Serious PC thread

[calitennis127]

Well, there IS one consensus: A white guy should never be able to say it.

Yes, that is a consensus, but it is completely silly when it comes to the variation "n***a" that is used jokingly in social contexts of schools and sports. "N---a" (as opposed to the -er version) translates as "buddy" or "friend" or "homie." Being the psychologically effeminate, left-wing-indoctrinated dweeb that you tend to be on these questions, you are obviously clueless about the level of hypocrisy and idiocy that surrounds this debate in the United States.

So let me give you a few real-life examples that you aren't familiar with because you haven't lived in America and show every time you comment on it that you don't understand it:

1) There is a high school or college basketball team that has 8 black players and 4 white players. The general culture of the team is set by the black players. Everyone on the team listens to rap. The black players call each other "n***a" left and right in front of the white players and very often call the white players the same thing with endearing phrases like "you my n***a."

2) There is a school that is, say, 80% white and 20% black. The black kids all frequently use the term "n***a," including when they fraternize with the white kids.

In both of these contexts, if the white kids simply repeat the humor of their black friends/acquaintances, they are liable to be accused of vicious "racism" and profound sin, even if their intent was simply to be jovial and sarcastic like the black kids. This is the most preposterous, irrational, unfair double standard that only idiots could defend.

But there are a lot of idiots in the world.

Choosing to focus on why black people are allowed to say it, while probably a valid question (even though, again, the answer is fairly obvious), isn't even in the top 10 problems associated with the N word...not when white people continue to use it so freely anyway.

Lol.....what white people "continue to use it so freely"? Your caricature of American life is beyond ridiculous.

It's not like black people not using it will make any white person less racist.

And what would you define as racist? Perhaps voting 95% for the same party every 4 years in order to express hostility toward another race? Because that is precisely what American blacks do.

When the N word is still such a big part of society and continues to be used to racially abuse black people, I'm not too concerned with whether white people are or aren't allowed to use it when singing lyrics.

Lol.....it is not "still such a big part of society," nor is it used to frequently "abuse black people." It is actually taboo in all parts of America, especially in official work and educational settings.

As always, you show just how ignorant and clueless you are about the USA, despite your immense confidence that you have it figured out.

 

[calitennis127]

When used between black people among themselves, not very. When a white person uses it against a black person, extremely offensive. Not sure what's so difficult to understand.

Oh I will gladly tell you what is "so difficult to understand." It's how people who on the one hand advocate "equality" also set up completely different rules for different groups of people because they clearly don't view the different groups as equal. What are you advocating is not "equality" but the treatment of black people as saintly angels who are morally superior and can get away with saying and doing what white people can't. I can tell you from witnessing this arrangement for years that it doesn't work, and it simply fosters racial resentment.

The underlying premise of your analysis (which is completely conventional and mainstream in American schools and media, btw) is that by virtue of past events, blacks are morally superior to whites and whites have to tread lightly on any issue pertaining to race. In other words, blacks are morally superior and whites are morally inferior. Black people are angels who can do no wrong while whites have to tippy-toe very gently. A black man can say "n***a" 100 times and it's all good. A white man says "n***a" one time and - no matter his intent - he is being racist.

That is such an equal relationship, isn't it? No wonder race relations in the U.S. are so great.

I don't think for a second that you're trying to normalize the word,

Oh don't worry. Murat doesn't have to normalize it. Standard black culture has normalized it in a way that you are clearly unaware of.

Context, history, intentions, etc... all matter a lot.

Right, so because whites enslaved blacks centuries ago during a time when blacks themselves owned slaves and often sold them to whites, we now must live in a time where blacks can use a racial slur whenever they feel like it but a white person can't ever, ever, ever use it a single time even if it is in imitation of how blacks use it with the term "n***a."

Wow, how fair and how equal. Talk about logical fallacies. Just look at how you view history.

 

[Moxie]

I didn't mean for you take it as me being rude about you. I was directing my focus on the writer!

But you kind of did a Cali and assumed what I think about Britain in terms of trans ideas. All I was saying was that it illuminated something as to why Brits (and ex-pat Brits) here see certain things so highlighted, which we don't pay much attention to here in the US. I think I did indicate I was asking for comment, and was taking it with a grain o'. I'm just thinking that this op-ed didn't come from nowhere. I know BB says it's more "common sense" in Britain. Maybe yes, maybe no, but I can see some illumination as to why we have the arguments we do. Coverage/conversation in UK is just couched differently on the subject. I thought that was interesting.

 

[Federberg]

But you kind of did a Cali and assumed what I think about Britain in terms of trans ideas. All I was saying was that it illuminated something as to why Brits (and ex-pat Brits) here see certain things so highlighted, which we don't pay much attention to here in the US. I think I did indicate I was asking for comment, and was taking it with a grain o'. I'm just thinking that this op-ed didn't come from nowhere. I know BB says it's more "common sense" in Britain. Maybe yes, maybe no, but I can see some illumination as to why we have the arguments we do. Coverage/conversation in UK is just couched differently on the subject. I thought that was interesting.

I made that assumption because... and you must admit... you're quite free with the use of the -ism label. Just because a lot of us here disagree with all of this gender fluidity stuff you have repeatedly tried to diagnose what you think is wrong with us, whether it's fear or panic or whatever else. But the moment I make an assumption about you I'm being insulting?... ok

 

[Federberg]

The electoral logic of the looney left. Protect the interests of less than 1% of the electorate at the expense of over 50%...

 

[britbox]

But you kind of did a Cali and assumed what I think about Britain in terms of trans ideas. All I was saying was that it illuminated something as to why Brits (and ex-pat Brits) here see certain things so highlighted, which we don't pay much attention to here in the US. I think I did indicate I was asking for comment, and was taking it with a grain o'. I'm just thinking that this op-ed didn't come from nowhere. I know BB says it's more "common sense" in Britain. Maybe yes, maybe no, but I can see some illumination as to why we have the arguments we do. Coverage/conversation in UK is just couched differently on the subject. I thought that was interesting.

I'd be interested in your views on the video @Federberg posted up. I've said in the past that going down this route will destroy women's sport. I'm not trying to be alarmist when I think somebody is going to end up being killed in a physical mismatch before common sense does win this argument.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

I'd be interested in your views on the video @Federberg posted up. I've said in the past that going down this route will destroy women's sport. I'm not trying to be alarmist when I think somebody is going to end up being killed in a physical mismatch before common sense does win this argument.

I have such a hard time trying to understand people like the lady talking to Piers. She is telling us to forget about everything we know to be true and scientific and asking us to accept totally subjective situations as truths. If we have a hard time with the idea, let the flow of words ending with ...phobia begin. To a point where people's lives and careers are destroyed. I cannot even understand how common sense became such a hurtful and offensive word. She cannot even say yes, if Mayfair gets in the ring with a woman, the woman is leaving on a stretcher with serious brain damage and it is not really fair. She cannot say that because of the politics involved in this. So sad.

 

[Moxie]

I'd be interested in your views on the video @Federberg posted up. I've said in the past that going down this route will destroy women's sport. I'm not trying to be alarmist when I think somebody is going to end up being killed in a physical mismatch before common sense does win this argument.

I think it sounds like the arguments we have here. LOL. I've said what I think about transpeople in sport. And I don't really see the point in arguing it anymore. It's clear enough what everyone thinks.

 

[tented]

 

[mrzz]

What if some former male Democratic candidate would suddenly identify as a woman? Would she be a possible choice for Biden's VP, given his recent announcement?

 

[Federberg]

I really just don't understand people who support transgender women competing with women. I just don't. It's grotesque

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

I really just don't understand people who support transgender women competing with women. I just don't. It's grotesque

...and just plain dangerous when it comes to certain sports.

 

[El Dude]

I really just don't understand people who support transgender women competing with women. I just don't. It's grotesque

You mean you don't think Connie MacGregor should compete in the women's UFC? What about LaBronna James in the WNBA?

 

[El Dude]

On a serious note, the problem with discussion around transgenderism is that it often conflates several things:

1. Whether transgenderism should be culturally accepted, and transgender given equal rights and treated with respect.
2. Whether preferred pronouns should be legally enforced.
3. How transgender people should compete in sports.

Most culturally liberal people (including myself) will advocate for 1 - it is basic human decency and part of our ongoing cultural evolution in terms of opening the umbrella of mutual respect and diversity.

Number 2 is how Jordan Peterson became an intellectual celebrity. Here we get into authoritarianism that I personally find quite worrisome.

Number 3 is a health hazard. "Connie" MacGregor should not compete in the women's UFC. Fallon Fox did, although interestingly enough lost one match. But it seems an unnecessary risk, not to mention competitively unfair (Imagine Regina Federer, Rafaela Nadal, or Nicola Djokovic ending their careers with a WTA Grand Slam). Men tend to be not only bigger, faster and stronger, but have greater bone density.

 

[Moxie]

On a serious note, the problem with discussion around transgenderism is that it often conflates several things:

1. Whether transgenderism should be culturally accepted, and transgender given equal rights and treated with respect.
2. Whether preferred pronouns should be legally enforced.
3. How transgender people should compete in sports.

Most culturally liberal people (including myself) will advocate for 1 - it is basic human decency and part of our ongoing cultural evolution in terms of opening the umbrella of mutual respect and diversity.

Number 2 is how Jordan Peterson became an intellectual celebrity. Here we get into authoritarianism that I personally find quite worrisome.

Number 3 is a health hazard. "Connie" MacGregor should not compete in the women's UFC. Fallon Fox did, although interestingly enough lost one match. But it seems an unnecessary risk, not to mention competitively unfair (Imagine Regina Federer, Rafaela Nadal, or Nicola Djokovic ending their careers with a WTA Grand Slam). Men tend to be not only bigger, faster and stronger, but have greater bone density.

I appreciate your dividing up some of the issues. Makes them easier to discuss. I'm with you on #1, as I think are most or all here. How people feel about it personally is a different thing, but I don't think anyone denies dignity to real transgender people.

As to #2: "legally enforcing?" That seems mad to me. We didn't legally enforce other PC terms here in the US, and even most hate speech is protected by the Constitution in the US. (I know things are different in other parts of the world.) It becomes a matter of politeness and respect, if you ask me. In polite society, we refer to people as they choose, if they tell us. I don't know if this is too cavalier an example, but if a person goes by "Robert" and someone insists on calling him "Bob," even when it's been mentioned, I consider that rude.

#3: I said in an earlier post that all life choices come with compromises. If an athlete chooses to transition, it's a choice, but it comes with giving up the life of a professional athlete. At least until there are leagues for trans people.

 

[tented]

As to #2: "legally enforcing?" That seems mad to me. We didn't legally enforce other PC terms here in the US, and even most hate speech is protected by the Constitution in the US. (I know things are different in other parts of the world.) It becomes a matter of politeness and respect, if you ask me. In polite society, we refer to people as they choose, if they tell us. I don't know if this is too cavalier an example, but if a person goes by "Robert" and someone insists on calling him "Bob," even when it's been mentioned, I consider that rude.

I think it’s a good example. I have nephews who go by Andrew and William. They think it’s rude when people call them Andy, Bill, Will, etc.

As you put it, refer to them as they choose.

 

[El Dude]

Yes, refer to them as they choose - but that fits more with my 1st point. It is just basic human decency and respect.

The Peterson thing was because of Bill C-16 in Canada which protects "gender identity or expression." His concern was that it would consider referring to someone by their non-preferred pronoun as hate propaganda, and thus could be "compelled speech." This was based on his own experience as a university professor.

Now the bill doesn't actual technically compel speech, but there's a slippery slope.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The separation of Men's and Women's sports is because all of us agree that their physical abilities are different and it won't be a fair competition if you put them together.

Now, I just wonder as to why there is separate women's chess championship and men's chess championship.

Many feminist women who feel that it is rude when a man offers their seat to them in a bus, don't think twice about participating and/or cheering women's chess or bridge championships.

 

[Jelenafan]

On a serious note, the problem with discussion around transgenderism is that it often conflates several things:

1. Whether transgenderism should be culturally accepted, and transgender given equal rights and treated with respect.
2. Whether preferred pronouns should be legally enforced.
3. How transgender people should compete in sports.

Most culturally liberal people (including myself) will advocate for 1 - it is basic human decency and part of our ongoing cultural evolution in terms of opening the umbrella of mutual respect and diversity.

Number 2 is how Jordan Peterson became an intellectual celebrity. Here we get into authoritarianism that I personally find quite worrisome.

Number 3 is a health hazard. "Connie" MacGregor should not compete in the women's UFC. Fallon Fox did, although interestingly enough lost one match. But it seems an unnecessary risk, not to mention competitively unfair (Imagine Regina Federer, Rafaela Nadal, or Nicola Djokovic ending their careers with a WTA Grand Slam). Men tend to be not only bigger, faster and stronger, but have greater bone density.

Renee Richards , the transsexual player in the 70’s, in her mid forties fought a long and famous battle to play in WTA tournaments, peaking at top 20 said this:

Exclusive interview: Meet Renee Richards - sport's accidental transgender pioneer

Pioneer, trailblazer, history-maker.

www.telegraph.co.uk

“Also, if someone had surgery when they were 20, then you wouldn’t have a level playing field. Because that person would be much too strong and advantaged against women. When the judge in my case found in my favour, he was very careful not to make a blanket statement about transgender people. And he was a very wise man in doing that. If he hadn't he would have opened the door for a 20-year-old cyclist or soccer player or whatever."

And this:
“Having lived for the past 30 years, I know if I'd had surgery at the age of 22, and then at 24 went on the tour, no genetic woman in the world would have been able to come close to me. And so I've reconsidered my opinion."

Renée Richards - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[brokenshoelace]

Again, I'm a liberal. Not even a moderate one. I'm a flat out liberal. However, the issue of trans rights is far more complicated than pro-trans rights (and on the whole, I probably would refer to myself as one) people would like to pretend. Extreme examples such a sports, prison, and to a much lesser extent, bathrooms, aren't straightforward.

The sport dilemma in particular cannot be understated, and I feel the trans-rights group is doing themselves a disservice by using this a a hill to die on. It's taking away from the actual hardships transgenders deal with (bullying, abuse, harm, etc...). You gotta select your battles. There are very real arguments as to why trans-women shouldn't be competing with women. To deny that would be lunacy. The other reason I wouldn't even focus on that if I were them is that for the time being, it's not a big deal. It's nothing common, yet. Pick your battles and have your priorities straight. I understand everything isn't mutually exclusive, but this seems to be taking away too much attention.