TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 9 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 225 of 338

Thread: Cancel culture cancelled the thread on cancel culture

  1. #201
    Still Subjective
    Registered: Dec 1999
    Location: Idiocy will never die
    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    I'm still waiting for proof that false claims have become a significant issue with more women coming forward to tell their stories as part of #metoo or even what a news publication not properly vetting and corroborating their sources has to do with cancel culture.
    What's hilarious is we have the #metoo hashtag in the same thread as some guy saying that women who don't want to have a dick swinging in front of them and their underage daughters whilst in a changing room (or other safe space, like a women's refuge) should like it or lump it.

    It's beyond parody.
    Last edited by SubJeff; 8th Jul 2020 at 11:15.

  2. #202
    Still Subjective
    Registered: Dec 1999
    Location: Idiocy will never die
    Quote Originally Posted by raph View Post

    First, it still focuses on genitals, which is an issue in itself, as if GRS was the culmination of transition. This isn't necessarily the case.
    It has to focus on genitals. That's what the issue is about. How you gonna discuss the tomato crops without mentioning tomatoes. Or crops?

    I know GRS isn't the culmination. I've said as much earlier in the thread.

    On one hand, you can bet a pre-op trans man probably won't be flashing his vulva
    Sure, he might use a cubicle. No problem.

    just like a pre-op trans woman wouldn't be flashing her penis
    But if they did, it would upset people more than the other way around, wouldn't it?

    Ask your wife or girlfriend or some female friends. Try it.

    Why do you assume that men wouldn't get... ...predatory, IF they saw something?
    I don't.

    Can I kindly ask that you don't strawman me like this?

    This is a legit concern of course. I think it far more likely that a trans man is assaulted in a changing room by a cis man, than a trans woman by a cis woman. Far far more likely.

    Another thing that makes me extremely uncomfortable in this argument is that it also seems to grossly assume, for the purpose of generating extra discomfort, that trans women are just men in drag
    Nope. Not at all.

    I can assure you that you probably crossed path with trans women (and men) many times, and were none the wiser.
    I'm sure. I knew a trans woman way back in the early 90s. She was a friend of a friend. I didn't know for at least 2 years.

    Imagine if someone was lucky to transition early and develop into a full-blown woman... then just because she has a penis you'd force her to share facilities with men? She does not belong there, no more than the man I posted before belongs in the women's.
    What do you mean by "full blown"?

    Also, I never said that such a person should have to share facilities with men. Just that I understand the concerns surrounding them using female facilities.

    And let's be clear - I don't think unisex toilets are really a big deal. They usually have cubicles so you can have privacy and even if they have urinals most people aren't going to feel exposed. If they do they can use the cubicles. I'm talking changing rooms and other places where people are likely to spend more time in a vulnerable state.

  3. #203
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Land of the crazy
    Bringing #metoo into this is a non-sequitor. #metoo was about sexual harassment. A trans woman changing in the women's changing room or peeing in the women's bathroom is not sexual harassment.

    For the last time, trans women don't want to use women's facilities so they can show off their dicks to other women. That's a figment of your imagination. Hell, most are ashamed of their dicks and don't want people to see them. They want to use women's facilities because their gender is female, not male. And they should use the women's facilities because they are female, not male. If you don't understand that, you don't understand gender.

    It's clear we're can't discuss this rationally until you can recognize the difference between gender and genitalia.

    And you shouldn't be shocked by the thought of an underage girl possibly getting a glimpse of penis in a non-sexual situation. It's as if you think that ANY viewing of the opposite biological sex is automatically a sexual situation, which is religious nut territory.

  4. #204
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: The Land of Make Believe
    Quote Originally Posted by Aja View Post
    You want to ban all trans women from women-only spaces on the basis that they might be offenders. How is that functionally different than what I accused you of when you treat every trans women as a potential Karen White?
    No I don't, I want to ban anyone with a penis from certain women-only spaces.

    Your second sentence is (I can only assume) a deliberate misrepresentation of what I wrote. You don't need to treat every transwoman as a potential Karen White, just to acknowledge that the group called transwomen contains people like Karen White, and that permitting all transwomen into certain spaces necessarily involves permitting the Karen Whites into those spaces.

  5. #205
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: The Land of Make Believe
    Quote Originally Posted by heywood View Post
    It's clear we're can't discuss this rationally until you can recognize the difference between gender and genitalia.
    Oh the irony.

    The argument is that people with certain genitalia be blocked from certain spaces utilised by people with other genitalia.

    In a case of blatant misdirection, it is the opponents of this stance who are introducing gender into the situation.

  6. #206
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Land of the crazy
    The fundamental issue here is one of gender.

    The "OMG, somebody might see a dick!" argument I keep hearing from your guys is the misdirection.

    We're just never going to agree. If you're not willing to let trans women act as women in public, solely because they have male genitalia, regardless of whether their genitalia poses a problem or threat to anyone, then there really isn't much more to talk about. I'm just glad you guys aren't making the rules.

  7. #207
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    I feel like this thread has gone full circle now.

    At the end of the day, when you boil it right down, this entire "bathroom discussion" is about fear.
    Leaving aside trans people for a moment (as it's not really a subject any of us are knowledgable enough to argue about), women like J.K. Rowling appear to be afraid of men (which in her definition also includes trans people). She seems to be afraid that men are dangerous sexual predators and that women need to be kept safe from them.

    Let's take a step back from that for a moment. Why would women be so afraid of men?
    I'm going to suggest that one reason is because the small percentage of bad men tend to get away with it. For various reasons, our society and our courts tend to always favour the accused in these kinds of cases.
    The existence of a small number of dangerous criminals is bad, but the fact that they rarely get punished for their crimes and are often free to repeat them makes it far worse.

    Compare that to something like murder. If someone is murdered in a town, the culprit is usually caught and arrested, so you don't have to fear also being murdered there, unless there is a (statistically unlikely) second murderer. But if someone is sexually assaulted, the culprit is often released shortly afterwards, so the threat of that one bad actor doesn't actually go away after the crime.

    I'm going to argue that our society making (some) women that afraid of men is a much bigger problem than the sub-problem of which bathroom or changing room someone should be using as a result of that fear.

    Since we've already established that our society and courts currently don't deal with cases of sexual crimes against women, then it stands to reason that we need to reform our society in some way.

    How can we do that? Well, for one thing, we can start by making sure that the perpetrators of these kinds of crimes face the consequences of their actions, by for example refusing to associate with them or refusing to support them. A kind of "consequence culture" for misdeeds that currently don't have appropriate consequences in our society.

    And you know what? Someone who doesn't like the idea of a consequence culture and wants to diminish it might decide to mis-label this as a "cancel culture".

  8. #208
    Taking the Death Toll
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Location: they/them mayhem
    Quote Originally Posted by SubJeff View Post
    That's a leap.

    Anyone can commit sexual assault.

    The law in many countries, including the one I live in, defines rape as requiring a penis. That's only relevent to me as an example of how penis owners are already treated differently to non penis owners. Fwiw I disagree with the definition as I think non penis owners who force certain sexual acts on whoever are still rapists.
    you "disagree" with the definition and yet your entire argument is based around it

    this entire thread has been a showcase of you making spirited arguments and then you say you believe the opposite of those arguments

  9. #209
    I want to reiterate that the vast majority of feminists I know and know of are in fact largely open and intersectional. Women like J.K. Rowling are a minority that makes a lot of noise to destroy all the progress that's been made in the last decade, but in my, admittedly limited, experience, the LGBTQ and feminist community Venn diagram is pretty much a single circle. I'm lucky to be in Barcelona though, which is one of the most inclusive cities in the world, so my perception may be skewed.

    Transgender people are vulnerable, and victims of the same men these women claim will attack them if trans people have their way e.g. with restrooms. There's a growing movement, in France anyway, to recognize and commemorate feminicides, but for years every November, the trans community have been remembering their dead too. What TERFs claim is irrational but it dominates the debate because it plays on very old, very obvious and very real fears, and it also makes trans people an easy target to point at, because transphobes latch on this valid fear to double down on hate and harassment.

    In actuality, feminists and LGBTQ collectives often work hand in hand to fight transphobia and patriarchy, and create safe spaces for everyone. We must do the same and fight this harassment, educate people better about LGBT issues, while also addressing what makes these fears so present. That's kind of been my intention in this thread.

  10. #210
    Still Subjective
    Registered: Dec 1999
    Location: Idiocy will never die
    Quote Originally Posted by june gloom View Post
    you "disagree" with the definition and yet your entire argument is based around it

    this entire thread has been a showcase of you making spirited arguments and then you say you believe the opposite of those arguments

    No it isn't.

    And no it isn't.

  11. #211
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    Just don't mention Cyberpunk 2077 around them. I have one trans friend on Facebook, and when the subject of interchangeable gender (via augmentations) came up that did not go down well.

    If one could be male one day then switch an augment and be female the next and back and forth, is that trans or a new category entirely? I have no idea. To my friend he/she said it is but (and my knowledge on this subject is practically zero) isn't trans when a male wants to be female? But if one fully wanted to be male one day and female the next is that the same thing? And then which bathroom would they use? Would really mess with the other topic of conversation.

  12. #212
    That's more genderqueer/non-binary identities, which depending on who you ask is part of the transgender spectrum.

  13. #213
    Moderator
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: Wales
    An article on the BBC website: Cancel culture: What unites young people against Obama and Trump

    It's more to do with statues rather than bathrooms though.

  14. #214
    Taking the Death Toll
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Location: they/them mayhem
    Quote Originally Posted by SubJeff View Post
    No it isn't.

    And no it isn't.
    i rest my case

  15. #215
    Taking the Death Toll
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Location: they/them mayhem
    Quote Originally Posted by icemann View Post
    he/she
    do they actually use both pronouns or are you just a shitty friend who can't be bothered to remember which one they use?

  16. #216
    Still Subjective
    Registered: Dec 1999
    Location: Idiocy will never die
    Can you read?

    You're really amazing. We finally agree on one thing and you can't see how my view is not built on anything to do with who can and can't commit rape or assault. At all.

    Where have I said this?

  17. #217
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: The Land of Make Believe
    Quote Originally Posted by heywood View Post
    The fundamental issue here is one of gender.

    The "OMG, somebody might see a dick!" argument I keep hearing from your guys is the misdirection.

    We're just never going to agree. If you're not willing to let trans women act as women in public, solely because they have male genitalia, regardless of whether their genitalia poses a problem or threat to anyone, then there really isn't much more to talk about. I'm just glad you guys aren't making the rules.
    No, it's about dicks, and you seem to simultaneously want to associate dicks with gender, while denying that dicks define a person's gender. It's Schrodinger's Cock.

    Plus it's a bit more than "somebody might see a dick". Although you seem entirely unwilling to accept that a lot of women and girls would be extremely intimidated by seeing dicks in a changing room, and justified in being intimidated.

    And to repeat, nobody wants to prevent transwomen acting as women in public. We're talking about denying access to women's private safe spaces.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nameless Voice View Post
    I feel like this thread has gone full circle now.

    At the end of the day, when you boil it right down, this entire "bathroom discussion" is about fear.
    Leaving aside trans people for a moment (as it's not really a subject any of us are knowledgable enough to argue about), women like J.K. Rowling appear to be afraid of men (which in her definition also includes trans people). She seems to be afraid that men are dangerous sexual predators and that women need to be kept safe from them.

    Let's take a step back from that for a moment. Why would women be so afraid of men?
    Well gee, I don't know, I guess it must be because a significant proportion of men are dangerous sexual predators.

    The statistics say 20% of women in this country have been the victims of sexual assault. Having spoken to some actual women, that sounds somewhat on the low side to me, but let's take it at face value.

    Next time you're out and about, count the women you pass. Every fifth one has been sexually assaulted. Add them up. Then tell me women at their most vulnerable - captive in prisons, naked in a locker room - have nothing to fear.

    Society does a terrible, terrible job at protecting women from sexual violence. I'm sorry that prioritising their safety impinges on anyone else, but it's tough shit.

  18. #218
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2002
    Location: I think I've been here
    Quote Originally Posted by Nameless Voice View Post
    Since we've already established that our society and courts currently don't deal with cases of sexual crimes against women, then it stands to reason that we need to reform our society in some way.

    How can we do that?
    Well since you're not living in an oppressive political regime but in Ireland, I guess you could...

    A) Effect change in the solid democratic process of your country.
    B) Or start advocating extrajudicial punishment though social ostracism and slander.

    Let's see which way you choose:

    Quote Originally Posted by Nameless Voice View Post
    How can we do that? Well, for one thing, we can start by making sure that the perpetrators of these kinds of crimes face the consequences of their actions, by for example refusing to associate with them or refusing to support them. A kind of "consequence culture" for misdeeds that currently don't have appropriate consequences in our society.

    And you know what? Someone who doesn't like the idea of a consequence culture and wants to diminish it might decide to mis-label this as a "cancel culture".
    I understand you sympathize with the cause of rape victims and so do I. But I'm not going on a slippery slope to totalitarianism for them, the same way I'm not going to advocate censoring the whole internet because of child abuse. If that's cancel culture, it would already look bad. But it's also fiercely anti-intellectual in its rash and immoderate retributions for perceived thought-crimes, creating a stifling intellectual atmosphere. And it propagates ahistorical revisionism, when judging works of art solely by today's quickly tightening moral standards with intent of holding their creators responsible if possible.
    Cancel culture is in one word an ideology, that you subscribed to under the tutelage of a guy who can barely leave his basement for fear of the outside world, feeding his hatred of everyone who isn't as miserable as he is.

  19. #219
    Taking the Death Toll
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Location: they/them mayhem
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolya View Post
    Cancel culture is in one word an ideology, that you subscribed to under the tutelage of a guy who can barely leave his basement for fear of the outside world, feeding his hatred of everyone who isn't as miserable as he is.
    if this is in reference to me, biggest lmao in the world because A) i'm not a guy and 2) i promise you, NV doesn't need me to teach him anything

    i wonder when the forum nazis will show up, i'm shocked they haven't yet as this thread continues to fester unchecked

  20. #220
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Jawohl? You rang?

    ...eh, looks okay to me. A little overly tense and touchy, but that's not unusual these days.

  21. #221
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    If someone has been the victim of abuse, they have every right to speak out about it, even if they can't prove it in court. Rather, it would be totalitarian to shut down their free speech.

    Something being historical is no excuse for giving it a free pass for its problematic aspects. Statues in public spaces are also current symbols, for example, and as such can easily be retired, especially ones put up with bad intentions to begin with. And disclaimers on old movies or TV episodes are hardly "stifling intellectual atmosphere".

    Cancel culture is in one word a narrative perpetuated by reactionaries who are afraid of the mores changing and yearn for the "good old days".

  22. #222
    Still Subjective
    Registered: Dec 1999
    Location: Idiocy will never die
    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    Cancel culture is in one word a narrative perpetuated by reactionaries who are afraid of the mores changing and yearn for the "good old days".
    So all these people are reactionaries?

    Got it.

    Thanks.

  23. #223
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    I think stifling of expression is a legitimate concern when the targeting is misguided and causes more friction in social communication than there should be - that's definitely a concern, but you can't say that people like Rowling didn't deserve it.

    But outside of Rushdie having a fatwa declared on him for having the gall to treat a religious prophet as a flawed human being/take creative liberties on a religious text (/s in case it's needed), have any of those people actually been 'cancelled'? Heck, I'm pretty sure that more people wanted to read Rushdie after that furore than before.
    Last edited by Sulphur; 9th Jul 2020 at 00:10.

  24. #224
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2003
    Location: The Plateaux Of Mirror

  25. #225
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Wait, who is stifling Rowling's expression? She's a multimillionaire who produces Hollywood movies and has millions of followers on social media. She doesn't just have a platform, she has, like, all of the platform.

Page 9 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678910111213 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •