What a bizarre post. Regardless of my mistyping her surname, the woman I'm referring to has been awarded an OBE in recognition of services to higher education. If you think she doesn't exist, then I suppose you've magically wished her away ... along with the existence of biological/genetic sex.
Translation: you don't wish to be put on the spot by answering my questions, even though you challenged to me to provide specifics and have previously responded to my posts.
Did Jordan Peterson write that one for you?
No, and I doubt there are many outside of a tiny minority who insist otherwise.
Pray tell, how do you treat someone with respect and decency while refusing to acknowledge their identity?
Literally no one insists that is true.
Did knee-jerk "political correctness" write your post for you?
The fact that he and they both make heavy use of that kind of rhetoric should be a sign that maybe you're on the wrong side.
Just like how people not taking you seriously on the topic of Spurs proves that Spurs is going to win any minute now. The fact that you're a meme is just because people can't compete with you.
You mean persecuting, stirring up hatred, spreading conspiracy theories and taking away rights?
I'm sorry, but you are woefully out of touch with the reality of trans-ideology in its absolutist form - which is what my posts have been about.
Still ducking my questions I see. What a surprise, from someone who asked for specifics then bugged out when given some.
I assume this is a joke. You know that when someone asks for specifics on one topic they're not asking for specifics on another topic? Like if I ask for specifics on how British colonialism benefited India, specifics on why Spurs will win the league or how anti-depressants don't work isn't an answer?
And, as I said, I doubt those who've done so are much more than a tiny minority.
Trans women are literally women, though. The argument is that there's difference between gender and sex, but erasing that distinction to try and make trans people and those who support them look ridiculous is a tried and true tactic (as you've so aptly demonstrated).
Ah, so hollow gestures. Not sure that qualifies as either respectful nor decent.
What kind of rhetoric? The fact is that extremists exist in significant numbers when it comes to absolutist forms of trans-ideology. They will brook no discussion, call any criticism "transphobia", publish the home address of people like J.K Rowling and encourage activists to stand outside her house, call "transphobic" any scientific fact that doesn't square with their ideology, want words associated with biological sex to be abolished - e.g. not breast-feeding but "chest-feeding" when midwives talk in certain contexts - lest it offend their ideological beliefs, and push the notion that (for instance) a man who transitions to female, but stays sexually attracted to women, can count as a lesbian.
The LGB Alliance is a hate group.
No. More the ones who criticize how far the US seems to have gone the other way in terms of their sensitivity to having a discussion. Maybe it's not a right thing but more a centrist thing I'm referring to. But then again as an outsider the whole left right thing over there can be confusing.
If you're going to read up on it, whatever you do, don't start with John Money.
Okay no idea who that is but any unbiased sources to read up on this? Or maybe something that explains the stance of both sides of the debate to understand the "war" going on.
There are currently a big push for anti-LGBT+ legislation in the US, with special focus on the T, so I'm not sure what you mean about "the other way". Several states are trying to criminalize gender affirming treatment, and you have a large part of the right calling people groomers just for saying that trans people exist. This is not just about trans people, of course, a large part of the right are including gay cis people as well.
I doubt any unbiased sources exist in these sorts of realms, because the only people motivated to write about them are heavily invested one way or the other.
Why are you quoting "virtue-signalling" and "politically correct" to me like they're things I've mentioned?
And as I've said, you are woefully out of touch with the reality.
I'm mentioning "virtue-signalling" and "politically correctness" because IMO they reflect your stated views.
Do you believe that no such silent majority exists? Or is this just something else - like biological gender - to be magically wished away?
I'd say you're unbelievable, but the truth is you're just OG Glaston, same as it ever was
"chest-feeding" and midwives in the same sentence.
Oh, the irony.It's come to quite a pass when lesbians, gays and bisexuals - many of whom will have experienced hostility and hatred because of their sexual preferences - are now being branded as a "hate group" because they dare to express concerns or criticism about any aspect of trans-ideology.
Yes, it is ironic - a reflection of just how absurd the direction of trans-ideology has become. But wait a year or two, and some trans-ideologists will want "midwives" replaced with "midpeople"."chest-feeding" and midwives in the same sentence.
You should go to a gay bar and start talking about how great the LGB Alliance is and see how many lesbians, gays and bisexuals agree with you.
This is a lie. This is not an invitation to a discussion, I'm just pointing out that you are a liar. You are dishonestly equivocating between being a part of the LGB Alliance and expressing concern. It's transparent and rotten behaviour, which for certain people is par for the course. It's similar to when members of far-right groups claim that they're targeted just because they're "critical of mass immigration".
Next they'll want "police officer" instead of "policeman". Or "firefighter" instead of "fireman". Or "flight attendant" instead of "steward"/"stewardess". Any day now.
I haven't said that the LGB Alliance is "great". Instead, I've implied it's not great when lesbians, gays or bisexuals are branded as "hate" mongerers if they dare to question any aspect of trans-ideology.
False analogy. They are called midwives because, understandably, most women want a woman to advise and attend to them during the course of their pregnancy, not least because many midwives will already have gone through the bodily experience of pregnancy themselves.
What kind of nonsense argument is this? You could literally make the same argument about any previously gendered job title or description, which today has a more common gender neutral modern word. Just saying "false analogy" doesn't mean shit.
I think I'm probably allowed to call a group that claims to represent me and in fact pushes views that I, along the vast majority of lesbians, gays and bisexuals, think are hateful, a hate group.
There is no lie and your post make no sense. The LBG Alliance is being accused of transphobia precisely because they express concern over aspects of trans-ideology. Why else do you imagine they're being targeted?
