Oor Nicola Sturgeon thread.

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

23 minutes ago, strichener said:

It isn't an excellent post.  We do not have 27 years of data.  The misuse of statistics was pointed out at the time.

 

16 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

Gender Critical

Indeed. It's something I wish somebody would actually set about compiling diligently, because it would help frame both sides of the argument in a better perspective. People are confusing the absence of collated data for an indication that no incidents have actually occurred.

Aye I'll give you it's a poor use of statistics but the central point remains the same. It is extremely telling of prejudice for people to say that self id will cause a massive increase in sexual assault when similar legislation has been in place in different jurisdictions for years and they never seem to have any data on that.

I also don't really care when the GC crowd are quoting figures about the proportion of the prison population who are trans and not understanding the reasons why that might be

[Boo Khaki]

2 minutes ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

 

Aye I'll give you it's a poor use of statistics but the central point remains the same. It is extremely telling of prejudice for people to say that self id will cause a massive increase in sexual assault when similar legislation has been in place in different jurisdictions for years and they never seem to have any data on that.

I also don't really care when the GC crowd are quoting figures about the proportion of the prison population who are trans and not understanding the reasons why that might be

That's not the claim though. 'Massive' doesn't come into it. For most GC advocates it's the simple fact that they believe self-ID facilitates abusers and predatory men, and that one incident is still one too many to justify relaxing GRA legislation. If you believe that to be untrue, you need to come up with an argument other than 'doesn't happen', because they'll just point you straight to characters like Karen White.

[( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)]

3 minutes ago, ThatBoyRonaldo said:

Full of nonsense, quick to wildly overreact, totally self-obsessed and delusional about their own brilliance?

Could be applied to the P&B thought police on here.

[NotThePars]

55 minutes ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

This is funny when you remember why your previous account was banned 

Posting that quote falsely attributed to Voltaire to show everyone how smart I am

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

13 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

That's not the claim though. 'Massive' doesn't come into it. For most GC advocates it's the simple fact that they believe self-ID facilitates abusers and predatory men, and that one incident is still one too many to justify relaxing GRA legislation. If you believe that to be untrue, you need to come up with an argument other than 'doesn't happen', because they'll just point you straight to characters like Karen White.

That would be true were I directly advocating, but I'm a floating voter. I am generally I'm favour of increased trans rights but have had doubts about self id. I find it very rare to find people who are especially GC who are able to look beyond their biases. You yourself referred to transgender people as transexuals earlier

[D Angelo Barksdale]

I think a lot of this could be solved by giving *these people their own bathrooms. 

Spoiler

*TERFS

 

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

 

7 minutes ago, ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) said:

Could be applied to the P&B thought police on here.

 

1 hour ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

This is funny when you remember why your previous account was banned 

 

[Boo Khaki]

5 minutes ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

That would be true were I directly advocating, but I'm a floating voter. I am generally I'm favour of increased trans rights but have had doubts about self id. I find it very rare to find people who are especially GC who are able to look beyond their biases. You yourself referred to transgender people as transexuals earlier

Yes, because transgender, transsexualism, transvesticism and so on are distinctly different things. "Transgender" isn't just a catch-all for everyone who is gender non-conforming.

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

3 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

Yes, because transgender, transsexualism, transvesticism and so on are distinctly different things. "Transgender" isn't just a catch-all for everyone who is gender non-conforming.

Fair enough, looked very much like you were using transexuals as a catch all term in an earlier post, but happy to be wrong! 

[NotThePars]

13 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

Yes, because transgender, transsexualism, transvesticism and so on are distinctly different things. "Transgender" isn't just a catch-all for everyone who is gender non-conforming.

I think cis people, especially straights, using "transsexual" gets a lot of trans people's backs up as it's outdated at best. Like GHB though, am not suggesting a lack of sincerity in what you're saying.

[Boo Khaki]

11 minutes ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

Fair enough, looked very much like you were using transexuals as a catch all term in an earlier post, but happy to be wrong! 

 

Just now, NotThePars said:

I think cis people, especially straights, using "transsexual" gets a lot of trans people's backs up as it's outdated at best. Like GHB though, am not suggesting a lack of sincerity in what you're saying.

In the context of that post, I used the term in the way that GC critics would, i.e. to emphasise that they view people who have either undergone reassignment or are in the process of medically transitioning as 'transexuals', whereas they maintain that men who simply live as women but have no intention of undergoing any sort of medical treatment are transvesticism fetishists.

Apologies for the confusion. I probably should have been clearer in explaining that I was talking from the perspective of how GC people usually make that argument, and not my own personal view on it. It is an outdated term, but it's still used frequently by GC people, and to be honest, I'm of a mind that it's one of a multitude of quite deliberate micro-aggressions on their part. See likewise 'penis owners' and such.

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

Just now, Boo Khaki said:

 

In the context of that post, I used the term in the way that GC critics would, i.e. to emphasise that they view people who have either undergone reassignment or are in the process of medically transitioning as 'transexuals', whereas they maintain that men who simply live as women but have no intention of undergoing any sort of medical treatment are transvesticism fetishists.

Apologies for the confusion. I probably should have been clearer in explaining that I was talking from the perspective of how GC people usually make that argument, and not my own personal view on it. It is an outdated term, but it's still used frequently by GC people, and to be honest, I'm of a mind that it's one of a multitude of quite deliberate micro-aggressions on their part. See likewise 'penis owners' and such.

No bother at all man, your posting on a level I'm not capable of getting on a Wednesday evening haha! Should have understood that from the context of your other posts! 

[NotThePars]

1 minute ago, Boo Khaki said:

 

In the context of that post, I used the term in the way that GC critics would, i.e. to emphasise that they view people who have either undergone reassignment or are in the process of medically transitioning as 'transexuals', whereas they maintain that men who simply live as women but have no intention of undergoing any sort of medical treatment are transvesticism fetishists.

Apologies for the confusion. I probably should have been clearer in explaining that I was talking from the perspective of how GC people usually make that argument, and not my own personal view on it. It is an outdated term, but it's still used frequently by GC people, and to be honest, I'm of a mind that it's one of a multitude of quite deliberate micro-aggressions on their part. See likewise 'penis owners' and such.

Yeah I completely agree on that last part and it's a perfect dogwhistle tbh because it signals their complete contempt to those they're targeting while leaving the average onlooker completely nonplussed.

[Gordon EF]

1 hour ago, MixuFruit said:

Kind of a sad observation, I wonder if there is something to it.

 

That's the kind of question that gets me thinking, from a stats point of view as much as anything, so I did a few sums. When you make a few assumptions about how many gay men there are / were in that mid 40s to mid 50s cohort and compare it to the numbers of AIDS deaths in the US, it's pretty clear it had an unbelievable toll on that generation even if you're fairly conservative on the estimate of what % of AIDS victims were gay men and what the age range of victims were. It absolutely would be significant.

45-54 is probably a bit young seeing as anyone who's 45 today was a child during the 80s but the point remains.

[git-intae-thum]

https://www.conter.co.uk/blog/2020/12/1/big-win-for-dissidents-at-snp-conference-what-next

Interesting comment piece on the internal machinations at the SNP.

Looks like the bulk of the membership remember the SNP is a pro independence party above all else.

The extreme political correct types have been dealt a right sair yin here.  Mibbe time for them move on and set up their own independence party

Edited December 3, 2020 by git-intae-thum
Typo

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

4 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

https://www.conter.co.uk/blog/2020/12/1/big-win-for-dissidents-at-snp-conference-what-next

Interesting comment piece on the internal machinations at the SNP.

Looks like the bulk of the membership remember the SNP is a pro independence party above all else.

The extreme political correct types have been dealt a right sair yin here.  Mibbe time for them move on and set up their own independence party

Why is it a good thing for a party to be pro independence above all else? How does that help persuade people that independence is a good idea, when recent polling has shown the current approach to be working? Who are some of the extreme politically correct types, which policies do you disagree with and why? 

Kerevan says in his own analysis there that a legal challenge, even a successful one, would just lead to a change in the law by Westminster. For a more UDIey approach, I lived in Barcelona in 2017 and if you think Scots are going to put their bodies on the line with protests, civil disobedience and defending polling stations from riot police in the same way Catalans did then I have a bridge to sell you. Not that that's been particularly effective in any case.

 

[sophia]

Kerevan comes across to me as significantly partisan via the portal of that piece.

I'm not sure Nicola Sturgeon has the privileges to unilaterally suspend party members.

He seems to advocate law breaking in terms of Peter Murrell's remuneration.

After that I lost a bit of interest and only read to the end through politeness.

[Granny Danger]

3 hours ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

Why is it a good thing for a party to be pro independence above all else? How does that help persuade people that independence is a good idea, when recent polling has shown the current approach to be working? Who are some of the extreme politically correct types, which policies do you disagree with and why? 

Kerevan says in his own analysis there that a legal challenge, even a successful one, would just lead to a change in the law by Westminster. For a more UDIey approach, I lived in Barcelona in 2017 and if you think Scots are going to put their bodies on the line with protests, civil disobedience and defending polling stations from riot police in the same way Catalans did then I have a bridge to sell you. Not that that's been particularly effective in any case.

 

I cannot see wholesale resistance Catalan style, but the Catalan protests were mainly peaceful.

I don’t think it’s impossible to foresee a far smaller number of people taking far more serious and direct action however.

 

[Detournement]

12 hours ago, MixuFruit said:

Kind of a sad observation, I wonder if there is something to it.

 

It's nonsense!

Kids these days are cut off from the past in a way that no generation has been previously but surely anyone can figure out that there were loads of gay bars/clubs and culture in the 90s?

 

[Detournement]

3 minutes ago, MixuFruit said:

Are 'loads' the same as 'as many as there would have been if a lot of people hadn't died of AIDS in the 80s'? I'd presume not. I'm a little too young to have really lived through this but friends in 50s and 60s talk very poignantly about the dozens of friends they lost in that period.

I'd say so. 

Deaths in the UK ran at about 1000 a year until 1990 jumped to 2000 by 1995 then dropped back to 1000 a couple of years later. That is a lot of death amongst younger people but not enough to decimate a generation of a cohort which makes up 2-3% of the population.