God* help us, more PC madness

[Gaz]

[Pigmy Pony]

Yes, but they can still be who they are, without needing some ridiculous label. People of such persuasions existed long before these fashionable labels were invented, and good luck to them. They didn't need them then, and they don't need them now, as labels don't define who you are. *Being* who you are is the important thing, not having a daft badge to identify it.
Marco.

Being labelled as some obscure minority gender may be handy when jobhunting. That way, when you don't get the job there will be some PC liberal type more than willing to hold up your gender label as being the reason for you being discriminated against. I read on here recently that there are about 45 identifiable genders - God help those poor businesses who employ 44 employees or less They'll be getting some shit from somewhere.

[Lawrence001]

Being labelled as some obscure minority gender may be handy when jobhunting. That way, when you don't get the job there will be some PC liberal type more than willing to hold up your gender label as being the reason for you being discriminated against. I read on here recently that there are about 45 identifiable genders - God help those poor businesses who employ 44 employees or less They'll be getting some shit from somewhere.

And for those in a tiny minority group they can look forward to a massive wage spiral as companies compete to hire them to get their numbers up. Won't matter what they do or how good they are.

Sent from my POT-LX1 using Tapatalk

[Crackles]

No doubt you think trans people are fantasists and male to female are still male and female to male are still female.

I would say more than 99% of the world's population think this. It's only a relatively tiny minority of westerners who believe that transgenderism isn't a mental disorder.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Joe]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/740411...he-new-normal/

I know it was published in The Sun

And therefore need not be read, but should be put in the bin.

[Gaz]

And therefore need not be read, but should be put in the bin.

I do love the way people assume something is automatically nonsense if it's in The Sun or Daily Mail, I'm pretty sure both reported on England winning the world Cup in 1966, The twin towers, Concord, the space shuttle, did none of those happen?

[Joe]

I do love the way people assume something is automatically nonsense if it's in The Sun or Daily Mail, I'm pretty sure both reported on England winning the world Cup in 1966, The twin towers, Concord, the space shuttle, did none of those happen?

I just mean you shouldn't read the Sun, especially in the context of its 'reporting' of Hillsborough. The same goes for the Daily Mail, which supported fascists in the 1930s and still supports them now. As for the 'story', who gives a toss? People do get het up over the most trivial things, but I guess it goes with reading shite newspapers that print stuff designed to wind up a certain demographic. Read a good book instead, there's thousands out there.

[Pigmy Pony]

Haven't read The Sun in years. Does it still have George and Lynne? Their stories were always believable.

[Joe]

I don't think I've ever read it. My parents used to buy the Daily Mirror, until it started competing with The Sun in printing pictures of scantily-clad young women. Then they switched to the Daily Express, which was weird, as it was and is a right-wing comic and they were both Labour supporters (my mother being somewhere to the left of Tony Benn).

[Marco]

Haven't read The Sun in years.

I haven't read a newspaper in years!

Marco.