Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I'm not seeing her again
=== THREAD CLOSED ===
expecting at least 100 replies.
The gay debate has been done to death already this week.
It could do with a sentence by sentence fisking but I'm not going to dignify it with the time.
Incidentally, if anyone wants to contribute to the Home Office marriage equality consultation it mentions, click on the online form link here http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/about-us/consultations/equal-civil-marriage/ It's open to anyone. Worth taking the time if you're in favour as they've getting large numbers of hostile responses.
You look like a bit of a pussy now.
some parts of this article are just plain trolling for example
'But in an effort to appease the social constructionist feminist lobby (which prefers the term "gender" to "sex")'
51 minutes ago
It's not that the language is meaningless, but rather that the meaning does not correspond to the reality of human experience or behaviour.
It's all a bit "grim up North London" isn't it:
"Ah, lovely, you've had a baby, was it a boy or a girl?"
"What do you mean?"
"Boy or girl?"
"I beg your pardon, our offspring has been assigned the male gender owing to possession of a penis and testicles but we will reserve judgement as to the reality until s/he reaches puberty and will dress him/her gender neutrally until that time."
"What's his name?"
I fully accept ideas of gender are fluid. There's not just one type of masculine and one type of feminine - hell I'm a guy and I don't like football.
But physical sex is a (mainly) set thing and people should be allowed to develop their gender identity at their own pace as they develop as a person.
Wasn't there some video recently of a mother having a conversation with her young child about how ideas who gender identity are reducive? He's a kid for God sake, if he wants to play with guns and action mean and play football let him. Surey pushing your master thesis ideas onto a child is just as bad as if you had a kid that actually *did* define as the other gender but not letting them express that.
favourite bit where he says you only get queer studies at "polytechnics that now masquerade as universities" such as Yale.
You're letting your prejudices cloud your judgement again.
-"That document also uses language that is "alien to a large proportion of the population". In fact, some of it is pure gibberish, made up of the kind of words and phrases you don't normally hear outside of Queer Studies departments at those former polytechnics that now masquerade as universities".
-"The phrasing of that question shows how utterly mainstream so-called Queer Theory has become".
Dictionaries the world over are now revising the definition of "mainstream" to read "alien to a large proportion of the population".
by christ, the man is absolutely fucking hopeless.
>The Lib-Con consultation on gay marriage has hinted that words such as "husband" and "wife" could soon become a thing of the past, to be replaced by the sterile and soulless "spouse".
- no it doesn't.
>In Canada, they've already done this.
- no they haven't.
>Such tinkering with lingo, the replacement of words that have real depth and meaning for millions of people with bureaucratic terms that no normal person uses, reveals the social-engineering instinct that lies behind the gay-marriage campaign.
- no it doesn't.
> it is about demoting and devaluing traditional relationships, as built on marriage as it was once understood.
- no it isn't.
>traditional identities will be trounced in the name of allowing political elites to look cool by backing gay marriage.
- no they won't and what the fuck are you talking about
Sporting Elites 10 -0 Husbands & Wives AFC