blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 08:05:33 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272476 Posts in 66752 Topics by 16945 Members
Latest Member: Zula
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  The Lounge
| | |-+  M, F or X?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Go Down Print
Author Topic: M, F or X?  (Read 10630 times)
tikay
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: October 11, 2017, 11:24:46 PM »

NSFW



Joey Diaz knows

One can but wonder what your Browsing History looks like.

Wink
Logged

All details of the 2016 Vegas Staking Adventure can be found via this link - http://bit.ly/1pdQZDY (copyright Anthony James Kendall, 2016).
Marky147
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 22796



View Profile
« Reply #16 on: October 11, 2017, 11:42:14 PM »

Browsing history is clean as a whistle, Tikay. Don't you chicken Wink



Oh man, literal lolling - he's funny ..about the coffee anyway

He's hilarious. Saw him in Vegas this summer, and was in tears.



Just so many vids of him that are too com.
Logged

RickBFA
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2001


View Profile
« Reply #17 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?


Logged
kukushkin88
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3892



View Profile
« Reply #18 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.
Logged
kukushkin88
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3892



View Profile
« Reply #19 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.
Logged
kukushkin88
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3892



View Profile
« Reply #20 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".
Logged
MintTrav
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3401


View Profile
« Reply #21 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.

Logged
Woodsey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15846



View Profile
« Reply #22 on: October 12, 2017, 09:03:27 AM »

^ Wtf seriously?
Logged
RED-DOG
International Lover World Wide Playboy
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 46911



View Profile WWW
« Reply #23 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?
Logged

The older I get, the better I was.
nirvana
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7804



View Profile
« Reply #24 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.
Logged

sola virtus nobilitat
tikay
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #25 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.



Logged

All details of the 2016 Vegas Staking Adventure can be found via this link - http://bit.ly/1pdQZDY (copyright Anthony James Kendall, 2016).
nirvana
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7804



View Profile
« Reply #26 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
Logged

sola virtus nobilitat
PokerBroker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1189



View Profile
« Reply #27 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. 

Logged
RickBFA
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2001


View Profile
« Reply #28 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" Huh?

Is open debate and are different opinions not healthy?



Logged
PokerBroker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1189



View Profile
« Reply #29 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" Huh?

Is open debate and are different opinions not healthy?





lol.  Typo, I meant shite. 
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.373 seconds with 20 queries.