US Government rules on Gender Identity

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Sounder » Sun Oct 14, 2018 8:53 pm

Jane Clare Jones wrote...
My argument would be that rather than engage in this act of coerced recognition, what we should actually be doing is working towards a state in which we recognise that trans people are trans, and that that’s okay. I understand that this isn’t easy for some trans people, because dysphoria produces an intense desire to be the other sex, and an intense desire to be validated as a member of that sex.



Thanks Mac, reality testing in under threat.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby JackRiddler » Tue Oct 16, 2018 2:14 pm

MacCruiskeen » Sun Oct 14, 2018 12:59 pm wrote:A brilliant recent blogpost by the English philosopher Jane Clare Jones. It is, first and foremost, a razor-sharp and wonderfully clarifying analysis of the meanings and (mis-) uses of the term identity, but her tone turns unashamedly polemical and righteously fucking angry towards the end. And no wonder.

IDENTITY, SOVEREIGNTY AND NARCISSISM
Part 1: Identity and Recognition

https://janeclarejones.com/2018/10/12/i ... arcissism/


Do read the three footnotes too.


I'd say so.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Sounder » Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:10 am

It gladdens my heart to find academics such as Jane Clare Jones that stand up for clear thinking rather than playing an indoctrinating role as does much of current academia. We can be thankful for this gender identity kerfuffle if it helps to illustrate systemic shortcomings in our collective thinking.

In short, Platonist's, pretty much all of society, want to place an ‘essence’ inside of things, whereas it may be more correct to say that an ‘essence’ is an ongoing creation that is formed and deepened through relationship.

If we stop turning everything into objects we will improve our relationships.

Imagine the pent up energy that may be released as humans learn to have positive relations.

This collective gaslighting is a desperate attempt to inhibit the development of rational thought.



https://janeclarejones.com/2018/10/18/a ... tarianism/


When I first encountered trans ideology about six years ago, it never occurred to me in a million years that the academy would just roll over for this pile of cobbled-together, anti-materialist, life-denying, patriarchal, bullying bullshit and ask it to tickle its tummy. The whole thing is a reality distortion cognitive dissonance machine. It’s an exercise in mass gaslighting that relies on a concatenation of double-thinks. And I had supposed, naively it turns out, that the people who are paid to think about things, would, y’know, think.




I would like to hear from AD, just not those silly indoctrinating articles he posts.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Elvis » Wed Nov 07, 2018 12:07 am

Sounder wrote:I would like to hear from AD, just not those silly indoctrinating articles he posts.


Fine, just not in this thread.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=40036&start=240#p635946
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7413
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:15 am

Did you ever wonder how this issue got so hot so fast?



Follow the Money: Pritzker Money All The Way, Baby!
"When IT reigns, I’m poor.” Mario
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:27 am

Nov 6, 2018, 09:24pm
Trump Isn't America's Richest Politician Anymore. Illinois' New Governor J.B. Pritzker Is.
by Deniz Cam

https://www.forbes.com/sites/denizcam/2 ... fb91bc5749


Image

Hyatt heir and longtime Democratic donor J.B. Pritzker gave a record $171.5 million of his own money to his campaign to become Illinois’ new governor. And just a little over an hour after the polls closed, Pritzker found out it was money well spent. According to multiple news outlets, Pritzker beat out incumbent Republican governor Bruce Rauner, winning by an estimated 31% margin as of 9:25 p.m. Eastern Time.

Once Pritzker assumes office, he will be the richest sitting politician in the country, worth an estimated $3.2 billion, surpassing President Trump, who currently holds that title with a net worth of $3.1 billion.

“I know I grew up lucky in life, with a good family and the resources to get a great education and to pursue my dreams,” Pritzker said when he announced his candidacy in April 2017. The Illinois resident’s fortune comes from the Hyatt Hotel chain, which was founded by his uncle Jay in 1957 and run by his father, Donald. Nevertheless, Pritzker didn’t follow in his father’s footsteps. He graduated from Northwestern Law in 1993. Three years later, he and his brother Anthony founded the private equity firm Pritzker Group. The company, from which Pritzker stepped away, owns and runs industrial firms and has a stake in SpaceX, Elon Musk’s rocket firm.

During a record-breaking election in money terms (federal candidates raised an estimated record of $5.2 billion), Pritzker stood out for setting a new record in self-financing: Forbes estimates he has given the largest amount of his own money to his campaign in U.S. history—$171.5 million (the campaign spent a total of $135.9 million on the election). Rauner, who was an early partner in a Chicago-based private equity firm, spent $57.8 million on his own reelection campaign in 2015 and 2016. Together, their personal spending during this election cycle almost hit $230 million.

Meg Whitman previously held the record after spending $144 million on her failed gubernatorial bid in California in 2014. Florida governor Rick Scott, who is in a too-close-to-call race for U.S. Senate, spent about $60 million on his gubernatorial race in 2010.

“Given the campaign finance arms race, it's increasingly the case that you can't run for office unless you're either rich or have a lot of rich friends. That restricts voters' choice because there's evidence in political finance that rich people have systematically different views about various public policy questions than everyone else,” says Ian Vandewalker, a senior counsel at Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. “If the only people who can ever get in office are people who are already rich, that really skews the way the government solves the policy problems that affect everyone."

(For more on who spent the most money on their federal campaigns, read Forbes' coverage from earlier in the week.)

As Pritzker bankrolled his own bid, his opponent, Governor Rauner, not only spent millions on his own campaign but got millions more from Chicago billionaire Ken Griffin. The hedge fund billionaire spent $22.5 million in 2017 to help reelect Rauner. His contribution was the largest made to any statewide race across the country during this election cycle (excluding candidates’ own money), according to the National Institute on Money In Politics. He held the same record in 2014 when he gave $13.6 million to Rauner.

In addition to financing his own campaign, Pritzker contributed $661,000 to federal Democratic candidates and super PACs in 2018, according to the Federal Election Commission. Prior to seeking governorship in his home state, Pritzker invested millions of dollars in Democratic causes. In 2016, he spent over $14 million supporting Democrats, including former secretary of state and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

“[Hillary Clinton], I believe, understands better than any other candidate—including a real estate developer that's running—how to create jobs in the United States,” he said in an interview with CNN Money in May 2016, clashing with his brother Anthony, who sat next to him. Anthony contributed about $1 million to mostly Republicans and the Libertarian Party in 2016; he gave another $220,000 to mostly Republicans in 2018. Their sister Penny Pritzker, also a billionaire, served as U.S. commerce secretary under President Obama from 2013 to early 2017.
"When IT reigns, I’m poor.” Mario
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:57 am

Heaven Swan » Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:15 am wrote:Did you ever wonder how this issue got so hot so fast?


This video is seriously hateful in its style with the music and the glitter. Starts with a set of facts about Pritzker money and lobbying that could make a useful table, then moves into insinuation and defamation of basically anyone who's trans in public. What's Chelsea Manning or the actor on Orange is the New Black got to do with it? Especially Manning?!
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:30 am

I think what the video maker is trying to do is highlight the monetary $$$ backdrop behind the rise of transgender.
She highlights Pritzger money but upthread are articles about the other big money supporters of a movement that became a colossus with huge cultural influence overnight.
"When IT reigns, I’m poor.” Mario
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:08 am

Heaven Swan » Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:30 am wrote:I think what the video maker is trying to do is highlight the monetary $$$ backdrop behind the rise of transgender.


I get it. If we give him-her a maximum benefit of the doubt -- not that I'm inclined -- she highlights why she could have used some classes in film or media theory or basic logic and argument, or at least, how not to look like a bad brainwash movie for fifth graders. The opening venture at a facts-only presentation (with bad music and suspicious use of glitter effects) wanders off the rails into random association and light demonization of a lot of people who probably have nothing to do with Pritzker money. It's like a Soros-rules-the-world thing.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:40 am

^^^
I agree Jack that after the initial download of funding facts, the film jumped around a bit, but saw it as if someone from another planet were looking down and trying to figure out "What is going on on that planet?"

From the tone of your commentary I gather that you support the current gender regime, led by trans-activists and big pharma, and promoted in universities and big media? Do you approve of their tactic of stifling debate with accusations of hate and transphobia, which they back up with suicide and death threats? (especially the death threats which are covered upthread).

If this movement continues to march forward as is, we may be looking at a future that is a mix of medically and legally enforced sex roles, where gay children are pushed by family and society to medically transition (a form of gay conversion therapy), and women's sports matches are played by former men, in a form of medical "woman-face".

If this powerful lobby gets their way, our future could be a strange, politically-correct version of what they have in Iran today, where gays have the choice to transition to "straight" or die, and this is the woman's football team:

The Telegraph
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldn ... e-men.html

Eight of Iran's women's football team 'are men'

Iran's football association accused of being 'unethical' after it is claimed eight players in women's national team are men awaiting sex change operations
Eight of Iran women’s football revealed to be men

Image
Eight of Iran women’s football revealed to be men Photo: Getty Images

By Barney Henderson
11:16PM BST 30 Sep 2015

Eight of Iran's women's football team are actually men awaiting sex change operations, it has been claimed.
The country's football association was accused of being "unethical" for knowingly fielding eight men in its women's team.
Mojtabi Sharifi, an official close to the Iranian league, told an Iranian news website: “[Eight players] have been playing with Iran’s female team without completing sex change operations.”

On Wednesday, authorities reportedly ordered gender testing of the entire national squad and leading league players. The names of the players thought to be male were not revealed.
Iran's women national football team (red) play a friendly football match with club Malavan Anzali football team in Tehran (File Picture)Iran's women national football team (red) play a friendly football match with club Malavan Anzali football team in Tehran (File Picture) Photo: Getty Images
The Iranian women's team play in hijab headscarfs, long-sleeved tops and tracksuit bottoms.
In 2014, the country's football governing body introduced random checks after it was revealed that four national team players were either men who had not completed sex change operations, or were suffering from sexual development disorders.
In 2010, doubts were raised about the gender of the team's goalkeeper.
Gender change operations are legal in Iran according to a fatwa - or religious ruling - pronounced by the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, spiritual leader of the 1979 Islamic revolution.
The law contrasts with the strict rules governing sexual morality under the country's Sharia legal code, which forbids homosexuality and pre-marital sex.


Sex changes are commonly carried out in phases in Iran, with the full procedure taking up to two years and including hormone therapy before the full gender transformation is completed.

Image
Iranian Malavan Anzali women's football team warms up during a training session in the Caspian Sea city of Bandar Anzali (File Picture) Photo: Getty Images

Football is highly popular among many Iranian women, despite religious rules that bar them from entering stadiums to watch matches between male teams.
Earlier this month the women's national team captain was unable to fly with the squad to Malaysia because her husband refused her permission to fly.

Image
Players of Iran's women national football team Photo: GETTY IMAGES

“As a Muslim woman, I wanted to work for my country’s flag to be raised [at the games], rather than traveling for leisure and fun,” Niloufar Ardalan, 30, said at the time.
“I wish authorities would create [measures] that would allow female athletes to defend their rights in such situations.”
"When IT reigns, I’m poor.” Mario
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Wed Nov 14, 2018 6:49 am

Some history of the controversy, set in an enjoyable-to-read play format:


The Annals of the TERF-Wars
https://janeclarejones.com/2018/11/13/t ... terf-wars/



Prologue: A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…

Transsexual women: We just want some basic human rights.

Women: Okay.

Transsexual women: We have this condition called gender dysphoria and it’s really painful and we need to transition to live as the other sex because it’s the treatment for the dysphoria.

Women: Yeah, that sounds tough. Okay, if that’s what you need to do.

Transsexual women: We’d like you to treat us as women.

Most women: Um, okay. Sure, we can do that if that helps.



Prequel: A long time ago in a lesbian bar that no longer exists

Lesbians: We don’t have to treat you as women for sexual purposes, do we?

Many transsexual women: No, that’s cool

Nascent trans activists: Well, actually, if you don’t want to fuck us then it invalidates our womanhood and that is misgendering and it’s a human rights abuse and you should want to fuck us.

Lesbians: It’s a human rights abuse if we don’t want to fuck you? What the fuck?

Nascent trans activists: Yes, you should want to fuck us.

Lesbians: Even if you still have dicks?

Nascent trans activists: Even if we still have dicks.

Lesbians: Um yeah, sorry, we don’t do dicks. We’re LESBIANS.

Nascent trans activists: You are vagina fetishists with unconscious bias and are gatekeeping your vaginas. We are women and our dicks are women’s dicks. If you don’t want to fuck us, you’re bigots.

Lesbians: We’re not bigots, it’s just you’re male, and we fuck female people.

Nascent trans activists: LITERAL VIOLENCE. WE ARE WOMEN. YOU SHOULD WANT TO FUCK US.

Lesbians: Um yeah, we’re not really feeling that right now to be honest.

Nascent trans activists: TERF TERF TERF TERF TERF.

Lesbians: HEY PEOPLE! These people are pressuring our sexual boundaries because they say they’re women but the way they’re pressuring us doesn’t make us feel like they’re women…in fact, it makes us feel like they’re men and we don’t fuck men. We’re lesbians, we don’t fuck men. That’s the reason we did all the marching, so that was okay right? RIGHT????

(Nascent trans activists: TERF TERF TERF TERF TERF)

Lesbians: HEY PEOPLE!!! Could we get some fucking help here?

Rest of the LGB community and world: Did someone say something?

Read the rest at:

https://janeclarejones.com/2018/11/13/t ... terf-wars/
"When IT reigns, I’m poor.” Mario
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:12 am

And, thank god, in the UK, in response to the self-ID law proposal, some sanity has been entering into the debate, and miraculously, even reaching US shores. This U of Penn professor has (brilliantly) summarized some points:

http://english.la.psu.edu/global-images/AXIOMATIC.pdf


This statement of principles was written by Christopher Reed to alert colleagues, administrators, and students wanting to engage his expertise in sexuality and gender studies to be prepared for reasoned debate grounded in historical knowledge and open to critical thinking. His classes on sexuality and queer theory engage a diversity of approaches to these topics, including discursive theories of gender/sexuality, and therefore allow for a reasoned variety of protocols of pronoun address and citation.

He writes to address a campus climate not specific to Penn State, but national in which recent ideologies concerning sex and gender gain traction not through informed,
reasoned analysis but by ignoring histories of other, possibly more productive approaches, and the new litany of “correctness” is enforced by appeals to authority to suppress alternative ideas.

Reed asserts his right to engage these issues as a fundamental matter of academic freedom. As a scholar fortunate to be protected by academic rank and job security, he
offers the following 25 axioms and observations (enumerated in homage to Eve Sedgwick's "Axiomatic" and Susan Sontag's "Notes on Camp") as a modest contribution
to these debates. He hopes the tone might also have a hint of Oscar Wilde's "Phrases and Philosophies for the Use of the Young." This text thus attempts to perform what it describes: the value of the unruly GLQ cultures once again at risk of pathologization and prohibition.

1. Chronology is not the same as progress. Over time, ideas can be refined and improved. They can also be co-opted and dumbed down. It is an unwarranted
assumption that ideas about sexuality and gender today necessarily correct or supplant transformative ideas from the past.

Doc is not formatting properly so...

Read the rest at
http://english.la.psu.edu/global-images/AXIOMATIC.pdf

I assure you it's well worth it. (If I could bold text I would bold points 1,3, 8, 9, 20, 22 and 25)
"When IT reigns, I’m poor.” Mario
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:15 pm

Heaven Swan » Wed Nov 14, 2018 5:40 am wrote:From the tone of your commentary I gather that you support the current gender regime, led by trans-activists and big pharma, and promoted in universities and big media? Do you approve of their tactic of stifling debate with accusations of hate and transphobia, which they back up with suicide and death threats? (especially the death threats which are covered upthread).


I don't know what "the tone" of my commentary is. From my actual commentaries on this thread you could easily see that what you "gather" here about my views is largely incorrect. It is true that bullshit and hate propaganda angers me, no matter what cause it is supporting, and that video you posted was pretty horrendous. The hateful (de)contextual and aesthetic elements undermined the portion of factual reporting. I am not sure what the "current gender regime" means. I am probably against whatever you think was the "old" gender regime, as well as the "current" one. Hatred and violence against gender non-conforming people, especially against M-to-W trans people (with the violence against them invariably committed by MEN) is very common, as is male violence against women generally, as is, well, male violence generally. I refuse to downplay or accept any of these. I do not support any medical procedures carried out on minors because of a diagnosis of gender dysphoria or gender identity. I am appalled by the "TERF" smear against many feminists, and the violence and death threats against women by certain trans activists (almost invariably and unsurprisingly coming from biological males). I think the distinction between biological birth-sex (99.5%+ binary) and the self-identifications, cultural-social associations,role-expectations, behaviors, superficialities, fluidities, and stereotypes grouped under gender is a useful one that should not be abolished. Okay?

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Heaven Swan » Thu Nov 15, 2018 2:32 pm

I just rewatched the Follow the Money video. What on earth was “hateful” about it? I didn’t really care for the music but cheesy music does not qualify as hate.

Now I see her point. She wasn’t claiming that every transgender model, actor and YouTuber mentioned was directly financed by J Pritzger, just that the deep pockets of Pritzger and other donors like him helped build the stage for an (AstroTurf) Movement that skyrocketed into the media spotlight and made enormous legislative gains in record time.

I’m not trying to pick on you Jack, I very much appreciate your contributions here, but knee-jerk (and bogus) accusations of hate are one of this lobby’s favorite tactics for shutting down debate.

Did you read Christopher Reed’s list of axioms in the post above?
(http://english.la.psu.edu/global-images/AXIOMATIC.pdf)
Is he hateful’ too?


JackRiddler » Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:15 pm wrote:
Heaven Swan » Wed Nov 14, 2018 5:40 am wrote:From the tone of your commentary I gather that you support the current gender regime, led by trans-activists and big pharma, and promoted in universities and big media? Do you approve of their tactic of stifling debate with accusations of hate and transphobia, which they back up with suicide and death threats? (especially the death threats which are covered upthread).


I don't know what "the tone" of my commentary is. From my actual commentaries on this thread you could easily see that what you "gather" here about my views is largely incorrect. It is true that bullshit and hate propaganda angers me, no matter what cause it is supporting, and that video you posted was pretty horrendous. The hateful (de)contextual and aesthetic elements undermined the portion of factual reporting. I am not sure what the "current gender regime" means. I am probably against whatever you think was the "old" gender regime, as well as the "current" one. Hatred and violence against gender non-conforming people, especially against M-to-W trans people (with the violence against them invariably committed by MEN) is very common, as is male violence against women generally, as is, well, male violence generally. I refuse to downplay or accept any of these. I do not support any medical procedures carried out on minors because of a diagnosis of gender dysphoria or gender identity. I am appalled by the "TERF" smear against many feminists, and the violence and death threats against women by certain trans activists (almost invariably and unsurprisingly coming from biological males). I think the distinction between biological birth-sex (99.5%+ binary) and the self-identifications, cultural-social associations,role-expectations, behaviors, superficialities, fluidities, and stereotypes grouped under gender is a useful one that should not be abolished. Okay?

.
"When IT reigns, I’m poor.” Mario
User avatar
Heaven Swan
 
Posts: 634
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Sounder » Fri Nov 16, 2018 12:47 pm

While the effects of this 'movement' on women's rights for self-determination are regrettable, one can hope and expect that this will generate fresh energy for feminists to get their message to a wider audience. My guess, Heaven Swan is that most straight people support the feminist view on this issue, (and that may help with understanding of other issues, likely more important than is this silliness).

Perhaps I live in a dream world, but the poison may be the cure, -what else is there to wake people up to the infinite money PR galaxy generated, collective oil-lighting designed to compromise reality attribution machine. (COLDCRAM for you wonks out there)

Thereby driving people into the arms of authority because they are too damn insecure to think for themselves.

http://www.stationgossip.com/2018/11/fa ... itter.html


On Thursday, an ardent Canadian feminist who has supported the #MeToo movement but has opposed a bill that would encode gender identity and gender expression into Canadian law furiously revealed that Twitter wouldn't let her say that men are not women.

Meghan Murphy, who founded the feminist blog and podcast Feminist Current in 2012, had tweeted in October, “Men aren’t women tho,” and “How are transwomen not men? What is the difference between men and transwomen?”

On Thursday, Murphy revealed on Twitter that she had been notified by Twitter that her language in the tweet had violated their rules against hateful conduct.

Murphy was furious, and tweeted, “This is fucking bullshit @twitter. I'm not allowed to say that men aren't women or ask questions about the notion of transgenderism at all anymore? That a multi billion dollar company is censoring BASIC FACTS and silencing people who ask questions about this dogma is INSANE.”

Murphy continued on Twitter:

What ARE we allowed to say here??? How tf is simply saying 'men aren't women' hateful??? I am losing my goddamned mind over this. Enjoy your brave new world, sjws. Here's your f***ing social justice … I'm assuming my account is going to get locked again simply for speaking about this. But this is not f***ing ok and I'm not going to let it go silently … Trans activists have been targeting my account for a few months now. Either someone at Twitter or with an in at Twitter has been combing through old tweets and reporting them for “hateful conduct.” Twitter seems to instantly shut my account down without a second thought.


After Murphy revealed what had happened to her, tons of her followers came to her defense by simply tweeting, “Men are not women.” That prompted Murphy to tweetat Twitter, “Are you going to ban every single user on here who says 'men aren't women'?? Actually??? @Twitter Or are you just going out of your way to specifically silence ME?”

One Twitter user responded to Murphy by tweeting, “One more time for those in the back: the right to free speech protects you from the government. Not criticism. You are entitled to say whatever dumb thing you want. You are not entitled to a private company providing you an audience.” Murphy fired back, “Yeah and the government is trying to legislate against our free speech, thanks to gender identity ideology. Pay attention.”
In 2013, Murphy referred to Twitter as "a horrible place for feminism ... intellectual laziness is encouraged, oversimplification is mandatory, posturing is de rigueur, and bullying is rewarded.”

When she appeared before the Canadian Senate in 2017 to oppose bill C-16, which encoded gender identity and gender expression into Canadian law, Murphy stated, "Treating gender as though it is either internal or a personal choice is dangerous and completely misunderstands how and why women are oppressed under patriarchy as a class of people ... The rights of women and girls are being pushed aside to accommodate a trend."


Nobody can sat it better than that.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests