• 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.

Moderated Using wrong pronouns= violence??

d4m10n said:
Would such a victim be justified in using violence in self-defense?
Click to expand...
I think you're actually asking whether someone is justified in using physical violence in "self-defense" against mental, emotional or social violence, which is crossing over categories. Would this be a correct interpretation of your question?
 
Matthew Best said:
I looked at her Wikipedia article, as you suggested (I'm not watching Youtube videos I'm afraid - I have some self-respect left after all). There's no mention of sterilization, forced or otherwise, and no mention of a Nazi mentor.
Click to expand...

Well the video does provide evidence of all of it, with her actual Tweets and her own videos posted on Youtube. Kind of sad it's not on the Wikipedia article.

theprestige said:
Begs the question.

In fact, pronouns are third-party references to a person's apparent biological sex.
Click to expand...

Nope.
 
arthwollipot said:
Putting aside for now the discriminatory phrasing, the great thing is that you don't have to. Just don't worry about it. Expend no mental effort on the question because it really doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
It is a post modern principle that it doesn't matter.
As I say I listened to all of it, and I believe Shaun is a man.
It then raises the question what is his field?
It is unusual to have no frame of reference within the podcast genre.
It should matter who he is to the women who consider KJK's uncommonly straightforward campaign fits their current world view and anxieties. The essence of evil portrayal demonstrates a fascinating divide.
 
arthwollipot said:
For a start, sure. Whether Shaun is a trans man or a cis man is totally irrelevant and anyway it's none of your business.

Regardless, why does Shaun's gender matter? Surely the more important thing is what they are saying?
Click to expand...

I've got to hand it to him for not just going through her Twitter, but her YouTube videos. I started to go through her Twitter to pull out some of the stuff in order to cite it here and...it's so not worth it.

She argues with a bot that says in its replies that it's a bot!

The woman is so hateful and stupid, with such disdain for rational thought, even when it's supporting her, that it's more an indictment of her followers than her that she has any.

It's...so not worth going through her stuff more.
 
tyr_13 said:
I've got to hand it to him for not just going through her Twitter, but her YouTube videos. I started to go through her Twitter to pull out some of the stuff in order to cite it here and...it's so not worth it.

She argues with a bot that says in its replies that it's a bot!

The woman is so hateful and stupid, with such disdain for rational thought, even when it's supporting her, that it's more an indictment of her followers than her that she has any.

It's...so not worth going through her stuff more.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I have no knowledge of the person being referred to because I don't need that in my life, so I was merely responding to the language Samson was using.
 
tyr_13 said:
I've got to hand it to him for not just going through her Twitter, but her YouTube videos. I started to go through her Twitter to pull out some of the stuff in order to cite it here and...it's so not worth it.

She argues with a bot that says in its replies that it's a bot!

The woman is so hateful and stupid, with such disdain for rational thought, even when it's supporting her, that it's more an indictment of her followers than her that she has any.

It's...so not worth going through her stuff more.
Click to expand...
Sweep her under the carpet? Pretty lumpy.
She will shamelessly misgender, but never promote the physical violence Shaun claims she does.
Her trans opponents do physical violence, yes some do.
Two men in Albert Park assaulted her and an elderly lady. The one that assaulted her has physically transitioned, but she will always call him a man. She is coming to the court case. It will be an event of sorts for the afficionados of this contemporary crisis.
 
Samson said:
Sweep her under the carpet? Pretty lumpy.
She will shamelessly misgender, but never promote the physical violence Shaun claims she does.
Her trans opponents do physical violence, yes some do.
Two men in Albert Park assaulted her and an elderly lady. The one that assaulted her has physically transitioned, but she will always call him a man. She is coming to the court case. It will be an event of sorts for the afficionados of this contemporary crisis.
Click to expand...

You claimed to have watched the entire thing, which means you saw:

Her tweets where she calls for trans men to be sterilized. (Asserting this would be accomplished without violence is denialism.)

Her conversation with other Anti-trans (or 'Gender Critical') advocates where they talked gleefully about bashing in the skulls of the 'zombie trans'. (Asserting this is only a jest talking about zombies ignores the entire context of the conversation that makes it clear they're openly fantasizing about murdering transgender people.)

Her own videos that were posted on her own YouTube channel where she advocates for cisgender men to use women's bathrooms armed with firearms in order to 'protect' women (this means shooting trans women).

...and after all that and more you claim she isn't calling for actual violence? Why? Because she says she isn't calling for violence while calling for violence?

And the Nazi mentor was fully evidenced as well unless you think the guy talking about the Jewish control of world governments who she gushes over isn't actually a Nazi?

Correctly identifying what the things she says means, as her fellow Gender Critical people have also done and condemned her for, is not 'sweeping her under the rug'.
 
tyr_13 said:
You claimed to have watched the entire thing, which means you saw:

Her tweets where she calls for trans men to be sterilized. (Asserting this would be accomplished without violence is denialism.)

Her conversation with other Anti-trans (or 'Gender Critical') advocates where they talked gleefully about bashing in the skulls of the 'zombie trans'. (Asserting this is only a jest talking about zombies ignores the entire context of the conversation that makes it clear they're openly fantasizing about murdering transgender people.)

Her own videos that were posted on her own YouTube channel where she advocates for cisgender men to use women's bathrooms armed with firearms in order to 'protect' women (this means shooting trans women).

...and after all that and more you claim she isn't calling for actual violence? Why? Because she says she isn't calling for violence while calling for violence?

And the Nazi mentor was fully evidenced as well unless you think the guy talking about the Jewish control of world governments who she gushes over isn't actually a Nazi?

Correctly identifying what the things she says means, as her fellow Gender Critical people have also done and condemned her for, is not 'sweeping her under the rug'.
Click to expand...
I imagine you understand she is a leader. You disapprove, but her method requires controversy. She gets clicks by consistency and a fanatical devotion to her cause. To turn this around, I would invite you to name a contemporary woman who is reaching more traditional females. I know exactly what she achieved in New Zealand, and she has changed the landscape. Jill Ovens started the Women's Rights Party modelled on her principles. Her message would be hopelessly watered down if she misgendered by ignoring the science, and kowtowing to her avowed foes.
As I said, this is a language war. Pronouns are arguably the very worst nonsense to have taken root.
When I say arguably, I listen to all counter views.
 
theprestige said:
Yep.

Ask yourself why someone needs to tell you their preferred pronouns.
Click to expand...

Nope. Flat no.

Someone might have to say their pronouns because they know themselves better than you know them. And they absolutely do.

Samson said:
I imagine you understand she is a leader. You disapprove, but her method requires controversy. She gets clicks by consistency and a fanatical devotion to her cause. To turn this around, I would invite you to name a contemporary woman who is reaching more traditional females.
Click to expand...

Greta Thunberg, AOC, Mariah Carey, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and a whole host of others. Kellie-Jay just isn't that well known.

I know exactly what she achieved in New Zealand, and she has changed the landscape. Jill Ovens started the Women's Rights Party modelled on her principles. Her message would be hopelessly watered down if she misgendered by ignoring the science, and kowtowing to her avowed foes.
Click to expand...

'Gender Critical' anti-trans advocates in Australia and New Zealand said her visit put their movement back years.

As I said, this is a language war. Pronouns are arguably the very worst nonsense to have taken root.
When I say arguably, I listen to all counter views.
Click to expand...

You're mostly flailing and BSing. You claim things that are shown to be trivially untrue in most of your posts. This isn't a language war, language is just one thing being leveraged, it's a culture and morality war.

And the side with the literal Nazis tend to lose those. So...
 
tyr_13 said:
Nope. Flat no.


'Gender Critical' anti-trans advocates in Australia and New Zealand said her visit put their movement back years.
Click to expand...
I have not heard this and I have my ears open. I would certainly be interested to know who.
Anti trans is a made up term of course which is quite meaningless.
 
arthwollipot said:
Then why are so many people opposed to human rights for trans people? How would you describe that?
Click to expand...
There is a current story a post on kiwiblog today.

Some questions
Is Taieri anti trans?
Are the people correctly served by the system and the media in meticulously misgendering?

Taieri
“A woman who sexually assaulted a drunk man in a Dunedin churchyard will be released from prison next week after nearly seven years behind bars.”

https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/crime/sex-offender-be-released-prison

Nowhere in the article does it say that the “woman” in question is actually a man.
 
arthwollipot said:
Not an answer.
Click to expand...

The common answer is that according rights to m to f trans removes rights from women.
Women are fighting a second war for their rights. They prefer sex pronouns for this reason so everyone knows who the invaders are. It is difficult to finesse this without conceding ground that is never recovered.
Sometimes progressive is hopelessly regressive.
 
Last edited:
Samson said:
The common answer is that according rights to m to f trans removes rights from women.
Click to expand...
For a start I'm having difficulty parsing your sentence. Secondly, it really doesn't. What human rights does a trans woman "remove" from cis women? Cis women still have all their human rights regardless of the existence of trans people. Thirdly, is it beyond your notice that trans men also exist? Or are they just okay? Why the discrimination?

Samson said:
Women are fighting a second war for their rights.
Click to expand...
Bully for them. Trans people are fighting their first.

Samson said:
They prefer sex pronouns for this reason so everyone knows who the invaders are. It is difficult to finesse this without conceding ground that is never recovered.
Click to expand...
What the actual **** are you talking about?

Samson said:
Sometimes progressive is hopelessly regressive.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, the old "tolerance of intolerance" argument. Be skeptical of skepticism. Flammable, inflammable, labels don't matter. Human rights matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom