Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Not really mate, i’m not the one advocating the right to express hate speech.
Judge Says Belief in Biological Sex Not Protected (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter shmmeee
- Start date
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
You should probably try and get back in touch with the real world at some point if you think that’s actually going to happen and worth mentioning.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Yup. People campaign for all kinds of daft and strange shit. It doesn't mean we should give it any credence.
It's just front page tabloid fodder to get people frothing at the mouth.
Marty
Well-Known Member
Just admit you're wrong and we don't have free speech in this country.
What about that man that was so sick of his girlfriend going on about there dog, that he taught his dog to raise its paw when he said 'gas the jews'
Clearly a joke, but was convicted of a hate crime.
Alan Dugdales Moustache
Well-Known Member
A kid at school who wishes to identify as the opposite gender wishes to use the toilet of that gender. The school say no. Many parents object as well. The child has to use the disabled toilet as a compromise.
This happened at a school I taught over 10 years ago. That child was in my class. We were all aware that this particular child was to identify as the opposite sex many weeks before it happened. The child left on the Friday as "Mark" and returned on the following Monday as "Faith" .The school supported the child as best it could. Occasionally I called the child by the wrong name once they made the "switch" but soon got used to it. I could never refer to him as "she" however, because to me "she" wasn't a female, so I never ever engaged in a he/she conversation in the classroom. The kids at school all seemed to take it in their stride . Swimming lessons were very tricky. So many parents refused to allow the child into the female changing rooms that this particular child had to go to the disabled changing facility accompanied by a T.A. The child at that time was only 10 years old.
Anyone think that the parents' objection were discriminatory ? Anyone considers my decision not to refer to that child as "she" is wrong ?
This happened at a school I taught over 10 years ago. That child was in my class. We were all aware that this particular child was to identify as the opposite sex many weeks before it happened. The child left on the Friday as "Mark" and returned on the following Monday as "Faith" .The school supported the child as best it could. Occasionally I called the child by the wrong name once they made the "switch" but soon got used to it. I could never refer to him as "she" however, because to me "she" wasn't a female, so I never ever engaged in a he/she conversation in the classroom. The kids at school all seemed to take it in their stride . Swimming lessons were very tricky. So many parents refused to allow the child into the female changing rooms that this particular child had to go to the disabled changing facility accompanied by a T.A. The child at that time was only 10 years old.
Anyone think that the parents' objection were discriminatory ? Anyone considers my decision not to refer to that child as "she" is wrong ?
fellatio_Martinez
Well-Known Member
Hate is completely objective depending on the person suffering it and that's the problem with so called hate speech.
Once you start giving one group special privileges every marginalised section of society will come out and demand action on speech.
That's why we need absolute free speech and we almost certainly do not have that.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
It's not necessarily about targeting minority sections of society, presumably you'd be fully supportive of someone being able to openly encourage violence against people of this country and their right to have a platform to express this?
Otis
Well-Known Member
You can't have total free speech can you? If there are no repercussions for anything you say, then you would be free to to tell someone you are going to kill them, that black people are a sub-species, that Jews deserved to be gassed etc. etc.
It's not free speech if there is a consequence to what you say and surely there has to be a consequence to someone making death threats.
Otherwise everyone can just say everything they say is just banta.
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Chromosomes determine biological sex/gender.
Surgery/drugs to change appearance is perhaps like putting on make-up. Wearing fancy clothes or beefing up down the gym carries the same motive in the cold light of day. To make you feel more attractive to those you want to attract.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Within certain boundaries.
It's no wonder we are all confused...'barriers exist only in your mind' is positively encouraged...until you speak out of turn.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
So a man that surgically changes sex to a woman can still get an erection?
Rich - can you help us out here?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Ok...I self determine to be Master of the Universe. As such you ALL do as I say, right?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Obviously he can't say "but you are still biologically the same gender...so you're still a bloke really" or words to that effect, for starters
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Yep, exactly.
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Respect...that is what it all comes down to. Just because some things don't sit right with us doesn't mean we can be unpleasant to/about them.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
So racism is okay as long as you don't use it in attack, or advocate bad behaviour of others towards attack?
Some might say those idiots doing the monkey chants at football matches aren't attacking anyone. "Banter innit?" They might say.
I'm with Schmmeee on this in finding it all fascinating how we have such a wide variety of thought on acceptable or not.
Bit like a young woman out on the town looking for a suitor on a Friday night. Some >50yr year old guy (probably MartCov lol) says "lovely arse luv" & gets roundly verbally chastised. 20meters further on some gym bunny with my looks says exactly the same thing & is welcomed with open arms.
Proving once again, offence can only be taken...so to respect others we have to try to find the most respectful & inoffensive way of getting the message across...bloody minefield isn't it?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Otis
Well-Known Member
We have free speech, but it is impossible to have total free speech.
Is anyone truly advocating that? More free speech, fair enough, but complete and total free speech?
Just how lovely would it be if people came up to your wife, or girlfriend, or worst of all, your son or daughter and said 'I am going to rape you.'
Free speech, innit.
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
On the face of it it is ridiculous...but then it is often used by intellectually lazy people to describe intellectually enthusiastic people in a negative/offensive way.
Where is the line? Who draws it?
Maybe we should just rename the earth as 'a grey area'
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
WTF, where have I said racism is okay as long as it’s not attacking anyone? Any sort of racism is abhorrent, whether it is to attack someone or not.
The right to say whatever you want would also mean that people would be free to racially abuse people at a football match as it would be their freedom of speech. We’ve already seen gassing the Jews described as a joke on this thread, so I guess anti-Semitic chants would also be okay.
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
You seripusly cannot see how the bit highlighted could be offensive to white males? It could be interpreted as racist because the insinuation is that hate speech is the preserve of white males...which we all know it isn't
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
I’m not taking exclusively about racism, the point is is that it’s easy to pass judgement on others when you’re in the majority.
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
I think it is all from attitudes that bark back to the 'good old days'. Due to the prevalence & pattern of conversations heard as a child - until I knew someone that was openly gay - I could easily have developed into a homophobe with the unspoken but discomforting belief that all homosexuals had a desire to take me roughly from behind AND liked young boys (i.e. paomedophile!)
Obviously, absurd. Also, related to your post, There are parts of the world where young children & subsequently young adults DO use the bathroom & shower facilities. They DO feel comfortable undressing & re-dressing in front of each other. It isn't perceived as a signal, come-on, threat or whatever. So what do parents think their child will do or have done to them as a result of using the same changing room as this fellow pupil? Like you said - the kids just take it in their stride. However thanks to prejudicial parents the child in question has possibly been mentally scarred for life.
Your approach I cannot see an issue with. You appear to have avoided gender references & early-days mix-ups with names have to be expected I would think. Hope said child only blamed the parents & not the school staff...otherwise who the hell could they rely on to turn to?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Agree entirely. Have said the same in some other thread at some point.
Unless you are the one being offended on that specific issue, it is very hard if not impossible to understand it.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Sorry if I was unclear - you specifically used racism to attack someone. I wasn't accusing you, merely asking the question.
We could say "THAT is how easy it is to cause offence" which clearly neither you or I were intending to do
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Otis
Well-Known Member
It is a minefield and I am sure we all have our own take in exactly what we find offensive and what we don't, that's why there needs to be some kind of regulation in place.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No that’s a direct threat of violence
fellatio_Martinez
Well-Known Member
You're completely missing the point.
Threatening to rape someone is an actual crime. Calling someone a name isn't.
Pretty simple stuff.
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Am I getting confused or something but isn't this this ruling not that that belief isn't protected but that the person who holds that belief shouldn't be able to use it to discriminate against people in the workplace?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Surely you can not believe in something without being a dick and offending people. For example I'm not religious but if someone else says they are I don't start making obviously offensive comments to them.
If someone wants to be called he or she then just call them what they want, its not difficult and doesn't mean you agree with their choice.
To be fair I'm not a fan of individuals using they / them, but thats more because it just doesn't sound right and makes it seems like more than one person is being referred to in many instances. And yes I know it can be singular but its down to phrasing.
As for parents who want to 'protect' their kids I think thats mostly just their own prejudice. Kids don't give a shit and take it all in their stride. However when it comes to things like shared changing rooms there is an issue. If its self identifying how do you prevent some weirdo turning up at the local baths and claiming they identify as a woman to get access to the women's changing rooms?
If someone wants to be called he or she then just call them what they want, its not difficult and doesn't mean you agree with their choice.
To be fair I'm not a fan of individuals using they / them, but thats more because it just doesn't sound right and makes it seems like more than one person is being referred to in many instances. And yes I know it can be singular but its down to phrasing.
As for parents who want to 'protect' their kids I think thats mostly just their own prejudice. Kids don't give a shit and take it all in their stride. However when it comes to things like shared changing rooms there is an issue. If its self identifying how do you prevent some weirdo turning up at the local baths and claiming they identify as a woman to get access to the women's changing rooms?
fellatio_Martinez
Well-Known Member
That's all well and good until you forget which specific pronoun out of the hundreds available that someone is and they then get you fired because you "miss gendered" them.
And what if you're Christian or Muslim and your faith goes against such things and you do find it extremely difficult?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Clearly nobody should be fired for a genuine mistake but in that instance wouldn't you just apologise and move on. Sure in most cases it would be fairly obvious if it was a genuine mistake and / or the person being deliberately offended to make things difficult. That's very different to what's happened here with someone consistently refusing to use the preferred pronoun.
No different to something like catholics and homosexuality is it? You can have that belief but if you went into work and started ranting at somebody who was homosexual, or even just anyone in general, you'd expect to be hearing from HR pretty swiftly.
fellatio_Martinez
Well-Known Member
The difference is that if you're religious and don't agree with using different pronouns it doesn't matter because using the correct pronouns is compelled speech, so you have to use it or else you're fired or location depending, arrested. How anyone can't see that as an encroachment on basic rights is living in cuckoo land and happily handing things over language zealots.
It's not as if the main voices fighting for this are even moderate, liberal minded people themselves yet they want everyone else to roll over and have their arseholes tickled.
tisza
Well-Known Member
Where things have got out of control is the use of social media to spread abuse.
Social media companies often claims free speech outweighs anything (cynic in me thinks that more to do with profit).
People emboldened to make "hateful" comments whilst hiding behind their computer screens etc. or "anonymous" usernames.
I see JK Rowling spoke out in support of this woman and has been pelted on social media by certain sections.
Social media companies often claims free speech outweighs anything (cynic in me thinks that more to do with profit).
People emboldened to make "hateful" comments whilst hiding behind their computer screens etc. or "anonymous" usernames.
I see JK Rowling spoke out in support of this woman and has been pelted on social media by certain sections.