• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trans women are not women (Part 8)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sideroxylon said:
How about you make your point explicit and what the link says about it.
Click to expand...

Summary

In October 2021, she resigned from the University of Sussex in the aftermath of a student campaign that called for her dismissal and allegations of the Sussex branch of the University and College Union of "institutional transphobia
Click to expand...

An example of a University not being
a place where ideas and concepts are scrutinised, rebuilt and discarded with intellectual vigour
Click to expand...
 
shuttlt said:
These kinds of top down manipulations of language have been going on for something like 100 years, since advertising and propaganda really got going. You've got an explicit plan to make exactly these kinds of language manipulations for exactly the purposes you are seeing going back just as long. As far a I'm aware the idea of how you would go about doing this to change people's behaviours was originally based on Freud.
Click to expand...


And that's a reason for giving in without protest? That's a way of saying "you're wrong so shut up"?

Forget it.
 
Well, people here seem to be getting the memo.

[imgw=600]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FTeg1ccXEAAKXMZ?format=jpg&name=medium[/imgw]

I'd take a fair bet that if you could explain what's going on to the majority of people who still haven't realised that Nicola is actually serious about this and what it entails, then ask them to vote, it would be a lot higher than 60%. (We know there was an international campaign among trans people to get them to engage with the consultation and say they agreed. What I don't know is how the responses split by location of responder. Although come to think of it I don't remember being asked for any verification of my reply that I live in Scotland.)
 
Sideroxylon said:
I appreciate the effort and insight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking
Click to expand...


How many examples do you want? "Give me some examples." "Here you are." "That's cherry-picking."

There are a lot more examples of this type of thing happening and women being driven out of universities than there are of women being supported by their academic institutions in gender-critical thought.
 
Rolfe said:
Well, people here seem to be getting the memo.

I'd take a fair bet that if you could explain what's going on to the majority of people who still haven't realised that Nicola is actually serious about this and what it entails, then ask them to vote, it would be a lot higher than 60%. (We know there was an international campaign among trans people to get them to engage with the consultation and say they agreed. What I don't know is how the responses split by location of responder. Although come to think of it I don't remember being asked for any verification of my reply that I live in Scotland.)
Click to expand...
Hypothetically, what would be the consequences of putting through some unpopular law? Are people going to vote the Conservatives in in Scotland? There was something recently about the rate at which petitions at change.org resulted in anything, and it was indistinguishable from zero if you ignored handwaving.

The way social progress happens is that first you have some sort of elite consensus on the change, then you see that change being reflected in legal decisions, then the law is updated to reflect the new legal reality, then education and media normalise it and recontextualise the previous state of affairs.
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
How many examples do you want? "Give me some examples." "Here you are." "That's cherry-picking."

There are a lot more examples of this type of thing happening and women being driven out of universities than there are of women being supported by their academic institutions in gender-critical thought.
Click to expand...

What’s the difference here than when a climate change denialist offers the same to attack the scientific establishment? I don't remember asking for any examples. You seem to be off on a rant about something different to what was being responded to in the lazy link dump response. I see the wagons are well and truley circled in this thread.
 
Scottish politics are complicated and this is just one strand among many. It's perhaps less the subject itself in some people's minds as the extent to which the First Minister has been captured by the Stonewall agenda and is hell-bent on steamrollering this legislation through, devoting enormous resources to it, while at the same time kicking her long-promised independence campaign into the long grass time and time again.

And of course "who else would you vote for" is a huge question. I've spoiled my (or a) ballot paper on the last two occasions I voted.

But this could be a massive derail, let's not go there. In the short term I think the consultation responsed could embolden backbenchers who themselves believe the bill is a bad thing to rebel against the whip. It happened with the bill about the right to choose the sex of the person who does your medical examination if you have been raped.
 
Rolfe said:
How many examples do you want? "Give me some examples." "Here you are." "That's cherry-picking."

There are a lot more examples of this type of thing happening and women being driven out of universities than there are of women being supported by their academic institutions in gender-critical thought.
Click to expand...
The game is to insist that your own position is the null hypothesis. If you can be the one who controls the null hypothesis, then all you have to do is reject the other sides evidence to win.
 
Homeschool Bible crowd?

Climate change deniers?

Seems like someone wants to try some sort of guilt by association.
 
Seems like someone is going around with a bag over his head and has no idea what's actually happening in the world.
 
Sideroxylon said:
More in the response than I have time for now but will try to do this more justice later. Seeing university as a place of indoctrination and not a place where ideas and concepts are scrutinised, rebuilt and discarded with intellectual vigour sounds like what I am used to hearing from the homeschool Bible crowd. Universities in the liberal arts tradition seem rooted in the very idea of concepts and movements organically grown.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that there is indeed a lot of intellectual vigour (sic) being used to analyze and discuss transgenderism and its role in society on college campuses. On the other hand, I don't see a lot of intellectual rigour.
 
I'm still failing to see how a tenured professor resigning is proof of much of anything than their own intellectual cowardice.

Tenure would have protected Stock's anti-trans opinions, no matter how unpopular, exactly as it is intended to had she not voluntarily quit.

Some of her peers supported her, some criticized her. Such is the nature of engaging in controversial issues. Perhaps she should grow a thicker skin.

Another crybully that demands the right to criticize others, but cries foul whenever a critical lens is placed on them.
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
Homeschool Bible crowd?

Climate change deniers?

Seems like someone wants to try some sort of guilt by association.
Click to expand...

Yes, same argument. And I have seen it in the same context too by fundamentalists who see conspiracy and top down control of ideas across all university fields. Excuse me if I react to such ******** being countered by cherry picked examples just as those anti-intellectual crowds do.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
I'm still failing to see how a tenured professor resigning is proof of much of anything than their own intellectual cowardice.

Tenure would have protected Stock's anti-trans opinions, no matter how unpopular, exactly as it is intended to had she not voluntarily quit.

Some of her peers supported her, some criticized her. Such is the nature of engaging in controversial issues. Perhaps she should grow a thicker skin.

Another crybully that demands the right to criticize others, but cries foul whenever a critical lens is placed on them.
Click to expand...

Despite their "Be Kind" mantra, there seems to be a correlation between trans activism and an absence of empathy.

Sideroxylon said:
Yes, same argument.
Click to expand...

What is the science behind the concept of "trans kids"?
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
Homeschool Bible crowd?

Climate change deniers?

Seems like someone wants to try some sort of guilt by association.
Click to expand...

Sideroxylon said:
Yes, same argument.
Click to expand...

Oh, what the heck....I'm going to go there.

Maybe, sometimes, the argument is right.


I happen to have friends that are part of the "homeschool Bible crowd." In some cases, homeschool Bible folks are dumb as a stump and don't have a clue. I don't think their kids are getting a good education. In other cases, they are highly intelligent Christians who are distressed at the quality of public schools and the values present in those schools. (Among the people I know, the quality is the primary concern.) The two couples I can think of that fit the description of the latter group consist of two very intelligent people. The husband has a good job and makes enough money for the family to live comfortably. The wife is highly intelligent and is perfectly capable of teaching their children, and doing a better job at it than the average elementary school teacher.

But you are going to lump them both in and dismiss them as part of the "homeschool Bible crowd". And then somehow transfer that into attitudes towards transgenders.

With respect to climate change deniers, it's a bit different. What I have seen is that there are a few different categories. I'll break it into three, but we could split it up finer. There's the "Antrhopogenic climate change isn't happening." crowd. Then there's the "Climate change is an existential threat to humanity that must be addressed with immediate and significant changes right now to prevent massive suffering and death." crowd. And finally there's a crowd that says, "Yes it's happening, but we can live with it." (Remember, I only broke into three categories. There's actually more.)

The problem on this front is that people want to shove that third crowd into the first one.

And then you are going one more and saying that people who criticize the transgender agenda are just like that first crowd.


Frankly, it's nonsense. You can paint people with as broad of a brush as you like, and all you will accomplish is the sort of smug satisfaction that comes from allowing yourself to ignore opinions that make you uncomfortable.

Now let's get back, specifically, to transgender issues, without dragging in unrelated things, like Christian homeschooling or climate change. They really have nothing to do with the subject at hand.
 
Last edited:
Sideroxylon said:
The whole idea of gender is being questioned, evolving and in revolution perhaps. A clash of ideas is to be expected. Science and medical tech is not only challenging our ideas about gender but what it is to be human. People with different ideas about their identity, genitalia and social expectations exist and are taking advantage of both that as well as Western liberal freedom to create and assert their own identity themselves. And more power to them I say.
Click to expand...

I think in these parts, you will find little argument about that.

The problem comes in when they assert their own identify, and demand that others accept their assertion.

It all sounds so lofty when you express it like that, but in the end, it's all about whether or not that 15 year old girl I talked about earlier has to take off her clothes in the presence of a person that has a dick.

ETA: And, if you can convince her that it makes sense, I'll go along. Until then, I'm on her side.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom