Josem exposes QE2 drag queen photos

[jackwhite]

2 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

I’m not sure that’s true.

Positive messages on social media tend to receive less attention than the negative ones, because they stand out more.

I think we need to look at society as a whole rather than concentrating on the social media side of things.

And society  as a whole has undoubtedly become more tolerant over the decades.

The reason I use social media as a barometer of it, or online is because most people are very vocal online or when they're anonymous. They wouldn't say these things to people in public either as they'd expose themselves. Society has become more tolerant in places. Of that you are correct. I mentioned above how my own opinion has changed over the years.

You also seem to contradict yourself here. I'm wondering if it's a typo. You say positive messages receive less attention because they stand out more. Surely they would receive more if that's the case. If you mean because they don't stand out, then fair. The reason for this is we're more wired to take note of the negative ones, whether we agree with them or not.

2 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

I also think we need to be clearer about what defines hate and “ anti trans rhetoric “

I am one who believes everyone has the right to act, dress and behave ( without hurting others ) as they wish, including trans people.

I don’t however, together with most, believe that sex and gender are different things. 
For expressing this opinion I have received some really quite offensive remarks on MF. I wouldn’t say they pass the threshold of being hateful. But if I was of a thinner skin I could have found them quite hurtful.

 

I wouldn't view what you are defining as 'anti-trans rhetoric'. 

In terms of the discussion over gender, I simply don't give an eff one way or another. I'm quite happy living my life and don't feel the need to wade into a discussion over who is what, and then demand you can't be this or that. I honestly don't care and don't see why you do either.

I've got more to do with my life than worry about that sort of thing.

[Josem]

20 hours ago, jackwhite said:

As long as they're not breaking the law, I don't have an issue with what they do in public. Live and let live. 

I think the substantial discussion here focuses on what the laws and rules should be.

For example, should "people who have penises" be getting changed in the women's change rooms?

For example, should school teachers be using schools to promote extremist political views that undermine women's rights?

For example, should taxpayers fund surgery which removes penises or vaginas from children and/or adults?

[HeliX]

Just now, Josem said:

should school teachers be using schools to promote extremist political views that undermine women's rights?

Trans rights don't do that. Christ you're insufferable.

[jackwhite]

3 minutes ago, Josem said:

I think the substantial discussion here focuses on what the laws and rules should be.

For example, should "people who have penises" be getting changed in the women's change rooms?

For example, should school teachers be using schools to promote extremist political views that undermine women's rights?

For example, should taxpayers fund surgery which removes penises or vaginas from children and/or adults?

I would rather focus on the laws as they are. Not what they might be.

You particularly seem to have a massive issue with this. That and a few other issues I've noticed you commenting on in the past make me think you're doing your best to hide the fact you're a bigot.

[HeliX]

Just now, jackwhite said:

I would rather focus on the laws as they are. Not what they might be.

You particularly seem to have a massive issue with this. That and a few other issues I've noticed you commenting on in the past make me think you're doing your best to hide the fact you're a bigot.

It's not very good hiding.

[jackwhite]

Just now, HeliX said:

It's not very good hiding.

Yet he likes to play 'Mr Nice Guy' on his socials.

[Gladys]

2 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

 

I don’t however, together with most, believe that sex and gender are different things. 
 

 

Getting your head around the fact that they are makes it all a lot easier. 

Sex= biology/chromosomal.

Gender = societal construct on appearance,  behaviour, emotion, role. 

 

[The Voice of Reason]

8 minutes ago, jackwhite said:

The reason I use social media as a barometer of it, or online is because most people are very vocal online or when they're anonymous. They wouldn't say these things to people in public either as they'd expose themselves. Society has become more tolerant in places. Of that you are correct. I mentioned above how my own opinion has changed over the years.

You also seem to contradict yourself here. I'm wondering if it's a typo. You say positive messages receive less attention because they stand out more. Surely they would receive more if that's the case. If you mean because they don't stand out, then fair. The reason for this is we're more wired to take note of the negative ones, whether we agree with them or not.

It wasn’t a typo but yes I meant that positive messages don’t stand out as much as negative ones.

I didn’t word it too well so I’ve gone back to edit and clarify.

Thanks for bringing it to my attention 

[John Wright]

29 minutes ago, Josem said:

I think the substantial discussion here focuses on what the laws and rules should be.

For example, should "people who have penises" be getting changed in the women's change rooms?

For example, should school teachers be using schools to promote extremist political views that undermine women's rights?

For example, should taxpayers fund surgery which removes penises or vaginas from children and/or adults?

Of course, there’s always a place for debate on laws, rules and social issues. However that debate won’t necessarily come up with the correct answer. That’s been proved time and time again when public attitudes would have held back changes like

abolition of the death penalty

abolition of judicial corporal punishment

abortion rights

Homosexual law reform

As for the women with penises debate, it’s an extreme, and shouldn’t be allowed to muddy the waters. Hard cases make bad law or rules. And it ignores the realities of XX, XY, XXY, X0 and all sorts of ambiguous physiological expressions of intersex, hermaphroditism and external ambiguity.

As for the teachers, there’s zero evidence, apart from that invented by Tufton Street type think tanks, MTPA, the Libertarian Right, the religious right/fundamentalists of anyone promoting any political views to undermine women or anyone else. The extremism is of those political groups who seek to push an agenda driven by seeking to achieve division, marginalisation and deflection from real political and social issues, for their own political and economic ends. It’s you and those groups who whip up the hate and offence.

As for gender reassignment surgery, publicly funded, if it reduces the mental health treatment bill picked by society by allowing people to achieve the gender they are, when it’s not aligned to their chromosomal sex, and removes the mental and emotional consequences of being one gender trapped in the body of another, I’m not sure there can be any objection.

The problem is the debate as fuelled by you, Rowling, TERFs etc doesn’t allow for rational discussion, and it certainly is short on facts and evidence.

 

[John Wright]

1 hour ago, WillowWeed said:

 

id be interested to see an actual poll on this, on the one hand you say Voice of Reason is wrong to state most people hold his view, however 3-4 lines later you make a claim that most share your particular view on the trans/sex/gender ambiguity.

not saying either of you is right or wrong, but i would say @John Wright knowing who you are (by reputaion and not personally) and what you do for a living that you of all people would be more careful of calling someone out on a sweeping statement only to follow up with a sweeping statement of your own.

https://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/70488-josem-exposes-qe2-drag-queen-photos/&do=findComment&comment=1729237

[quilp]

Dear god in heaven.

[The Voice of Reason]

35 minutes ago, John Wright said:

https://www.manxforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/70488-josem-exposes-qe2-drag-queen-photos/&do=findComment&comment=1729237

There’s no poll in there as to what percentage of people believe/ don’t believe that sex is the same as gender.

Theres one that says do you think people should be able to self identify as whichever gender they wish. Well of course they should ( how would you stop them even if wanted to?).

Its a whole different question.

[piebaps]

Indeed Quilp and this wasn't even a trans-issue. The whole QE2 thing is just anti-gay.

[HeliX]

1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said:

There’s no poll in there as to what percentage of people believe/ don’t believe that sex is the same as gender.

Theres one that says do you think people should be able to self identify as whichever gender they wish. Well of course they should ( how would you stop them even if wanted to?).

Its a whole different question.

I am perplexed by your refusal to accept that gender and sex are different things. Where is the utility in that view? Of what benefit is it to anyone?

[The Voice of Reason]

17 minutes ago, HeliX said:

I am perplexed by your refusal to accept that gender and sex are different things. Where is the utility in that view? Of what benefit is it to anyone?

No benefit or disadvantage to anyone. It’s just biology. ( I know you and Glad will say not)

I am equally perplexed as to why you are particularly bothered by this view. It’s not an attack on trans people  ( with whom I have no axe to grind), despite what any particular mischief maker might say.