Why are there only 2 gender options for my profile on redcafe? Some kind of medieval website we have here.
Has political correctness actually gone mad?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
No, it doesn't. It is just a shitty excuse made by people who are insensitive.
Generally, women play a version of a male dominated sport.
There’s simply no getting away from that.
Female athletes deserve respect for rising to the top of their field.
But in almost all of those fields, people don’t really give a damn who is at the top.
I’m not shit posting. It’s a sensible acceptance.
I think your tagline takes care of that, doesn't it?
Speaking truth to power!
People losing their shit because he imitated a white man. Don't they know it doesn't affect us in the same way?
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/vodafone-boss-sends-tasteless-see-14065072
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/vodafone-boss-sends-tasteless-see-14065072
*clicks article* literally (correct use) no one talking about tartan face and everyone pissed off because management is fecking around while people lose their jobs
Hey libtards, consider this:
Libtards owned
Libtards owned
They underlined words, it must be true.
Is that biology or social science though.
Here is a PHD in sexual neuroscience who takes a dump on this idea and where it comes from and explains why its dangerous.
What's your take Wibble?
Tell me you are being sarcastic. Please.Hey libtards, consider this:
Libtards owned
Debra Soh defends conversion therapy, and thinks it's a legitimate treatment method for children suffering from gender dysphoria. She claims allowing children to transition (a very complex issue, but let's avoid it for now, as it always turns into a complete shitshow) is a form of homophobia, and works from the assumption that it's the parents that are pressuring the kids into transitioning for fear of having a gay son or daughter. She discusses trans people in the same way that Ben Shapiro discusses anything; by twisting the truth, omitting facts and completely ignoring any research that goes against her position. She's a certified anti-trans wacko, and her opinions on gender and trans people are worth about as much as the dump you claim she took. She says it's dangerous because she doesn't like it, much like Jordan Peterson thinks leftist politics are dangerous.
Fair enough she is an idiot then.
Hmmm... they’ve moved the goalposts actually. If gender is a social construct then the whole trans gender thing falls apart. So we can’t say that any more. Obviously, this pisses off a load of feminists that have spent their life trying to argue that gender is a social construct but there you go. The whole thing causes much furious debate and is not a Twitter rabbit hole I’d recommend.
Also ruins re watches of Father Ted.
Obviously he is.
No sure what you are saying? It is those who confuse biological sex with gender (basically denying that gender is a social construct) that can't get their heads around gender identity including trans.
She is still just taking 13 minutes to say biological sex and gender are the same thing. She states right up front she doesn't believe that gender is a social construct.
I'm a biologist (or was) and her whole argument is garbage. I'd guess she will turn out to be a fundamental Christian nutbag.
Edit: Christian - check, nutbag - check. Not sure about the fundamental thing.
Last edited:
People losing their shit because he imitated a white man. Don't they know it doesn't affect us in the same way?
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/vodafone-boss-sends-tasteless-see-14065072
Objecting to cynical corporate callousness is now an example of Political Correctness run amok? #allcorporationsmatter. The age of Centrism is truly upon us.
Biological sex is what it is.
Gender is either a social construct (i.e. 100% created by external influences) or it’s intrinsic. We’re born with it. It can’t be changed. This idea is central to the concept of people being transgender.
If gender really was just a social construct then that would imply you can’t be born trans. Obviously, that’s a very controversial claim.
Do whatever you want. You can’t change your sex but you can claim to be whatever you like. Whether people treat you how you’d like is down to them and their position on the arsehole meter.
I love it when the "hard sciences" think social sciences are somehow less real and valid. If gender really is a social construct, then you being a biologist doesn't make you an expert.
So it is a social construct, then? Despite what Pogue says, it's not an all or nothing matter.
So it is a social construct, then? Despite what Pogue says, it's not an all or nothing matter.
I don't think that is a reasonable or logical implication at all. Gender is related to sex in that is the starting place and obviously partly informs the traditional 2 gender identities, but it isn't the same thing. How you feel about your gender identity involves your actual biological sex and how you feel/identify in your head which in the case of being trans, like being gay, is likely to be due to a combination of genetic/developmental biological and "nurture" to varying degrees - all seen through the lens of socially constructed gender identities.
So many of your/our assumptions about gender are inaccurate historically and grammatically as they pertain to science, culture and language.
No doubt it's unfixed definition is partly why it has become such an active battleground for agenda and bigotry. Are we talking words? are we talking primary sexual characteristics? are we talking observable behaviour? self identification? or do we not really care and simply use it as a way to promote wokeness/bigotry on the socials.
I'm not quite sure if you are arguing a specific position on whether a distinction between sex and gender actually exists, or if you are just trying to catch people out. But:
As it pertains to behaviours (sexual preference, femininity, masculinity) Born this way has always been a bad argument, at least philisophically speaking (controversial or not I've seen Gay/trans/me people all make this point). But that doesn't mean that it can't work as a well intentioned promotion of inclusivity.
Gender means different things to different people. Depending on your parameters it seems quite possible to view gender as partly arising from primary sexual characteristics and partly culturally learned behaviours.
Hell you can see it in dogs raised amongst other dogs of the opposite sex that will often cock/squat as learned behaviour independent of their biological instruction. Edit: This means nothing to the point about gender classification.
Gender as construction (partly or entirely) seems a solid position (see Beauvoir and many since for some of the better arguments and examples). And just because something has been constructed doesn't mean that it doesn't have a real affect psychologically or culturally on individuals or society as a whole. Surely we can try to understand and empathise with feeling like a woman as an abstract concept, without having to get out the tape measures to see how they measures up to some womanly universal form.
No doubt it's unfixed definition is partly why it has become such an active battleground for agenda and bigotry. Are we talking words? are we talking primary sexual characteristics? are we talking observable behaviour? self identification? or do we not really care and simply use it as a way to promote wokeness/bigotry on the socials.
I'm not quite sure if you are arguing a specific position on whether a distinction between sex and gender actually exists, or if you are just trying to catch people out. But:
As it pertains to behaviours (sexual preference, femininity, masculinity) Born this way has always been a bad argument, at least philisophically speaking (controversial or not I've seen Gay/trans/me people all make this point). But that doesn't mean that it can't work as a well intentioned promotion of inclusivity.
Gender means different things to different people. Depending on your parameters it seems quite possible to view gender as partly arising from primary sexual characteristics and partly culturally learned behaviours.
Gender as construction (partly or entirely) seems a solid position (see Beauvoir and many since for some of the better arguments and examples). And just because something has been constructed doesn't mean that it doesn't have a real affect psychologically or culturally on individuals or society as a whole. Surely we can try to understand and empathise with feeling like a woman as an abstract concept, without having to get out the tape measures to see how they measures up to some womanly universal form.
Last edited:
People losing their shit because he imitated a white man. Don't they know it doesn't affect us in the same way?
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/vodafone-boss-sends-tasteless-see-14065072
Has anyone been chaining themselves to barriers or banning phone companies from University Campuses for 'Cultural Misappropriation', or is that bullsh*t term only applicable if you have a certain skin colour?
Why would they?
Because cultural misappropriation is the biggest ill in the world apparently
No, but it’s in a National newspaper, has gone viral enough for us to see, and you’re getting needlessly angry about it without seemingly reading any of the article (which is largely about worker dissatisfaction with management) so... in a way, kinda, yeah?
Whose been chaining themselves to whatnow again?
What skin colour? Scottish?
Tell us what you’re really angry about, dude.
Spotting sarcasm isn't your strong point it seems, perhaps too much time spent learning mid 1960s coastal Californian dialect (unless you originate from there, that could be considered cultural misappropriation)
But my final sentence is a half serious point, strange how this bollocks of cultural misappropriation is only called out as an issue when it is done by certain demographics
I very much got the sarcasm. It was just that really bad kind of sarcasm that was drawing equivalance between two entirely non-equivocal things..
Which bit is the half bit?
Which part of this particular story has struck you as hypocritical or misappropriated? Sarcasm or not, you seem very annoyed by it ... but I can’t for the life of me work out why? Or how anything in the article you posted speaks to that .... aside from the headline and the picture, of course. But then I’d never be so gauche as to assume you posted it on the strength of them alone, without deining to read it first? That would be a cynical take, and I hate being cynical. I can’t help it sometimes. Perhaps it’s too much time spent learning early 21st century bullshit?
Some of the comments are abhorrent, and the reporting is awful, but I think this story fits perfectly in to the discussion in this thread at the moment.
that man's name?
albert einstein
Some of you people really need to read Warren Ellis' Transmetropolitan (from 1997-2002)
@niMic do we have a word in Norwegian for gender? Kjønn is asked when wondering about the sex, so I find it hard to follow conversations when I can't translate it in my head properly.
That or I just forgot, just woke up after all. :P
That or I just forgot, just woke up after all. :P
What’s your own position on that?