Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man

Recommended Posts

"I'm fascinated by the way that concepts apparently arise from nowhere, take hold in popular imagination, then become naturalised and beyond question. One such idea is that individuals can be "born in the wrong body," so that men can be women. Since there is no scientific evidence, neuroscientific or otherwise, that an unambiguously biological male can in fact, be female, how can society have arrived at a stage where people who question the claim that, "Trans women are women" are routinely labelled Nazis, bigots and 'Trans-phobes?'

A new nomenclature has arisen which bifurcates women into two groups: 'Cis' (biological women) and 'Trans.' This performs a linguistic sleight of hand that enables the idea that some men can be women. But no matter how cultivated their 'feminine' outward-appearance, 'Trans-women' (as opposed to Transsexuals) have penises.

The concept that 'Trans-women' are women, and that we must believe this because they affirm it is further translated into the idea that 'Trans-women' are even more oppressed by the patriarchy than their 'Cis' sisters. Progressives routinely turn with vitriol on women who challenge this newly-minted 'Truth,' labelling them "Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists' or TERFS, no matter how moderate, thoughtful or indeed 'Trans-friendly' those women are. 

This new definition of womanhood is having bizarre effects on our political institutions. The Labour Party now admits men who identify as women on to all-women shortlists, without any necessity for a gender-recognition certificate. A number of these men have successfully applied to the Jo Cox Women In Leadership programme.

Then there's the misogyny. Labour continues to support Lily Madigan (Trans) in the role of Women's Officer for Rochester and Strood, despite His bullying of gender-critical feminists and other women. One of his latest Twitter missives states that, "TERFS can go fuck themselves" and he is allowed to say this (amongst other profane insults) with impunity not only by the party but by Twitter itself. Labour also (briefly) appointed Munroe Bergdorf (Trans) to an LGBT working group. Bergdorf had recently been quoted in the magazine 'Grazia' saying that feminists are "biological-essentialists" because they "summarise women as walking vaginas... ...a similar approach to that of misogynists."

A kind of informal, 'Ministry of Truth' has emerged around the Trans issue -- or rather a, 'Ministry of Propaganda' since it is responsible for the falsification of historical events and biological facts. In keeping with the concept of 'doublethink' the Ministry creates and then spreads 'Truth' through the new language of 'Cis' and 'Trans.'

And in a chilling twist, it is now feminists who are the alleged misogynists, purely because they don't allow human beings with penises to control the political narrative. The statement -- both mundane and tautological -- that women don't have penises is now considered inflammatory! A feminist group distributed stickers making this observation recently in Liverpool, the Police opened an investigation!

A cold wind of authoritarianism is blowing through our allegedly progressive, Liberal-democratic society. And not only in regards to this issue.

When telling the truth becomes hate-speech, when oppression becomes ethics, when non-facts become Truth, we all better watch out..."

Edited by quilp
Att. Spiked.
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Twas ever thus. 'Progressive' western society and it's planners love to divide people up into ever smaller boxes, far easier to rule over if everyone is at each others throats and people are unsure what is and isn't 'allowed' to come out of their mouths, let alone pass through their brain.

Beam me up Scotty.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, quilp said:

"I'm fascinated by the way that concepts apparently arise from nowhere, take hold in popular imagination, then become naturalised and beyond question. One such idea is that individuals can be "born in the wrong body," so that men can be women. Since there is no scientific evidence, neuroscientific or otherwise, that an unambiguously biological male can in fact, be female, how can society have arrived at a stage where people who question the claim that, "Trans women are women" are routinely labelled Nazis, bigots and 'Trans-phobes?'

A new nomenclature has arisen which bifurcates women into two groups: 'Cis' (biological women) and 'Trans.' This performs a linguistic sleight of hand that enables the idea that some men can be women. But no matter how cultivated their 'feminine' outward-appearance, 'Trans-women' (as opposed to Transsexuals) have penises.

The concept that 'Trans-women' are women, and that we must believe this because they affirm it is further translated into the idea that 'Trans-women' are even more oppressed by the patriarchy than their 'Cis' sisters. Progressives routinely turn with vitriol on women who challenge this newly-minted 'Truth,' labelling them "Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists' or TERFS, no matter how moderate, thoughtful or indeed 'Trans-friendly' those women are. 

This new definition of womanhood is having bizarre effects on our political institutions. The Labour Party now admits men who identify as women on to all-women shortlists, without any necessity for a gender-recognition certificate. A number of these men have successfully applied to the Jo Cox Women In Leadership programme.

Then there's the misogyny. Labour continues to support Lily Madigan (Trans) in the role of Women's Officer for Rochester and Strood, despite His bullying of gender-critical feminists and other women. One of his latest Twitter missives states that, "TERFS can go fuck themselves" and he is allowed to say this (amongst other profane insults) with impunity not only by the party but by Twitter itself. Labour also (briefly) appointed Munroe Bergdorf (Trans) to an LGBT working group. Bergdorf had recently been quoted in the magazine 'Grazia' saying that feminists are "biological-essentialists" because they "summarise women as walking vaginas... ...a similar approach to that of misogynists."

A kind of informal, 'Ministry of Truth' has emerged around the Trans issue -- or rather a, 'Ministry of Propaganda' since it is responsible for the falsification of historical events and biological facts. In keeping with the concept of 'doublethink' the Ministry creates and then spreads 'Truth' through the new language of 'Cis' and 'Trans.'

And in a chilling twist, it is now feminists who are the alleged misogynists, purely because they don't allow human beings with penises to control the political narrative. The statement -- both mundane and tautological -- that women don't have penises is now considered inflammatory! A feminist group distributed stickers making this observation recently in Liverpool, the Police opened an investigation!

A cold wind of authoritarianism is blowing through our allegedly progressive, Liberal-democratic society. And not only in regards to this issue.

When telling the truth becomes hate-speech, when oppression becomes ethics, when non-facts become Truth, we all better watch out..."

An excellent insight, and a great post. Keeping an eye on this one quilp x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, you failed to reference who the quote came from, but I can imagine the sort of person it came from.

Secondly, got as far as "Since there is no scientific evidence, neuroscientific or otherwise" and stopped reading, as clearly the original quotee didn't do much reading of their own on the subject before forming his ill informed rant.

 

ETA: And seeing both who quoted this nonsense and the people "supporting" this nonsense, I can see how this thread is going to progress.  

 

Edited by RIchard Britten
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical of you to rubbish the source. Because it came from 'Spiked' it has no relevance, correct? Let's see how the thread progresses. You obviously believe it ok for a person to claim womanhood with a cock in their knickers. I don't and believe feminists have a point. As has Heather Brunskell-Evans' last couple of paragraphs in that piece. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the learning point is that the internet's excellent search facilities means one should always provide citations for one's references?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would have expected a subject like this to grow organically over time, bearing in mind the tiny percentage of the population that it actually affects. However it's come crashing in out of the leftfield, with legislation changes, movements, flags, dominating the media and unfortunately young impressionable minds will be caught and lives ruined along the way. As is the case with an increasing number of people who underwent the process of sex change now regretting it.

I've no issue with people who genuinely feeling like they don't belong and have issues with their sexuality and gender, I genuinely sympathise and of course we should over time decide what the best courses of action should be in terms of how society evolves to fully include and incorporate people who feel excluded or misrepresented. However I can't help thinking that it's a bit soon and completely over the top to try and turn generations of societal norms on their head in the blink of an eye. It benefits no-one and as I mentioned creates the opposite effect to what it is purported to do.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, quilp said:

Typical of you to rubbish the source. Because it came from 'Spiked' it has no relevance, correct?

Correct.  Spiked is know for its "edgelord" stance on subjects like this.

Quote

You obviously believe it ok for a person to claim womanhood with a cock in their knickers

Strawman, and typical Quilip "black and white-ism".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bobbie Bobster said:

So the learning point is that the internet's excellent search facilities means one should always provide citations for one's references?

Citation provided but had I just posted the link, because it came from 'Spiked' it would probably have been ignored and villified, as has just been seen. At least that Britten fella actually took the time, considering his prejudices. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Bobbie Bobster said:

So the learning point is that the internet's excellent search facilities means one should always provide citations for one's references?

Well it will help the "slower" in the class, and also helps establish the "intent" behind the person posting the quote.

Edited by RIchard Britten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, quilp said:

Citation provided but had I just posted the link, because it came from 'Spiked' it would probably have been ignored and villified, as has just been seen. At least that Britten fella actually took the time, considering his prejudices

Aiming to break the irony meter before lunch are we?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lxxx said:

You would have expected a subject like this to grow organically over time, bearing in mind the tiny percentage of the population that it actually affects. However it's come crashing in out of the leftfield, with legislation changes, movements, flags, dominating the media and unfortunately young impressionable minds will be caught and lives ruined along the way. As is the case with an increasing number of people who underwent the process of sex change now regretting it.

I've no issue with people who genuinely feeling like they don't belong and have issues with their sexuality and gender, I genuinely sympathise and of course we should over time decide what the best courses of action should be in terms of how society evolves to fully include and incorporate people who feel excluded or misrepresented. However I can't help thinking that it's a bit soon and completely over the top to try and turn generations of societal norms on their head in the blink of an eye. It benefits no-one and as I mentioned creates the opposite effect to what it is purported to do.

Or, and the more likely and simple explanation, is that this issue was never on your "radar" until recently because it doesnt directly effect you or someone close to you.

As the issue has gained attention, you feel like it has suddendly "sprung up" on you, where for Trans people, this issue has been around for a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RIchard Britten said:

Or, and the more likely and simple explanation, is that this issue was never on your "radar" until recently because it doesnt directly effect you or someone close to you.

As the issue has gained attention, you feel like it has suddendly "sprung up" on you, where for Trans people, this issue has been around for a long time.

I'm sure it has but that doesn't detract from the fact that it still attracts the tiniest percentage of the whole population. We shouldn't be turning society upside down on the basis of a small number of people and their needs/desires. You can address the requirements of minorities sensitively and inclusively, indeed the vast majority of trans individuals would prefer this to be the case, I would imagine. However we do seem to have a militant fringe which seems to have hijacked this subject and as humans are great mimickers it'll run and run regardless of the collateral damage.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×