That’s quite an odd “perspective” then
Analogy failure.
The “questions being asked” are of course questions about magic gender.
Notice that “they” starts by boasting of “their” in depth understanding of biological sex and gender – the kind of “in depth” understanding of course that thinks men are women if they say they are.
But that pales in comparison to announcing that non-adherence to gender ideology is comparable to racism, homophobia, and misogyny.
What a piggy little twerp.
Updating to add information about this genius:
Che Barnes is a Gender Diversity and Inclusion Trainer – helping organisations bridge their knowledge gap on Gender Equality, inc intersex, transgender & non-binary. Science based talks, workshops & online course.
I’m sure it’s all very in-depth.
I’ve been listening to lots of history podcasts recently and generally enjoying them. It has struck me though how frequently either a guest or expert historian will be either trans or trans ideology friendly. They then take examples of women in positions of power, who achieved extraordinary things in their time, and use that as evidence that trans people have always been with us. Not a moment of reflection that perhaps said women knew perfectly well that they were women, and that they used the cultural tools available to them to seize and maintain power. In other words those women rejected being hemmed in by the gender binary in much the same way that second wave feminists did centuries later.
Sometimes we absolutely should protect people who are accused of being racists, sexists or homophobes.
Even if someone holds views that fall into these categories, that doesn’t make them fair game for any sort of horrible treatment one could mete out to them.
Otherwise you end up empowering people who use these terms as a sort of get-out-of-decency free card.
Bruce, well put.
Not even just those accused. I would add that we absolutely should protect people who hold views we find repugnant but who do not let those views influence their actions in the workplace. Someone who thinks gay people are immoral and going to Hell, but who does not discriminate in any way against gay people in doing the job, should not be fired because of opinions. Most of us, I suspect, have had to swallow our opinions about individuals or groups sometimes in order to get on with the business of work and life. It’s usually a good sign that someone can put aside personal animosity and treat people fairly.
Rob – so these historians are saying that if a woman achieved something that shows she was actually a man?
Peak contempt for women achieved.
Ophelia – not quite so blunt, but almost. More typically – this is a really interesting reminder that gender expression has been with us forever and that people were not seen as male and female, but instead gender was fluid – or words to that effect. It completely removes any agency from when to achieve in their own right, as opposed to achieving because they feel themselves to be a man.
And yet genderists keep telling us that they should be able to be “their authentic selves” to their place of work for everyone else to admire and center.
Not to mention that it is completely possible for someone to be accused of being a racist, sexist, or homophobe without actually being any or all of them.
J. K. Rowling is a good example.
Oh damn, if a They says so, who are we to question them? We are but peasants, and they are the magi.
That fourth paragraph stating that 23% of all 11- to 26-year-olds in the UK identify with they/them pronouns could do with a citation or two.
As luck would have it my two grandsons (12 & 13) came up this evening. I asked them both how many of the kids they knew in their school identified with they/them pronouns. Bearing in mind that a quarter of all students would amount to some 450 they/thems across the school and 150 in the two year groups of my grandsons, the fact that between them they could think of only five (when statistically there should be 7.5 in each of their tutor groups for starters) and that four of them are in the sixth/upper sixth forms (16-18 yrs) suggests to me that the figure of 23% was likely plucked from thin air.
I’m not suggesting that there are only five they/thems in the school, because of course my grandsons don’t know every student personally, but at the claimed 23%, my grandsons – both outgoing with a lot of friends of both sexes – would certainly know of more than five.