The end of binary order - and biology and science

[Skybird]

https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.focus.de%2Fpolitik%2Fdeutschla nd%2Fschwarzer-kanal%2Fdie-focus-kolumne-von-jan-fleischhauer-was-es-ueber-sie-aussagt-wenn-sie-glauben-ihr-geschlecht-sei-eine-sache-der-biologie_id_11517292.html



One must not be mistaken: just because something looks strange does not mean that it cannot have an effect. In fact, hardly any discipline has had such a career as the gender sciences, although one cannot really speak of science in the narrower sense. None of the presented theses can withstand a review by biology or neuroscience.
Thats my argument ^. It is absurd, it is hilarious, and many reasonable people do not care at all - nevertheless it is very powerful and influential and creates a very intense destructive power (right becauue reasonable people did not care to contain it while there still was time). It creates quota policies, discrimination of "binary people" and demonization of ordinary, reasonable people. It creates witch hunts and public defamation campaigns, ruined careers and dysfunctional social constellations. Its one of the most popular examples of how noisy minorities can dominate the scene - not by being indeed right, but by merely being noisy instead.




In truth, the centers of the new gender theory can be relatively well delimited on a world map. It is the American universities on the two coasts of the USA as well as the European university cities, with Germany particularly standing out as a distribution area.

[Jimbuna]

I'll stick to my fundamental belief, you are born either male or female and whatever you choose to become after that is up to each individual and should be of little to no concern of anyone else.

[JU_88]

^Aye and the only reasonable demand you make of society is that they tolerate you and dont discriminate too much (I say 'too much' because individually we all dicriminate whether we like it or not). You cannot expect society en mass to embrace you or bend over backwards to accomadate you so you feel comfortable all the time, that is simply not reasonable or possible.

[Skybird]

You can demand that - and be successful with that. That is the point. This madness works. It is successfully spreading. Job candidates get decided for or against on basis of whether they embrace gender theory or not. At universities you can get fired if you do not obey gender language. Your papers that you have to file as a student can get rejected if you do not comply with gender language. it is it being done - on very wide front. Teachings, lessons can get booed down and boycotted, speakers and tutors can get mobbed if they object to gender new speak.It happens. Right now. All the time. City administratition demand gender new speak in official forums. they adress citizens with gender new speak, they even sometimes refused papers handed in by citizen due to discriminative violation of language. On natzional and eU level they push to criminlaise rejeciton of gender theory. Not complying with egnder new speak shall become a ounsiable offence, based on hate crime and discrimination.


Its reality, guys. Already now. And not even rare. Its becoming standard. Once legislation and laws have been taken over, this madness will have beocme the new norm, and anybody not following it will feel the sting from not doing so.

[Dowly]

Not complying with egnder new speak shall become a ounsiable offence, based on hate crime and discrimination.As it should be. Hate crimes and discrimination are intentional, targeted harassment.

[JU_88]

As it should be. Hate crimes and discrimination are intentional, targeted harassment.


Sometimes Dowly, sometimes, but thats one hell of blanket statment you made. problem is who gets to define what a 'hate crime' is and determine when one has taken place, alot of it is down to perception and context.
Just like any other type of crime its by no means always so simplistic and black and white as you put it.
E.g A trangender woman being refused service by a gynocologist can be percived as a hate crime by some.
or....
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/27/male-genitalia-week-in-patriarchy-women

Case and point, how they should be used ideally and how they are used in reality are not always the same thing.
I dont think is such a problem hate crimes exist, but if they do - they need to be WAY more clearly thought through and clearly defined, the problem is they are usually not, they are sketchy to the point they are open to about as much interpretation as a nostradamus prediction.

Often heavily based on how victims claims it 'made them feel'. Feelings can often be wrong.

[Skybird]

As it should be. Hate crimes and discrimination are intentional, targeted harassment.
So you are saying not complying with the utmost hilarious and absurd pervertations of language based on esoteric, narcissim, anti-scientific belief and ideolgocial power-play should be punishable.



Says a lot. But its not a compliment. To your defence I give oyu the benefit of doubt I just assume for a moment that maybe you are not aware of what queer lingual contorted manouvers official German and EU English are practicing already now. We even have had court cases already because of referring to a female with a child as a "mother", or distinguishing between "mother" and "father". We even have had action already about the use of male and female articles. Some even demand that in families the use of "mum" and"daddy" should be seen as a discrimination of some gender fools who feel offended and that it should allow the state to get engaged in order to correct this antisocial habit. On more and more forms, "mother" or "father" is beign replaced with "parent No. 1" and "parent No. 2" Although some retards already argue that the whole concept of "parenthood" is a discrimination and that it should be dropped alltogether, also to no longer be able to diffeentiate between biological parents of a child, and homosexual legal guardians: it is an offending to tell a homosexual couple that they could not create a baby biologically by their own means.



You are insane if you support this, Dowly. There are some simple basic truths about life and existence. One of them is that we must breath and eat and drink, another is that humans are a heterosexual species by genetical and biological design and evolutionary need and that this is the only one meachism by which we can continue to exist as a species, which is true for all mammals, as far as I know. No ideolgoy and no claim will ever chnage this. Reality will never bend and distort to comply with wnated idelgical world views. Rejecting this disqualifies you from any reasonable conversation or scientific discussion. "Gender science" - has as much to do with science as homeopathy or astrology. Its faery tale.



Just a few months ago german child psychologists and neuroscientists have warned and showed that a steep increase in personality disorders and psychological problems in juveniles over here is to be linked to a.) taking children away from intact family life and cramming them into Kindergardens aleady at way too early ages (as low as 1.5 years, everybody who gas had dealt with concepts like bonding and ealry-years children psychology knows what a destructive crime that is), and b.) systematically disrupting their natural sexual self identification process in their puberty by indoctrinating them with gender ideology and telling them that they are sexual neuters and can freely chsose whether they want to be a boy or a girl, that they can even switch back and forth or to beign something different as often as they want. The madness knows no limits here.



That is bull****, Dowly. And you will not hear anything different from me, ever. And I save myself from spenign more tme on listing exmaples of how contemporary language gets dustored further by the use of "#" and "*" and avoiding Mrs and Mr and Hr. and Fr. and female and male forms of subjectives and instead now adressing males as females in general . Not to mention gender quotes in job awardings, even complete exclusions of males from (legal action against this discrmination of males so far has seen no successes), there are univeristies in Austria and Germany where they have banned male candidates alltogether. It is here where gender idiocy and fascist feminism have come together in an unholy alliance.



Ba careful what you defend there. You destroy the mortar in the brickwall of our civilization there. And outside the Americna and European self-proclained "intellectual" left, nobody follows this and takes it for serious anyway. Here in Europe, it widens the trenches between people and societies with a still intact sense of historically grown own identity, and "progressive" entities being raped by EU ideologists who march amongs others for "gender idoelgiy" and radical, almost fascist femism.



Before the law, men and women shall be treated equal. Period. Not less. Not more. And the German Basic Law says right this in ink on paper, black on white, in writing. I am totally in support of this. Of this, but not more than this.

[Dowly]

So you are saying not complying with the utmost hilarious and absurd pervertations of language based on esoteric, narcissim, anti-scientific belief and ideolgocial power-play should be punishable.If you are doing it intentionally, to harass or discriminate. Yes, absolutely.


As for the rest of your post: please don't assume I'm defending anyone here.


@JU_88, re: your link, she lost. The law decided against her/him/whatever.

[JU_88]

@JU_88, re: your link, she lost. The law decided against her/him/whatever.


In that particular case yes - and for now yes, but left unchecked who knows where we go with it...
In the UK we've already had a girl arrested for posting offensive Rap lyrics online
A Scottish guy fined £800 for teaching a Dog to nazi salute (in the clear context of a prank)

Im just saying there is valid argument for some Push back against hate crime/ hate speech laws, and it should never be automatically dismissed as 'Biggots just wanna biggot' etc (not that im accusing you of this personally),

But yeah where its clear and proven targetted discrimination- I have no problem with sensibly implimented hate crime laws either, Hate speech laws on the other hand.... but thats for another discussion.

[Skybird]

If you are doing it intentionally, to harass or discriminate. Yes, absolutely.


As for the rest of your post: please don't assume I'm defending anyone here.



Okay, if you say so.


So you are saying not complying with the utmost hilarious and absurd pervertations of language based on esoteric, narcissim, anti-scientific belief and ideolgocial power-play should be punishable: If you are doing it intentionally, to harass or discriminate. Yes, absolutely.


What has not complying with these implications to do with harassment and discrimination. What had Rowlings's recent defending of that there are women and that there are men to do with discrimination and harassment. Its fact. She just said the most obvious. And here now comes oyu saying that referring to men as men and women as women, is discmrination and harassment.



I leave it here. You illustrated yourself, and repeatedly. I wait for the day when the first complaint will be filed that 2 + 2 has a result of 4, and somebody feels offended by that and demands it to be 5 and 7 as well, and says that a result of 4 is discrimination of those believing this mathematical term solves for a result of whatever he/she/it feels like.



Damn, I need a homeopathic globuli now to get down again.

[Dowly]

And here now comes oyu saying that referring to men as men and women as women, is discmrination and harassment. I didn't say that, Skybird. I said if one does it intentionally to harass someone, it should be punishable.

And for the record just so you don't have to assume things about me: I agree, there are only two genders. But that doesn't mean I am against a law or laws that would shield people who believe otherwise from harassment, discrimination or violence for no other reason than they think differently.

[Skybird]

And again you reiterate that telling an obvious fact like that there are males and females is potentially a punishable offence if somebody does not see this fact as a fact, and therefore it shall not be told in first - or getting punished for being told. The fact-teller shall shut ob and effetcovely gets censore dö. which indeed is what they do in relaity now - and the nuthead is free to claim whatever he/she/it claims thigns to be: without needing to face burden of evidence himself for anythign at all.

You turn the world from its feet on its head. Continue your weaseling step-dancing on eggs, its in a way quite amusing.

[Tchocky]

What's it to you, Skybird?

[Dowly]

And again you reiterate that telling an obvious fact like that there are males and females is potentially a punishable offence if somebody does not see this fact as a fact, and therefore it shall not be told in first - or getting punished for being told. The fact-teller shall shut ob and effetcovely gets censore dö.

Again, I am speaking about hate crimes and discrimination (which you left out, because of course you did). Accidentally calling someone him instead of her is not punishable and I very much doubt will ever be.
Targeting someone, intentionally and repeatedly would be harassment (and possible hate crime, depending).

Rest easy, Skybird. The sky is not falling tonight either.

[ikalugin]

Again, I am speaking about hate crimes and discrimination (which you left out, because of course you did). Accidentally calling someone him instead of her is not punishable and I very much doubt will ever be.
Targeting someone, intentionally and repeatedly would be harassment (and possible hate crime, depending).

Rest easy, Skybird. The sky is not falling tonight either.


The problem seems to be two fold:
- compelled speach
- politication and then censorship of speach

For example should the state compel specific types of speach?
If a person has a factually correct opinion that there are two biological sexes for humans, should that person be allowed to state it?
If a person were to state on twitter that transwomen are biologically men, could they be arrested in say UK?


And this without going into what we should do with bad faith actors such as trans-athletes or the certain guy with the waxing request.

[Tchocky]

Wait. Trans athletes are bad-faith actors?

Nice blanket statements we have here.


I don't know who missed the newsletter but sex and gender are different things.

[Tchocky]

Just spotted the thread title.


THE END OF BINARY ORDER

Hilarious.

[ikalugin]

Wait. Trans athletes are bad-faith actors?

Nice blanket statements we have here.


I don't know who missed the newsletter but sex and gender are different things.
To begin with the simplest one, yes - they are two different things, but this is irrelevant because radicals deny the relevance (or even existance) of biological sex with gender, often self identified gender (ie without transition, remember the whole gender fluid thing where a person could change gender during the conversation?), being the only factor to be considered.

Sure it is a blanket statement (and thus faulty from individualistic perspective), but it does accurately convey the problem - people who transition man->woman have an unfair advantage in female sports competitions, particularly if they have transitioned recently or if they did not actually transition, because radicals demand that those people should not requite to provide evidence that they have transitioned.
South Park did an amusing number there:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URz-RYEOaig

And then there are more clear cut cases of abuse, for example when the guy demanded a lady to wax his male genitalia and sued the practice for being transphobic when she refused. Or where a non transitioned person would go to female prison and assault ladies there... after being convicted for the crimes of the very same sexual nature.

[u crank]

The damage being done to society by the increasing preference to identity politics and the radical non binary gender ideolagy is only begining. What will be the effect of this on young easy impressed children?

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jordan-peterson-gender-politics-has-no-place-in-the-classroom

..and the tenth-rate academic dogmas driving the entire charade, that “identity” is something solely determined by the individual in question (whatever that identity might be). Even sociologists (neither the older, classical, occasionally useful type, nor the modern, appalling, and positively counterproductive type) don’t believe this.

The continually expanded plethora of “identities” recently constructed and provided with legal status thus consist of empty terms which (1) do not provide those who claim them with any real social role or direction; (2) confuse all who must deal with the narcissism of the claimant, as the only rule that can exist in the absence of painstakingly, voluntarily and mutually negotiated social role is “it’s morally wrong to say or do anything that hurts my feelings”; (3) risks generating psychological chaos among the vast majority of individuals exposed to the doctrines that insist that identity is essentially fluid and self-generating (and here I’m primarily concerned about children and adolescents whose standard or normative identity has now merely become one personal choice among a near-infinite array of ideologically and legally defined modes of being), and (4) poses a further and unacceptably dangerous threat to the stability of the nuclear family, which consists, at minimum, of a dyad, male and female, coming together primarily for the purposes of raising children in what appears to be the minimal viable social unit (given the vast and incontrovertible body of evidence that fatherlessness, in particular, is associated with heightened risk for criminality, substance abuse, and poorly regulated sexual behaviour among children, adolescents and the adults that they eventually become).

I could not agree more with the following.

The silence of the majority on such issues — driven, I think, by fear of the purposeful and genuinely dangerous social alienation likely to be generated in the wake of any given individual’s objections (regardless of how representative of the majority those objections happen to be) — will, in my opinion, generate a state of affairs among our children and adolescents that we will come in the decades to follow to deeply and profoundly regret.

[Buddahaid]

Given enough time it will collapse on itself when those who push the limits find they are not really any more special or deserving than anyone else.

[mapuc]

Since some years back, Swedish news paper does not use words like she, her or he him.

Now they use the word hen
Female is either written as hon(she) or henne(her)
Male is either written as han(he) or honom(him)
so instead they use the word hen in every aspect.

Markus

[Skybird]

Maya Forstater, Joanne Rowling. Forstater speakign otu plain reaosn and scinetific fact - and gettin fired for it. Rowling Defending her, earning a massive sh!tstorm.

One has to know that there is a fundamental "civil war" takling place inside radical feminism. the one side, to which Fostater and Rowling seem to be sympathetic, is called trans-exclusive femism, and the other camp around Judith Butler who claims that biological gender is not real but just an arbitrary social construct.


https://www.queer.de/publisher/pics/jk-rowling-tweet-trans-600.jpgTrans women are women.
Trans men are men.
Non-binary people are non-binary.

CC: JK Rowling.
Human Rights Campaign (@HRC) December 19, 2019 (https://twitter.com/HRC/status/1207675378325770246?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) Twitter / HRC (https://twitter.com/HRC/status/1207675378325770246)

A ****storm - for this ^ ???


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50858919
Reasonable reasons for the judgement - in this ^ ...???

I read quotes of what Forstater said, the media usually summarize it as "transphobic". I do not see any phobic statement there at all, just plain reason and scientific, biological fact. Because its about the genes, stupid.

Its totally idiotic what happens ther ein massacres against reason and science. But brutal reality.


And what is it that Forstaster said and what she got fired for?

LINK Read here. (https://hiyamaya.net/sex-and-gender/)

Loosing your job - for this ^??? Discrimination...? "Phobic"...???


:ping: Its reality, not a scenario of the future they might or might not turn real in the future. Like it is real already whatg I gave in exmaples in an earlier post above: job discmrination of males, male-all-exclusion quotas. Hell, there are 150 chairs for gender "sciences" in Germany. 150...!! Not mone fot hem deals with science, however. None of them has ever released abytjign that even cloesly would qualify for a scientific work. We could as well launch professorships for astrology, or homeopathy and Bach flowers "therapy", or green healing rays by St. Raphael, and healing with stones.



You are wrong, Dowly. From A to Z you are wrong there.

[Tchocky]

What's it to you, Skybird?

[Skybird]

Rejecting cancel culture. rejecting a small noisy minority of ignorrants the right to turn political correctness into existentially threatening fascism in the name of wannabesomethings who are bored by their meaningless life and insist to become a special something, a celebrity-kind of personality that gets applause for nothing than just claiming something and which is in collision mode with science and reason.

Thats what it is to me, Tchocky.


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37875695


Nobody starts being able to breath under water just by claiming he is a fish and wants to be seen as one. And I dont like getting pushed and getting forced to award him for this folly, and getting sanctioned, cancelled, punished if I dont comply.


That all is what it is to me. And what it should be to everybody.

[Tchocky]

Rejecting cancel culture. rejecting a small noisy minority of ignorrants the right to turn political correctness into existentially threatening fascism in the name of wannabesomethings who are bored by their meaningless life and insist to become a special something, a celebrity-kind of personality that gets applause for nothing than just claiming something and which is in collision mode with science and reason.


Jesus, would you consider taking a moment and considering how nasty the stuff you type is?

I really would be careful throwing around the word "ignorant" here.


Complaining that others are encouraging fascism because of their ignorance, yelling about bored idiots in the minority with meaningless lives?

If they're bored, Skybird, then what the hell are you?

Be nice for once.

Celebrity personality?

Are you *insane*?


You know nothing of what you speak.

Take a break.

Be nice.

[Catfish]

I intend to become a unicorn. I just hesitate which gender :hmmm:

[Tchocky]

Hilarious.

[Skybird]

What you demand, is almost personally offensive. By demanding respect for nonsense you tell me to my face that you think I am an idiot. Sorry, I do not respect this nonsense, and I have certainly zero intention to ever play nice when the personal obsessions of others are no longer kept in their private cabin, but insist to take over the rules of public life and language and social standards. You do not let the insane manage the asylum, even less so if they threaten you with punishments, sanctions, "cancellation" as it is called these days if you do not play by their new rules. This all is highly corrosive for society, it costs an awful lot of money to make this mande3ss a cozy plkace that it demands and wants to widen, just to please a handful of nutheads and narcissists who have learned to live by taking themselves as overly important, and the public creates them the stage on which they can wallow in their ego, whatever gender it may feel like on this or that day. Sorry, but not sorry at all, no go with me. Not before I have turned insane myself. Respecting this and be nice on it, would be a frontal assault on reason, intellectual thinking, and what is good and valuable in human nature. A raping of my own standrds and dignity, my own values and my own ethics. You see what problem I have there, yes?

Request denied.


"I've studied authoritarianism for a very long time - for 40 years - and they're started by people's attempts to control the ideological and linguistic territory," he told the BBC.
"There's no way I'm going to use words made up by people who are doing that - not a chance."
Dr Peterson is concerned proposed federal human rights legislation "will elevate into hate speech" his refusal to use alternative pronouns.
Legal experts disagree.
Bill C-16, currently before Canada's parliament, prohibits discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act on the basis of gender identity and expression. The bill covers the federal government and federally regulated industries like banks or airlines. It also extends hate speech provisions under Canada's criminal code to transgendered people.
"I don't think any legal expert would say using an inappropriate pronoun, while not something that respects the human rights of trans people, would ever result in a criminal conviction," said Kyle Kirkup, a law professor with the University of Ottawa who specialises in gender identity and sexuality law.
But Dr Peterson could face sanction under Ontario's human rights code, which extended protection to trans people in 2012.
Penalties range from fines and damages to mandatory anti-discrimination training.Mandatory anti-.discmrination traning"...? Where? In Chinese reeducation camaps, maybe? Absolvents get a diploma confirmign they are now qualified for culturally more beautiful opinion-forming?

Crowd, world, everybody - get back to your damn senses. What is left of them.


A parody, in German, for those who understand German. Unfortunately, the starting point - the gender corretc lanbgaue offensive in the olublic amdinstraitona nd services of Hanniover - is not parody, but real. There and in many other cities and districts. When madness becomes pandemic, it turns into the norm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SylSFRcqPgk


The linguistic perversions described ALL ARE REAL IN GERMANY, officials and politicians and media people use this kind of raped German all the time. You can get removed from public services if you refuse to use it. You most likely will have your exam paper rejected and your diploma exam failed if you refuse to write in gender-correct language. You will be barred from tutoring, if you do not surrender. Students and tutors alike must obey it, else they get thrown out and must stop. Reality in Germany, Austria... since years. POrivate, social mobbing and consequences not even counted.



Yeah cancel culture they call it. Fascism I call it.

Great lady: sharp tongue, witty mind, smart and intelligent, charming and humorours and always polite. Not German, but Swiss. Her good looks are an additional benefit, but she must not live of them, her brain alone already justifies the money for the ticket. She runs a great - German-speaking - channel.

[ikalugin]

Given enough time it will collapse on itself when those who push the limits find they are not really any more special or deserving than anyone else.


I am uncertain. The traditional feminists seem to be following the fate of the brown shirts - once useful to push for identity politics, group rights at the cost of universal individial rights and activist power they are now being slowly purged, with arrests and what not.

[Tchocky]

I am uncertain. The traditional feminists seem to be following the fate of the brown shirts - once usefull to push for identity politics and group rights at the cost of universal individial rights they are now being slowly purged, with arrests and what not.




Hey maybe don't compare feminism to Nazism.


Just a wild crazy thought.

[Dowly]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50858919
Reasonable reasons for the judgement - in this ^ ...???


Sounds reasonable to me.
I conclude from this, and the totality of the evidence, that the Claimant is
absolutist in her view of sex and it is a core component of her belief that she
will refer to a person by the sex she considered appropriate even if it violates
their dignity and/or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or
offensive environment. The approach is not worthy of respect in a democratic
society.Plenty of other reasonable reasons in the judgment document as well.

[ikalugin]

Hey maybe don't compare feminism to Nazism.


Just a wild crazy thought.
Well it is not as bad, not yet anyway.
Note how you respond to the emotional hook rather than going after the actual arguments and problems, for example discussion of political prosecution of TERFs with arrests, etc.

But the foundations are there, down to the use of the same racial theory.
There is a good reason why you can swap some things in Mein Kampf and submit entire chapters for respectable subject matter journals.

[Catfish]

[...] There is a good reason why you can swap some things in Mein Kampf and submit entire chapters for respectable subject matter journals.
What has Mine craft to do with feminism? Uh i misread.. :oops:

As you probably guessed i decided not to take this thread seriously. The discussion, yes, just not this thread. :D

[ikalugin]

What has Minecraft to do with feminism?
https://youtu.be/u6aPgA5549g?t=12

[Tchocky]

What you demand, is almost personally offensive.

The things you post here are offensive.


So please don't mind if I tell you where you can stick your "almost personally offensive".

By demanding respect for nonsense you tell me to my face that you think I am an idiot. Sorry, I do not respect this nonsense, and I have certainly zero intention to ever play nice when the personal obsessions of others are no longer kept in their private cabin, but insist to take over the rules of public life and language and social standards.


Ridiculous. No one is demanding anything of you except the basic decency of avoiding being cruel. There are words and epithets we don not use anymore because they are universally found to be cruel and disrespectful.

Clearly you cannot do this - but please don't make your own general unpleasantness the fault of wider society.

Keep it in your private cabin and so on and so forth.

You do not let the insane manage the asylum, even less so if they threaten you with punishments, sanctions, "cancellation" as it is called these days if you do not play by their new rules. This is also known as being held responsible for your own behaviour.


To the privileged, any movement towards equality looks like punishment.

Please stop labelling those who you disagree with as insane. You are not helping an environment which is already malignant and cruel enough.

This all is highly corrosive for society, it costs an awful lot of money to make this mande3ss a cozy plkace that it demands and wants to widen, just to please a handful of nutheads and narcissists who have learned to live by taking themselves as overly important, and the public creates them the stage on which they can wallow in their ego, whatever gender it may feel like on this or that day.

What sort of catastrophic rubbish have you been reading that suggests trans people can be fairly described as "nutheads and narcissists" who change their gender on a daily basis?


Again, it's not society's fault you are unable to speak with respect here so please stop blaming your personality issues on the rest of us.

Sorry, but not sorry at all, no go with me. Not before I have turned insane myself. Respecting this and be nice on it, would be a frontal assault on reason, intellectual thinking, and what is good and valuable in human nature.
Ugh. For someone who can't resist firing up the megaphone to complain about nutheads who change their gender on a daily basis, you really have stretched my patience with this claptrap about "reason".


Maybe one of those 150 gender studies academics could help you sort this out in your own head before the keyboard breaks under the crushing weight of your own self-righteousness.


JUST A THOUGHT.

A raping of my own standrds and dignity, my own values and my own ethics. You see what problem I have there, yes?I see that you are sufficiently deluded to think that this issue is a good one in which to use language of sexual assault to describe your own hurt feelings.


You are something else.

Mandatory anti-.discmrination traning"...? Where? In Chinese reeducation camaps, maybe? Absolvents get a diploma confirmign they are now qualified for culturally more beautiful opinion-forming? Well as long as you remain objective and reasonable.


You're all about reason, yes?

Crowd, world, everybody - get back to your damn senses. What is left of them.Fully agree. Talk to someone who knows about this field. Educate yourself.


The linguistic perversions described ALL ARE REAL IN GERMANY, officials and politicians and media people use this kind of raped German all the time.I would strongly advise against using the language of sexual assault here.

LGBT people and transgenders in particular suffer the highest rates of sexual assault, rape and intimate partner violence. Many are denied support services afterwards due to sexual orientation or gender identity

Yeah cancel culture they call it. Fascism I call it. Seriously I don't know why you continue to make claims of fascism. Where is this connection?

You started this thread talking about JK Rowling, on what planet is the reaction to her statements in any way analogous to fascism?


Seriously, chill.

Her good looks are an additional benefit, but she must not live of them, her brain alone already justifies the money for the ticket. And now we get to it.


Christ on a bike.

[Dowly]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37875695I was waiting for when someone would bring up Peterson and his views on C-16 which were very quickly pointed out to be false. But I guess that doesn't matter to him, considering before he made his Patreon income hidden he was making $40k a month to peddle outrage to angry people.

[Tchocky]

I was waiting for when someone would bring up Peterson and his views on C-16 which were very quickly pointed out to be false. But I guess that doesn't matter to him, considering before he made his Patreon income hidden he was making $40k a month to peddle outrage to angry people.I'm sure that relying on a known liar and fraud isn't going to stop anyone.

[ikalugin]

And here comes character assasination.

[Tchocky]

What, Peterson?

He was absolutely full of it regarding C16

[Dowly]

And here comes character assasination.
It's not character assasination if it's true.

Peterson's views on C16 where simply wrong, either he on purpose misrepresented it or he didn't know what he was talking about. C16 was, to put it simply, an amendment to existing anti-discrimination laws. It says absolutely nothing about being punished for mistakenly using a wrong gender pronoun.

[Subnuts]

I have Asperger's Syndrome.

On a scale of 1-10, how much am I contributing to the downfall of nonautistic Western civilization? :06:

[Skybird]

I have Asperger's Syndrome.

On a scale of 1-10, how much am I contributing to the downfall of nonautistic Western civilization? :06:
Not at all. But then you are not like this young lady we have over here in Germany, she has Down syndrome and she loves it. She says she wants to have many many babies and hopes they all will have Down syndrome and that society will embrace Down syndrome to be a contribution to what defines normality and that the quota of Down syndrome people amongst the population should rise. Dumb like straw, if you ask me.



The defamation of Peterson is fact. It does nto matter what the man likes or says, it is about the brutality by which a small but vocal minority claism the right to desrtoy everybody who dies not share their opinion and their demand that their opinions should become the common ruke of public life and standards. That Tchicky an Dowly love these kind of new legislations and embrace sanctionsing people disagreeing, is no surprise. The totalitariansim in the progressive scene is not one inch less intense and brutal as it is in right wing totalitarianism. For the corfrtetc world view and ideology: anything goes! And if you hold the wrong world view or the wrong opinion, you must not be disagree with, no - you must be destroyed socially, economically, legally! Serves you right!


One thing these people do not like, however - if they are beign called out for it and if what they do gets called by its real name.

[Dowly]

That Tchicky an Dowly love these kind of new legislations and embrace sanctionsing people disagreeing, is no surprise.Four times I have told you what I think should be punishable. You still seem to be unable to read simple text.

[Tchocky]

That Tchicky an Dowly love these kind of new legislations and embrace sanctionsing people disagreeing, is no surprise.

I suggested you behave like a decent person in discussion.


You didn't bother and now are assigning beliefs to myself and Dowly that we have not posted.

If you have to make things up to make your point, maybe you don't have one.


You could respond to what I posted but you'd rather fire up your imagination and invent things we said.

Well done.





There isn't enough internet between you and me. I need a shower.

[Skybird]

Four times I have told you what I think should be punishable. You still seem to be unable to read simple text.
You have done it four times, yes. and four times you did not realise the self-contradiction you are stating.

You imply that there could be an offence in stating the obvious. You focus on the intention behind stating the obvious. Since when does truth have an intention? Only the desire to hide the truth has an intention behind doing so. it. As if truth depends on intention for being truth! It needs not. Truth is truth. And there cannot be several truths - where it seems so, all but one truths must be wrong. That is the meaning and concept behind this term "truth".

There is no offence possible, and thus there shall not be any form of punishment or sanctionizing be possible or imaginable. So where you answered my question whether refusing gender-ideology-correct speech should be punishable with "If you are doing it intentionally, to harass or discriminate. Yes, absolutely", you imply - you cannot evade that implication - that using the obvious truth should be punished if the truth violates somebody's personal belief. And for that I call out a foul.

What did Peterson (whose case you comfortably cut short in summary as well) get quoted with in that article?

"
"I've studied authoritarianism for a very long time - for 40 years - and they're started by people's attempts to control the ideological and linguistic territory," he told the BBC.
"There's no way I'm going to use words made up by people who are doing that - not a chance."
Dr Peterson is concerned proposed federal human rights legislation "will elevate into hate speech" his refusal to use alternative pronouns.
Legal experts disagree.
Bill C-16, currently before Canada's parliament, prohibits discrimination under the Canadian Human Rights Act on the basis of gender identity and expression. The bill covers the federal government and federally regulated industries like banks or airlines. It also extends hate speech provisions under Canada's criminal code to transgendered people.
"

The C16 bill obviously criminalises the rejection of gender-ideological nonsense speak rules by labelling it as "hate crime" and "discrimination". BOTH IT IS NOT. The bill recngises gender claims on the gorudn sof nothing as natural, fact, and it gionroed sciencetific evidnce not beign exostent for such claims. It puts claim and beleif above evidence, truth, and effect. That is as if a court says since the offended does not feel guilty, his words are taken for granted, the case is lcosed and he can wlak as a free man. No evidence needed. That puts the legal system from its feet on its head, doesn't it?! You imply and you state - repeatedly - it would never be punished to not use gender speak, while since years the clear and direct opposite of your claim already happens in reality, and I gave example for it. It happens across most of Europe, North, Middle, South, West, not so much in the East. Tutors being fired from university, like they wanted to do with Peterson. Papers not accepted if students do not use gender new speak. Public administration forcing staff to use it. Social discrimjnation of rejective people. Media campaigns to defame violators. Mobbing at assemblies where paradoxically the right of free speech is claimed for pro gender, and is denied for anti-gender, or anti-FFF, or anybody not believing the mainstream dogma wanted by the self-proclaimed guardians of political correct thinking, especially in the academic territories. Cancel culture. Super-sensitive animosities of new students claiming to feel abused or ofended by somethign somebody said and demanding that he should be banned from telling what he has the right to say by freedom of speech. Peterson in the present faces a lock-out from movies and cinemas, just because part of staff in cinemas say they fell "uncomfortable" with airing his latest movie. Some cinemys rceived threats if they do not cancel the show. I pointed at the link between gender ideolgiy and activists, and the two battling schools of feminism. you ignore it, although it is important to know about it.

You deny reality. That simple. And you do so not on the grounds of reason or logic or evidence. You do so on grounds of ideologically founded claim of a special interest group's claim for power and influence, nothing else than this. All that what Tchocky implies as "being nice". If that is what means to "be nice", i hope peple see me as a rotten angry cat biting everybody. Because "being nice" then would be a disgrace.

I do not care for men dressing as women, or what people do inside their homes and cabins. I am not interested as long as what they do with others is acting by mutual consent. I just do not care. But they want me and us all to play by their rules, and to grant them special appreciation deserved by - nothing. They want rules being turned in their favour, and they want it to be sanctioned and punished when rejecting these rules. They want to underscore to be somethign special by demanding that they are seen as a norm of normlaity.



And this attitude of expecting something once has no claim for and even implying one has the right to enforce it by using brute force aganst all others to make them fallign in line, my dear Dowly, this all is the basic fundament of fascism in the wider sense of the term, because the term by common practice is fashionable since long to be used far beyond the historical context of the black skirt movement in past Italy.

And another thing you completely ignore: to adress what Forstater said and what Rowlings said, whom i quoted and linked to one page earlier, a Twitter message by Rowling and a full page or statement by Forstater. FORSTATER GOT FIRED FROM HER JOB. You completely ignore that forstater already GOT FIRED for an claimed offence you insist to descrie as NEVER GETTING PUNISHED at all. while claiming that the truth should be pnsihed if beign spoken out in an intention. Oh my.... What queer chaos of self-contradictions you have arranged there.

You deny reality. Things already are beyond your claims. SINCE MANY YEARS. But Tchocky demands me to "be nice". Well, always some volunteer around to put the cream on top of the cake.

Done here. Its pointless to talk to a deaf wall with holy scriptures on it.

[Dowly]

You have done it four times, yes. and four times you did not realise the self-contradiction you are stating.

You imply that there could be an offence in stating the obvious. You focus on the intention behind stating the obvious. Since when does truth have an intention? Only the desire to hide the truth has an intention behind doing so. it. As if truth depends on intention for being truth! It needs not. Truth is truth. And there cannot be several truths - where it seems so, all but one truths must be wrong. That is the meaning and concept behind this term "truth".

There is no offence possible, and thus there shall not be any form of punishment or sanctionizing be possible or imaginable. So where you answered my question whether refusing gender-ideology-correct speech should be punishable with "If you are doing it intentionally, to harass or discriminate. Yes, absolutely", you imply - you cannot evade that implication - that using the obvious truth should be punished if the truth violates somebody's personal belief. And for that I call out a foul.
As I've said already in this thread:
And for the record just so you don't have to assume things about me: I agree, there are only two genders. But that doesn't mean I am against a law or laws that would shield people who believe otherwise from harassment, discrimination or violence for no other reason than they think differently.

What did Peterson (whose case you comfortably cut short in summary as well) get quoted with in that article?I quoted the link, anyone interested could read the entire article instead of the summary you posted.

"I've studied authoritarianism for a very long time - for 40 years - and they're started by people's attempts to control the ideological and linguistic territory," he told the BBC.What's the difference in trying to control it the other way around?

The C16 bill obviously criminalises the rejection of gender-ideological nonsense speak rules by labelling it as "hate crime" and "discrimination". BOTH IT IS NOT.No, C16 doesn't do that. It simply adds 'Gender identity and expression' under the umbrella of existing laws.
If you deny service from someone on the basis that that person identifies as man, but looks like female. That's discrimination.
If you beat someone up and your motive is because she identifies as him, that's a hate crime.
C16 has absolutely nothing to do with whether you use the correct pronoun when addressing someone.

You completely ignore that forstater already GOT FIRED for an claimed offence you insist to descrie as NEVER GETTING PUNISHED at all. while claiming that the truth should be pnsihed if beign spoken out in an intention. Oh my.... What queer chaos of self-contradictions you have arranged there.First of, she didn't get fired, her contract wasn't renewed. There's a difference. Secondly, let's see what I actually said:
Accidentally calling someone him instead of her is not punishable and I very much doubt will ever be.
She didn't accidentally use an incorrect pronoun, she did it repeatedly, seemingly on purpose.