|
Title: M, F or X? Post by: tikay on October 11, 2017, 12:04:42 PM http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/41567449/why-i-want-gender-neutral-uk-passports Is it reasonable to have "gender-neutral" passports? (http://i.imgur.com/bQrtVwj.png) (https://imgur.com/bQrtVwj) Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: AndrewT on October 11, 2017, 12:11:09 PM If you identify as either M or F this will not make a lick of difference to you.
Same as straight people moaning about gay marriage. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: POWWWWWWWW on October 11, 2017, 12:18:31 PM Quote "When I changed my passport gender to female, I had to get a letter from my doctor that basically said 'OK Mia is trans. This transition is permanent. She is now considered female, please change it'. It wasn't enough for just my permission to do it. (https://media.giphy.com/media/P0HC80OR5vkD6/giphy.gif) Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: ripple11 on October 11, 2017, 01:03:31 PM Unspecified sounds great....you can chose the shortest queue for the loos. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: RickBFA on October 11, 2017, 03:12:50 PM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they?
"she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: kukushkin88 on October 11, 2017, 04:05:02 PM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Evilpengwinz on October 11, 2017, 04:51:50 PM Think about reasons why this needs to be on a passport - Laws differ throughout the world, and some of those differ based on whether you are male or female. E.g. there are countries where men and women have a different age of consent. Indonesia's laws are not "According to your passport you're transgender, so you can pick and choose whether you're allowed to have underage sex based on whether you're feeling more masculine or feminine today". There are legitimate reasons why there are two options (Probably far better examples than the one I've given) and as I can't see places like Saudi Arabia rewriting their laws for equal treatment of men, women and everything in between any time soon, binary is necessary.
Quite frankly, you'd have to be an absolute moron to tick that box even if you were transgender and the option was provided, because of the rights you would be giving up in so many parts of the world. Pull your pants down and tick a box accordingly is the smart move - identifying as transgender on a passport will give you far more trouble than it's worth. You're literally volunteering to be discriminated against if you tick that box. Commit a crime? Good luck when they chuck you in the men's part of a foreign prison if you're biologically female. Also, good luck being transgender and getting a fair trial in most parts of the world. Getting through customs? Guess who is going to get held up for hours on end when they see you ticked the "X" box. Visiting America? You'll probs get shot by a cop, just because. Going to the World Cup in Russia next year? Not any more. So no, we shouldn't allow an "X" option. It already says "Sex" which is biological, thus binary, as opposed to "Gender" which is psychological. It's fine the way it is right now. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: nirvana on October 11, 2017, 05:11:12 PM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: kukushkin88 on October 11, 2017, 06:16:46 PM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject for the first part of the question. It seems a statistically significant proportion of people do identify as gender neutral though and I guess the benefit that would accrue would be something like the same as when any person/group is shown respect. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: ash_d on October 11, 2017, 06:26:20 PM worlds going bonkers imo
Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: nirvana on October 11, 2017, 06:50:02 PM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject for the first part of the question. It seems a statistically significant proportion of people do identify as gender neutral though and I guess the benefit that would accrue would be something like the same as when any person/group is shown respect. I take your ticket on showing people respect. I would show any member of the LGBTQQIAAP community respect if I met them and they were alright with me. This desire to be labelled quite specifically and on ones own terms, is very modern and ill conceived imo. My egalitarian spirit would tend to think less labelling, rather than more, is a better way forward. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: RED-DOG on October 11, 2017, 07:43:09 PM Gender neutral my arse.
Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Marky147 on October 11, 2017, 07:43:28 PM NSFW
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90LGetWUGF8 Joey Diaz knows Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Woodsey on October 11, 2017, 09:02:40 PM No, it’s just more bullshit, we don’t just get to stamp our feet and get whatever we want in life, it doesn’t work like that although some like to try....
Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: nirvana on October 11, 2017, 11:06:45 PM NSFW YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90LGetWUGF8 Joey Diaz knows Oh man, literal lolling - he's funny ..about the coffee anyway Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: tikay on October 11, 2017, 11:24:46 PM NSFW YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90LGetWUGF8 Joey Diaz knows One can but wonder what your Browsing History looks like. ;) Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Marky147 on October 11, 2017, 11:42:14 PM Browsing history is clean as a whistle, Tikay. Don't you chicken ;)
Oh man, literal lolling - he's funny ..about the coffee anyway He's hilarious. Saw him in Vegas this summer, and was in tears. YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti6vrdNkw2Y Just so many vids of him that are too com. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: RickBFA on October 12, 2017, 04:47:59 AM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject for the first part of the question. It seems a statistically significant proportion of people do identify as gender neutral though and I guess the benefit that would accrue would be something like the same as when any person/group is shown respect. Seems about 0.3% of population are gender neutral. It's possible to show respect without changing customs and culture like saying "good morning ladies and gentlemen" Are we really saying that example is not showing respect? Should we change things like that so we do not "offend" a tiny percentage of the population? Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: kukushkin88 on October 12, 2017, 05:44:00 AM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject for the first part of the question. It seems a statistically significant proportion of people do identify as gender neutral though and I guess the benefit that would accrue would be something like the same as when any person/group is shown respect. Seems about 0.3% of population are gender neutral. It's possible to show respect without changing customs and culture like saying "good morning ladies and gentlemen" Are we really saying that example is not showing respect? Should we change things like that so we do not "offend" a tiny percentage of the population? It should be up to individual organisations how they address it. For me, getting rid of "Ladies and Gentlemen" in announcements, seems a bit much but letting people be free from a gender label on their passport, that seems OK and appropriately respectful of their wishes/who they are. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: kukushkin88 on October 12, 2017, 06:20:37 AM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject for the first part of the question. It seems a statistically significant proportion of people do identify as gender neutral though and I guess the benefit that would accrue would be something like the same as when any person/group is shown respect. I take your ticket on showing people respect. I would show any member of the LGBTQQIAAP community respect if I met them and they were alright with me. This desire to be labelled quite specifically and on ones own terms, is very modern and ill conceived imo. My egalitarian spirit would tend to think less labelling, rather than more, is a better way forward. I'm not sure the desire for labels is modern, isn't it more a function that for almost all people the appropriate labels have long been established. Small minorities on the other hand, they'd shy away from labels that would mark them as different, as they'd fear the bigotry and oppression minority groups have nearly always faced in the past. Hopefully they don't have to be fearful any more and so can be honest about who they are. If they'd like a label, on their terms, it's cool with me. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: kukushkin88 on October 12, 2017, 07:36:00 AM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject for the first part of the question. It seems a statistically significant proportion of people do identify as gender neutral though and I guess the benefit that would accrue would be something like the same as when any person/group is shown respect. I take your ticket on showing people respect. I would show any member of the LGBTQQIAAP community respect if I met them and they were alright with me. This desire to be labelled quite specifically and on ones own terms, is very modern and ill conceived imo. My egalitarian spirit would tend to think less labelling, rather than more, is a better way forward. I'm not sure the desire for labels is modern, isn't it more a function that for * almost all people the appropriate labels have long been established. Small minorities on the other hand, they'd shy away from labels that would mark them as different, as they'd fear the bigotry and oppression minority groups have nearly always faced in the past. Hopefully they don't have to be fearful any more and so can be honest about who they are. If they'd like a label, on their terms, it's cool with me. * Instead of "almost all people", I should have gone for "the majority of people". Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: MintTrav on October 12, 2017, 08:59:30 AM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject for the first part of the question. It seems a statistically significant proportion of people do identify as gender neutral though and I guess the benefit that would accrue would be something like the same as when any person/group is shown respect. Seems about 0.3% of population are gender neutral. It's possible to show respect without changing customs and culture like saying "good morning ladies and gentlemen" Are we really saying that example is not showing respect? Should we change things like that so we do not "offend" a tiny percentage of the population? It should be up to individual organisations how they address it. For me, getting rid of "Ladies and Gentlemen" in announcements, seems a bit much but letting people be free from a gender label on their passport, that seems OK and appropriately respectful of their wishes/who they are. Glad to see the back of 'ladies and gentlemen'. Let's hope other organisations follow suit. The Underground wants everyone to feel welcome, which is fine, but this outdated language has no place in the modern world anyway. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Woodsey on October 12, 2017, 09:03:27 AM ^ Wtf seriously?
Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: RED-DOG on October 12, 2017, 09:24:41 AM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject for the first part of the question. It seems a statistically significant proportion of people do identify as gender neutral though and I guess the benefit that would accrue would be something like the same as when any person/group is shown respect. Seems about 0.3% of population are gender neutral. It's possible to show respect without changing customs and culture like saying "good morning ladies and gentlemen" Are we really saying that example is not showing respect? Should we change things like that so we do not "offend" a tiny percentage of the population? It should be up to individual organisations how they address it. For me, getting rid of "Ladies and Gentlemen" in announcements, seems a bit much but letting people be free from a gender label on their passport, that seems OK and appropriately respectful of their wishes/who they are. Glad to see the back of 'ladies and gentlemen'. Let's hope other organisations follow suit. The Underground wants everyone to feel welcome, which is fine, but this outdated language has no place in the modern world anyway. Is "Glad to see the back of" an outdated phrase? Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: nirvana on October 12, 2017, 09:46:00 AM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject for the first part of the question. It seems a statistically significant proportion of people do identify as gender neutral though and I guess the benefit that would accrue would be something like the same as when any person/group is shown respect. I take your ticket on showing people respect. I would show any member of the LGBTQQIAAP community respect if I met them and they were alright with me. This desire to be labelled quite specifically and on ones own terms, is very modern and ill conceived imo. My egalitarian spirit would tend to think less labelling, rather than more, is a better way forward. I'm not sure the desire for labels is modern, isn't it more a function that for almost all people the appropriate labels have long been established. Small minorities on the other hand, they'd shy away from labels that would mark them as different, as they'd fear the bigotry and oppression minority groups have nearly always faced in the past. Hopefully they don't have to be fearful any more and so can be honest about who they are. If they'd like a label, on their terms, it's cool with me. I understand the kind of thought process and some labels, Gay is a good example, have worked very well and have tended to develop inclusivity rather than generate further division. In my lifetime, the change in attitudes is pretty astonishing and so I think it is actually quite a recent thing but feels like it's well established. So, when talking about a Gay person I'm going to call them Gay, if it's ever relevant for me to refer to it, rather than a bunch of other offensive euphemisms and this helps me as it's straightforward and clearly non-pejorative. But it doesn't change the footing of my relationship with them as an individual and the way I need to address them, communicate with them etc. If I meet someone for the first time, I'd be surprised if they felt the need to tell me their sexuality at the outset, for fear that I may unwittingly offend them, at least I'd hope no-one felt that need. I have much more mixed feelings about the current crop of labels - they seem much more narcissistically based than based on the basic human rights of a group of people. If someone didn't tell me they were gender neutral I wouldn't spot that they were and then start to treat them differently. If I saw a person expressing their sexual preferences I wouldn't make value judgements about them that would be altered by them declaring they were Gender neutral. If I saw a female labourer or a male nanny I wouldn't make judgements about them that would be altered by them letting me know they were gender neutral. The only rationale for them to tell me they are gender neutral must be to try and exercise some control over how I interact with them and it seems pointlessly confrontational when there was never an issue to begin with. It's not a big deal and, if I ever find myself in a room with someone who this mattered to, I'd probably just fall in and humour them for the sake of harmony - but humouring them is what I'd be doing, rather than genuinely thinking differently as I don't see what there is to think differently about. Anyhoo, interesting subject and I am making progress as I try not to laugh at cross dressing men these days. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: tikay on October 12, 2017, 12:25:11 PM The person in the article will be fuming with the BBC - in the article they described her as "she" - how dare they? "she" should start a campaign for gender neutral descriptions in articles too. Rather like the campaign to stop London Underground announcers saying "Good morning Ladies and Gentleman" and really offensive stuff like that. There must be more important things to campaign about surely than this nonsense? Unless you identify as gender neutral, I guess it might seem very important then. What does identifying oneself as gender neutral mean and what benefit accrues to the person if I suspend disbelief and say, yah, I see that you are indeed gender neutral, wp. In the past you could just stick two spoons up your nose and achieve the same result. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject for the first part of the question. It seems a statistically significant proportion of people do identify as gender neutral though and I guess the benefit that would accrue would be something like the same as when any person/group is shown respect. I take your ticket on showing people respect. I would show any member of the LGBTQQIAAP community respect if I met them and they were alright with me. This desire to be labelled quite specifically and on ones own terms, is very modern and ill conceived imo. My egalitarian spirit would tend to think less labelling, rather than more, is a better way forward. I'm not sure the desire for labels is modern, isn't it more a function that for almost all people the appropriate labels have long been established. Small minorities on the other hand, they'd shy away from labels that would mark them as different, as they'd fear the bigotry and oppression minority groups have nearly always faced in the past. Hopefully they don't have to be fearful any more and so can be honest about who they are. If they'd like a label, on their terms, it's cool with me. I understand the kind of thought process and some labels, Gay is a good example, have worked very well and have tended to develop inclusivity rather than generate further division. In my lifetime, the change in attitudes is pretty astonishing and so I think it is actually quite a recent thing but feels like it's well established. So, when talking about a Gay person I'm going to call them Gay, if it's ever relevant for me to refer to it, rather than a bunch of other offensive euphemisms and this helps me as it's straightforward and clearly non-pejorative. But it doesn't change the footing of my relationship with them as an individual and the way I need to address them, communicate with them etc. If I meet someone for the first time, I'd be surprised if they felt the need to tell me their sexuality at the outset, for fear that I may unwittingly offend them, at least I'd hope no-one felt that need. I have much more mixed feelings about the current crop of labels - they seem much more narcissistically based than based on the basic human rights of a group of people. If someone didn't tell me they were gender neutral I wouldn't spot that they were and then start to treat them differently. If I saw a person expressing their sexual preferences I wouldn't make value judgements about them that would be altered by them declaring they were Gender neutral. If I saw a female labourer or a male nanny I wouldn't make judgements about them that would be altered by them letting me know they were gender neutral. The only rationale for them to tell me they are gender neutral must be to try and exercise some control over how I interact with them and it seems pointlessly confrontational when there was never an issue to begin with. It's not a big deal and, if I ever find myself in a room with someone who this mattered to, I'd probably just fall in and humour them for the sake of harmony - but humouring them is what I'd be doing, rather than genuinely thinking differently as I don't see what there is to think differently about. Anyhoo, interesting subject and I am making progress as I try not to laugh at cross dressing men these days. How are you progressing with Mr Izzard, then? I think I'm truly ambivalent on all these matters, & I certainly don't have any bad vibes about the whole thing, but when I see a chap who presents himself in this way, I'm like a 5 year old staring at a man with a deformity - I just can't help staring, jaw suitably agog. For the record, he seems a decent chap & I enjoy watching him. I still stare at him though. (http://i.imgur.com/pO26QU3.jpg) (https://imgur.com/pO26QU3) Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: nirvana on October 12, 2017, 01:01:08 PM Ha, obviously don't know him personally but since he's a public figure I think I can say I don't like him..nothing to do with his appalling dress sense though, it's just he was funny once and he's let us all down by becoming so boorish. Like the worse kind of alpha male
Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: PokerBroker on October 12, 2017, 02:00:54 PM Utter nonsense and far too many more important issues in the world to get dragged down by this site.
Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: RickBFA on October 12, 2017, 04:08:45 PM Utter nonsense and far too many more important issues in the world to get dragged down by this site. "Dragged down by this site" ??? Is open debate and are different opinions not healthy? Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: PokerBroker on October 12, 2017, 04:12:02 PM Utter nonsense and far too many more important issues in the world to get dragged down by this site. "Dragged down by this site" ??? Is open debate and are different opinions not healthy? lol. Typo, I meant shite. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: RickBFA on October 12, 2017, 05:35:00 PM Utter nonsense and far too many more important issues in the world to get dragged down by this site. "Dragged down by this site" ??? Is open debate and are different opinions not healthy? lol. Typo, I meant shite. :D Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: RED-DOG on October 12, 2017, 06:33:42 PM Utter nonsense and far too many more important issues in the world to get dragged down by this site. "Dragged down by this site" ??? Is open debate and are different opinions not healthy? lol. Typo, I meant shite. Haha. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: The Camel on October 12, 2017, 08:14:13 PM Have no idea why this is an issue.
It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Evilpengwinz on October 12, 2017, 10:02:44 PM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. I don't think the bolded statement could possibly be more wrong. There's the argument that "Hey, why are people wasting my tax money and their time on this when NHS/Housing/Education/Whatever is fucked?" on the basis that it either benefit more people and/or represents a better use of a limited amount of resources to use the money elsewhere - I don't agree with those people in this case as I think it's a conversation worth having, but we can't (and shouldn't) prevent people from having that opinion, because democracy. If a gender neutral British tourist is harmed or perhaps killed as a direct consequence of identifying themselves as such on a passport - highly likely given LGBT tolerance in many countries still - clearly that affects far more than 0.3% of the population who are gender neutral if you think about it for more than a nanosecond. Concern for the safety of a gender neutral person abroad, and the consequences should anything happen to them, are valid concerns for anyone, not just those who identify as gender neutral. Also, people minding their own business means that LGBT people who are binary would also not be entitled to a (likely supporting) opinion, even though it directly affects them as a change benefiting gender-neutral people increases the likelihood that future changes involve better treatment towards them in some way, too. So no, the other 99.7% of people shouldn't be banned from expressing an opinion and told to 'mind their own business', irrespective of their views. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: RickBFA on October 12, 2017, 10:57:07 PM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: The Camel on October 12, 2017, 11:10:27 PM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. What difference is there between saying "good morning ladies and gentlemen" to "good morning everyone"? 50 years ago, the black and white minstrels and gollywogs were an accepted part of British culture. Do you think they should be brought back? Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Marky147 on October 12, 2017, 11:21:35 PM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. What difference is there between saying "good morning ladies and gentlemen" to "good morning everyone"? That was my first thought. Maybe I just care too little about things, because I couldn't give a fuck if people don't say L&G anymore :D Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: AndrewT on October 12, 2017, 11:51:16 PM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. Wanting the option to have a box on a passport application form that actually includes them = looking for conflict. Jeez Rick, I'm surprised you ever manage to leave the house out of fear if this is your threshold for people looking for conflict. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Woodsey on October 13, 2017, 12:05:52 AM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. Agree, a simple no fuck off should suffice.... Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: kukushkin88 on October 13, 2017, 06:01:10 AM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. Agree, a simple no fuck off should suffice.... The thing is the difference for the majority would be so small, you'd have to look pretty hard to even the notice it. Speaking of groups that are vocal the 'I defend my right to be slightly bigoted because it's what we've always done and it works OK for me' group seem to still be doing fine on that front. As always Woodsey is a solid barometer of any opinion. When he writes "agree" it's time for a rethink. Even if you still come back with the same opinion, it is definitely time to think again. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Woodsey on October 13, 2017, 12:57:36 PM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. Agree, a simple no fuck off should suffice.... The thing is the difference for the majority would be so small, you'd have to look pretty hard to even the notice it. Speaking of groups that are vocal the 'I defend my right to be slightly bigoted because it's what we've always done and it works OK for me' group seem to still be doing fine on that front. As always Woodsey is a solid barometer of any opinion. When he writes "agree" it's time for a rethink. Even if you still come back with the same opinion, it is definitely time to think again. You are the barometer of when someone needs a slap around the face with a wet fish for being too much of a PC wanker who thinks his opinion is the be all and end all of what is right and wrong, this might come as a huge shock to you but your not..... someone pass me a fish. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Jon MW on October 13, 2017, 01:05:15 PM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. What difference is there between saying "good morning ladies and gentlemen" to "good morning everyone"? 50 years ago, the black and white minstrels and gollywogs were an accepted part of British culture. Do you think they should be brought back? It's slightly off topic - but I've used the tubes every now and again for over 20 years and my wife used them constantly when she was doing her degree; and neither of us can ever remember the announcements including "ladies and gentleman". Was this actually just one or two individual announcers that it affected and the newspapers were being a bit journalisty about it; or was this actually a general practice on the tube? Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: nirvana on October 13, 2017, 01:34:16 PM Without 'Ladies and Gentleman' boxing becomes unwatchable imo
Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Marky147 on October 13, 2017, 03:51:58 PM Without 'Ladies and Gentleman' boxing becomes unwatchable imo :D Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: MintTrav on October 13, 2017, 04:40:04 PM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. What difference is there between saying "good morning ladies and gentlemen" to "good morning everyone"? 50 years ago, the black and white minstrels and gollywogs were an accepted part of British culture. Do you think they should be brought back? It's slightly off topic - but I've used the tubes every now and again for over 20 years and my wife used them constantly when she was doing her degree; and neither of us can ever remember the announcements including "ladies and gentleman". Was this actually just one or two individual announcers that it affected and the newspapers were being a bit journalisty about it; or was this actually a general practice on the tube? I think you're right - I can't remember ever hearing it either. They do have some other anachronisms though. WTF is all the alighting about? I have never heard anyone use the word 'alight' IRL - only in train/tube/bus announcements. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: tikay on October 13, 2017, 05:09:07 PM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. What difference is there between saying "good morning ladies and gentlemen" to "good morning everyone"? 50 years ago, the black and white minstrels and gollywogs were an accepted part of British culture. Do you think they should be brought back? It's slightly off topic - but I've used the tubes every now and again for over 20 years and my wife used them constantly when she was doing her degree; and neither of us can ever remember the announcements including "ladies and gentleman". Was this actually just one or two individual announcers that it affected and the newspapers were being a bit journalisty about it; or was this actually a general practice on the tube? I think you're right - I can't remember ever hearing it either. They do have some other anachronisms though. WTF is all the alighting about? I have never heard anyone use the word 'alight' IRL - only in train/tube/bus announcements. I suppose, "Soho, this is where you get off" might be misconstrued. Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: Mohican on October 13, 2017, 06:42:40 PM Saw the title and thought it was going to be about this.
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-mX9T2qyIQ Title: Re: M, F or X? Post by: kukushkin88 on October 13, 2017, 10:11:52 PM Have no idea why this is an issue. It doesn't affect anyone except the gender neutral. The other 99.7% should mind their own business. Putting the passport thing to one side, the broader argument for me is around changing the culture and customs of our country to accommodate 0.3% of the population is just madness as it affects everyone. We should treat everyone with respect and accept differences but not change things to accommodate the vocal minority within the 0.3% that appear to thrive on looking for conflict. Agree, a simple no fuck off should suffice.... The thing is the difference for the majority would be so small, you'd have to look pretty hard to even the notice it. Speaking of groups that are vocal the 'I defend my right to be slightly bigoted because it's what we've always done and it works OK for me' group seem to still be doing fine on that front. As always Woodsey is a solid barometer of any opinion. When he writes "agree" it's time for a rethink. Even if you still come back with the same opinion, it is definitely time to think again. You are the barometer of when someone needs a slap around the face with a wet fish for being too much of a PC wanker who thinks his opinion is the be all and end all of what is right and wrong, this might come as a huge shock to you but your not..... someone pass me a fish. Nice easy one to start with. What is wrong with political correctness? Other than that it's a meaningless phrase popular only with Clarkson like cretins and the Mail. |