JimCorrigan
Well-Known Member
Won't someone think of the children?Not in front of the kids.
Won't someone think of the children?Not in front of the kids.
That's a whole different can of worms but I actually am not 100% convinced that it is OK for the government to tell me who I do business with, no matter the intent.It is against discrimination. And as far as I can tell, it uses the same reasoning used when you call someone the N-word, the R-word etc in a professional context. Tell someone you're not renting to them because they are gay - that's discrimination. Tell someone you don't rent your apartments to "N-word" - you're discriminating and gonna get fined.
I think (hope!) very few people will disagree with that. (picture of Donald Trump with the rainbow flag goes here)
Tell someone you're not renting out to transsexuals (or whatever gender blabla) - and telling them that while refusing to address them in a way that does not hurt them - is that the same?
See if I were bothered by you calling me Mrs Prizrak I would do a very simple thing, hit the ignore button and never have to worry about it again or just plain leave the forums.Now we come to the root of the problem here - is not using the pronoun a person wishes to be used the same as using the N-word. Maybe Mrs Level and Mrs prizrak would like to comment on this ... I'll put some money aside for the lawsuit
You are conflating two completely different things, as majority of animals on this planet we have two genders (well there are actually 5 biological possibilities but the other 3 are abnormalities) and crucially we look we only have two genders. So if I were to call a guy "she" I know damn well what I'm doing, if I call a non-binary gender-fluid who looks like a guy a "he" it's because HE LOOKS LIKE A GUY. Also if I think I'm Napoleon and you refuse to call me that no one would claim I have the right to think I'm Napoleon and that right should be protected.Joking aside, I guess we boys here all know that calling a guy "a girl" or "gay" when they aren't is an insult. Deliberately (not accidental!) calling them the wrong thing in a professional context - is an insult too.
Is it the same as calling a black person the N-word? I don't think so. But what do I know? Maybe we should ask people who actually have that sort of problem in their lives? How can I decide for another group of people just what kind of language is insulting to them and used when they are discriminated against - when I have no clue what their life is like? As someone white, I'm not trying to tell black people what they are allowed to be offended by. Should I as a straight male tell gays that? Or trans-people? I don't think it's me who get's to decide what another person is offended by IF I discriminate against them.
I had a couple beers before watching this. I suggest you do as well.
TC;n3542337 said:Excuse the rant, but the thing that deeply troubles me about the transgender subject is that we seem to have forgotten a very valuable and important lesson that took... god knows how long to learn. A lesson that led to unprecedented peace and harmony.
I'm talking of course about the fact that you do not need to believe what others believe to be tolerant of their beliefs. And others don't need to believe what you believe to be tolerant of your beliefs.
But that very basic truth doesn't seem apply to the issue of transgenderism. At least as far as the current political hysteria surrounding it anyway. When it comes to that subject we've regressed back to 4th century thinking. If you so much as doubt, even for a moment, that each person has 2 genders (an inner and an outer), or that there are thousands of genders making a spectrum, or that there is no such thing as biological sex, then these people form the modern equivalent of a lynch mob, scream the modern equivalent of blasphemy, and demand the modern equivalent of your exile.
The fact that these people call themselves "progressives" makes it all the more embarassing. The title of "Regressive" has never been more fitting.
But when they're called out for this insanity, they descend to even deeper levels of intellectual bankruptcy by conflating your doubt in everyone having 2 genders, or whatever, to you questioning the very humanity of other people. This is Olympic level mental gymnastics if I've ever heard it. We would never entertain such an argument anywhere else.
Can you imagine if religious people started using that line? Going around claiming that atheists are denying their humanity, their religious identity, their lived experiences, their right to exist in this space, etc? We'd call bullshit on that in a heartbeat. But since we live in a world where integrity has been replaced with hypocrisy, we are more than happy to pretend such arguments have merit, so long as we feel sufficiently sympathetic for the person making them.
TC;n3542337 said:Excuse the rant, but the thing that deeply troubles me about the transgender subject is that we seem to have forgotten a very valuable and important lesson that took... god knows how long to learn. A lesson that led to unprecedented peace and harmony.
I'm talking of course about the fact that you do not need to believe what others believe to be tolerant of their beliefs. And others don't need to believe what you believe to be tolerant of your beliefs.
But that very basic truth doesn't seem apply to the issue of transgenderism. At least as far as the current political hysteria surrounding it anyway. When it comes to that subject we've regressed back to 4th century thinking. If you so much as doubt, even for a moment, that each person has 2 genders (an inner and an outer), or that there are thousands of genders making a spectrum, or that there is no such thing as biological sex, then these people form the modern equivalent of a lynch mob, scream the modern equivalent of blasphemy, and demand the modern equivalent of your exile.