UK Labour party can't say what a woman is.

[Patooka]

A troll is somebody who says something they don't believe solely to shit stir

Nope. They can believe it. A troll is someone whose sole motivation is to be a shit stirring cunt. Stephen Crowder, Tim Blair and Avi Yemeni are examples.

But that wasn't what I was referring to. I mentioned "Trollish journalism", which is behaviour solely motivated to manufacture a gotcha moment. Peter Doocey, A Current Affair and Today Tonight are examples of this.

Seriously dude, for someone so consistently butt-hurt about definitions, I would have thought you'd be more careful with yours.

 

[ZiprHead]

What's a gender bigot?

Do you have a mirror?

 

[Metaphor]

Seriously dude, for someone so consistently butt-hurt about definitions, I would have thought you'd be more careful with yours.

Asking somebody to explain what they mean when they make legislation about something is not shit stirring. It is holding power to account.

 

[Metaphor]

What's a gender bigot?

Do you have a mirror?

Yes. I asked laughing dog a question, and if laughing dog is calling me a gender bigot, he should be the one to explain what he means, not you.

But, since you have revealed you think I'm a gender bigot, what is a gender bigot?

 

[Patooka]

Do you have a mirror?

For some reason, I'm reminded of this image.

 

[laughing dog]

What's a gender bigot?

Do you have a mirror?

Yes. I asked laughing dog a question, and if laughing dog is calling me a gender bigot, he should be the one to explain what he means, not

If you read carefully what I wrote, I did not call you anything.

In my view, a gender bigot is someone with a narrow and rigid view about what constitutes a gender or a sex.

 

[Patooka]

Asking somebody to explain what they mean when they make legislation about something is not shit stirring. It is holding power to account.

What is why I pointed out that you are oblivious to trolling journalism, particularly on this topic. My point still stands.

 

[Metaphor]

If you read carefully what I wrote, I did not call you anything.

If you read carefully what I wrote, you'll find I did not say you did. I said if you did.

In my view, a gender bigot is someone with a narrow and rigid view about what constitutes a gender or a sex.

I see. Narrow and rigid views on a particular subject are not what I would call 'bigoted', but we all march to the tune of a different drummer.

 

[Metaphor]

Asking somebody to explain what they mean when they make legislation about something is not shit stirring. It is holding power to account.

What is why I pointed out that you are oblivious to trolling journalism, particularly on this topic. My point still stands.

It is your opinion that the journalist was trolling, but even if they were, it's still a pertinent question.

 

[Metaphor]

Do you have a mirror?

For some reason, I'm reminded of this image.

Patooka, what is a gender bigot?

 

[Patooka]

Patooka, what is a gender bigot?

I think LD nailed it. However, I'm not a definition nazi and am totally fine with terms being fluid depending on context. You might want to give it a go someday.

It is your opinion that the journalist was trolling, but even if they were, it's still a pertinent question.

And seeing as they most certainly were, Yvette Cooper's answer is totally satisfactory. Your objection to it is entirely your problem.

 

[laughing dog]

[QUOTE="Metaphor,]
If you read carefully what I wrote, you'll find I did not say you did. I said if you did. [/quote] I read carefully. I just wanted ti be clear because of yiyr tendency to imagine slights.
[/QUOTE]

I see. Narrow and rigid views on a particular subject are not what I would call 'bigoted', but we all march to the tune of a different drummer.

I didn’t say narrow and rigid views necessarily constituted bigotry, so you don’t see.

 

[Metaphor]

And seeing as they most certainly were, Yvette Cooper's answer is totally satisfactory. Your objection to it is entirely your problem.

Of course it is totally satisfactory to you. I wouldn't have imagined otherwise.

 

[Metaphor]

I didn’t say narrow and rigid views necessarily constituted bigotry, so you don’t see.

I have precise views about biological realities such as sex, and those views are informed by the science.

I wouldn't say I have narrow and rigid about gender, because I don't know what other people mean when they say it.

 

[Patooka]

Of course it is totally satisfactory to you. I wouldn't have imagined otherwise.

And yet you still can't grasp the basic fundamentals of anyone else's argument. I know your moves too, honey. It's almost like we're an old married couple. Except I'm not going to force you into a gender role you're uncomfortable with.

 

[Metaphor]

Of course it is totally satisfactory to you. I wouldn't have imagined otherwise.

And yet you still can't grasp the basic fundamentals of anyone else's argument. I know your moves too, honey. It's almost like we're an old married couple. Except I'm not going to force you into a gender role you're uncomfortable with.

What makes you believe I force people into "gender roles"?

 

[laughing dog]

I didn’t say narrow and rigid views necessarily constituted bigotry, so you don’t see.

I have precise views about biological realities such as sex, and those views are informed by the science.

So?

I wouldn't say I have narrow and rigid about gender, because I don't know what other people mean when they say it.

Your inability or unwillingness to understand is not relevant to the issue of what I mean by the term gender bigot.

 

[Bomb#20]

The people demanding preferred pronouns are creating the hostile workplace. They are demanding others follow their religion or face the ruination of their livelihoods for refusing. They are making extra cognitive demands on others who may not be able to easily comply, such as those with disability or those who have English as a second language.
...
It is the ones creating the religious and cognitive demands on others advancing the hostile workplace.

This isn't the first time religious observances have been imposed on grammar. According to the Quran you're supposed to utter a mini-prayer when you use future tense. So I wonder what would happen if it were to become fashionable among Muslims to try to get non-Muslims to participate in their ritual -- if a lot of them were to take up asking their coworkers to say "if God wills it" any time they mention a Muslim doing something in the future. "The proposal was supposed to be done by now." "Sorry, we'll get it to you by Wednesday." Oops! That's hurtful -- one of the guys on the team putting together the proposal is Muslim. Got to remember to say "Sorry, we'll get it to you by Wednesday, if God wills it."

Well, Muslims could ask; and any non-Muslims who felt like letting their own opinions about religious observances take a backseat to somebody else's opinion would be free to comply. The question is, what would happen if Muslims go up a couple of levels on the progressive stack? Would the progressives who are currently trying to make using somebody's preferred pronouns compulsory also try to make it compulsory for the rest of us to say "if God wills it"? Would they define failure to say "if God wills it" as creating a hostile workplace, and make it actionable?

 

[Metaphor]

So?

I am applying you definition of gender bigot to my behaviour. Of course, I know you didn't call me one. Not directly.

 

[laughing dog]

So?

I am applying you definition of gender bigot to my behaviour. Of course, I know you didn't call me one. Not directly.

I do apologize for being obscure. I responded to your "I have precise views about biological realities such as sex, and those views are informed by the science. " The basis of your "precise" views misses the point: "woman" is not simply a biological identity but a social one as well.