"UK refusal to issue gender-neutral passports unlawful, high court told"
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
Sometimes I think some people have nothing better to do and 95% of the time its better off white people, we have wars, hunger, homelessness and other major issues all over the world and in the UK. you get some stupid people, Oh I don't think my passport show say male or female.
Now the time, attention and money that could be spend on something important will be on this.
You wont see a working person (white, black, brown or other) bothered about things likes this.
Now the time, attention and money that could be spend on something important will be on this.
You wont see a working person (white, black, brown or other) bothered about things likes this.
Last edited:
Soldato
Are we moving to the point where gender ad a concept is irrelevant now? Except in instances of transexuality where perceived wisdom is that there is a misalignment in terms of a person's sex there surely isn't much use for it. If I'm a guy whose cultural and social preferences align more closely with those of a female I wouldn't go around claiming a different gender, I'd just say "Alright, I'm Matt, I have a todger but I prefer musicals to action films, ballet to football and I would rather spend time in the company of female friends than male friends." Why does this need a label? Calling myself pan gender or some such is just superfluous.
Soldato
One of Thatchers bigger mistakes was closing down the lunatic asylums.
Now we have all kinds of crazy roaming the land like extras from a 1980's zombie movie, not only living their delusions but demanding that everybody else should live them too!
Please, Please, Make it stop....
Now we have all kinds of crazy roaming the land like extras from a 1980's zombie movie, not only living their delusions but demanding that everybody else should live them too!
Please, Please, Make it stop....
Man of Honour
That's wrong on several levels.
1) There are an infinite amount of genders because gender is at most a matter of biological trends and far more often just a matter of fashion and it's different for every different thing. For example, height is gendered (a real trend), hair length is gendered (fashion) and clothing colour is gendered (fashion). So every person is gendered 3 different ways just for those things alone and in many cases a person won't be gendered the same way for each one, e.g. a person who is 6' tall, has long hair and is wearing strongly coloured clothing that isn't a sports team replica kit. They're gendered very masculine for height, strongly feminine for hair length and quite strongly feminine for clothing colour. This week in this place - fashions for hair length and clothing colour could change wildly at any time and from place to place and even the gendered aspect of height can vary. 6' wouldn't be as masculine in Norway as it is in the UK and it would be more masculine in Japan than it is in the UK. That's just 3 things picked at random from millions. Even for just those 3 things, the only one that could be accurately assessed for gender is height because that's the only one that's a trend based on somethig real and quantifiable and even then it would only be for a specific time and place.
2) While it could be argued that there are only two sexes, it's far more difficult than it might seem to create an accurate definition that covers everyone. Sure, male or female works fine for almost everyone...but not everyone. Also, how do you define "male" and "female"? That's a serious question and the devil is in the details. Chromosome type is simply wrong - genotype is not phenotype. So it has to be biological but what, exactly?
3) Without a definition of sex, you can't state that it can't be changed. Since many aspects of biology can be changed, you're going to have a really hard time coming up with an accurate and unchangeable definition of sexes.
Every time I hear "micro aggression" I'm reminded of some thug in a pub or club selecting a victim and blaming them by demanding "Are you looking at me?". It's exactly the same mentality - an abusive bully blaming their victim. Of course, you're not being serious so that's different.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 7,613
I agree. We're tolerating way too much dysfunctional nonsense. People are free to 'identify' as whatever they want, and the rest of us should be free not to give a ****.One of Thatchers bigger mistakes was closing down the lunatic asylums.
Now we have all kinds of crazy roaming the land like extras from a 1980's zombie movie, not only living their delusions but demanding that everybody else should live them too!
Please, Please, Make it stop....
Wasn't there a teacher sacked over calling a kid by the wrong gender? So how does this gender fluid **** work? You decide one day you're going to be female after years being a male, then if you get called a male you can kick up stink about it and get the SJW brigade on your side?
Pretty sure there was none of this nonsense when life was all about survival of the fittest. Is this an issue in the rest of the animal kingdom?
Now that sapiens are top of the tree maybe there is too much free time for the weaker minded to be scheming up such drivel.
My guess is that there was a bit more to it than that.
well he's an evangelical but it seems he was sacked for misgendering a pupil
http://metro.co.uk/2017/12/10/teacher-sues-school-sacked-calling-transgender-boy-girl-7147404/
Unfortunately the school is remaining quiet about it (which they probably have to if disciplinary proceedings are ongoing). I find it hard to believe that a school would fire a teacher for accidentally misgendering a child once, especially considering how powerful teaching unions are.
My guess, and it is just that, is that the teacher in question refused to follow the school policy on more than one occasion and deliberately used female pronouns on more than one occasion. If you deliberately break school policies then expect disciplinary action, much like if you deliberately break any employers policies.
Go call somone ****** and tell me if thier perference not to be called that isn't enforced rather quickly upon you.
Even according to their side after he was told that to say and he failed Todo so. Absolutely adored be sacked when his own believes get in the way of his work.
Its really very easy to define 'sex' 'male' and 'female'
A man who has had cut his penis cut of, had something visually approximating female genitalia constructed in its place, had breast implants and who is taking female hormones is not a woman (ditto for a trans man) .
A sufficiently advanced science (far beyond our current level) may one day be able to literally change the sex of a human but that's not currently possible.
So this usually ends with the retort about what about (biological) women who can't have children? (and the corollary point for an infertile man)
Well they are still women just women with a defect much the same as one of the defining features of humans is to be bipedal.
Someone born with a defect which leaves them with no or deformed legs which can't be walked on or someone who loses their legs in an accident is still a human just a deformed one or a severely injured one.
A trans woman is not the same as an infertile woman.
So finally we come to intersex people (who account for a very small percentage of people).
Now of course anyone who remembers much of their biology lessons might recall that in a rather crude sense all humans in the womb 'start of' as being of a similiar (female) body plan and after that develop based on hormones (hence male nipples).
And for the small percentage of intersex people this process doesn't complete as it normally should leaving them with some biological indicators of both sexes be that physical, chromosomal or other.
So a third category for intersex people may be appropriate. But trans people aren't generally intersex. A pre op trans person would normally, by all objective measures, be able to be categorised into the sex that aligns with that on their birth certificate.
Personally I suspect (that at least in some cases) that being 'trans' isn't so much about actually thinking you are of the other sex but rather a phillia for becoming a caricature of the opposite sex. Which may account for some information suggesting 'trasitioning' doesn't seem to improve mental health outcomes and may help account for why a lot of trans women seem to adopt a rather accentuated feminine persona.
There's a difference between not calling someone something abusive and being forced to address someone by their preferred pronoun.
I only use three variant
Hers, his and theirs
If (I knew that) someone is trans I would use 'theirs' or just use their name.
"that's Susan's Cup"
I am not going to to use any of the potentially infinite list of pronouns that have sprung up recently (XE, hir etc).
Last edited:
Sex is historically a physiological definition; male or female. Intersex could be considered a definition and therefore create a third category and be correct.
Gender is a sociological definition, as Angilion pointed out, and can be categorised in any manner of ways. If someone identified as something other than their sex, apparently this is an outrage. I say let them be, it has very little to no effect on you so what difference does it make if someone wants to create their own identity?
Also, anyone that suggests the definition he should be based on "DNA", or more specifically chromosomes, XX/XY mosaicism does exist (albeit extremely rare), so what would you do then?
Gender is a sociological definition, as Angilion pointed out, and can be categorised in any manner of ways. If someone identified as something other than their sex, apparently this is an outrage. I say let them be, it has very little to no effect on you so what difference does it make if someone wants to create their own identity?
Also, anyone that suggests the definition he should be based on "DNA", or more specifically chromosomes, XX/XY mosaicism does exist (albeit extremely rare), so what would you do then?