![]() In a bid to get the thread back on track - and because Susie Green is yet again the woman Linehan has decided to spend this week lying about and bullying in a hateful manner - I'm reposting this from the 5th thread. The biology of sex is very much one of those areas. Grown-up science goes far beyond this and requires acceptance and understanding of the areas where things are less clear-cut. I'll add to this that GCSE level of study typically involves simplifications of complex topics to make them more accessible to children. Sophie has an excellent post here on the biology of sex: I will stop asking GCSE Biology questions here. Sadly we know that doesn't always mean this side wins. I wonder which side is founded in logic and reality. I don't actually expect you to do this, because it would involve empathy and consideration of the problematic assumptions behind your position, and that's difficult to do, particularly when wrapped up in the levels of fear and anger which seem to characterise anti-trans groups. It's a useful exercise to try to argue for your opponent's position, especially in heated topics. I think people who argue for your position typically don't actually understand what they're arguing against, and make too many unfounded and unquestioned assumptions about what we believe. I can do this for trans-exclusionary arguments, if I suspend my critical faculties, and if I did, I think you would accept that I understand the broad strokes of where you're coming from. I'm not asking you to agree with them, just try to describe them neutrally. I'll add one:Īre you able to describe the general current arguments for trans-inclusivity in a way that we would recognise? I look forward to seeing your answers to them, then - plenty of them have been put here. Quote from: Redfern on September 24, 2021, 08:58:07 AM ![]() Yes you can all sneer at his 'racecar bed', but how many of you would make such sacrifices to partake in a fight you have no direct stake in? If the trans lobby is so put upon, why is a man's life cratered for speaking out against it? He has made enormous sacrifices to fight this insansity, which is disgracefully largely ignored or indulged by the mainstream media. He has alluded to regret at some of his past behaviour, but his contrition has been too mealy mouthed for my liking. After years of starting & joining pile-ons, viciously smearing people for challenging things like mass immigration (where the core battle lines are actually pretty similiar), he suddenly found himself at the the other end of the stick. ![]() It only succeds if enough people are willing to endure the copious doublethink required, as well as the grave injustices against particulary, but not exclusively, women and children which it perpetrates.Ī word on Glinner: Like a lot of 'left wing liberals' (see Hadley Freeman, Julie Bindel etc), I feel he was hoisted by his own petard. And it will not take much to crumble the facade, because as we have seen, it is built on very little indeed. And once the excesses of TR's really start to bite, there will be a pushback. Because most people naturally favour reality. You can sit in your echo chamber here, but the vast majority of the public is GC, even though most will not have heard of that term. The arrogance of trying to change societal rules & people's perception of reality without wanting to be challenged is breathtaking. These posts have confirmed to me that TRA's will simply respond with fury when challenged. GC's can answer all the questions thrown at them. TRA's cannot answer basic questions because they expose the incoherence of their ideology.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |