Everyone is so offended.

[R Mutt]

amusingduck said:

Any knitters who didn’t condemn him were in trouble too: many received messages saying that it had been noticed they were still following him, and could they please explain when they would stop and provide a public statement against him.

The behaviour described on that article has started seeping into PH over the last few years. It's so pathetic, albeit amusing.

Well there are varying degrees of actions or attitudes which might draw calls for condemnation.

You may have someone seeming to support an unpleasant cause by close association obliged to distance themselves from it.

At the other end of the spectrum you might have a superfluous need to condemn an atrocity or genocide.

But a case like this, in which the accused has not even used anything remotely close to hate speech I don't think it's really fair to draw any such comparison.

[amusingduck]

R Mutt said:

At the other end of the spectrum you might have a superfluous need to condemn an atrocity or genocide.

Yeah, that's the type I'm seeing on PH more often these days.

The Sabinsky spat was hilarious, a few posters indulged themselves in the warm glow of making sure that everyone agrees that ethnic cleansing is bad, and making sure that those who haven't explicitly condemned him should do so before they continue

[R Mutt]

amusingduck said:

R Mutt said:

At the other end of the spectrum you might have a superfluous need to condemn an atrocity or genocide.

Yeah, that's the type I'm seeing on PH more often these days.

The Sabinsky spat was hilarious, a few posters indulged themselves in the warm glow of making sure that everyone agrees that ethnic cleansing is bad, and making sure that those who haven't explicitly condemned him should do so before they continue

That did seem to dominate long after the conversation had progressed to the wider subject of race and genetics. Pretty much sums up why politics never moves on. In this case one would be forced to admit that most people in to knitting are likely old and do not have the most up to date grasp of political correctness

[popeyewhite]

8.4L 154 said:

Well if you hadn't of confused yourself so much with out of context quoting and follow the comments back to what they relate to etc

Incorrect, again.

My first post, which you then addressed as concerning the other athlete.

popeyewhite said:

amusingduck said:

Not sure that's right, seeing as there's people like Caster Semenya who are intersex and competing with females?

IAAF state biology is the athletic classification marker not gender. Semenya is DSD and will have to have her testosterone levels decreased medically if she wants to compete against women in the future.

[8.4L 154]

popeyewhite said:

8.4L 154 said:

Well if you hadn't of confused yourself so much with out of context quoting and follow the comments back to what they relate to etc

Incorrect, again.

My first post, which you then addressed as concerning the other athlete.

popeyewhite said:

amusingduck said:

Not sure that's right, seeing as there's people like Caster Semenya who are intersex and competing with females?

IAAF state biology is the athletic classification marker not gender. Semenya is DSD and will have to have her testosterone levels decreased medically if she wants to compete against women in the future.

I was hoping not to have to do this.

Here is you making an idiot of yourself in the chain going back to the sentence in bold.

popeyewhite said:

8.4L 154 said:

popeyewhite said:

8.4L 154 said:

she has despite the reality of her results as she is not winning, obliterating or even qualifying for the competition she is supposed to do all those things in.

She got a 2016 Olympic Gold medal you wazzock.

Really? you'd have though if that was the case she would be listed in the medals table.

Why? She's a runner, those are weighlifting classifications.

here is the sentence again in its original context before you selectively quoted it (the second bold section) which tracks back up to the first bold section via you making the rather bizarre comment about fractions of a second in weightlifting and I mentioned your selective quoting being misleading. So much so you jumped the shark to a different athlete and sport.

8.4L 154 said:

popeyewhite said:

8.4L 154 said:

Kind of sums it up really, its got nothing to do with her athletic performance ..

????

She has the testosterone level of a man, and all the benefits raised t levels bring (larger muscles, quicker recovery, greater oxygen uptake). It doeasn't matter how /where she competes it will be unfair if she competes against women. To these athletes competition is their lives and training is all they do, and when a race/result can be determined by a split second a level and fair field is crucial, I'm sure you agree.

Why did you cut it off there to deliberately mislead and ignore what i said about the reality of all the advantages you claim (which are mostly untrue) she has despite the reality of her results as she is not winning, obliterating or even qualifying for the competition she is supposed to do all those things in.

8.4L 154 said:

Kind of sums it up really, its got nothing to do with her athletic performance or the fact she is struggling to qualify,

And you left out the bit I was responding to about it just being about not liking how she looked.

Which as you can see goes back to this original context of the comment with me replying to WinstonWolfs post relating to Laura Hubbard (see tweet)

8.4L 154 said:

WinstonWolf said:

8.4L 154 said:

WinstonWolf said:

https://twitter.com/DrJamesKent3/status/1232445812...

Well

How is she going to obliterate the Olympics when she hasn't even qualified and came 5th in the penultimate qualification having only made two clean lifts in her past nine international competitions?

https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1091321/we...

Just look at "her". I can see why female athletes aren't happy.

Kind of sums it up really, its got nothing to do with her athletic performance or the fact she is struggling to qualify, much like no other trans person is known to have qualified for the Olympics in near 20 years of eligibility But look at her! That is prejudice right there i'm afraid.

So no, I'm afraid your wrong, the discussion I was having was in relation to Laura Hubbard and you just confused yourself.and if that is a mess (or masterpiece) of quoting you only have yourself to blame.

[8.4L 154]

PS I never addressed your comment on casta from amusingduck post

[gizlaroc]

What has all this got to do with being offended?

Is anyone actually offended about someone male entering the women's weightlifting area? Or do they just find it pathetic?

8.4L seems to be the only one who is offended, offended we don't think it is fine.



Put it like this, if Tyson Fury declared he was a woman tomorrow should he be allowed to compete on the women's boxing circuit?


Surely this is for the trans thread?

[gregs656]

otolith said:

It does seem to me that trans women choosing to compete in elite sport are not doing trans people in general any favours.

I think most people can agree with that.

It sucks when your situation blocks you from achieving your goals, but some times that’s just how it is. Something that is far from unique to the trans experience.

[popeyewhite]

8.4L 154 said:

So no, I'm afraid your wrong,

No you are, and you smell and your mummy's fat.

[Ridgemont]

popeyewhite said:

8.4L 154 said:

So no, I'm afraid your wrong,

No you are, and you smell and your mummy's fat.

Well I think that wraps up this thread.

[WinstonWolf]

8.4L 154 said:

popeyewhite said:

8.4L 154 said:

Kind of sums it up really, its got nothing to do with her athletic performance ..

????

She has the testosterone level of a man, and all the benefits raised t levels bring (larger muscles, quicker recovery, greater oxygen uptake). It doeasn't matter how /where she competes it will be unfair if she competes against women. To these athletes competition is their lives and training is all they do, and when a race/result can be determined by a split second a level and fair field is crucial, I'm sure you agree.

Why did you cut it off there to deliberately mislead and ignore what i said about the reality of all the advantages you claim (which are mostly untrue) she has despite the reality of her results as she is not winning, obliterating or even qualifying for the competition she is supposed to do all those things in.

8.4L 154 said:

Kind of sums it up really, its got nothing to do with her athletic performance or the fact she is struggling to qualify,

And you left out the bit I was responding to about it just being about not liking how she looked.

It's not a case of not liking, that's a bloke in the pictures. Trying to claim otherwise is all a bit "Kings New Clothes" for me.

[Johnnytheboy]

gizlaroc said:

Surely this is for the trans thread?

Bored now.

Or at least, I identify as bored.

[ACCYSTAN]

gregs656 said:

otolith said:

It does seem to me that trans women choosing to compete in elite sport are not doing trans people in general any favours.

I think most people can agree with that.

It sucks when your situation blocks you from achieving your goals, but some times that’s just how it is. Something that is far from unique to the trans experience.

Agree although they have chosen to be trans , all choices have consequences both good and bad.

The only trans woman I know accepts her experience of being female will never be the same as a biological females no matter how much transition surgery and drugs are taken.
It’s quite a refreshing attitude to have as she can accept her life is different to others and doesn’t get hung up on the usual rubbish that occupy the more militant members of the trans lobby and stonewall types.

It also buggers up the desperation of the union rep who is now hostile towards her because she doesn’t want to play the victim card.
There is something very troubling about people on the far left of politics, in this case the union rep is obsessed with telling other what to do, what to think and what to feel (emotionally).
Not my idea of tolerance.

[JagLover]

Britbox criticised for airing old episodes of Doctor Who that contain "racism".

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britbox-opens-u...

Interesting one this because Britbox was set up specifically to show old UK TV and repeats for the 1970s and 1980s are bound not to meet today's PC standards.

[smn159]

JagLover said:

Britbox criticised for airing old episodes of Doctor Who that contain "racism".

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britbox-opens-u...

Interesting one this because Britbox was set up specifically to show old UK TV and repeats for the 1970s and 1980s are bound not to meet today's PC standards.

It's mostly behind a paywall, but the quote at the top of the article was from someone, presumably of Asian origin, who suffered racial abuse while growing up saying that the use of ''s and 'Yellowface' is hard to watch for her.

Fair enough, surely? Although your use of inverted commas around the word racism implies that you believe that you should be free to all Chinese people 's' and 'Yellowfaces' if you want.

What exactly do you think that 'today's PC standards' are anyway? Mostly they seem to just ask people not to act like a towards others

Why do some seem to find that difficult?

[dandarez]

smn159 said:

JagLover said:

Britbox criticised for airing old episodes of Doctor Who that contain "racism".

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britbox-opens-u...

Interesting one this because Britbox was set up specifically to show old UK TV and repeats for the 1970s and 1980s are bound not to meet today's PC standards.

It's mostly behind a paywall, but the quote at the top of the article was from someone, presumably of Asian origin, who suffered racial abuse while growing up saying that the use of ''s and 'Yellowface' is hard to watch for her.

Fair enough, surely? Although your use of inverted commas around the word racism implies that you believe that you should be free to all Chinese people 's' and 'Yellowfaces' if you want.

What exactly do you think that 'today's PC standards' are anyway? Mostly they seem to just ask people not to act like a towards others

Why do some seem to find that difficult?

The bit that is not hard to read is not behind the paywall.

Basically, she says she grew up in Hong Kong and for her 'it is really hard to watch because yellowface is so unacceptable now'.

Jeezus!
There are lots of things to watch I don't like. Do you know what? I don't f. watch them!
Is she being 'forced' to watch them to be 'offended'?

How f hard is that for today's generation?

[markyb_lcy]

So The Times saw something they thought people *could* in theory be angry about so they trawled the streets looking for someone who might be upset about it in order to get a quote from them.

Somewhat of a non-story in my opinion.

[chrispmartha]

dandarez said:

smn159 said:

JagLover said:

Britbox criticised for airing old episodes of Doctor Who that contain "racism".

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britbox-opens-u...

Interesting one this because Britbox was set up specifically to show old UK TV and repeats for the 1970s and 1980s are bound not to meet today's PC standards.

It's mostly behind a paywall, but the quote at the top of the article was from someone, presumably of Asian origin, who suffered racial abuse while growing up saying that the use of ''s and 'Yellowface' is hard to watch for her.

Fair enough, surely? Although your use of inverted commas around the word racism implies that you believe that you should be free to all Chinese people 's' and 'Yellowfaces' if you want.

What exactly do you think that 'today's PC standards' are anyway? Mostly they seem to just ask people not to act like a towards others

Why do some seem to find that difficult?

The bit that is not hard to read is not behind the paywall.

Basically, she says she grew up in Hong Kong and for her 'it is really hard to watch because yellowface is so unacceptable now'.

Jeezus!
There are lots of things to watch I don't like. Do you know what? I don't f. watch them!
Is she being 'forced' to watch them to be 'offended'?

How f hard is that for today's generation?

And you’re not forced to read the article


How hard is that for yesterdays generation to understand

;-)

[Noodle1982]

smn159 said:

JagLover said:

Britbox criticised for airing old episodes of Doctor Who that contain "racism".

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britbox-opens-u...

Interesting one this because Britbox was set up specifically to show old UK TV and repeats for the 1970s and 1980s are bound not to meet today's PC standards.

It's mostly behind a paywall, but the quote at the top of the article was from someone, presumably of Asian origin, who suffered racial abuse while growing up saying that the use of ''s and 'Yellowface' is hard to watch for her.

Fair enough, surely? Although your use of inverted commas around the word racism implies that you believe that you should be free to all Chinese people 's' and 'Yellowfaces' if you want.

What exactly do you think that 'today's PC standards' are anyway? Mostly they seem to just ask people not to act like a towards others

Why do some seem to find that difficult?

Why isn't there any outrage when the history channel shows world war 2 documentaries which show the horrific treatment of Jews at the hands of the Nazis?

People seem to get more offended by scripted TV shows/dramas/comedies.

[markyb_lcy]

dandarez said:

smn159 said:

JagLover said:

Britbox criticised for airing old episodes of Doctor Who that contain "racism".

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britbox-opens-u...

Interesting one this because Britbox was set up specifically to show old UK TV and repeats for the 1970s and 1980s are bound not to meet today's PC standards.

It's mostly behind a paywall, but the quote at the top of the article was from someone, presumably of Asian origin, who suffered racial abuse while growing up saying that the use of ''s and 'Yellowface' is hard to watch for her.

Fair enough, surely? Although your use of inverted commas around the word racism implies that you believe that you should be free to all Chinese people 's' and 'Yellowfaces' if you want.

What exactly do you think that 'today's PC standards' are anyway? Mostly they seem to just ask people not to act like a towards others

Why do some seem to find that difficult?

The bit that is not hard to read is not behind the paywall.

Basically, she says she grew up in Hong Kong and for her 'it is really hard to watch because yellowface is so unacceptable now'.

Jeezus!
There are lots of things to watch I don't like. Do you know what? I don't f. watch them!
Is she being 'forced' to watch them to be 'offended'?

How f hard is that for today's generation?

There’s a difference between finding something offensive and not liking something.

There is also the fact that in order to find out you are offended about something (or don’t like something) that you’re going to have to watch at least a bit of it to find out.

People have the right to be offended. You not understanding their reasoning for it doesn’t take away their right to it.

If we want to air and watch tv with out of date cultural opinions and prejudices in there, then we have to accept that certain people might be offended by it. Seems to me that it’s not enough for these anti-snowflakers that this stuff is on tv and available ... they want everyone to shut up and not be offended by it too.

Free speech, but only when it suits them.