Jump to content

Freedom of speech is dead - official!


WestonSalop
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

A bit strong !
They can do as they please, however I am very uncomfortable with the 'protected ' status of such minorities.
It flies in the face of the definition of equality.

Can you imagine just how bullet-proof a transgender member of the travelling community would be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Can you imagine just how bullet-proof a transgender member of the travelling community would be?

In theory , yes, in practice ,Ive met a few gay members of the travelling community, and they are accepted, and ridiculed at the same time.

Travs are not very PC , as Im sure you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Thunderbird said:

Does anyone know why the last transgender thread disappeared?

Probably removed for discrimination.

In other news.

Image may contain: text

The University of Edinburgh is hosting an event conference titled “Resisting Whiteness” where white people are to be banned from speaking. Resisting Whiteness is also the name of the group that has organized the event and describes itself as a QTPOC (queer and trans people of color) organization.

There will be two “safe spaces” at the event, one of which white people will be barred from entering. A blurb for the conference reads that the aim is to “amplify the voices of people of color” and therefore will not be giving the microphone to white people during Q&A’s.

“If you are a white person with a question, please share it with a member of the committee or our speakers after the panel discussion.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Probably removed for discrimination.

In other news.

Image may contain: text

The University of Edinburgh is hosting an event conference titled “Resisting Whiteness” where white people are to be banned from speaking. Resisting Whiteness is also the name of the group that has organized the event and describes itself as a QTPOC (queer and trans people of color) organization.

There will be two “safe spaces” at the event, one of which white people will be barred from entering. A blurb for the conference reads that the aim is to “amplify the voices of people of color” and therefore will not be giving the microphone to white people during Q&A’s.

“If you are a white person with a question, please share it with a member of the committee or our speakers after the panel discussion.”

Amazing!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as i think the lunatics are running the asylum, i can't help but think back to my last stay in hospital when i was asked by the nurse booking me intro the ward what i wanted to be called, Mr M, robert, rob etc , it made me feel more comfortable everyone calling me Rob. And it makes me think that if you can make someone relaxed in an environment that can be the cause for concern then why not call someone they, or it or whatever, it's not as if it will kill you to do so.

For a religion that is supposed to be tolerant, this doctor isn't really following the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/10/2019 at 21:04, welsh1 said:

As much as i think the lunatics are running the asylum, i can't help but think back to my last stay in hospital when i was asked by the nurse booking me intro the ward what i wanted to be called, Mr M, robert, rob etc , it made me feel more comfortable everyone calling me Rob. And it makes me think that if you can make someone relaxed in an environment that can be the cause for concern then why not call someone they, or it or whatever, it's not as if it will kill you to do so.

For a religion that is supposed to be tolerant, this doctor isn't really following the rules.

I think you make a good point Rob, and I think most people would broadly agree with general human treatment and dignity. But what (I suspect) scares a lot of people is the influence of the trans lobby and the apparent desire to compel speech. I don't know any transgender people but if I did, I would in polite conversation refer to them as whatever (within reason) they would prefer, because that's polite and if they were a friend I would want to be polite to them. I think people fear the slippery slope, with 90+ and counting different gender pronouns would an employer be looking at the wrong end of an employment tribunal for (even accidentally, and therefore 'institutionally') mis-pronouning a person, especially a person with activist tendencies?

The answer to that is yes, if gender identity is made a protected characteristic. 

I think there is a difference between calling someone a preferred thing to make them comfortable, and being made to state, apparently factually, that the entirely biologically male person sitting in front of you is in fact a woman. If doctors can't make statements about biology and anatomy, who can? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...