end of the above range. 0.0126% if we go for the upper bound.

Now, compare that to 136,000 approx sexual offences in the year ending March 2020. That works out as roughly 0.25% of the UK's population. Assuming one offence per person.

So we can actually ascertain, loosely, that amongst the trans population, perpetration of sexual offences is actually an order of magnitude lower.

The argument that someone will go to all the effort of transitioning with the view to committing an offence is ludicrous at best, it essentially stipulates the belief that any transgender person could be a sex pest in a frock.

Are you familiar with the mountain of emotional, physical, bureaucratic, medical and often, surgical, difficulty involved in a transition? It is not in anyway as simple as one day declaring you identify differently. That is only really step 1.

[Kopek]

4 hours ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

just a bit of a boomer?

Oi you! There's nothing wrong with that you name caller you !!!   😉

 

4 hours ago, Steady Eddie said:

woke asshole

Does a woke asshole only nice poos and farts???

[AcousticallyChallenged]

1 minute ago, Kopek said:

Oi you! There's nothing wrong with that you name caller you !!!   😉

 

Does a woke asshole only nice poos and farts???

They smell of sustainably sourced roses so I've heard.

[Hoops]

1 hour ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

 

Nowhere does it say whether the perpetrators were identifying as male or female.

Bear in mind that, per gov.uk, the overall average is 49% of prisoners are sentenced for violent or sexual crimes. Based on your cited FOI request, the figure for trans people is 45%. Of course, the figure for trans people could still be artificially high. As the FOI request states, there is a bias in the data towards those with longer, therefore, likely more serious, sentences.

Now, let's look at the figures in some more depth. 63 people out of 200,000 to 500,000 estimated trans people in the UK convicted for sexual offences. Or, 0.0315% of the trans population, assuming the lower end of the above range. 0.0126% if we go for the upper bound.

Now, compare that to 136,000 approx sexual offences in the year ending March 2020. That works out as roughly 0.25% of the UK's population. Assuming one offence per person.

So we can actually ascertain, loosely, that amongst the trans population, perpetration of sexual offences is actually an order of magnitude lower.

The argument that someone will go to all the effort of transitioning with the view to committing an offence is ludicrous at best, it essentially stipulates the belief that any transgender person could be a sex pest in a frock.

Are you familiar with the mountain of emotional, physical, bureaucratic, medical and often, surgical, difficulty involved in a transition? It is not in anyway as simple as one day declaring you identify differently. That is only really step 1.

Gov uk offenders management statistics Aril - june 2021 sexual offences made up 18% of the prison population. But 45% of the trans prison population in march/april 2018, when the foi request was made. 

My objective is not to denigrate the trans population, as I think my earlier post made clear, but to try to make you understand why many women do not want trans people  in their domestic abuse refuges, rape crisis centres and prison wings. 

When a legal challenge, brought about by an ex-inmate who claimed to have been sexually assaulted, to prevent transgender inmates with convictions with sexual or violent offences against women being placed in women's prisons was rejected, judge Holroyde said "I can accept, at any rate for present purposes, that the unconditional introduction of a transgender woman into the general population of a woman's prison carries a statistically greater risk of sexual assault upon non transgender prisoners then would be the case if a non-transgender woman was introduced". The mitigations work well, ask karen White.

I don't think there's any point in continuing this conversation any further.

 

Edited July 6, 2022 by Hoops