| So a woman is a biological female then…. 14:46 - Apr 16 with 22196 views | itfcjoe |
…I don’t dare look on social media for how this news has been taken by both sides of the debate.
|  |
| |  |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 09:11 - Apr 18 with 1712 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 21:58 - Apr 17 by redrickstuhaart |
Its almost as if you have completely ignored what I said, and instead assumed I said something anti. |
We are not amused. |  |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 09:15 - Apr 18 with 1689 views | DJR |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 21:29 - Apr 17 by redrickstuhaart |
Yes it can be used- and always has been. But only with care - because it does cause confusion depending on context.
We need a way of doing it, but personally I find they and them very clumsy and jarring. I have read books where, even when used to it, I have ot read back over a sentence or two before figuring it was being used singular. Confusing. |
I understand what you are saying but language can evolve.
For example, 15 odd years ago, I felt the expression Chair, in place of Chairman, was rather odd. But I have long since come to accept it, and indeed I suppose it can be said to reflect the verb chair.
And don't forget we have had no hesitation turning nouns like email into verbs. [Post edited 18 Apr 9:19]
|  | | |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 09:37 - Apr 18 with 1647 views | lowhouseblue |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 09:06 - Apr 18 by DJR |
This is a good and nuanced article on the issue but I rather fear its final paragraph will fall on deaf ears.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/18/if-britain-is-now-resettin
As regards the culture wars themselves when it comes to the trans issue, it seems to me a rather uneven fight with the battalions of the right media and political parties and an increasing hostile public on one side and a very small and vulnerable minority on the other. [Post edited 18 Apr 9:17]
|
good article. the trans people i have known generally have had an awful lot of complexity going on in their lives and i'm sure have just wanted to get on with stuff. their vulnerabilities have been very obvious. they haven't been seeking to push conflicts or seek confrontation. i also think that pre the last decade, as the article suggests, people did generally muddle through. the trans activists of the last decade have not been representative of that wider community - and their militancy has amplified conflicts. stonewall in particular bares much of the responsibility. they set out to create conflict through their 'no debate' stance and their attempts to politicise language and push to enshrine extreme positions in institutions through their training. the push for self-id ran against the public consensus and was incredibly divisive - any consensus then broke down.
where i disagree with the article is i don't think parliament will want to touch this issue again for a long time. i can't see new legislation coming to tidy up loose ends - unless the ehrc does something stupid with its revised guidance i think everyone will want to leave it there. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 09:43 - Apr 18 with 1631 views | DJR |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 09:37 - Apr 18 by lowhouseblue |
good article. the trans people i have known generally have had an awful lot of complexity going on in their lives and i'm sure have just wanted to get on with stuff. their vulnerabilities have been very obvious. they haven't been seeking to push conflicts or seek confrontation. i also think that pre the last decade, as the article suggests, people did generally muddle through. the trans activists of the last decade have not been representative of that wider community - and their militancy has amplified conflicts. stonewall in particular bares much of the responsibility. they set out to create conflict through their 'no debate' stance and their attempts to politicise language and push to enshrine extreme positions in institutions through their training. the push for self-id ran against the public consensus and was incredibly divisive - any consensus then broke down.
where i disagree with the article is i don't think parliament will want to touch this issue again for a long time. i can't see new legislation coming to tidy up loose ends - unless the ehrc does something stupid with its revised guidance i think everyone will want to leave it there. |
Your last paragraph is spot on.
The political parties will want to leave it to the EHRC and employers etc to sort it out. [Post edited 18 Apr 9:46]
| | | |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 09:58 - Apr 18 with 1566 views | NthQldITFC |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 18:56 - Apr 17 by Nutkins_Return |
Personally I would respect someones wish to be referred to by their preferred pronoun. But I also think it's slightly absurd linguistically and very clunky system. A singular person being referred to as 'they' is odd. I hope we come to a better system then this and something unique as a replacement would make much more sense.
I don't think having an aversion to using preferred pronouns necessarily equals transphobia at all. I think a lot of people just don't like the concept of changing a normal syntactic system (or in more simple terms 'change'). It does seem a bit silly and unnecessary to a lot of people and therefore they dont want to do it. It's not hate.
These arguments often come out as you either hate trans people or you don't. That's just nonsense. There is so much in-between.
For me you have to put yourself in someone else's shoes. And I can understand if I was trans that I might feel uncomfortable with he or she. It wouldn't be silly to me.
But just saying someone who isn't happy with the concept of using an individuals pronouns is transphobic doesn't seem right or accurate to me. |
Well put. |  |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 10:28 - Apr 18 with 1491 views | Nutkins_Return |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 09:15 - Apr 18 by DJR |
I understand what you are saying but language can evolve.
For example, 15 odd years ago, I felt the expression Chair, in place of Chairman, was rather odd. But I have long since come to accept it, and indeed I suppose it can be said to reflect the verb chair.
And don't forget we have had no hesitation turning nouns like email into verbs. [Post edited 18 Apr 9:19]
|
Of course it can and does and always will.
I know you weren't directly responding to me but the point I was making is people can disagree or not like changes to language or new rules being opposed. A new change being pushed doesn't mean it has to be accepted or it will become a permanent change. And people don't like change generally. So whilst I might not have a problem with someone choosing to be referred to as 'they'. That someone doesn't like that change does not make them a transphobe or make them hate filled etc etc. It's possible they are one...but that doesn't make them one.
It is somewhat entitled to expect everyone to instantly and without reservation accept a new way of doing things. Over time I agree the language will change as the younger generation won't have use the old way etc. that's normal in society and language evolution.
All boils down to mutual respect and seeing others points of view. I think 90% of people are well intentioned even if they don't agree on it. |  |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 10:41 - Apr 18 with 1447 views | J2BLUE |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 09:06 - Apr 18 by DJR |
This is a good and nuanced article on the issue but I rather fear its final paragraph will fall on deaf ears.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/18/if-britain-is-now-resettin
As regards the culture wars themselves when it comes to the trans issue, it seems to me a rather uneven fight with the battalions of the right media and political parties and an increasing hostile public on one side and a very small and vulnerable minority on the other. [Post edited 18 Apr 9:17]
|
I have to say I am sick of hearing the phrase culture war.
It's just a way for people to dismiss anything the other side says.
For the other side it's woke. Two dismissive terms to avoid engaging with the point.
Not really aimed at you, just a general point.
To respond to your point about a hostile public, I really don't think the majority of people are hostile. I don't think the majority even care. It's just when you see it taken to absurd levels by a small minority that most people push back.
Parliament should pass a law saying ideology cannot overrule biology and women are entitled to single sex spaces. As part of that same law it should make it clear trans people will have their rights fully protected and enhanced. Self certification etc, great, you do you and good luck to you. |  |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 10:48 - Apr 18 with 1402 views | Ryorry |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 10:28 - Apr 18 by Nutkins_Return |
Of course it can and does and always will.
I know you weren't directly responding to me but the point I was making is people can disagree or not like changes to language or new rules being opposed. A new change being pushed doesn't mean it has to be accepted or it will become a permanent change. And people don't like change generally. So whilst I might not have a problem with someone choosing to be referred to as 'they'. That someone doesn't like that change does not make them a transphobe or make them hate filled etc etc. It's possible they are one...but that doesn't make them one.
It is somewhat entitled to expect everyone to instantly and without reservation accept a new way of doing things. Over time I agree the language will change as the younger generation won't have use the old way etc. that's normal in society and language evolution.
All boils down to mutual respect and seeing others points of view. I think 90% of people are well intentioned even if they don't agree on it. |
Your point re mutual respect is key, so tbh, I don’t see why everybody can’t just make a little bit of extra effort to call people by their preferred pronouns and names, even if it seems a bit strange at first.
This does remind me of a debate on here a few years ago though (about 3?) - before your time anyway - in which I got absolute pelters from several posters for saying that I hated being called by my first name by complete strangers in email etc conversations with service providers etc. Esp since I’m known by my middle name by friends and no-one’s called me by my first name that I hate, since my Mum died 12 years ago! Being in my 70s, I grew up with ’Mrs’ and then ‘Ms’. [Post edited 18 Apr 10:55]
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 11:05 - Apr 18 with 1379 views | DJR |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 10:41 - Apr 18 by J2BLUE |
I have to say I am sick of hearing the phrase culture war.
It's just a way for people to dismiss anything the other side says.
For the other side it's woke. Two dismissive terms to avoid engaging with the point.
Not really aimed at you, just a general point.
To respond to your point about a hostile public, I really don't think the majority of people are hostile. I don't think the majority even care. It's just when you see it taken to absurd levels by a small minority that most people push back.
Parliament should pass a law saying ideology cannot overrule biology and women are entitled to single sex spaces. As part of that same law it should make it clear trans people will have their rights fully protected and enhanced. Self certification etc, great, you do you and good luck to you. |
And I only referred to culture wars in response to Joe who used it. | | | |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 11:13 - Apr 18 with 1352 views | DJR |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 10:28 - Apr 18 by Nutkins_Return |
Of course it can and does and always will.
I know you weren't directly responding to me but the point I was making is people can disagree or not like changes to language or new rules being opposed. A new change being pushed doesn't mean it has to be accepted or it will become a permanent change. And people don't like change generally. So whilst I might not have a problem with someone choosing to be referred to as 'they'. That someone doesn't like that change does not make them a transphobe or make them hate filled etc etc. It's possible they are one...but that doesn't make them one.
It is somewhat entitled to expect everyone to instantly and without reservation accept a new way of doing things. Over time I agree the language will change as the younger generation won't have use the old way etc. that's normal in society and language evolution.
All boils down to mutual respect and seeing others points of view. I think 90% of people are well intentioned even if they don't agree on it. |
I did preface my post that gave rise to my comment with "Whatever one's views on preferred pronouns," because I was trying to look at gender-neutral formulations more generally. [Post edited 18 Apr 11:16]
| | | |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 11:19 - Apr 18 with 1341 views | Herbivore |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 10:41 - Apr 18 by J2BLUE |
I have to say I am sick of hearing the phrase culture war.
It's just a way for people to dismiss anything the other side says.
For the other side it's woke. Two dismissive terms to avoid engaging with the point.
Not really aimed at you, just a general point.
To respond to your point about a hostile public, I really don't think the majority of people are hostile. I don't think the majority even care. It's just when you see it taken to absurd levels by a small minority that most people push back.
Parliament should pass a law saying ideology cannot overrule biology and women are entitled to single sex spaces. As part of that same law it should make it clear trans people will have their rights fully protected and enhanced. Self certification etc, great, you do you and good luck to you. |
So where will trans women, even those who have had full gender reassignment surgery, go to the toilet? Is it protecting and enhancing their rights to make them use men's toilets? [Post edited 18 Apr 11:20]
|  |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 11:25 - Apr 18 with 1316 views | Ryorry |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 10:41 - Apr 18 by J2BLUE |
I have to say I am sick of hearing the phrase culture war.
It's just a way for people to dismiss anything the other side says.
For the other side it's woke. Two dismissive terms to avoid engaging with the point.
Not really aimed at you, just a general point.
To respond to your point about a hostile public, I really don't think the majority of people are hostile. I don't think the majority even care. It's just when you see it taken to absurd levels by a small minority that most people push back.
Parliament should pass a law saying ideology cannot overrule biology and women are entitled to single sex spaces. As part of that same law it should make it clear trans people will have their rights fully protected and enhanced. Self certification etc, great, you do you and good luck to you. |
I think the majority of biological women care greatly! But as you imply, only when the issue of single-sex spaces arose.
Re your last para that everyone's rights should be fully protected - totally agree, but the problem is that one group's rights were then seen by another bigger group as impeding or setting back their own which they'd worked hard for for decades, hence the big clash. | |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 11:31 - Apr 18 with 1290 views | lowhouseblue |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 11:19 - Apr 18 by Herbivore |
So where will trans women, even those who have had full gender reassignment surgery, go to the toilet? Is it protecting and enhancing their rights to make them use men's toilets? [Post edited 18 Apr 11:20]
|
i suspect that public places will move over to offering some uni-sex toilets with cubicles. where i am we made that decision years ago. good practice will emerge and hopefully the ehrc guidance will provide a prompt. it's about responding respectfully and proportionately and doing the best to balance competing rights and vulnerabilities. compromise and common sense will prevail once the agitators move on. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 11:38 - Apr 18 with 1250 views | vapour_trail |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 19:19 - Apr 17 by itfcjoe |
This was from TWTD, where someone messaged me on Twitter saying I’d been transphobic on this forum……they sent a polite message saying that they’d been disappointed and would like to speak to me but I hadn’t seen this message and got a follow up which said this:
Joe,
I would appreciate a dialogue with you, regarding your transphobic comments you've made on TWTD. I'm trying to keep things under the radar, but I will be forced to escalate how I am dealing with this if you continue to not engage with me.
[Name removed]
Continuing to not engage was ignoring a message I hadn’t seen a few days earlier - it caused me a lot of stress and I was then tweeted about quite viciously but just not my name being mentioned etc [Post edited 17 Apr 19:20]
|
That’s very disappointing. In that case I take back earlier comments, you shouldn’t have to put up with that. |  |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 11:48 - Apr 18 with 1200 views | Kievthegreat |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 00:54 - Apr 18 by Nutkins_Return |
Shakespeare couldn't spell his own f'kin name ffs. A genius in terms of historical playwright of course but let's not start that argument around pronouns. Honestly going back to Chaucer and Shakespeare is no argument for modern language in my opinion (regardless of their historical genius)
You can have confidence in it but your are not coming from a place of neutrality. Wtf are they instantly rude and obnoxious. Honestly? I would use someone's chosen pronoun to someone who wished it. But I totally get some reluctance honestly and not for the reasons of being rude or obnoxious as is said.
If someone or some group decide to make up new rules you are not simply a dick for not agreeing to the new rules. That's is absurd. It's actually rude to decide they are. Someone's offence is not the same as someone's right.
The whole problem is entitlement and militant right or wrong on the subject. There needs to be courtesy and dialogue on all sides really. Absolutely there are complete douchebags on both extremes. I really wish everyone could get along and majority of people can with some common decency. Live and let live for me. But in all sides. [Post edited 18 Apr 8:54]
|
Here's my issue, you talk about common decency as something that is needed, but I don't see how just being respectful of someone's pronouns isn't a simple tenet of that. It's been touched on that we need to treat people with mutual respect and this is a simple case of doing so. I'd clarify my middle paragraph though because I use the word aversion too loosely, because of course you could have an aversion but still do the thing you are averse to. This is like you in this example, being respectful even if it feel awkward to you. Wanted to be clear I wasn't meaning to attack you in the scenario presented.
My final paragraph is a clearer representation of my thoughts. It's not in the liking or not liking the pronouns. It's in the deliberateness of the choice. If you deliberately use the wrong pronouns, you are being rude in my opinion. There's no difference than deliberately calling a he a she or vice versa. The cost for using they/them pronouns is small to non-existent if we're honest. People may not like them and they may feel clunky, but to ignore them on purpose is mean spirited and demeaning to that person. They've placed their ideas of how they/them can be used over tangible effects on another human being.
PS. It's sort of a side issue to the main topic of respect, but the reason Shakespeare and Chaucer are relevant is that this is not a new thing. This has been part of the language for hundreds of years and not only pre-dates modern language, but also modern discussions of gender identity. As pointed out elsewhere, it used by plenty of modern and early modern authors too. |  | | |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 12:08 - Apr 18 with 1119 views | J2BLUE |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 11:19 - Apr 18 by Herbivore |
So where will trans women, even those who have had full gender reassignment surgery, go to the toilet? Is it protecting and enhancing their rights to make them use men's toilets? [Post edited 18 Apr 11:20]
|
I think in that case you could make an exception or it's a bit like saying people who have lost a leg should not be allowed to use a disabled bathroom as they were born with two legs.
If your next question is how can you enforce this then I have absolutely no idea. There is no good easy solution or it would have been implemented by now.
Out of interest, what would you do? | |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 12:15 - Apr 18 with 1082 views | vapour_trail |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 10:41 - Apr 18 by J2BLUE |
I have to say I am sick of hearing the phrase culture war.
It's just a way for people to dismiss anything the other side says.
For the other side it's woke. Two dismissive terms to avoid engaging with the point.
Not really aimed at you, just a general point.
To respond to your point about a hostile public, I really don't think the majority of people are hostile. I don't think the majority even care. It's just when you see it taken to absurd levels by a small minority that most people push back.
Parliament should pass a law saying ideology cannot overrule biology and women are entitled to single sex spaces. As part of that same law it should make it clear trans people will have their rights fully protected and enhanced. Self certification etc, great, you do you and good luck to you. |
You don't recognise over the past decade or so an increasing behavioural pattern of a certain type of politician to use cultural issues with the intention of creating social division?
Not a dig, just a question. | |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 12:36 - Apr 18 with 1034 views | J2BLUE |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 12:15 - Apr 18 by vapour_trail |
You don't recognise over the past decade or so an increasing behavioural pattern of a certain type of politician to use cultural issues with the intention of creating social division?
Not a dig, just a question. |
I do but I think so much just gets dismissed using that label.
It's the same (worse?) on the other side dismissing very minor issues and requests to treat people with respect as woke nonsense. | |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 12:40 - Apr 18 with 1026 views | Trequartista |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 08:21 - Apr 18 by itfcjoe |
This is the problem with the culture war when there is a right side and a wrong side to a debate when that debate isn’t actually clear cut and people generally from both sides of the culture war divide end up on the same ‘side’ here
The noisy voices are so vicious, that any more nuanced views are either left unspoken because people don’t want to be seen to side with the wrong side, or they are deliberately misinterpreted as to being more black and white than they are so the debate isn’t actually clear dominated by the loudest angriest voices |
Always point out the Nazis were the first to embark on an anti-smoking campaign and work from there. |  |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 12:57 - Apr 18 with 984 views | Trequartista |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 11:19 - Apr 18 by Herbivore |
So where will trans women, even those who have had full gender reassignment surgery, go to the toilet? Is it protecting and enhancing their rights to make them use men's toilets? [Post edited 18 Apr 11:20]
|
It's a fair question and personally I'd have been happy to have had those who have had full gender reassignment use female loos even though they are biologically men.
What is not acceptable to me though is men putting a dress on saying they are transgender and entering the ladies.
I wonder if the historic definitions of trans-sexual and transvestite would have been more suited to solving the issues rather than the modern transgender pushed forward by trans activists. | |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 13:00 - Apr 18 with 963 views | lowhouseblue |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 12:36 - Apr 18 by J2BLUE |
I do but I think so much just gets dismissed using that label.
It's the same (worse?) on the other side dismissing very minor issues and requests to treat people with respect as woke nonsense. |
i find it amazing that some people genuinely seem to think that the 'culture war' is one sided. personally i don't see how you can understand the decade long furore over trans issues without including activists and groups like stonewall - who pushed things way beyond the public consensus on the issue. how can 'no debate' and pushing for self-id been seen as neutral, non-controversial acts entirely separate from any 'culture war'?
the 'culture war' label is originally from the US 100 years ago. it described a societal level debate about the role of / limits to the state and the acceptable dimensions of and limits to inequality. it then extended to conflicts between individual responsibilities and rights. that seems to reflect really fundamental political divisions that persist over decades. they are genuine and legitimate political debates and pretending that only one side is involved, or that one side is neutral and the other aggressive, or that one side of the debate is illegitimate is just nonsense. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 13:02 - Apr 18 with 944 views | J2BLUE |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 13:00 - Apr 18 by lowhouseblue |
i find it amazing that some people genuinely seem to think that the 'culture war' is one sided. personally i don't see how you can understand the decade long furore over trans issues without including activists and groups like stonewall - who pushed things way beyond the public consensus on the issue. how can 'no debate' and pushing for self-id been seen as neutral, non-controversial acts entirely separate from any 'culture war'?
the 'culture war' label is originally from the US 100 years ago. it described a societal level debate about the role of / limits to the state and the acceptable dimensions of and limits to inequality. it then extended to conflicts between individual responsibilities and rights. that seems to reflect really fundamental political divisions that persist over decades. they are genuine and legitimate political debates and pretending that only one side is involved, or that one side is neutral and the other aggressive, or that one side of the debate is illegitimate is just nonsense. |
Completely agree. | |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 13:08 - Apr 18 with 898 views | vapour_trail |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 13:00 - Apr 18 by lowhouseblue |
i find it amazing that some people genuinely seem to think that the 'culture war' is one sided. personally i don't see how you can understand the decade long furore over trans issues without including activists and groups like stonewall - who pushed things way beyond the public consensus on the issue. how can 'no debate' and pushing for self-id been seen as neutral, non-controversial acts entirely separate from any 'culture war'?
the 'culture war' label is originally from the US 100 years ago. it described a societal level debate about the role of / limits to the state and the acceptable dimensions of and limits to inequality. it then extended to conflicts between individual responsibilities and rights. that seems to reflect really fundamental political divisions that persist over decades. they are genuine and legitimate political debates and pretending that only one side is involved, or that one side is neutral and the other aggressive, or that one side of the debate is illegitimate is just nonsense. |
Nobody pretends one side is involved. Please evidence this .
Presenting opinions as fact as per. | |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 13:30 - Apr 18 with 820 views | Herbivore |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 12:08 - Apr 18 by J2BLUE |
I think in that case you could make an exception or it's a bit like saying people who have lost a leg should not be allowed to use a disabled bathroom as they were born with two legs.
If your next question is how can you enforce this then I have absolutely no idea. There is no good easy solution or it would have been implemented by now.
Out of interest, what would you do? |
Without having given it loads of thought, one solution would be for people with a gender recognition certificate to be allowed in those kinds of spaces, but only with a fairly rigorous process in place to enable people to get that certificate.
The idea that there's predatory men everywhere putting on a dress to get into female only spaces, those extreme examples are very few and far between, but it's important to recognise this as a concern in allowing trans women into female spaces. While there are a very, very small number of instances where someone has used self-ID to access female spaces for nefarious purposes, I'm not sure those individuals would get a gender recognition certificate if the process was rigorous and time consuming.
That would seem to be one potential way of respecting the rights of both trans and cis women. What I've found interesting since the ruling is that people who previously said there needs to be nuanced debate about this are now saying that basically trans women are men, which isn't a very nuanced position at all. The ruling applies to sex based rights under the Equality Act, it is not an all encompassing definition of how we talk about masculinity, femininity, and gender and yet we've seen some treat it as though it is. Now would be a good time for some nuance but I don't think we'll see it, sadly. | |
| |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 13:33 - Apr 18 with 802 views | lowhouseblue |
| So a woman is a biological female then…. on 13:08 - Apr 18 by vapour_trail |
Nobody pretends one side is involved. Please evidence this .
Presenting opinions as fact as per. |
it's a very common pretence* and i took your: "You don't recognise over the past decade or so an increasing behavioural pattern of a certain type of politician to use cultural issues with the intention of creating social division?" to imply that it was only a 'certain type of politician' (i'm guessing you mean those you disagree with) who raise these cultural issues which create social division. your question seems to be taking a one-sided line on the origins of cultural debates - or am i wrong and do you accept that people of all views can raise cultural issues which then feed into social divisions?
*it's obviously very hard to find a single link to capture a broad world view like this, but a very quick search led me to this as an example of a 100% one-sided take on one cultural dispute (the subject matter is irrelevant, it is the completely one-sided view that i'm pointing to): https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2023/11/10/who-are-the-culture-warriors-a-closer
**edit - and the down arrow suggests at least one person thinks culture wars only have one side. [Post edited 18 Apr 13:36]
| |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
