The Gender Non-binary debate.
Discussion
mike9009 said:
What I am disturbed about is that John Lewis is still distinguishing between the sexes on their website.....
Are they going to move to gender neutral sizing?For most clothes you can instantly tell whether it's been designed for a man or a woman based on the sizes on offer.
Why are women's clothes sized as 10, 12, 14 etc. Is it because, much like their age - they don't want people to know their actual waist size - whereas men, mostly, don't give a f
k 
Moonhawk said:
Why are women's clothes sized as 10, 12, 14 etc. Is it because, much like their age - they don't want people to know their actual waist size - whereas men, mostly, don't give a fk
It's as mental as sizing shirts by collar size. I lost weight, my arms didn't get any shorter.k Randy Winkman said:
I think it's rather odd that it's commonplace to criticise people from other cultures for their backwardness and make fun of things from years ago but say "What's the problem?" of 2017 in the UK. In 50 years people will look back on 2017 and think that some of our attitudes were laughable.
My guess is they will look back at the ridiculous PC absurdity of the lengths that people went to not to possibly offend anyone, but in fact did just that to the vast majority.PurpleMoonlight said:
Randy Winkman said:
I think it's rather odd that it's commonplace to criticise people from other cultures for their backwardness and make fun of things from years ago but say "What's the problem?" of 2017 in the UK. In 50 years people will look back on 2017 and think that some of our attitudes were laughable.
My guess is they will look back at the ridiculous PC absurdity of the lengths that people went to not to possibly offend anyone, but in fact did just that to the vast majority.I think it's great to let people make their own way in their own style.
I do wonder about some people on this thread - why don't they ask their gay friends/relatives what it was like going up gay in the 70/80s? Look how much nicer it is now compared to back then. Same kind of thing is now happening for another group of people.
I can't believe that this John Lewis thing is even news. Let kids and/or parents pick what they like. Also, this pink and blue nonsense is a recent thing anyway, back in Victorian times it was the reverse and kids wore similar clothes up to a certain age. Society changes and evolves
Who cares what toilet people use - whatever makes you feel most comfortable. We all have to go and I don't see how anyone could be worried about that. It puts me in mind of my brother aged 8 at the time being shocked by a female toilet cleaner in Germany!
If a boy wants to wear a dress - so what? I know two guys that wear dresses. One is a top engineer in his field and the other is a tough Glaswegian guy who works with underprivileged teens in London. Do they go round upsetting or causing harm - no, both great guys.
One of my exes used to always want to dress as a boy when a kid because she was a very outdoors kind of girl, climbing trees, fishing, getting muddy etc. Her dad was, she says, horrified as he thought girls should be girls and boys should be boys. That really did affect her a bit later in life and she felt he never respected her choices - including a very engineering focused degree. I believe he'd have been more impressed if she had gone into a 'girls' job instead of running global packaging technology for a major company.
I honestly think if you're bothered greatly by life being made a bit easier for a small percentage of people you need to have a good hard look at why. Why are you so upset by something that probably doesn't affect your day to day life in any way?
I believe it will take a bit of time to settle down and then in 30 years time no one will bat an eyelid.
I would also add that in quite a few societies there has for many years been the concept of third sexes. Often men who live as women and, in a few, women that take on the identity of a man....have a Google. I don't believe that it has led to the downfall of society or people bursting into flames....
Edited by jdw100 on Tuesday 5th September 05:13
jdw100 said:
I'm in the vast majority - white, male. 40's - not offended at all.
I think it's great to let people make their own way in their own style.
I do wonder about some people on this thread - why don't they ask their gay friends/relatives what it was like going up gay in the 70/80s? Look how much nicer it is now compared to back then. Same kind of thing is now happening for another group of people.
Just to say many try and equate homosexuality with this modern fad of non-fixed genders and they are not the same thing at all.I think it's great to let people make their own way in their own style.
I do wonder about some people on this thread - why don't they ask their gay friends/relatives what it was like going up gay in the 70/80s? Look how much nicer it is now compared to back then. Same kind of thing is now happening for another group of people.
Homosexual behaviour is widespread in the animal kingdom and it has been claimed that 1,500 species have been observed that have a proportion practising it. All the discrimination against it was trying to suppress something created by nature.
In contrast the assertion that there is no natural difference between men and women can be countered by just going out into the world and meeting people.
I believe the number of UK people who are transgender is 0.1% as that is the number who have undergone the so called "sex change" operation.
In America surveys where people can claim to be Transgender, rather than you know actually undergo an operation and change their genitalia. puts the number at 0.1-0.3% depending on the survey.
It is a tiny percentage of the population to promote such hysteria and just goes to show the left is always looking for the next cause to demonstrate how much more "virtuous" they are than the rest.
I will leave you with what Alan Finch (who underwent a sex change) had to say on the matter.
Transsexualism was invented by psychiatrists.… You fundamentally can’t change sex.... The surgery doesn’t alter you genetically. It’s genital mutilation. My "vagina" was just the bag of my scrotum. It’s like a pouch, like a kangaroo. What’s scary is you still feel like you have a penis when you’re sexually aroused. It’s like phantom limb syndrome. It’s all been a terrible misadventure. I’ve never been a woman, just Alan.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Randy Winkman said:
I think it's rather odd that it's commonplace to criticise people from other cultures for their backwardness and make fun of things from years ago but say "What's the problem?" of 2017 in the UK. In 50 years people will look back on 2017 and think that some of our attitudes were laughable.
My guess is they will look back at the ridiculous PC absurdity of the lengths that people went to not to possibly offend anyone, but in fact did just that to the vast majority.otolith said:
Moonhawk said:
Why are women's clothes sized as 10, 12, 14 etc. Is it because, much like their age - they don't want people to know their actual waist size - whereas men, mostly, don't give a fk
It's as mental as sizing shirts by collar size. I lost weight, my arms didn't get any shorter.k Randy Winkman said:
Are the "vast majority" really offended? If so, perhaps they should get out more.
A couple of things...- not all in the minority group will be bothered either way at these moves. I expect some will think it does more harm than good.
- equally not all of the "vast majority' will be. That's not what was being said.
- why is it OK to suggest that someone in the majority group should " get out more" but not in the minority group?
BJG1 said:
They already have gender neutral sizing for children's clothes, it's by age.
However I'm reasonably sure a “boys 5-6“ is not the same size as a "girls 5-6". Inevitably there will be outliers intra-gender, but generally it helps finding the right size that bit more quickly (even if it is just a plain white t-shirt).I'm not sure I'm convinced the issues resolved by removing the gender from labels nobody sees are enough to warrant the inconvenience etc... And if my boys want Hello Kitty t-shirts they'll let me know as they see them whenever they're in the shops.
But then buying clothes is the wife's job so I guess I don't need to worry
Murph7355 said:
However I'm reasonably sure a “boys 5-6“ is not the same size as a "girls 5-6". Inevitably there will be outliers intra-gender, but generally it helps finding the right size that bit more quickly (even if it is just a plain white t-shirt).
I'm not sure I'm convinced the issues resolved by removing the gender from labels nobody sees are enough to warrant the inconvenience etc... And if my boys want Hello Kitty t-shirts they'll let me know as they see them whenever they're in the shops.
But then buying clothes is the wife's job so I guess I don't need to worry
It's not really the label that matter to you, but it matters when merchandising the store layout - does Hello Kitty stuff go on the girls side or the boys side? Why have a girls side and a boys side at all? Just make most of the products gender-neutral and lay it out on the racks by size/age rather than by gender.I'm not sure I'm convinced the issues resolved by removing the gender from labels nobody sees are enough to warrant the inconvenience etc... And if my boys want Hello Kitty t-shirts they'll let me know as they see them whenever they're in the shops.
But then buying clothes is the wife's job so I guess I don't need to worry
boyse7en said:
It's not really the label that matter to you, but it matters when merchandising the store layout - does Hello Kitty stuff go on the girls side or the boys side? Why have a girls side and a boys side at all? Just make most of the products gender-neutral and lay it out on the racks by size/age rather than by gender.
Why have a childrens section at all? Just make most of the products age-neutral and lay it out on the racks by size rather than by age/gender.JagLover said:
Just to say many try and equate homosexuality with this modern fad of non-fixed genders and they are not the same thing at all.
Homosexual behaviour is widespread in the animal kingdom and it has been claimed that 1,500 species have been observed that have a proportion practising it. All the discrimination against it was trying to suppress something created by nature.
In contrast the assertion that there is no natural difference between men and women can be countered by just going out into the world and meeting people.
I believe the number of UK people who are transgender is 0.1% as that is the number who have undergone the so called "sex change" operation.
In America surveys where people can claim to be Transgender, rather than you know actually undergo an operation and change their genitalia. puts the number at 0.1-0.3% depending on the survey.
It is a tiny percentage of the population to promote such hysteria and just goes to show the left is always looking for the next cause to demonstrate how much more "virtuous" they are than the rest.
I will leave you with what Alan Finch (who underwent a sex change) had to say on the matter.
Transsexualism was invented by psychiatrists.… You fundamentally can’t change sex.... The surgery doesn’t alter you genetically. It’s genital mutilation. My "vagina" was just the bag of my scrotum. It’s like a pouch, like a kangaroo. What’s scary is you still feel like you have a penis when you’re sexually aroused. It’s like phantom limb syndrome. It’s all been a terrible misadventure. I’ve never been a woman, just Alan.
You make an interesting point in your second sentence (my italics).Homosexual behaviour is widespread in the animal kingdom and it has been claimed that 1,500 species have been observed that have a proportion practising it. All the discrimination against it was trying to suppress something created by nature.
In contrast the assertion that there is no natural difference between men and women can be countered by just going out into the world and meeting people.
I believe the number of UK people who are transgender is 0.1% as that is the number who have undergone the so called "sex change" operation.
In America surveys where people can claim to be Transgender, rather than you know actually undergo an operation and change their genitalia. puts the number at 0.1-0.3% depending on the survey.
It is a tiny percentage of the population to promote such hysteria and just goes to show the left is always looking for the next cause to demonstrate how much more "virtuous" they are than the rest.
I will leave you with what Alan Finch (who underwent a sex change) had to say on the matter.
Transsexualism was invented by psychiatrists.… You fundamentally can’t change sex.... The surgery doesn’t alter you genetically. It’s genital mutilation. My "vagina" was just the bag of my scrotum. It’s like a pouch, like a kangaroo. What’s scary is you still feel like you have a penis when you’re sexually aroused. It’s like phantom limb syndrome. It’s all been a terrible misadventure. I’ve never been a woman, just Alan.
The strongest argument that the gay community has made for itself has been "I was born this way".
That implies a biological causation and a very valid argument to society as a whole to force itself to be understanding, non judgemental and accepting.
One of the arguments made by the (broadly speaking) transgender advocates is that sex, gender and sexual proclivity vary independently of biological sex.
some have even been known to deny the existence of biological sex
Last time I checked, that person still had a job as a university professor and has never retracted his statement.
As you can see the two positions are in some considerable conflict, if not mutually exclusive.
The simple fact that the majority of men identify as men, dress in a recognised male/masculine way, and are heterosexual, and that the same statistically applies to women, disproves any such claim as being 'normal' or 'usual'.
That does not say there are not exceptions. For example, I know a small number of gay men and women that from time to time have gone / will 'go the other way'. Some (most?) would probably never consider it.
None of what I am saying here, or have said in the past is intended to deny transgender people the right to do and dress as they please.
I have no desire to impinge upon their liberty providing 'they' do not attempt to impinge on mine.
Earlier...
Goaty Bill 2 said:
<snipped>
According to The Mail article, John Lewis "consulted campaign group Let Clothes Be Clothes before making the changes".
I don't think it would be unreasonable to suggest that they may be a politically or ideologically motivated group.
A look at their blog titles and recommended links certainly suggests so to me.
(italics are my edit for this post)According to The Mail article, John Lewis "consulted campaign group Let Clothes Be Clothes before making the changes".
I don't think it would be unreasonable to suggest that they may be a politically or ideologically motivated group.
A look at their blog titles and recommended links certainly suggests so to me.
The John Lewis thing appears more likely to be driven by feminists rather than the transgender advocates, though I don't doubt it suits the agenda of the more radical of the transgender advocates.
Why anyone felt that they couldn't buy decent shoes for their daughters simple because of some Clarks labelling is beyond me. Just look in other shops.
If someone doesn't like the logo on a shirt, then buy a different bloody shirt rather than getting your knickers in a twist.
If I were to object to all of the logos used by clothing manufacturers on the fronts of t-shirts and polo shirts, and got my way (God help us all), you'd all be wearing plain colours and there wouldn't be a polo player, alligator or a stupid slogan in sight. (strips, dots checks etc. are fine by me
)When my children were under 2 years old putting some pink on my daughter, or some blue on my son made it easier for people to work it out. It diminished the chance of other people making a mistake and feeling embarrassed, and it saved me from having to correct them.
It's pretty simple really.
JagLover said:
Just to say many try and equate homosexuality with this modern fad of non-fixed genders and they are not the same thing at all.
Homosexual behaviour is widespread in the animal kingdom and it has been claimed that 1,500 species have been observed that have a proportion practising it. All the discrimination against it was trying to suppress something created by nature.
In contrast the assertion that there is no natural difference between men and women can be countered by just going out into the world and meeting people.
I believe the number of UK people who are transgender is 0.1% as that is the number who have undergone the so called "sex change" operation.
In America surveys where people can claim to be Transgender, rather than you know actually undergo an operation and change their genitalia. puts the number at 0.1-0.3% depending on the survey.
It is a tiny percentage of the population to promote such hysteria and just goes to show the left is always looking for the next cause to demonstrate how much more "virtuous" they are than the rest.
I will leave you with what Alan Finch (who underwent a sex change) had to say on the matter.
Transsexualism was invented by psychiatrists.… You fundamentally can’t change sex.... The surgery doesn’t alter you genetically. It’s genital mutilation. My "vagina" was just the bag of my scrotum. It’s like a pouch, like a kangaroo. What’s scary is you still feel like you have a penis when you’re sexually aroused. It’s like phantom limb syndrome. It’s all been a terrible misadventure. I’ve never been a woman, just Alan.
Quite indeed.Homosexual behaviour is widespread in the animal kingdom and it has been claimed that 1,500 species have been observed that have a proportion practising it. All the discrimination against it was trying to suppress something created by nature.
In contrast the assertion that there is no natural difference between men and women can be countered by just going out into the world and meeting people.
I believe the number of UK people who are transgender is 0.1% as that is the number who have undergone the so called "sex change" operation.
In America surveys where people can claim to be Transgender, rather than you know actually undergo an operation and change their genitalia. puts the number at 0.1-0.3% depending on the survey.
It is a tiny percentage of the population to promote such hysteria and just goes to show the left is always looking for the next cause to demonstrate how much more "virtuous" they are than the rest.
I will leave you with what Alan Finch (who underwent a sex change) had to say on the matter.
Transsexualism was invented by psychiatrists.… You fundamentally can’t change sex.... The surgery doesn’t alter you genetically. It’s genital mutilation. My "vagina" was just the bag of my scrotum. It’s like a pouch, like a kangaroo. What’s scary is you still feel like you have a penis when you’re sexually aroused. It’s like phantom limb syndrome. It’s all been a terrible misadventure. I’ve never been a woman, just Alan.
The way I look at it now, people are free to do what they want, just don't try to ram it down peoples throats.
Act appropriately and use common sense, and keep yourself to yourself, and don't get offended when people say and do normal people things.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Childrens sizing is currently by age though. A new system would need to be designed and agreed with retailers.
Children's sizing is currently by both gender and age. Because, bizarrely, children's sizes generally conform to those groupings and what people see on TV tends not to influence that boyse7en said:
It's not really the label that matter to you, but it matters when merchandising the store layout - does Hello Kitty stuff go on the girls side or the boys side? Why have a girls side and a boys side at all? Just make most of the products gender-neutral and lay it out on the racks by size/age rather than by gender.
Note the TKMaxx comment above I suspect not the experience JL are targeting. Why group anything in any way at all? It's rarely to reinforce gender stereotypes or to try and make a minority feel less included. IMO. Practicalities. None of which stop me buying a dress if I want one (being a tall and fat b
d probably do that). Rather than change the way things are done universally, my guess is that JL will retreat from this approach quietly later (if they even implement it in any material way) as the practicalities of it will scupper any idealist nirvana.
jdw100 said:
I'm in the vast majority - white, male. 40's - not offended at all.
I think it's great to let people make their own way in their own style.
I do wonder about some people on this thread - why don't they ask their gay friends/relatives what it was like going up gay in the 70/80s? Look how much nicer it is now compared to back then. Same kind of thing is now happening for another group of people.
I have been relatively relaxed about this as initially it seemed to me to be a storm in a teacup, but actually your post, and some others on this thread, have made me realise I actually have reservations about this whole media event.I think it's great to let people make their own way in their own style.
I do wonder about some people on this thread - why don't they ask their gay friends/relatives what it was like going up gay in the 70/80s? Look how much nicer it is now compared to back then. Same kind of thing is now happening for another group of people.
Gender identification on a binary pink v blue thing has always struck me as somewhat bizarre, and I have been pretty much in favour of 'let toys be toys', the sister campaign of the group advising John Lewis. I've never had an issue with my young one playing with dolls, prams whatever, as frankly I'm just happy that he's occupied and interested. If he wants to wear necklaces or a pink shirt bully for him.
I've generally agreed with a feminist friend, who is a scientist and has long argued that the amount of preprogramming that occurs on children is having a debilitating effect on STEM subjects, and it makes no sense to be closing kids off from experiences by limiting access to toys etc. Her general objection has largely been that the acceptance of the herding of girls away from object orientated learning, and even rough and tumble, towards standard girlie pre teen nonsense (princesses, make up, ponies, you name it) is actually deeply bad for girls. I agree.
I also completely agree that the trend towards sexualised girl clothing, which *is* a thing, is appalling. As has been noted, girl clothes are tailored towards skinny fit, with also shorter shorts etc for infants. It's completely weird and appears to be something new.
However. I have enormous concerns about adults then coming out with the following tripe:
jdw100 said:
I can't believe that this John Lewis thing is even news. Let kids and/or parents pick what they like. Also, this pink and blue nonsense is a recent thing anyway, back in Victorian times it was the reverse and kids wore similar clothes up to a certain age.
No. No they didn't. The wealthy were able to provide ludicrously genderfied clothes. The middling and poor still also adhered to differences. As they have done through out most of modern history.
First up lets not start rewriting history to fit an agenda.
jdw100 said:
Society changes and evolves
Who cares what toilet people use - whatever makes you feel most comfortable. We all have to go and I don't see how anyone could be worried about that. It puts me in mind of my brother aged 8 at the time being shocked by a female toilet cleaner in Germany!
And so an argument about clothes for infants actually turns out to be about bigger things. Colour me surprised. The discussion it appears is also about gender differentials on a more fundamental level.Who cares what toilet people use - whatever makes you feel most comfortable. We all have to go and I don't see how anyone could be worried about that. It puts me in mind of my brother aged 8 at the time being shocked by a female toilet cleaner in Germany!
You may not care about those differentials: a large number of people do. Why are you asking them to change? It's really no skin off your nose whether you have to wander into binary stick person booth a or b however for a very large section of society this is important, so why are you suggesting this should be a thing?
And now we're at the races.
jdw100 said:
If a boy wants to wear a dress - so what? I know two guys that wear dresses. One is a top engineer in his field and the other is a tough Glaswegian guy who works with underprivileged teens in London. Do they go round upsetting or causing harm - no, both great guys.
One of my exes used to always want to dress as a boy when a kid because she was a very outdoors kind of girl, climbing trees, fishing, getting muddy etc. Her dad was, she says, horrified as he thought girls should be girls and boys should be boys. That really did affect her a bit later in life and she felt he never respected her choices - including a very engineering focused degree. I believe he'd have been more impressed if she had gone into a 'girls' job instead of running global packaging technology for a major company.
I honestly think if you're bothered greatly by life being made a bit easier for a small percentage of people you need to have a good hard look at why. Why are you so upset by something that probably doesn't affect your day to day life in any way?
I believe it will take a bit of time to settle down and then in 30 years time no one will bat an eyelid.
I would also add that in quite a few societies there has for many years been the concept of third sexes. Often men who live as women and, in a few, women that take on the identity of a man....have a Google. I don't believe that it has led to the downfall of society or people bursting into flames....
Right. One of my exes used to always want to dress as a boy when a kid because she was a very outdoors kind of girl, climbing trees, fishing, getting muddy etc. Her dad was, she says, horrified as he thought girls should be girls and boys should be boys. That really did affect her a bit later in life and she felt he never respected her choices - including a very engineering focused degree. I believe he'd have been more impressed if she had gone into a 'girls' job instead of running global packaging technology for a major company.
I honestly think if you're bothered greatly by life being made a bit easier for a small percentage of people you need to have a good hard look at why. Why are you so upset by something that probably doesn't affect your day to day life in any way?
I believe it will take a bit of time to settle down and then in 30 years time no one will bat an eyelid.
I would also add that in quite a few societies there has for many years been the concept of third sexes. Often men who live as women and, in a few, women that take on the identity of a man....have a Google. I don't believe that it has led to the downfall of society or people bursting into flames....
So we slide from whether or not girls can be tom boys, to apparently the recognition of a '3rd sex', for which there is absolutely no concensus, societal or scientific, and you wonder why people may be getting a little hot under the collar?
Because, apart from the fact, that you are pretty much upfront about that, and so in fact are many of the people advocating this change, it also is deeply disingenuous to dress the discussion re John Lewis, in that context, as just 'window dressing'.
it doesn't take a PhD in Rocket Science and Gender Studies for the average socially conservative thinker to realise that that might be precisely the reason they feel deeply uncomfortable with the process in play here.
For many of them, it's not really about the principle of 'boys v girls' clothes.
Frankly as long as shops still have signs saying 'Jumpers', 'Dresses', 'knickers' etc, then I'll be fine, and I'm sure John Lewis will survive.
The issue is that many of the proponents of this change are intensely relaxed about gender identification generally, a development that is *not* shared by a significant chunk of parents.
Trust me kids latch onto all sorts of nonsense (vegan infants for Christ's sakes, just *because* Islay saw some other kid acting up over sausages). Gender identification is another of those issues. Introducing Jonny to the concept of Girls and Boys (and Winkies and Fu Fu) is one thing. Introducing the muddle headed nonsense that is Adult Gender Theory along with it, is another thing, especially as Parents will have one eye on the upcoming clusterf
k that is puberty. As one wise person explained parenthood to me, being a parent raising a child is like training astronauts for a moon orbit. You go through years of programming and guidance, in the hope that once they get fired into orbit, and you essentially lose contact with them for 5 years, that training kicks in, and they are able to return to earth in one piece. What you don't do is present the child with the manual and say 'write it yourself! Be whatever you want to be!'. They'll end up in orbit with no context and will probably crashland.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff