I don't even know what that is.
Has political correctness actually gone mad?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
I wouldn't be surprised if retirement was forced on to him, on account of him being a gammon
Do you think there's a problem with people who think it's weird? Also I noticed you picked up on the mental health comment from one member. You do realise there is plenty of evidence of psychological problems behind some of these things?
You can't say this
''cowardly weasels like you who will only do that over a computer''
When you've press the enter button over 7,000 on a internet forum.
I think people who complain about this sort of thing ought to shut up.
Oh yes I'm sure you do...SJWs often take this approach. I guess I'm part of the problem too!
You did just say SJWs so yeahOh yes I'm sure you do...SJWs often take this approach. I guess I'm part of the problem too!
And then the telegraph seek him out for a quote so that silly can people lap it up.
It's telling that the poster who originally bought this former police officer up has no comment on his after it was pointed out.
Uh, yes I can.
I'm not criticising posting things over the internet. I'm calling the post in question cowardly because it's easy to insult/throw a jibe at somebody over the internet.
But don't. It makes you look stupid.
Eh.. you have over 9000 posts. We are all guilty of it.
The guy is obviously a nutjob. They shouldn't have quoted him.
I think his point about resources/time/effort being directed towards something like this is relevant, and I also have doubts over whether it's a good thing to normalise the behaviour of someone who changes their gender every day.
Thanks for the advice, I'll be sure to completely ignore it in the future.
That's because like him, you are a bigot. You don't want to admit it, so instead you try to find functional reasons to justify your bigotry.
Well yeah thats why its a stupid insult to use.
That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
It would be if I had called him a coward because he posts a lot.
I'm a bit uneasy if we are unable to have a genuine debate about issues like this without people getting their knickers in a twist. It's a valid point to make about the practicalities of somebody who's gender is that fluid and what expectations should be placed on their workplace and the people they work with - is it reasonable to expect a work place to support something like that? Maybe it is, maybe it isn't - I don't really have an opinion on it but I think it's fair enough to ask the question.
I get a bit uneasy at the fact that we legitimise bigots by not calling them bigots when they act bigoted.
Throughout history these cnuts always have functional arguments against equality that turn out to be bollocks. We need to stop tolerating them, you wouldn't tolerate a racist would you?
Ah yes, questioning whether somebody who switches their gender every day is mentally stable or whether we should be normalising that as a society is an equivalent to racism.
You've got me good.
That is a big jump you are making. Of course I wouldn't tolerate a racist but I worry that if we start jumping to calling people bigots, racists, whatever, anytime somebody puts forward a point of view that we don't agree with instead of engaging in debate then nobody's mind is going to get changed and everybody is just going to end up angry.
And you do realise there's far more evidence of transgenderism & gender fluidity in dozens of civilisations/cultures/countries dating back thousands of years - therefore, it's far more 'normal' in society and history than it is perceived at present
Also, there's plenty of psychological problems with many things humans do - sleeping too long or too little, eating too much or too little, exercising too hard or too little, working too hard or too little etc therefore using mental health as a reason to be a bigot is not only an insult to mental health, but it's incredibly inaccurate way to try to describe the experience of the very people you're harming too.
You can think something is weird if you want, but it's not anyone's place to cast judgement or insist that they conform to your ideals.
It's not your life.
The policeman in question is quoted "I’ve done it a handful of times since and felt so happy that I got to be me at work." I would argue that, that is far better for their psychological wellbeing.
Bingo. Calling them what they are is a genuine debate.
It's only a debate if you engage in conversation and challenge their views that way - just shouting people down and calling them names isn't going to change anything and certainly is not going to challenge or change their views which if you really cared about it would be your goal.
I gave up on trying to change people's minds on the internet a while ago. Sometimes you just gotta throw away the political correctness, stop worrying about causing offence, and call a spade a spade. I thought that's what this thread was all about right?
I don't really see the "PC gone mad" thread as a way to change anyones minds, especially not people who are already bigots. The only people who might potentially be influenced are people who are undecided and read the thread and realize through simply calling a spade a spade that the views espoused are bigotry.
I'm not interested in debating whether white people naturally have higher iqs or whether being transgender is a mental disorder. Anyone who believes those things is a bigot and should feck themselves.
Madness is far too often in the eye of the beholder and - perhaps the central point in this particular debate - upholds the unsubtle coercion that is societal conformity. In short, frequently the labelling of someone as mentally unsound is yet another way of keeping people in their place, and a warning to those of us who, curiously, want to be considered 'normal'. This is deliberate and insidious.
You know the British state use to prosecute people for homosexual acts(Legalised in 1967) and its only recently that homosexuality has been seen as not a mental illness ?
The idea of labelling people 'mental ill' due to their gender isn't a good one at all.
In which societies historically did people have genders which were interchangeable day by day? And also simply because gender fluidity was practised in different societies, that doesn't mean their societies were better, more stable or more successful than their counterparts, or that these are the societies we should be trying to emulate.
You're comparing sleeping a little too long to changing your entire identity - who you are as a person - on a daily basis. It's a pretty significant jump.
Yes, I'm aware of that. Which doesn't automatically mean that everything identified as a mental illness in the future is suddenly void because the government was wrong about homosexuality.
If somebody who is switching between genders daily (surely this would come under multiple personality disorder?) isn't mentally ill, then what are they?
Sorry, but this is a an argument thats taken from a position of privilege - and is often used when discussing things like sexism & racism.
If the topic of debate surrounds the erasure of one groups existence or experience, then the group in question is likely to be more emotional, high-strung and therefore more likely to insult the other side of the debate, that shouldn't be the barometer for whether someone really 'cares' about the topic at hand.
If people are calling transpeople 'crazy' and having mental health issues just for existing, you can't then be surprised if others get wound up by it because it's incredibly demeaning.
Keeping your 'cool' within a debate doesn't make you any more legitimate, knowledgeable or articulate than the other side. Also, it certainly doesn't mean you don't care if you are effected emotionally, I would argue it means you care far more.
It's that kind of reasoning that gave the likes of Shapiro a platform.
First of all, 'day to day' is hyperbole, the article literally says that the police officer in question has done it "a handful" of times, it's hardly the monday = callum, tuesday = abi, wednesday = callum narrative you're trying to paint for whatever reason.
Secondly, it's not about whether societies were 'better' it's about the fact that transgenderism & gender fluidity is normal & has been normal for thousands of years. Those societies include the Egyptians, Native Indians, Romans & the Greeks - so they weren't exactly bottom of the barrel.
And no i'm not comparing i'm simply saying its a rubbish excuse to say 'there's plenty of psychological problems behind these things', considering there's plenty of psychological problems behind things a lot of people do.
The article is from 2017 ffs
who cares, let people live their lives
who cares, let people live their lives
Of course but we have to be carefully with when labelling something a mental illness due to the history.
Here's how you can ask the question and get a good answer without pissing off the forum and coming across as a bigot.
https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQu...y_is_gender_fluidity_not_considered_multiple/
Why is gender fluidity not considered multiple personality disorder?
Person 1 - In advance I apologise if I cause offence, I am not meaning to in any way, I’m genuinely curious how people who identify as multiple personalities wouldn’t be considered to have MPD but not even 5 years ago they would have For backstory in the UK there was a local news story about a girl who went by Patrick/Patricia and seems to swap between the two randomly
Person 2 - People who are gender fluid don't think that they are two different people. They just have different aspects of their identity in different contexts and depending on how they feel. Imagine a world where almost everyone has one genre of music they listen to-- rock people only listen to rock, and pop people only listen to pop. One person actually likes both, depending on the situation and her mood, so she's called music fluid. But she doesn't think she's two different people, a pop person and a rock person. She just thinks that having to be only one of those all the time doesn't work for her.
Person 1 - Sorry if this is another stupid question but why in this case would she say she’s got a different name if it’s not a disorder ? Also how to people decide when they’re male / female ? Sorry if these questions are stupid, for backstory I’m from the UK on the south coast where I’m surrounded by rich old white people, so I’ve never had interactions with many anyone who isn’t male / female.
Person 2 - I think it's more like how some people identify as "Billy" sometimes and "William" other times, depending on the context and how they're feeling. He doesn't think Billy and William are two separate people he switches between, they're both him just in different contexts and moods. People who've only ever heard him be Billy might be confused when they hear someone say something about William and not know who that is, but once they get used to it it's not that hard.
They're pretty normal questions to have, and it's great that you're asking them here-- it gets very tiring for genderqueer people to have to keep answering them all the time when they're just trying to buy groceries or whatever, so it's good that you're asking here where no one needs to answer if they don't feel like it. By the way, I'm not genderqueer but a lot of my friends are so this is based on what they've told me.
Person 1 - I think I get it now, so they can kind of pick and choose depending on the situation they’re in? for example he might be Samuel at work and in a professional environment but Samantha and identify as female in casual / non work setting ?
Person 2 - It could be different in different situation, or it could be just whichever they feel like. Like how my friend introduces himself as Sam half the time and Samuel half the time, I think just kind of whichever comes out. Sort of like how I'm a girl, but sometimes I feel like dressing up and looking pretty, and sometimes I feel like jeans and a loose t shirt. Obviously if I feel like jeans and a loose shirt but I need to go to work, I deal with it and put on work clothes, but in situations where I have a choice, different things feel good different times.
Person 1 - I think I’m starting to understand a little more, thank you very much for the comments
Person 2 - For a lot of people, maybe most people, gender is one of the most defining characteristics of who they are, maybe even more than being a human-- you'll see stuff on the internet where men identify with male lions or whatever more than with human women. If it's like that, then you can't really imagine being a different gender sometimes, because it would be like suddenly turning into a lion. But for other people, it's more like a job or an activity, where you can have the same job for your whole life, you can switch jobs, or you can be one of those people who always has tons of different jobs and it doesn't feel like a threat to who they really are.
Person 1 - That makes sense to me
How long after the article posted had the person started this? It was a handful of times then. In theory they could switch between genders as much as they like.
And acting like societies like Ancient Rome or Ancient Greece were gender fluid is misleading. For the most part there were very strict gender structures in both. They're both ancient societies so there were obviously a shit ton of ideas floating about, but gender fluidity wasn't some normal or accepted practise in either worlds. Even Ancient Egypt was absolutely predominantly binary with set understandings/expectations for both men & women. The idea of a 'third gender' that existed in Ancient Egypt have been heavily questioned as well, there's very little actual evidence of it but people found bits and pieces and immediately use it to imply that ancient societies were non-binary.
This is the usual go to insult of the unthinking...don’t agree with an opinion so they immediately resort to calling the other party a bigot. It gets really really boring.
I’m well aware of psychological problems with all the things you’ve listed so it’s a mystery why you feel the need to dismiss psychological problems as a factor in some gender issues as bigotry!
I don't agree that those answers are good. Subjectivity and all.
I like how you focus on the answers which suit your side of things, but what about the people answering in ways you don't agree with?
UFC could be forced to dump Octagon girls after politician moans that woman parading in bikinis at fights is ‘outdated’
Live and let live and all that but don't take away the octagon girls you pieces of shit!
I just don't get it. Do they think they're doing the right thing or is it just pure envy and jealousy with some people?
Live and let live and all that but don't take away the octagon girls you pieces of shit!
They earn good money and no one is forcing them to do it. Honestly, who gives a shit?
I just don't get it. Do they think they're doing the right thing or is it just pure envy and jealousy with some people?
professional dartsOh god you actually are a bellend. I was tried to engaged in something of a conversation with you but turns out I should have just been insulting you instead(By the way you've yet to give any answers).
@balaks See this is why its pointless debating with these people.
People rarely change their fundamental nature and deeply rooted beliefs, though (especially concerning religion, politics, personal value system) — challenging the orthodox views of someone who's either repeatedly disingenuous or a hard-boiled egg lacking in sensitivity/empathy and incapable of introspection is, quite frankly, a massive waste of time and labor. In that sense a few of the active posters in this thread are not too different from someone like @SwansonsTache in the past (who had a transparent and consistent agenda, and could not be reasoned with)...only they're more aware of their surroundings and better at hiding their “power level”, if you catch my drift.