- Joined
- Oct 22, 2010
- Messages
- 23,214
Meghan Markle backs campaign to 'decolonise the curriculum' by adding more black women to university staff instead of 'male, pale, and stale' professors in her first political intervention since joining the royal family.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...gn-decolonise-curriculum-UK-universities.html
Implying white = stale
As if adding someone black would shake things up a bit. By all means examine the curriculum and see if history is being studied enough from the other perspective. But why does it matter what colour the professors are?
I deleted my post since I mis-read it. I thought for some weird reason she was talking about history classes, but yeah I think you’re right.Only if you believe that skin color is more important than merit and the diversity of what is in someone's skull.
Unfortunately, there is a whole industry being made out of identity politics, so if we all applied common sense, people would lose their livihoods
Of course white professors are stale, they've generally been doing the same thing for 20-30-60 fecking years. That's quite literally you how become a professor.
I was more on about the fact you said “of course white professors are stale”.Not really. Unless you're interpreting "the same thing" too literally. Point is that it takes decades immersed in a subject area to become a professor in it. And that's before you get on to the usual arguments of different groups of people generally having different interests.
Looks like Esquire magazine is cancelled now.
I keep reminding myself that bun fights on twitter don’t fully reflect the opinions of people in general but watching loads of saps constantly rushing to let everyone know how woke they are is getting kind of soul-destroying.
Meghan Markle backs campaign to 'decolonise the curriculum' by adding more black women to university staff instead of 'male, pale, and stale' professors in her first political intervention since joining the royal family.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...gn-decolonise-curriculum-UK-universities.html
Has politically correctness gone mad?
I think mad is the wrong word here. The correct word would be "counterproductive".
One that falls in love I guess. If you let your twitter opinions get in the way of who you have feelings for then you’re probably taking things a bit farShe’s right but she also married into one of the palest, stalest institutions in the world.
What sort of “woke kween” marries a fecking British royal?
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/ten...ansphobic-comments/ar-BBTQqEG?ocid=spartandhp
Navratilova is not PC it appears.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/ten...ansphobic-comments/ar-BBTQqEG?ocid=spartandhp
Navratilova is not PC it appears.
I agree with her.
Is it “political correctness gone mad” that not enough people are interested in a dull lifestyle magazine/advertising catalogue for men with a lot of disposable income anymore?
To be honest, I’m always shocked that any print magazines are still going in 2019. Who’s buying them?
I don’t think this is necessarily a PC or un-PC thing, is it? It’s just...well, a fact.https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/ten...ansphobic-comments/ar-BBTQqEG?ocid=spartandhp
Navratilova is not PC it appears.
Been said many times but the Pledge of Allegiance is so fecking outlandish. Why do they do it?
Put them in the category they most align with physically (feck knows the threshold here ). Or give them their own category....To be honest, the fact that anyone could disagree with her just shows how fecking removed from reality the world is getting on this particular issue.
Is it “political correctness gone mad” that not enough people are interested in a dull lifestyle magazine/advertising catalogue for men with a lot of disposable income anymore?
To be honest, I’m always shocked that any print magazines are still going in 2019. Who’s buying them?
Dental surgeries.
Wait what!? A 60 year old white lesbian feminist appears to have transphobic views, well I'm truly shocked.
To be honest, the fact that anyone could disagree with her just shows how fecking removed from reality the world is getting on this particular issue.
The difference between Serena and Henin is miniscule compared to the difference between Serena and male tennis players.Should Lukaku and Herrera not be allowed to compete against one another because one has a “biological advantage” over another? How about Serena Williams and Justine Henin?
How transgender athletes should be categorised in non-mixed gender sporting competition is a worthwhile debate but to pretend it’s all down to physiology doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny when all sporting competitions see physical mismatches taking place on a regular basis.
To consolidate tribal loyalty and discourage dissent, I'd say. Authoritarian 101.Been said many times but the Pledge of Allegiance is so fecking outlandish. Why do they do it?
The difference between Serena and Henin is miniscule compared to the difference between Serena and male tennis players.
The difference in performance between men and women is huge. Of course there are exceptions, and I'm sure you can find a female athlete that's stronger than some male athletes, but that's an exception and definitely not the norm.Completely disagree with this tbh.
Basing things on the average biological male and average biological female is always going to be nebulous when there is such physical variation between people of the same biological sex within sports.
I’m not convinced that Juninho Paulista would have a physical advantage over his colleagues if he were play in women’s football.
And if we’re talking about hormones, then you’d have “unfair advantages” in many sports where pubescent teenagers compete against fully grown adults too.
The difference in performance between men and women is huge. Of course there are exceptions, and I'm sure you can find a female athlete that's stronger than some male athletes, but that's an exception and definitely not the norm.
If you're against separating sports between sexes that's fine, but shite male athletes who become world beaters after changing sex is cheating.
Should Lukaku and Herrera not be allowed to compete against one another because one has a “biological advantage” over another? How about Serena Williams and Justine Henin?
How transgender athletes should be categorised in non-mixed gender sporting competition is a worthwhile debate but to pretend it’s all down to physiology doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny when all sporting competitions see physical mismatches taking place on a regular basis.
If that indeed means that they have no physiological advantage than that's completely fine with me. As I said, it's purely the advantage they have that I'm opposed to. It has nothing to do with rights.The difference between the AVERAGE biological male and female are huge but when you look at the enormous variation in physiques of footballers, I don’t think it’s as big a deal as you make out.
Obviously everybody should be against blatant sex “cheating” (which I’d love to see actual evidence of having happened because as far as I’m aware it just seems like a TERF scare story). But I also don’t believe in excluding genuine transgender people from competing as the gender they have transitioned to.
How do you feel about people who transition prior to puberty for example? Most of the physiological arguments would not stand in that case so are they able to compete as their chosen gender? Think about how messy that would become if you ban some trans people but not all.
Well if you think male vs female biological advantages can be lumped in with biological advantages held by people of the same sex, then then the only logical conclusion is to do away with male and female categories altogether. Which is a shitty and unfair thing to do to women athletes but there you go. Apparently objecting to shitty and unfair things happening to women athletes can get you called transphobic. Who knew?
If that indeed means that they have no physiological advantage than that's completely fine with me. As I said, it's purely the advantage they have that I'm opposed to. It has nothing to do with rights.
It does seem pretty transphobic to exclude transwomen from certain female spaces, yes.
The idea that transwomen who compete in female sports are just men who decide to be women so they have a better chance of success is also transphobic and totally disrespectful to genuine transgender athletes.
Neither I nor Navratilova (as far as I know?) have ever made that claim.
Nobody should second guess the reasons behind any individual who decides to transition. That's entirely their own business and completely irrelevant to issue of whether or not someone with a cock and balls should be allowed to compete against women in an event that excludes men.
Are you not agreeing that males are generally physically bigger and stronger than females?Should Lukaku and Herrera not be allowed to compete against one another because one has a “biological advantage” over another? How about Serena Williams and Justine Henin?
How transgender athletes should be categorised in non-mixed gender sporting competition is a worthwhile debate but to pretend it’s all down to physiology doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny when all sporting competitions see physical mismatches taking place on a regular basis.
I’m not saying that you or Martina have ever made that point but I’ve seen it floating around a lot. One of the posters above even used the word “cheats” when referring to transwomen competing in female sports.
Anyway, you've evaded the main point of the post you quoted. If being a biological male provides no significant advantage over being a biological female, surely men and women (cis, trans, whatever) should compete together in every sporting competition? Just do away with the whole idea of different categories for men and women in sport. If not, why not?
It's an often repeated story that Serena Williams and Venus Williams both lost heavily to the 203rd placed men's tennis player who played after drinking a can of beer and smoking a cigarette.The difference between the AVERAGE biological male and female are huge but when you look at the enormous variation in physiques of footballers, I don’t think it’s as big a deal as you make out.
Obviously everybody should be against blatant sex “cheating” (which I’d love to see actual evidence of having happened because as far as I’m aware it just seems like a TERF scare story). But I also don’t believe in excluding genuine transgender people from competing as the gender they have transitioned to.
How do you feel about people who transition prior to puberty for example? Most of the physiological arguments would not stand in that case so are they able to compete as their chosen gender? Think about how messy that would become if you ban some trans people but not all.