The Gender Non-binary debate.

[8.4L 154]

gregs656 said:

Noodle1982 said:

What did I say that was incorrect?

You said

Noodle1982 said:

A lady is being interviewed under caution for misgendering another person's child on twitter.

The complainant has now challenged this, saying her complaint was about how she was talked about, not her daughter.

It was kind of about both of them. But misgendering Jackie was the least offensive bit. Words like castrate, mutilate and child abuse were used and specifically targeted at them.

In fact not far from some in this thread.

[Noodle1982]

gregs656 said:

Noodle1982 said:

What did I say that was incorrect?

You said

Noodle1982 said:

A lady is being interviewed under caution for misgendering another person's child on twitter.

The complainant has now challenged this, saying her complaint was about how she was talked about, not her daughter.

My postings were based on this tweet from Farrow

'All I know is that the police want to conduct a taped interview under caution because of tweets I sent “misgendering Susie Green’s daughter following a GMB interview.” That’s all I have been told. I know I haven’t ever tweeted Jackie Green directly or directed any abuse at them.'

The police need to do a better job of relaying complaints if what they told farrow isn't what had been reported to them.

[George Smiley]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

If anyone ever wanted an insight into what "people like me" have to put up with, you only need to look here on this thread.

Everyone has an opinion / criticism to make. And of course, any negative thing that happens is then used to tar us all with the same brush.

Kind of like this:

credit: xkcd

My own personal opinion on the matter is summed up thus:

"I am only resolved to act in that manner which will, in my own opinion, constitute my happiness, without reference to you, or to any person so wholly unconnected with me"
~~ Elizabeth Bennet, Pride & Prejudice (Jane Austen)

In the first picture, if that was a girl on the left and a boy on the right, the caption would say "you boys are rubbish at maths"

[The Surveyor]

mattmurdock said:

So there was no need to legislate to stop businesses putting up 'no blacks, no dogs, no Irish' signs? Everyone was perfectly happy that people with different skin colour did not need any form of protection against others who wished to deny them human rights?

Society and social perception move on, and my hope is that it always moves towards acceptance and common decency, rather than towards rejection and hate. I struggle with the idea that calling someone by their preferred name or pronoun is harmful to anyone, and whilst I may privately think that the multitude of pronouns outside of he, she or they is a bit daft, to persistently refuse to call someone what they have asked me to call someone is just plain rude.

There is a big difference between the search for equality, and any campaign to be treated uniquely IMHO. A trans person should rightly be treated equally, I'm less comfortable with any campaign to introduce new language who's aim is to specifically treat a group differently. That's divisive, not inclusive IMHO.

[Noodle1982]

8.4L 154 said:

It was kind of about both of them. But misgendering Jackie was the least offensive bit. Words like castrate, mutilate and child abuse were used and specifically targeted at them.

In fact not far from some in this thread.

Those words still don't warrant police intervention.

[gregs656]

Noodle1982 said:

The police need to do a better job of relaying complaints if what they told farrow isn't what had been reported to them.

I quoted the police statement about this from the article in the DM you linked to where they stated they were investigating 'a number of tweets'.

Like I said yesterday it could have meant anything.

In any case you were relying heavily on one side of the story from someone who had deleted all her tweets, didn't include their content in her statement and has form for getting a public platform.

[mattmurdock]

The Surveyor said:

There is a big difference between the search for equality, and any campaign to be treated uniquely IMHO. A trans person should rightly be treated equally, I'm less comfortable with any campaign to introduce new language who's aim is to specifically treat a group differently. That's divisive, not inclusive IMHO.

See, that is where something seems to be clouding your viewpoint - I don't know enough about you to say if it is personal bias or something else.

All they are asking to do is be treated equally to any other human being, that is to say to have the right to be referred to by whatever terms they find comfortable. No one is asking to be 'segregated' via the language, they are just asking for acceptance in the language, and to be treated as individuals.

If I decide that I would like people to call me Karen, and get my name changed by deed poll to Karen, is it acceptable for people to persistently refer to me as anything but Karen?

The language (in the main) is not new, they/them as a singular pronoun as evidenced in this thread has been around for years.

[_dobbo_]

Noodle1982 said:

Those words still don't warrant police intervention.

That's not really for you to decide though is it? And thank fk for that.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

_dobbo_ said:

That's not really for you to decide though is it? And thank fk for that.

[8.4L 154]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

_dobbo_ said:

That's not really for you to decide though is it? And thank fk for that.

[8.4L 154]

Noodle1982 said:

8.4L 154 said:

It was kind of about both of them. But misgendering Jackie was the least offensive bit. Words like castrate, mutilate and child abuse were used and specifically targeted at them.

In fact not far from some in this thread.

Those words still don't warrant police intervention.

Context, and the police seemed to think they did. Maybe if CF had talked to them before twitter it would not have blown up. But then she didn't want that. Much better to Stoke up the msm hate machine.

All I hope for now is she is prosecuted for perverting the course of justice by both deleting the evidence and journalistic press intimidation of the complainant. Couldn't happen to a nicer religious fundamentalist bigot.

[Noodle1982]

_dobbo_ said:

Noodle1982 said:

Those words still don't warrant police intervention.

That's not really for you to decide though is it? And thank fk for that.

Anybody who thinks those tweets are a police matter needs to give their head a wobble.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

Noodle1982 said:

Anybody who thinks those tweets are a police matter needs to give their head a wobble.

Or, perhaps, needs to dig deeper into the facts than a Daily Mail article that aligns with their confirmation bias.

[voyds9]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

Nobody is asking anyone to change the way they think. Nobody is telling you to believe down to the very core of your being that a trans woman is a genetic woman (as some here seem to think).

All that is being asked is for people to will a suspension of disbelief (if that's what it takes) or "play along with the charade" (as some have put it here in this thread) for the sake of politeness and decency.

And for the sake of politeness and decency would Jackie refer to herself as him when in conversation with a Catholic who only believes in 2 genders, or does the acceptance only run 1 way.

[Noodle1982]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

Noodle1982 said:

Anybody who thinks those tweets are a police matter needs to give their head a wobble.

Or, perhaps, needs to dig deeper into the facts than a Daily Mail article that aligns with their confirmation bias.

What else do I need to know about the situation?

I am referring to the tweets regarding castration and mutilation. The tweets which were reported to the police as mentioned in the mermaids statement.

[8.4L 154]

Noodle1982 said:

_dobbo_ said:

Noodle1982 said:

Those words still don't warrant police intervention.

That's not really for you to decide though is it? And thank fk for that.

Anybody who thinks those tweets are a police matter needs to give their head a wobble.

I think online hate crime and radicalisation should be taken very seriously. Maybe ask the citizens of NZ their opinion.

Anti trans hate in this country is affecting people on the high st. Emboldening people to be openly abusive to trans people irl. Online it's causing deaths by suicide as people give up on hope of a better world and one they can live in.

[mattmurdock]

voyds9 said:

And for the sake of politeness and decency would Jackie refer to herself as him when in conversation with a Catholic who only believes in 2 genders, or does the acceptance only run 1 way.

The problem with these sorts of arguments is you end up in acceptance top trumps, because both sides have a core identity issue with acceptance of the other. I'd like to think that most sensible Catholics are not so wedded to the 'only two gender' concept that their Christian decency would allow them to turn the other cheek and accept Jackie for who she is.

However, if they truly believe that it is an issue for them, I suspect the greater decency would be for the two parties to agree to not talk to each other anymore as they clearly are not going to be able to amicably continue a conversation.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

mattmurdock said:

The problem with these sorts of arguments is you end up in acceptance top trumps, because both sides have a core identity issue with acceptance of the other. I'd like to think that most sensible Catholics are not so wedded to the 'only two gender' concept that their Christian decency would allow them to turn the other cheek and accept Jackie for who she is.

However, if they truly believe that it is an issue for them, I suspect the greater decency would be for the two parties to agree to not talk to each other anymore as they clearly are not going to be able to amicably continue a conversation.

Good points well made.

[Noodle1982]

8.4L 154 said:

I think online hate crime and radicalisation should be taken very seriously. Maybe ask the citizens of NZ their opinion.

Anti trans hate in this country is affecting people on the high st. Emboldening people to be openly abusive to trans people irl. Online it's causing deaths by suicide as people give up on hope of a better world and one they can live in.

Why are you so concerned about the suicide rate in trans folk?!*

• That's the usual reply I get off CC whenever I've mentioned the suicide rates in the past.

[Noodle1982]

mattmurdock said:

The problem with these sorts of arguments is you end up in acceptance top trumps, because both sides have a core identity issue with acceptance of the other. I'd like to think that most sensible Catholics are not so wedded to the 'only two gender' concept that their Christian decency would allow them to turn the other cheek and accept Jackie for who she is.

However, if they truly believe that it is an issue for them, I suspect the greater decency would be for the two parties to agree to not talk to each other anymore as they clearly are not going to be able to amicably continue a conversation.

Have a chat with some Jehovah witnesses. Catholics are the least if the transgendered community worries.