Jump to content

Pronouns -- Sometimes I think they are just trolling us...


West

Recommended Posts

  • Charles Anthony changed the title to Pronouns -- Sometimes I think they are just trolling us...

They're serious... about chasing windmills

Just remember that the leftist parties are built around appealing to people who have never accomplished anything in life and they know they never will, therefor they lack a sense of self-esteem. When those ones sit at the table with their more-accomplished contemporaries they don't want to feel 'less-than' so they've created this imaginary world where everyone who has accomplished more than them was just privileged, or they had help from some racists of their own kind, etc, and therefor their 'superiors' are actually just morally and ethically inferior bullies. 

That's why they're always making things up about the police, SC nominees, creating genders & pronouns, advocating for pedophiles' rights, banning words like "mother" and "father", etc - they are deathly afraid of running out of causes that help them cling to their illusion of self-worth.

They say things like: "OMG, Brionna was a puritanical princess who was killed for sleeping black!" and if you don't pretend to see it 100% their way then you're racist, stupid, crazy, etc and you need to be cancelled: "YOUR WORDS ARE POISON! THEY'RE KILLING PEOPLE! AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!"

They finally dropped the whole "emotional support animal" BS because they finally realized that they just make them look like professional soccer players. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

1. Just remember that the leftist parties are built around appealing to people who have never accomplished anything in life and they know they never will, therefor they lack a sense of self-esteem.

2. That's why they're always making things up about the police, SC nominees, creating genders & pronouns, advocating for pedophiles' rights, banning words like "mother" and "father", etc - they are deathly afraid of running out of causes that help them cling to their illusion of self-worth.

1. It's a strange thing to tie human rights or even politeness to some idea that people need to have "accomplished" something... to your satisfaction.  It's certainly not a viewpoint that affords basic respect to the individual.
As to tying this to 'leftist' parties.  I suppose you mean the centrist Liberal Party of Canada, who have duped you into thinking they are a progressive party.  That's on you for believing their press.  Freedom is a conservative value, which is why Conservative and Harper's #1 man Jim Flaherty supported transgender rights early on.

So, in short, you are confused about rights.

2. People who want to ban "mother" and "father" are fringe dwellers.  Just ignore them and start posting about real politics if you have the wherewithal to do so.

As for those constructed pronouns - you're free to not use them.  I didn't use "Ms." for a long time - do you use that one ?  If you don't, I'm sure nobody cares either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. It's a strange thing to tie human rights or even politeness to some idea that people need to have "accomplished" something... to your satisfaction.  It's certainly not a viewpoint that affords basic respect to the individual.
As to tying this to 'leftist' parties.  I suppose you mean the centrist Liberal Party of Canada, who have duped you into thinking they are a progressive party.  That's on you for believing their press.  Freedom is a conservative value, which is why Conservative and Harper's #1 man Jim Flaherty supported transgender rights early on.

So, in short, you are confused about rights.

2. People who want to ban "mother" and "father" are fringe dwellers.  Just ignore them and start posting about real politics if you have the wherewithal to do so.

As for those constructed pronouns - you're free to not use them.  I didn't use "Ms." for a long time - do you use that one ?  If you don't, I'm sure nobody cares either way.

Is it really about "politeness" Mikey or is about something else?

I'm leaning toward trolling but if these post modernist types want to start yelling at ya for not calling them "fir" or whatever there's probably something going on upstairs and I feel sad for them more than anything

Edited by West
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, West said:

1. Is it really about "politeness" Mikey

2. or is about something else?

3. I'm leaning toward trolling

4. If these post modernist types want to start yelling at ya for not calling them "fir" or whatever there's probably something going on upstairs and I feel sad for them more than anything

1. Yes
2. No
3. No
4. Nothing to do with them being 'post modernist'.  They could just want attention or somesuch.  I'm not sure how someone who insists on being called 'fir' makes it through life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. It's a strange thing to tie human rights or even politeness to some idea that people need to have "accomplished" something... to your satisfaction.  It's certainly not a viewpoint that affords basic respect to the individual.
As to tying this to 'leftist' parties.  I suppose you mean the centrist Liberal Party of Canada, who have duped you into thinking they are a progressive party.  That's on you for believing their press.  Freedom is a conservative value, which is why Conservative and Harper's #1 man Jim Flaherty supported transgender rights early on.

So, in short, you are confused about rights.

2. People who want to ban "mother" and "father" are fringe dwellers.  Just ignore them and start posting about real politics if you have the wherewithal to do so.

As for those constructed pronouns - you're free to not use them.  I didn't use "Ms." for a long time - do you use that one ?  If you don't, I'm sure nobody cares either way.

Well they might be fringe dwellers but, mis gendering someone can cost you a jail sentence or fine. Lots of examples of this happening in western countries across the globe, is it a passing fade, or is this a glimpse into the future

Canadian Man Guilty of “Misgendering,” Fined 55k: Coming to America? (pulpitandpen.org)

Canadian Man Jailed After 'Misgendering' His Daughter (breitbart.com)-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Yes
2. No
3. No
4. Nothing to do with them being 'post modernist'.  They could just want attention or somesuch.  I'm not sure how someone who insists on being called 'fir' makes it through life.

The deconstruction of language is big in the post modernist thought. They believe everything including the English language is a symptom of the patriarchy or whatever which is why they make up words and demand you go along with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I looked up the case. It's kind of more about disobeying a judge's order then misgendering.. but don't let the facts get in the way of you getting upset over something right?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/vancouversun.com/news/local-news/anti-gay-activist-ordered-to-pay-55000-to-b-c-trans-activist-in-fight-over-hateful-flyer/wcm/2b01f2bb-3969-4eca-babd-60ecba01f203/amp/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. It's a strange thing to tie human rights or even politeness to some idea that people need to have "accomplished" something... to your satisfaction.  It's certainly not a viewpoint that affords basic respect to the individual.
As to tying this to 'leftist' parties.  I suppose you mean the centrist Liberal Party of Canada, who have duped you into thinking they are a progressive party.  That's on you for believing their press.  Freedom is a conservative value, which is why Conservative and Harper's #1 man Jim Flaherty supported transgender rights early on.

So, in short, you are confused about rights.

This has nothing to do with "human rights", that's why I didn't say "human rights". 

Leftist parties are all about 'virtue signalling' to suck in their base so that they can just say "look at those racists" to distract from their scandals. 

Case in point, the trucker scandal. Trudeau is forcing the vaccine on millions of people who don't need it and when people finally got fed up enough to drive all the way across Canada to camp out for weeks on the streets of Ottawa in the dead of winter, what did he say again? "Hey, look at those racists!"

And like the dumbest lemmings ever, all the leftist vaxtards said "Yes, I see them! I see the flags!" But they couldn't point to them in the thousands of hours of video recordings and tens of thousands of photos. 

If Trudeau said that he saw bigfoot in that crowd he'd have a million eye-witnesses backing him up. It's insane.

Quote

2. People who want to ban "mother" and "father" are fringe dwellers.  Just ignore them and start posting about real politics if you have the wherewithal to do so.

As for those constructed pronouns - you're free to not use them.  I didn't use "Ms." for a long time - do you use that one ?  If you don't, I'm sure nobody cares either way.

I think that we're starting to agree on who the "fringe dwellers" are.

This is from the link that was in my post above, which you just quoted:

Quote

On Sunday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Democratic majority proposed to eliminate “father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister” and all other language deemed insufficiently “gender-inclusive” from House rules. They would be ­replaced with terms like “parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling” and so on.

“Mother” — among the most important concepts in human life — would be erased from the lexicon of the US House of Representatives. 

Nancy Pelosi’s Democratic majority - AKA the "fringe dwellers".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. It's a strange thing to tie human rights or even politeness to some idea that people need to have "accomplished" something... to your satisfaction.  It's certainly not a viewpoint that affords basic respect to the individual.
As to tying this to 'leftist' parties.  I suppose you mean the centrist Liberal Party of Canada, who have duped you into thinking they are a progressive party.  That's on you for believing their press.  Freedom is a conservative value, which is why Conservative and Harper's #1 man Jim Flaherty supported transgender rights early on.

So, in short, you are confused about rights.

2. People who want to ban "mother" and "father" are fringe dwellers.  Just ignore them and start posting about real politics if you have the wherewithal to do so.

As for those constructed pronouns - you're free to not use them.  I didn't use "Ms." for a long time - do you use that one ?  If you don't, I'm sure nobody cares either way.

I'm not really certain we have the freedom to not use all these new gender pronouns.

Father jailed in Canada for using incorrect pronouns (independentsentinel.com)

Jordan Peterson got into a lot of trouble over this gender pronoun nonsense. A quick search informs me that there are 78 different gender pronouns. It's madness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ironstone said:

I'm not really certain we have the freedom to not use all these new gender pronouns.

Father jailed in Canada for using incorrect pronouns (independentsentinel.com)

Jordan Peterson got into a lot of trouble over this gender pronoun nonsense. A quick search informs me that there are 78 different gender pronouns. It's madness.

Like other laws, such as the countless tax laws you must know to file a simple income tax return, these "laws" are only on the back burner until they want to go after a political opponent

It's what the post modernist Marxist ideology is all about

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, ironstone said:

I'm not really certain we have the freedom to not use all these new gender pronouns.

Father jailed in Canada for using incorrect pronouns (independentsentinel.com)

Jordan Peterson got into a lot of trouble over this gender pronoun nonsense. A quick search informs me that there are 78 different gender pronouns. It's madness.

Yeah, the devil is in the details. And when people quote about all this trouble they got into ... Some of it is the court of public opinion, and some of it is ignoring judge's orders which is a different thing. If I miss gender you in public or in our relationship... Nothing's going to happen to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I'll stop you right there.. why not?

Lol, you're stopping right there because you don't want to address the fact that you called Pelosi and the Dems "fringe dwellers" lol. 

1) It's not a human rights issue because everyone has the same human rights. Gay people, trans people, POC, etc already have all the same human rights as everyone else. 

Leftists try to start a circus around things like Brionna's shooting because they know that there's a lot of emotion involved and they need to capitalize on it: "Never let a good tragedy go to waste."

They understand that at the very first mention of a person's death there is an overwhelming amount of emotion and there are very few facts to go around. They flesh out those stories with all of the info that supports their twisted narrative, omit any details that they don't want, demonize some people who did nothing wrong, and that initial feeling will survive long after the facts have turned things right-side-up. Leftists: "Brionna was a hard-working princess - a nurse with two jobs - who was shot for sleeping black." Facts: "She was a girl who lived with a convicted drug dealer and after they broke up and he had no fixed address his packages were being sent to her place. She rented a car with that guy the previous year that turned up with a dead guy in the trunk. Cops showed up at her place with a warrant and her new BF shot one of them." Yeah, those are two completely different stories about the exact same shooting.

We had the hijab hoax here, then we had the PM slandering the Freedom Convoy because he wanted to protect his drug trade (pseudovaxes). 

The Rayshard shooting was actually a perfect example of polite cops doing their job very professionally and treating a person who committed a very serious crime with great respect. Rayshard turned it into a potentially life-altering event when he shot a taser at an officers face. He put cops in a position where they had to take action and it went badly. Again, leftists tried to make that story into something that it wasn't so that they could capitalize on all the awful emotions surrounding it. There didn't need to be riots, it was a teachable moment. Rayshard drove so drunk that he passed out at the wheel at 10:30 at night. 30 people are killed every day in the US by people who drive that drunk. Replay that scenario where another Rayshard drives that drunk 100 times and you end up with 10 dead people who were just driving through a green light, riding a bike or walking on the sidewalk. 

Leftists didn't use that scenario as a teachable moment, they used it, I'll say again for emphasis - used it - to promote racial division, which is how they keep minority voters in their pocket. 

Trudeau and the MSM tried to pretend that some tree roots were a mass grave of children murdered by evil pedophiles. They accused Canada of committing a genocide because of it. Again, dead wrong. And even if it was a mass grave, murder was the least likely scenario, given the fact that the school was open during smallpox outbreaks, TB outbreaks, and the Spanish flu outbreak. 

Leftists are shit. Trudeau is not a fringe dweller. Pelosi and the Dems are not fringe dwellers. They are shit. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Lol, you're stopping right there because you don't want to address the fact that you called Pelosi and the Dems "fringe dwellers" lol. 

1) It's not a human rights issue because everyone has the same human rights. Gay people, trans people, POC, etc already have all the same human rights as everyone else. 

Leftists try to start a circus around things like Brionna's shooting because they know that there's a lot of emotion involved and they need to capitalize on it: "Never let a good tragedy go to waste."

They understand that at the very first mention of a person's death there is an overwhelming amount of emotion and there are very few facts to go around. They flesh out those stories with all of the info that supports their twisted narrative, omit any details that they don't want, demonize some people who did nothing wrong, and that initial feeling will survive long after the facts have turned things right-side-up. Leftists: "Brionna was a hard-working princess - a nurse with two jobs - who was shot for sleeping black." Facts: "She was a girl who lived with a convicted drug dealer and after they broke up and he had no fixed address his packages were being sent to her place. She rented a car with that guy the previous year that turned up with a dead guy in the trunk. Cops showed up at her place with a warrant and her new BF shot one of them." Yeah, those are two completely different stories about the exact same shooting.

We had the hijab hoax here, then we had the PM slandering the Freedom Convoy because he wanted to protect his drug trade (pseudovaxes). 

The Rayshard shooting was actually a perfect example of polite cops doing their job very professionally and treating a person who committed a very serious crime with great respect. Rayshard turned it into a potentially life-altering event when he shot a taser at an officers face. He put cops in a position where they had to take action and it went badly. Again, leftists tried to make that story into something that it wasn't so that they could capitalize on all the awful emotions surrounding it. There didn't need to be riots, it was a teachable moment. Rayshard drove so drunk that he passed out at the wheel at 10:30 at night. 30 people are killed every day in the US by people who drive that drunk. Replay that scenario where another Rayshard drives that drunk 100 times and you end up with 10 dead people who were just driving through a green light, riding a bike or walking on the sidewalk. 

Leftists didn't use that scenario as a teachable moment, they used it, I'll say again for emphasis - used it - to promote racial division, which is how they keep minority voters in their pocket. 

Trudeau and the MSM tried to pretend that some tree roots were a mass grave of children murdered by evil pedophiles. They accused Canada of committing a genocide because of it. Again, dead wrong. And even if it was a mass grave, murder was the least likely scenario, given the fact that the school was open during smallpox outbreaks, TB outbreaks, and the Spanish flu outbreak. 

Leftists are shit. Trudeau is not a fringe dweller. Pelosi and the Dems are not fringe dwellers. They are shit. 

When I first noticed what you posted here, I realized that leftists (specifically their political figures) are very sick in the head. I don't know if I necessarily blame the average leftist.. I think they are too trusting of these people to be honest and trustworthy and just haven't awoken yet to the vileness of their political figures

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yeah, the devil is in the details. And when people quote about all this trouble they got into ... Some of it is the court of public opinion, and some of it is ignoring judge's orders which is a different thing. If I miss gender you in public or in our relationship... Nothing's going to happen to me.

I think the Ontario Human Rights Commissions might have something to say about that, and likely every other unelected Human Rights organization in Canada.

Canada’s new human rights law: use trans pronouns or else | Education News (educationviews.org)

They say that refusing to  address someone by their preferred gender pronoun( 1 of 78?) in employment services, education, policing, health care, restaurants etc will be considered a form of discrimination. That seems pretty broad to start with and don't be surprised if or when that scope keeps expanding.

 

Seriously, how can anyone know 78 gender pronouns?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, West said:

I think they are too trusting of these people to be honest and trustworthy and just haven't awoken yet to the vileness of their political figures

What about the lefty who woke up to the vileness of all the snow-washing going on under Trudeau's nose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ironstone said:

 

They say that refusing to  address someone by their preferred gender pronoun( 1 of 78?) in employment services, education, policing, health care, restaurants etc will be considered a form of discrimination. 

Why would you not go to the source, rather than a heavily biased opinion piece on the topic? The ohrc has a website here's the link.

It says that no particular pronoun is required but that misgendering is harrassment.  And of course, you are free to harass people.. just not if you are dealing with them in a legislative area such as employment or housing.

https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/questions-and-answers-about-gender-identity-and-pronouns#:~:text=Is it a violation of,factor in a person's identity.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Why would you not go to the source, rather than a heavily biased opinion piece on the topic? The ohrc has a website here's the link.

It says that no particular pronoun is required but that misgendering is harrassment.  And of course, you are free to harass people.. just not if you are dealing with them in a legislative area such as employment or housing.

https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/questions-and-answers-about-gender-identity-and-pronouns#:~:text=Is it a violation of,factor in a person's identity.

I have no quarrel with the actual facts in that post, but it fails to take into account the amount of slander against "THE DREADED CISGENDER WHITE PEOPLE" who never owned slaves, never discriminated against minorities, and who grew up with anything but 'privilege'.

Joy Reid turns every topic into "OMG ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE EVIL" and yet her show is still broadcast on our Canadian TV stations all the time. How is that a thing? 

How is that Trudeau's obvious hate mongering is allowed yet people here are in favour of cancelling people for not wanting to put gay people on top of a cake?

I can understand negative injunctions all day [stop doing shitty things] but enforcing positive injunctions on people [Timmy said you have to do this, so DO IT!] gets messy. Forcing someone to put gays on a cake is like forcing someone else to print posters that say "Trump is the greatest human ever." If someone doesn't want to do those things then they shouldn't have to. Just because you own a business doesn't make you a slave to everyone who walks through your door. Sure it's considered "being small" but it's not worthy of judicial interference. Turning away unwanted business is actually reasonable in some circumstances. People can put their own gay statues on a cake if the shop won't do it for them. People can get their Trump signs printed elsewhere, and if no one in an entire city will do it then maybe take the hint. 

Gender pronouns are another positive injunction. I'm not going to learn people's ridiculous pronouns or learn the panoply of the genders BS for a bunch of people who want me to stop saying mom. It's way beyond ridiculous. I'm fine with people dressing like clowns and playing their own games all day but I won't be taking orders from them and I won't stop using the first word that people learn in every language and culture. If people wanna get shitty about it, and someone eventually has to say uncle, so be it, but I thought that the whole point of gay rights was to avoid violence and shittiness towards each other. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Why would you not go to the source, rather than a heavily biased opinion piece on the topic? The ohrc has a website here's the link.

It says that no particular pronoun is required but that misgendering is harrassment.  And of course, you are free to harass people.. just not if you are dealing with them in a legislative area such as employment or housing.

https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/questions-and-answers-about-gender-identity-and-pronouns#:~:text=Is it a violation of,factor in a person's identity.

 

So basically compelled speech

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, West said:

1. Restricted speech/compelled speech in a democratic society is a farce.
2. That's what dictatorships do

1. You put a slash beside them, which means you are now differentiating them as two different things - which is good.  But speech is most always restricted in polite society, and democratic society tends to be polite.
2. There are lots of examples of restricted speech: hate speech, harassment, threats, fraudulent claims, libel, slander, false advertising, false medical claims, false alarm, false advertising.  That's off the top of my head.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,770
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Akalupenn
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...