Fewer Nativity Christmas Cards

[Baby boomer]

Do you really want to go down that rabbit hole?

What I want is the freedom to choose which rabbit holes to explore. I baulk when someone says "you can't do that" and Intend to immediately respond "why not?" I don't find the modern excuse that certain speech can be "unsafe" for listeners to be at all convincing - if you don't like it, don't listen.

What I don't get is the need some people have to but labels on other people, or their objection to labels people put on themselves.

Anyone is free to label themselves as they wish. What they're not free to do is compel others to adopt their labelling system.

My gender, gender identity or sexuality isn't threatened or undermined by someone else identifying as a women or a man or whatever.

Nor is mine. But I find that being required to agree to a patently untrue proposition (on pain of being labelled transphobic or even criminalised) is a step too far.

Why is it so important to Linehan and his ilk? What's the big deal? What consenting adults do together, wear, identify as etc is their own business and doesn't hurt anyone else. It would be great if we could get to a place where words like straight, gay, bi, trans etc were unnecessary, just as descriptions around skin pigmentation should be, and people were just people.

Careful now, me lad!! You'll find that your noble ambition to be colour blind to skin pigmentation is held (by the woke amongst us) to be a classic example of white privilege and hence racist. (Or "I hear you're a racist, now, Purple" to misquote the good Mr Linehan's work.)

In that context I find the objections to LGBTQ people and how they see themselves as deeply unsavoury.

They're more than welcome to see themselves any way they want. It's a free world. What is unsavoury is when they want to impose their worldview on everyone else, even though it defies biological science.

The objectors are more often than not informed by Middle Eastern tribal writings which can be summed up in "We want to oppress or kill you because we love you".

Or maybe the objectors elevate scientific reality over ideological dogma?

 

[peemac]

How did we get from the non availability of Nativity scene Christmas Cards to peoples' freedom of speech?

And that's why no-one sends religious Christmas cards anymore

 

[RichInSpirit]

I agree with Leper's first post. I was looking to buy an old fashioned Nativity scene Christmas card a bit before Christmas and there was none available in the shop I visited.
I learned since that you could buy the religious cards from some of the religious communities, charities etc. And very inexpensively too but you would have to get a quantity of cards. I was only looking to get one card.

 

[Purple]

What I want is the freedom to choose which rabbit holes to explore. I baulk when someone says "you can't do that" and Intend to immediately respond "why not?" I don't find the modern excuse that certain speech can be "unsafe" for listeners to be at all convincing - if you don't like it, don't listen.


Anyone is free to label themselves as they wish. What they're not free to do is compel others to adopt their labelling system.

I think it's more to do with not being harassed as ridiculed in their everyday life, particularly by people who are unaffected by their views and choices.

Nor is mine. But I find that being required to agree to a patently untrue proposition (on pain of being labelled transphobic or even criminalised) is a step too far.

I agree, but I don't see that happening.

Careful now, me lad!! You'll find that your noble ambition to be colour blind to skin pigmentation is held (by the woke amongst us) to be a classic example of white privilege and hence racist. (Or "I hear you're a racist, now, Purple" to misquote the good Mr Linehan's work.)

I don't think so.

They're more than welcome to see themselves any way they want. It's a free world. What is unsavoury is when they want to impose their worldview on everyone else, even though it defies biological science.



Or maybe the objectors elevate scientific reality over ideological dogma?

Possibly, but people who believe in sky fairies telling someone else that gender or sexuality is an immutable thing is more than a bit ironic.

 

[RetirementPlan]

Anyone is free to label themselves as they wish. What they're not free to do is compel others to adopt their labelling system.

In a situation like a university or school or employment, it is entirely reasonable that people are treated with a little basic respect and human dignity. It is dreadfully sad that some people lack the basic humanity to do this, so sometimes organisations have to put in place policies to require people to do this. For trans people, this may involve requiring people to use their chosen name or chosen pronouns. If you have difficulty with treating people with a little basic dignity like this, maybe you shouldn't be working in a university or school or such employment.

Nor is mine. But I find that being required to agree to a patently untrue proposition (on pain of being labelled transphobic or even criminalised) is a step too far.

Is there any such proposition in Ireland?

Careful now, me lad!! You'll find that your noble ambition to be colour blind to skin pigmentation is held (by the woke amongst us) to be a classic example of white privilege and hence racist. (Or "I hear you're a racist, now, Purple" to misquote the good Mr Linehan's work.)

No-one knows who wrote Fr Ted or Black Books or the IT Crowd. The scripts were handed down over the generations from parent to child, and appeared on the desk of a C4 commissioning editor on vellum pages in cloud of smoke.

 

[Baby boomer]

Possibly, but people who believe in sky fairies telling someone else that gender or sexuality is an immutable thing is more than a bit ironic.

The sky fairy was feeling bored one day so she decided to have a bit of fun. There was a clap of thunder and a voice rang out from the clouds. From now on, she declared, my human creations in Ireland only need to print out and sign a piece of paper and their sex will instantly change. Men will magically transform into women, and women will magically transform into men. Furthermore, the changes will be retrospective and it is hereby declared that the men who transform to women were in reality always women even if nobody (including themselves) knew it. Likewise the women who become men were always men, even if they have previously given birth to children.

A few wise archangels tried to talk some sense into the sky fairy but she wasn't buying it. One suggested that people could just go along with the idea and pretend that the men were now women and call the female names and pronouns. No, no, said the sky fairy, that won't do at all. It's a question of faith - they must actually BELIEVE that the former men were always women and are just now discovering their true sex. But lookit here, another angel said, that'll mean that men can get pregnant and terms like expectant mother will have to be banned. Absolutely said the sky fairy and I'll make the HSE address women's health care issues to "people with cervixes" even though this might mean that some patients don't understand and miss out on vital screenings. Yet another angel pointed out that any man convicted of a crime in Ireland could opt to be sent to a women's prison. And what about women's sports said another? Imagine a twenty stone six foot six second row playing women's rugby, there'll be carnage. Are you seriously saying that boys can use the girls changing rooms if they sign a bit of paper saying they're a girl, asked another angel.

Yes, said the sky fairy, all those things and more besides will follow. But can't you see I'm only having a bit of fun here. It's an experiment to see how gullible people can be and how far we can push this. Some of the other Gods get their people to believe really way out stuff like Immaculate Conceptions and winged horses ascending to heaven. I'm a bit jealous of them really. Why shouldn't my secular believers be required to affirm equally nonsensical dogma?

And the archangels had to admit: she had a point.

 

[RetirementPlan]

The sky fairy was feeling bored one day so she decided to have a bit of fun. There was a clap of thunder and a voice rang out from the clouds. From now on, she declared, my human creations in Ireland only need to print out and sign a piece of paper and their sex will instantly change. Men will magically transform into women, and women will magically transform into men. Furthermore, the changes will be retrospective and it is hereby declared that the men who transform to women were in reality always women even if nobody (including themselves) knew it. Likewise the women who become men were always men, even if they have previously given birth to children.

A few wise archangels tried to talk some sense into the sky fairy but she wasn't buying it. One suggested that people could go along with the idea and pretend that the men were now women and call the female names and pronouns. No, no, said the sky fairy, that won't do at all. It's a question of faith - they must actually BELIEVE that the former men were always women and are just now discovering their true sex. But lookit here, another angel said, that'll mean that men can get pregnant and terms like expectant mother will have to be banned. Absolutely said the sky fairy and I'll make the HSE address women's health care issues to people with cervixes even though this might mean that some patients don't understand and miss out on vital screenings. Yet another angel pointed out that any man convicted of a crime in Ireland could opt to be sent to a women's prison. And what about women's sports said another? Imagine a twenty stone six foot six second row playing women's rugby, there'll be carnage. Are you seriously saying that boys can use the girls changing rooms if they sign a bit of paper saying they're a girl, asked another angel.

Yes, said the sky fairy, all those things and more besides will follow. But can't you see I'm only having a bit of fun here. It's an experiment to see how gullible people can be and how far we can push this. Some of the other Gods get their people to believe really way out stuff like Immaculate Conceptions and winged horses ascending to heaven. Why shouldn't my secular believers be required to affirm equally nonsensical dogma?

And the archangels had to admit: she had a point.

It's always funny when people who never had the slightest interest in conditions on women's prisons or strength of women's rugby are suddenly hugely concerned about the theoretical problems that could possibly arise. We've had gender self-declaration in Ireland for what, about five years now, and women's prisons haven't exploded in smoke, women's rugby hasn't collapsed in a scrum. The relevant authorities in each area are well capable of managing such situations as and when they arise. I know of one girl's convent school locally, the one that had the reputation for being the most conservative and traditional, who handled beautifully the transition of one of the students from female to male. It all works.

It also seems to look like this isn't really a free speech issue. This is about people who want to impose their traditional gender norms on others, and use free speech as a flag of convenience.

 

[Purple]

@Baby boomer, I agree that self declaration of gender identity is daft. There should be a more onerous process. That doesn't mean I don't think being Trans is a real thing but in the end it doesn't matter what I think, it matter what the people this impacts think, and the whole healthcare/prison thing is just hysterical nonsense. A tiny proportion of people are Trans. They have no material impact on the rest of us. Why not just leave them alone to get on with their lives?

 

[Baby boomer]

@Baby boomer, I agree that self declaration of gender identity is daft.

Good! Some common ground there. Mind you that makes us both transphobes according to the criteria used by trans advocates.

There should be a more onerous process. That doesn't mean I don't think being Trans is a real thing but in the end it doesn't matter what I think, it matter what the people this impacts think,

To a point, yes. When the rest of us are obliged to adopt their thinking and follow through with the consequences of it, then the problems start...

and the whole healthcare/prison thing is just hysterical nonsense.

No, it's not actually. There are at least two violent sex offenders, with histories of crimes against women, but who self-identified as female, housed in Limerick prison. At least one, with 10 convictions for sexual assault, has never received any hormonal or surgical transition treatment and is a fully equipped biological male. He is required to be accompanied by two prison officers at all times when in the common areas of the prison. Utter, utter madness. Do a Google search for details but do dig deep - the mainstream press are extremely reluctant to report the details and use deliberately evasive language!

A tiny proportion of people are Trans. They have no material impact on the rest of us. Why not just leave them alone to get on with their lives?

More than happy to oblige as long as they reciprocate. But when they start to infringe on my freedom of speech, I draw the line.

 

[Baby boomer]

It's always funny when people who never had the slightest interest in conditions on women's prisons or strength of women's rugby are suddenly hugely concerned about the theoretical problems that could possibly arise.

It's not theoretical; it already has arisen. You may not have heard about it because the media are so reluctant to report it. Google is your friend though. See my post above.

We've had gender self-declaration in Ireland for what, about five years now, and women's prisons haven't exploded in smoke, women's rugby hasn't collapsed in a scrum.

Not yet. In other countries, women (real ones) have been deprived of the opportunity to participate on national Olympic teams in favour of biological males. Only a matter of time, here....

The relevant authorities in each area are well capable of managing such situations as and when they arise.

Not always. Especially when the law constrains what they can do.

I know of one girl's convent school locally, the one that had the reputation for being the most conservative and traditional, who handled beautifully the transition of one of the students from female to male. It all works.

Good for them. Not all cases will work out as well as that and the law doesn't provide a remedy for abuse of self-id.

It also seems to look like this isn't really a free speech issue. This is about people who want to impose their traditional gender norms on others, and use free speech as a flag of convenience.

Aha! The old argument ad hominem trick. You don't like my argument so you attack my bona fides rather than dealing with the issue. Free speech is a hugely important right and is the bedrock of democracy. Any constraints on free speech are a very legitimate concern whether or not you agree with the person making them. Popular or inoffensive speech doesn't need protection.

 

[Purple]

Good! Some common ground there. Mind you that makes us both transphobes according to the criteria used by trans advocates.

Some, but certainly not all. I don't care what people label me as. As I've said above I'm not a fan of labels and place little value on them.

To a point, yes. When the rest of us are obliged to adopt their thinking and follow through with the consequences of it, then the problems start...

Who is trying to force anyone to adopt 'their' way of thinking? There isn't one single 'way of thinking' common to all Trans people. They are people; their views differ, back to the shortcomings of labels.

No, it's not actually. There are at least two violent sex offenders, with histories of crimes against women, but who self-identified as female, housed in Limerick prison. At least one, with 10 convictions for sexual assault, has never received any hormonal or surgical transition treatment and is a fully equipped biological male. He is required to be accompanied by two prison officers at all times when in the common areas of the prison.

Okay, so if that's correct there are two people out of 5 million that are causing a problem. I'm sure we can deal with that.

More than happy to oblige as long as they reciprocate. But when they start to infringe on my freedom of speech, I draw the line.

Who is infringing on your freedom of speech?
You are perfectly entitled to hold and voice any opinions you like. You can be transphobic, homophobic, racist, misogynistic, Islamophobic or whatever and you should be freely entitled to say what you like as long as you are not inciting violence or attacking an individual.

 

[RetirementPlan]

It's not theoretical; it already has arisen. You may not have heard about it because the media are so reluctant to report it. Google is your friend though. See my post above.

Is the media reluctant to report it, or do they just see it as a non-issue being bigged up by people who want to impose their own gender norms on others? I've heard some of those details before, though given that the prison service don't comment on individual or operational issues, I'd take some of them with a large pinch of sald.

I'm also left wondering why some people are so motivated to be so concerned about this one particular issue in a women's prison. Did you have any previous concerns, about safety there, or treatment by staff, or quality of food, or violence between inmates, or quality of rehabilitation services. What is it about this one particular issue that motivates this sudden yet very narrow concern for women prisons.

Repeat for women's rugby.

Not yet. In other countries, women (real ones) have been deprived of the opportunity to participate on national Olympic teams in favour of biological males. Only a matter of time, here....

From the little bit I read on this some time ago, this is again a very simplistic approach, taking no account of the complexities that arise around, for example, female athletes like Caster Semenya with high testosterone levels. And again, the relevant sporting federations are all of the issue.

And again, I wonder about the sudden, narrow interest in women's olympic team selection procedures, focused on this one very narrow issue. It's almost as if sport isn't really the issue here.

Not always. Especially when the law constrains what they can do.


Good for them. Not all cases will work out as well as that and the law doesn't provide a remedy for abuse of self-id.

Can you give any examples of how relevant authorities have been constrained by law in dealing in dealing with trans people? And what kind of abuses of self-declaration have been going on?

Aha! The old argument ad hominem trick. You don't like my argument so you attack my bona fides rather than dealing with the issue. Free speech is a hugely important right and is the bedrock of democracy. Any constraints on free speech are a very legitimate concern whether or not you agree with the person making them. Popular or inoffensive speech doesn't need protection.

Again, I've no idea what kind of constraints on free speech you're talking about. Are you on about deliberate misgendering of people in an educational or employment context?

Treating people with some basic respect and dignity is a pretty important bedrock of democracy too.

 

[Baby boomer]

Is the media reluctant to report it, or do they just see it as a non-issue being bigged up by people who want to impose their own gender norms on others? I've heard some of those details before, though given that the prison service don't comment on individual or operational issues, I'd take some of them with a large pinch of sald.

None so blind as those who don't wish to see....

I'm also left wondering why some people are so motivated to be so concerned about this one particular issue in a women's prison. Did you have any previous concerns, about safety there, or treatment by staff, or quality of food, or violence between inmates, or quality of rehabilitation services. What is it about this one particular issue that motivates this sudden yet very narrow concern for women prisons.

Repeat for women's rugby.

If an argument is good and valid in its own right, the motivation of those making it don't invalidate the argument. You are scraping the bottom of the rhetorical barrel by resorting to such tactics. One can only assume that's because you can't or won't address the issues without the ad hominem crutch.

From the little bit I read on this some time ago, this is again a very simplistic approach, taking no account of the complexities that arise around, for example, female athletes like Caster Semenya with high testosterone levels. And again, the relevant sporting federations are all of the issue.

Semanya is different, being DSD which is an incredibly rare genetic intersex-type condition typified by XY chromosomes, testes rather than ovaries, ambiguous external genitalia and male testosterone levels. Whatever the argument for allowing her compete as a woman (not very strong in reality) there's none at all for the self-id brigade. And to be honest, the sporting organisations are all over the shop on this and have been terrified into submission by the trans lobby.

And again, I wonder about sudden, narrow interest in women's olympic team selection procedures, focused on this one very narrow issue. It's almost as if sport isn't really the issue here.

Again, nice try at diversion tactics!

Can you give any examples of how relevant authorities have been constrained by law in dealing in dealing with trans people?

I have! The Irish Prison Service being forced to accept biological males into women's prisons.

And what kind of abuses of self-declaration have been going on?

See women's prison issue above.

Again, I've no idea what kind of constraints on free speech you're talking about.

The aforementioned criminal legislation on "Hate Speech" being worked on by Helen McEntee.

Are you on about deliberate misgendering of people in an educational or employment context?

"Misgendering" is a completely makey-uppy concept. You could more correctly call it right-sexing.

Treating people with some basic espect and dignity is a pretty important bedrock of democracy too.

No, actually, it's not. It's what happens organically in society. You can't really legislate for it between ordinary citizens in a democracy or other system.

 

[Purple]

None so blind as those who don't wish to see....

Irony, it seems, is in the eye of the beholder.

If an argument is good and valid in its own right, the motivation of those making it don't invalidate the argument.

Yes, and this one isn't.

And to be honest, the sporting organisations are all over the shop on this and have been terrified into submission by the trans lobby.

What Trans Lobby? You'd swear there was some well funded nefarious group subverting society rather than a tiny minority seeking to be allowed to live in peace without duress.
The proposed guidance from international rugby is that trans women who transition before puberty can play the women's game but those who transitioned after puberty can't. That could be finetuned but it seems about right. These things can be figured out.

I have! The Irish Prison Service being forced to accept biological males into women's prisons.

See women's prison issue above.

The women's prison thing is just a nonsense argument against broader Trans rights.

"Misgendering" is a completely makey-uppy concept. You could more correctly call it right-sexing.

All words are makey-up.

No, actually, it's not. It's what happens organically in society. You can't really legislate for it between ordinary citizens in a democracy or other system.

Without sufficient respect and commonality for the other side democracy doesn't work. With the exception of the far left looneys and the Shinners I know that every political party in this country is fundamentally committed to democracy. When we don't have basic manners and respect we lose commonality and what happened in the USA last January happens.

 

[Leo]

This is fast becoming a recreation of the awkward Christmas conversation with the racist granny who's had a little too much of the brandy after dinner. You'll never convince her she's wrong, she's too ingrained in her views and too inebriated to comprehend that all people, regardless of how they see themselves are deserving of basic respect.