[Humour] It’s not for girls…

[BadFish]

Yes because it’s not a natural way to speak

Language is a social construct? there is no "natural way to speak"

Thats why we have different languages and dialects. Language is also continuously evolving. It might sound a bit weird at first but you soon get used to it.

 

[Lenny Rider]

I showed this advert to my 12year old daughter last night, who could not believe this was allowed at anytime to be on tv.
My wife remembers the advert, and thinks although it is funny, is now gladly a thing of the past.
Me I think it’s funny, and probably because I’m a white heterosexual 50 plus male, don’t really think beyond that, I guess that’s wrong.

Is this a timeless harmless funny advert ?
or an embarrassment that quite rightly a thing of the past.

Be interested to see the age demographic of the 14 who voted for option 2?

 

[Live by the sea]

Ok

 

[BadFish]

What is a sensitive gender environment ?

Working with people who experience gender dysphoria.

 

[Live by the sea]

Ok. I don’t really get that anyway but each to their own I guess .

 

[Bakero]

Language is a social construct? there is no "natural way to speak"

Thats why we have different languages and dialects. Language is also continuously evolving. It might sound a bit weird at first but you soon get used to it.

Back when I lived in Vietnam I had to learn about 20 pronouns to address people of different sex and age. Hard to understand the fuss people make over here when it's suggested that for one in 100000 people they might be asked to use they/them. Especially, as we've used they/them as gender neutral 3rd person pronouns for donkey's years.

(As I type, Kae Tempest just came on the radio. @Live by the sea might be interested to read this interview with Kae from last year https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...ving-with-this-boiling-hot-secret-in-my-heart )

 

[BadFish]

Back when I lived in Vietnam I had to learn about 20 pronouns to address people of different sex and age. Hard to understand the fuss people make over here when it's suggested that for one in 100000 people they might be asked to use they/them. Especially, as we've used they/them as gender neutral 3rd person pronouns for donkey's years.

(As I type, Kae Tempest just came on the radio. @Live by the sea might be interested to read this interview with Kae from last year https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...ving-with-this-boiling-hot-secret-in-my-heart )

Interesting article. I don't know the artist but they tell their story well. Thanks

 

[birthofanorange]

I ask people to call me a shortened version of my name and people are pretty happy to do it. Not much to ask is it?

No, it isn't, by any stretch of the imagination, though why you like to be called 'Bad' is a bit worrying.

 

[Bakero]

Interesting article. I don't know the artist but they tell their story well. Thanks

I recommend checking out some of their songs. Not everyone's cup of tea, my partner's not a fan, but a great lyricist imo.

 

[dsr-burnley]

There’s a big difference between tolerance for reasonable behaviour and ridiculous behaviour . Not knowing whether you are female or male and wanting to be addressed in a non gender way is a serious mental health issue and these people need help not the general public pandering to their issues .

It's not a mental health issue, by and large. On an individual basis, it's just linguistics. Ever since human beings existed, the difference between male and female has been based on genitals, and essentially (though they didn't know it at the time) chromosomes. Have a Y chromosome, you're a man. Simple as that.

Biologically, that definition still exists. But certain aspects of modern society are trying to introduce a new definition of a man by which anyone who declares himself to be a man, regardless of chromosomes, is a man under the new definition. (And vice versa for women, of course.) If someone makes that declaration, it doesn't mean insanity, it just means they have adopted the new definition. Obviously if a person with a penis and a Y chromosome believes that he is pregnant and may give birth, then he does have a mental health problem, but that's a different issue.

Where the issue comes is that the people who want to redefine the word "man" are trying to make out that someone who fits the new definition of "man" has all the attributes of the old definition. Hence the farce whereby people with the size and strength advantages of Y chromosomes are being allowed to play sports against those without. If they change the definition of a man and a woman, that's one thing. But to change the definition of a man and a woman and then to pretend they haven't changed so the rules don't need to change, that's where the trouble really lies.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Except it's the Fat Acceptance movement that is the problem in the woke community.

These people actually take on the medical science and try to push the narrative that the medical view is wrong and that obese people can actually be healthy.

They are saying they are "metabolically healthy" even if they are obese.

These people on the social media platforms that influence young impressionable are pushing awful advice based on their ideologies.

They are worse than fat shamers because fat shamers aren't refuting medical science, the fat acceptance movement is.

So any movement or thought process you don't like, you're just lumping them altogether from zebra Tim to fat acceptance, to whatever else you don't like. And it's convenient to pretend it's one thing and call it all woke or whatever else.

 

[sydney]

So the idea that all men would be sneered at in all bars in NYC if they ordered a diet coke is a load of old bollocks, then, I presume you'll agree?

if you went into some bars in NY and asked for a diet coke with llama spunk , pineapple juice and a microdot in it you would probably get it ...depending on the bar , it all depends on the bar wouldn't you say...?

and yes , total bollox

 

[sydney]

No ones outraged mate.

sorry did i say outraged ....did i ...??

 

[sydney]

I guess our definitions of outraged and offended are different. (Which may explain why I struggle to see the woke stuff people are always raging against).

I won't ask you to highlight the posts but I am genuinely interested to know which you are referring to.

well Hamilton is defo having a moment....more petulant than outraged ...i don't think i used the word outraged but hey ho .....could be wrong.

 

[Insel affe]

 

[abc]

“Fat acceptance”? Never heard of it. Never heard of half the stuff you go on about. Zebras etc.

Which should tell you something;

If you go looking for stuff to be outraged and upset by, you’ll likely find it.

I let people carry on and strangely, I don’t hear about hardly any of it.

I agree with what I am reading as your general acceptance and tolerance of different people and their view of life. I also work with vulnerable people and you couldnt do so without acceptance and tolerance. However, it rather clashes with the language you regularly use on here towards those that don't share your political views. Perhaps you communicate very differently in the work place and in public compared to when you can be anonymous on a keyboard?

 

[sydney]

I agree with what I am reading as your general acceptance and tolerance of different people and their view of life. I also work with vulnerable people and you couldnt do so without acceptance and tolerance. However, it rather clashes with the language you regularly use on here towards those that don't share your political views. Perhaps you communicate very differently in the work place and in public compared to when you can be anonymous on a keyboard?

i say...!! steady on old chap...!!

 

[birthofanorange]

I agree with what I am reading as your general acceptance and tolerance of different people and their view of life. I also work with vulnerable people and you couldnt do so without acceptance and tolerance. However, it rather clashes with the language you regularly use on here towards those that don't share your political views. Perhaps you communicate very differently in the work place and in public compared to when you can be anonymous on a keyboard?

Tbf, those that vote for political parties such as the one we currently have in power, do actually impact on our individual lives, in a rather negative way.
I think it's fair to treat them rather differently to someone who chooses to indentify as a zebra, for example.

 

[The Clamp]

I agree with what I am reading as your general acceptance and tolerance of different people and their view of life. I also work with vulnerable people and you couldnt do so without acceptance and tolerance. However, it rather clashes with the language you regularly use on here towards those that don't share your political views. Perhaps you communicate very differently in the work place and in public compared to when you can be anonymous on a keyboard?

Hmm. It’s a fair question. I would say that it is more that my tolerance of stupid people is low than cover of anonymity.

I have tolerance for anyone who could for example, give me a reasoned argument for Brexit or give a valid argument for voting Conservative.

However, I find those on here that argue for such things largely argue stupid points or chip on with provocative rhetoric, never actually giving a solid argument for their views.

If you look at my response to political topics, I’ll debate reasonably with anyone prepared to back up their viewpoint.

But as I’ve said many times, I reserve the right to call stupid notions, stupid.

 

[MattBackHome]

sorry did i say outraged ....did i ...??