Gender Discussion #27

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
This is so unbelievably regressive. 5 years ago this kind of practise was on it's way to being unnecessary in most of the western world. Now we are going backwards and companies are monetising this misery again.
Couple more screenshots from this company. Came as no surprise that the first category of I am is trans.
20220610_071509.jpg
20220610_071532.jpg
 
  • Sick
  • Wow
  • Sad
Reactions: 12
This is so unbelievably regressive. 5 years ago this kind of practise was on it's way to being unnecessary in most of the western world. Now we are going backwards and companies are monetising this misery again.
I honestly can’t get my head around it. I thought that for “average” people in the Western world (not super religious, etc) coming out as gay is no longer a huge problem.

(But then you look at Rebel Wilson coming out at 42 and remember that, actually, even in celebrity circles, being gay or lesbian is still considered a massive barrier to a successful acting career).

I think it’s the modern imagery of the advert that bothers me. Or the fact they’re trying to rebrand a derogatory term like “bearding” into a nicey-nicey word like “bynding” 🤢

Whatever it is, it’s regressive and homophobic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 20
Bynding (🙄 why do they love to replace perfectly good letters in words so much? See also Folx, womxn) is also reminiscent of binding, as in chests. Probably not a coincidence.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 14
Anyone follow Waterstones on social media? It’s just one of those companies I follow. I keep noticing how much they promote lgbt books, nothing wrong with that but they are so OTT with it. It’s literally every day and not just because it’s pride month. I’m convinced stonewall have got them. Today they are focusing on books about trans people. They have a cheek to say they highlight all kinds of books. Then why, when I asked for Helen Joyce’s Trans book, did they have to go get it from the back for me? Why was that not highlighted. They had Shon Faye’s book out on display though.

I would try and avoid them but there aren’t that many other book shops where I am. And I like to browse a book shop rather than buy online. I just get a bad stonewall-y feeling off them.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 14
I’m not sure whether Waterstones have drunk the Stonewall kool aid, or whether their (quite aggressive) pro-trans stance is just an inevitable consequence of the kinds of personalities who work in bookshops (who are not dissimilar to the people who work in the library sector - and we all know they’re ushering in drag queen story hour etc).

I think it might be the latter. I bet a lot of blue haired do-gooders work for Waterstones, hiding Helen Joyce, Kathleen Stock and Julie Bindel’s books in the depths of the stock room…
 
  • Like
Reactions: 20
I can't keep up with all this bollocks.

Obviously, people's lives are now so easy in the West, with all problems and issues taken care of, that they are actively looking around for tit like this to keep their minds and lives busy ?
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 19
I'm sure there is probably a bit of nuance that is being lost, but I don't see the outrage about paedophilia (stupid American spellings) being seen, or even taught, as an innate sexuality. Just so long as it remains clear that any sexual contact between an adult and a child is still illegal and always remains so. The second they start using "but it's just innate sexuality, bigot" to agitate for a change in the law then duck those fuckers.

Edit - innate sexuality as in "some people are just wired that way". My instinct would say that most paedophiles are that way because of trauma in some way, but I don't know the research. Innate should not always mean acceptable, though.
 
  • Sick
  • Like
Reactions: 6
Anyone follow Waterstones on social media? It’s just one of those companies I follow. I keep noticing how much they promote lgbt books, nothing wrong with that but they are so OTT with it. It’s literally every day and not just because it’s pride month. I’m convinced stonewall have got them. Today they are focusing on books about trans people. They have a cheek to say they highlight all kinds of books. Then why, when I asked for Helen Joyce’s Trans book, did they have to go get it from the back for me? Why was that not highlighted. They had Shon Faye’s book out on display though.

I would try and avoid them but there aren’t that many other book shops where I am. And I like to browse a book shop rather than buy online. I just get a bad stonewall-y feeling off them.
They are probably trying to get rid of the terrible memory of when hundreds of children/people queued up to meet JK for her last book with smiles and not stones to lynch her!!
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 10
I'm sure there is probably a bit of nuance that is being lost, but I don't see the outrage about paedophilia (stupid American spellings) being seen, or even taught, as an innate sexuality. Just so long as it remains clear that any sexual contact between an adult and a child is still illegal and always remains so. The second they start using "but it's just innate sexuality, bigot" to agitate for a change in the law then duck those fuckers.

Edit - innate sexuality as in "some people are just wired that way". My instinct would say that most paedophiles are that way because of trauma in some way, but I don't know the research. Innate should not always mean acceptable, though.
Some people are just hard-wired that way & it is unacceptable in society.
There will always be some that will push for it to become more acceptable by any means possible 😖
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 6
I honestly can’t get my head around it. I thought that for “average” people in the Western world (not super religious, etc) coming out as gay is no longer a huge problem.

(But then you look at Rebel Wilson coming out at 42 and remember that, actually, even in celebrity circles, being gay or lesbian is still considered a massive barrier to a successful acting career).

I think it’s the modern imagery of the advert that bothers me. Or the fact they’re trying to rebrand a derogatory term like “bearding” into a nicey-nicey word like “bynding” 🤢

Whatever it is, it’s regressive and homophobic.
Yes, sadly sexuality is still a barrier to a successful acting career. Which is ridiculous considering the whole point of acting is to play someone who isn't you, so why anyone would care about what an actor does in their private life is beyond me.

I recall Kate Winslet commenting on it last year where she said she knew of at least four actors who weren't out because they were scared of the repercussions (link below). So I guess there is a demand for this 'Bynding' nonsense.

 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 11
I'm sure there is probably a bit of nuance that is being lost, but I don't see the outrage about paedophilia (stupid American spellings) being seen, or even taught, as an innate sexuality. Just so long as it remains clear that any sexual contact between an adult and a child is still illegal and always remains so.
I think the fundamental problem is it’s not innate so it’s wrong to teach it as such.

And even if you can successfully argue that it is… that’s a slippery slope that surely opens the floodgates to teach all manner of harmful paraphilias/criminal behaviour as innate behaviours.

Also, innate is a loaded term. Innate means they can’t help it. Innate means you need to start feeling sorry for them.

Are paedophiles born or made? My assumption has always been that the “innate” argument is a fiction designed to legitimise paedophilia as a benign thing that people (aka men) are simply born with, and as long as it’s never acted upon, it’s fine, nothing to see here…

I don’t think p**dos are born any more than abusive deviant kinksters are born. I’m not sure what drives someone in that direction sexually, but I don’t think it’s innate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 18
Yes, I probably should have made that clear. Obviously if it's not true, or only has flimsy acceptance by the psychological community, then it shouldn't be taught full stop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3
I recently saw a post that really pissed me off along the lines of "it's wrong to gatekeep people and say they're not part of an oppressed group, when they are clearly subject to that oppression. If someone is subjected to anti-Black racism, you shouldn't say they're not Black enough because they're mixed / light skinned. If someone is sexually assaulted because she is perceived as a woman, who are you to say she isn't a woman?" Pretty sure it was referring to Meghan Markle and whether she should be considered Black, but it still pissed me off. First of all, don't use any form of racism to make transactivism look legitimate. Also, with a few exceptions, most transwomen are very visibly men. If they're being sexually assaulted, violently attacked, discriminated against, etc. it's because of homophobia or a desire to enforce social roles ("men should be X and women should be Y") - not because they are actually women
TBH, I have never seen an exception. Monroe Bergdof at a push but he's had tons of surgery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6
TBH, I have never seen an exception. Monroe Bergdof at a push but he's had tons of surgery.
I find it's almost always given away with the voice. Lots of surgery isn't always a giveaway in my opinion as plastic surgery, botox, fillers, etc seem so prevalent these days - regardless of gender.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.