bump for HitlerTwitter isn't the optimal medium to be hashing this out, but the only way through this with sanity intact is to grab onto humour wherever you find it.
Good luck with gender identity extremists, who specialise in the inadvertent variety. Netflix Protests presents:
tamborine woman.If you can't laugh (even if it's nervously) at the sheer unhinged brilliance of the double act of her and
DARVOMAN, you're made of stronger stuff than I.
Yes "unhinged" comes up a lot, because that's what you see,
over and
over. And make no mistake, it's coming from one side.
Those who go on about the
toxicity of this debate frequently paint a false equivalence. The gender critical crowd aren't the ones walking around with signs like this.
We're the ones dressing as
dinosaurs. (I say "we", even though the only protesting I do is online to a gaggle of faithful bots.)
Let's be careful out there.. . .
From
a Mumsnet thread about Judith Butler's latest
bucket o' words:Has she completely misunderstood the gender-critical argument, or is she deliberately misrepresenting it? I honestly don't know.
Whatever it is, it just seems to be the case that she's an output-only device. There's no clear evidence that she in any way perceives the outside world or reality, or if she does it doesn't matter. She just produces words.
She's like Douglas Adams' Nutri-Matic machine:
The way it functioned was very interesting. When the Drink button was pressed it made an instant but highly detailed examination of the subject's taste buds, a spectroscopic examination of the subject's metabolism and then sent tiny experimental signals down the neural pathways to the taste centers of the subject's brain to see what was likely to go down well. However, no one knew quite why it did this because it invariably delivered a cupful of liquid that was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.
As I recall, Arthur managed to nearly doom the ship by trying to get the machine to produce some actual tea. I wonder what happens if you try to get Butler to actually address some real arguments or actually tackle the rights conflict.
More from the naughty corner:
Any other scientists feel like you are in an alternate reality?It’s one of the most amazing coincidences of our time that the biology of sex, which was straightforward enough to be taught to school children for many years, suddenly became too complicated to understand, right at the same time as men began to demand access to women’s spaces.
On a wider basis though, I do sometimes wonder if we are moving past the age of enlightenment and onto darker times. Religion often went hand in hand with science in the early days, and I wonder whether people are incapable of living without some kind of magical thinking, so that ironically, the “debunking of the existence of God” has left that segment of human nature wide open to other neo/pseudo-religious movements.
Irish women will be heardI think that the entirety of gender ID ideology is playing on the ambiguity over whether they mean it or not. That’s basically the grift.
“I literally mean that transwomen are female when I am demanding that they be in women’s prisons and sports. I don’t mean that transwomen are female, when they go to the doctor. Of course not, that would be silly!”
I think that most people think that they mostly don’t mean it. That’s the “outer knowledge”. The “inner knowledge” is that they mean it to a much greater extent than those on the outside realise, although they still don’t fully mean it. Because you can’t really, fully mean that males are females.
At the end of the day, it’s basically: "I mean words literally when I choose. And when I don’t, my words mean nothing and you can’t hold me to them." Because it’s quite simply about being able to exercise arbitrary power.
It was a very dark timeI'm pretty jaded now. There's little that would surprise me. Sports, prisons, refuges, schools. I expect no end of nonsense. But the one thing that never stops shocking me is that a law was created in the first place that took the word female, which provided recognition of the entire female sex, away from them and created a new, mixed sex, indefinable 'psyche' category that female would mean from that day on. I cannot fully comprehend the enormity of legally redefining all females so that men could be 'recognised' as females. That was the day we failed the female sex, comprehensively, utterly.
I'll never get over it, even when it's repealed, and I'm telling my great grandchildren about the insanity of the early 21st century.
"They literally stopped recognising every actual single woman and girl, every female person. And they told us that we were now all an identity instead of a sex, a psychology instead of a physiology. That was what female now meant. So that men could say they were women. And they did, hundreds of thousands of them did. There was no single word for actual females. We weren't allowed one. Our word was reallocated to men. We had to talk about ourselves as people with cervixes, or menstruators, and we had to agree that biology wasn't the real difference between the sexes, identity was. One by one, every reference to biological sex was replaced in every law with references to identity, until the law had erased any connection with female biology from pregnancy, childbirth, motherhood. Everything became something that applied to both men and women because it was forbidden to have real references to sex.
Stating that only females were women was enough to lose your job, or even be charged with a crime. Failing to agree with a man that he was a woman was enough to be ostracised, censored or threatened with legal action. Men took over women's sports, institutions, groups. Men represented us in every level of society, calling themselves women. There were no words to distinguish ourselves from these men. Everyone could see the female sex were becoming unspeakable people, unspoken of. You weren't allowed to acknowledge our separate existence from male people. Men committed crimes and society said women did it. You could never escape a man because he could follow you into any public space by identifying as female. People were very, very afraid to tell the truth.
Many hundreds of children lost their reproductive organs trying to become the other sex. It was a very dark time."
Margaret Atwoodhttps://twitter.com/MargaretAtwood/status/1452088652188819462https://twitter.com/thatotherlisa/status/1452121432931012609https://twitter.com/mary_scone/status/1452234366688669700OMG, Jordan Peterson radicalized Margaret Atwood in the produce isle.
Is this a cross between Cluedo and The Crucible?
"Trans Criminals are not Women" says Priti PatelWe are such Morlocks to their Eloi.
. . .
This just in:
