Jump to content

Freedom of s***ch and the responsibility that carries


Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, Curvykate said:

“Is because that as a woman she should have had a better understanding” I’m not saying you agree with that *** but that it’s a justification for others to *** her

And the word I used was perceived. Please do not twist my words

Posted
4 minutes ago, Donnykinkster said:

Hmmm it was you who raised this point not I, I just Said it was because some perceive her sex as a reason to have  a better understanding rather than a man. Basically confirming that which you insinuated.

I’m sorry. I don’t know how to quote a particular part of a post. Should not have misquoted you. I am not and would not accuse of that behaviour.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Donnykinkster said:

Hmmm it was you who raised this point not I, I just Said it was because some perceive her sex as a reason to have  a better understanding rather than a man. Basically confirming that which you insinuated.

I did raise that point. I don’t agree that it’s because people think she should have a better understanding. I think it’s other factors I believe, but I am regretting going down this rabbit hole already. I’m happy to debate privately, Donny.

Posted
Just now, Curvykate said:

I’m sorry. I don’t know how to quote a particular part of a post. Should not have misquoted you. I am not and would not accuse of that behaviour.

It's easy for us all to miscommunicate when only words on a page 😊

 

For the record, nope death threats for almost any reason are just not on. She been so viciously attacked for not only her opinion but also yes because shes a female and because she's a public figure. More hear so there will be more opinion whether that is good or bad but that was her intention in the first place, to use her celebrity as a platform for a view 😊

Posted
3 minutes ago, Curvykate said:

I did raise that point. I don’t agree that it’s because people think she should have a better understanding. I think it’s other factors I believe, but I am regretting going down this rabbit hole already. I’m happy to debate privately, Donny.

Ha ha ha ok I will await your message 😊😊

Posted
On 7/9/2020 at 4:24 AM, Donnykinkster said:

Yet in their minds they are very "real" women. Real is only perception of the individual.

Unfortunately it isn't. Its a biological fact of life. And the more people are subverting what has been plainly understood for all of hunan history (go ask any kid to point a man and a woman out, they will do it instantly) is now being subverted by fascists posing as people wanting equality. How equal is it for a man who has transitioned to s woman with all the benefits of growing up as a man in relation to physicality to then compete against women? Its a travesty and women are the very first people put at risk. Serious risk. 

Posted
On 7/9/2020 at 4:13 AM, Donnykinkster said:

When it becomes hate s***ch then Yes it should be rejected and those who speak it should be excluded and isolated

Huge on cancel culture then arent you? The only s***ch which should be restricted is that which incites *** or encourages others to do so. The only society worth living in is one where your most precious beliefs can be rubbished. This is the way good and bad ideas are brought to the fore and taken on or rejected. Perhaps you would like to live in North Korea or China where dissidents are not very welcome at all. 

Posted
On 7/9/2020 at 4:11 AM, Donnykinkster said:

You miss my point. It's not about "censoring people" but more about self censoring. Making a decision to withhold opinion not for *** of backlash but because that opinion may cause others who we really know nothing about deep emotional *** especially in an area like this where. unless you are trans yourself you cannot even begin.to understand how it feels.

No, again I totally disagree. Not expressing your feelings it just the same as cancel culture and doing as you're told. It goes back to the fundamental of free s***ch. Dont give me the identity politics rubbish, youre not black you can't understand them, youre not trans you can't understand them. I have a brain and I can understand them. If what you say is true, you can understand them either so how do you know what you're saying is right? "Back in your lane" as your totalitarian fascist friends would say. 

Posted
7 minutes ago, Thir***point7 said:

No, again I totally disagree. Not expressing your feelings it just the same as cancel culture and doing as you're told. It goes back to the fundamental of free s***ch. Dont give me the identity politics rubbish, youre not black you can't understand them, youre not trans you can't understand them. I have a brain and I can understand them. If what you say is true, you can understand them either so how do you know what you're saying is right? "Back in your lane" as your totalitarian fascist friends would say. 

Your completely right, I have stated clearly elsewhere I can't understand how a trans person feels but I do know how thought on the subject makes me feel. As far as cancelling culture again you do have a point and it's something I have fought to defend but, some culture, some of what we are should we really be proud of and want to hang on to? I'm a proud Englishman so no I do not cancel culture. For culture to survive it has to evolve in much the same way we do, no culture ever stays the same as we do so does the culture 😊

Posted
23 minutes ago, Thir***point7 said:

Dont give me the identity politics rubbish, youre not black you can't understand them, youre not trans you can't understand them. I have a brain and I can understand them

No, you cant. You have a brain sure, but that does not, in any way, mean you have the slightest idea of how a trans person feels. We are shaped by our chemistry, hormones, childhood, culture, trauma, experiences, identity and so much more. Everyone processes external factors in different ways. To say you understand a trans person just because you have a 'brain' doesnt make any sense what so ever.

Posted
25 minutes ago, Thir***point7 said:

Huge on cancel culture then arent you? The only s***ch which should be restricted is that which incites *** or encourages others to do so. The only society worth living in is one where your most precious beliefs can be rubbished. This is the way good and bad ideas are brought to the fore and taken on or rejected. Perhaps you would like to live in North Korea or China where dissidents are not very welcome at all. 

Again No culture I value, but parts of it, not so. You make very good points and ones that are valid in many ways. You for some reason seem to assume I have all of a sudden decided to abandon my right to free s***ch, I can assure you that is not the case. I have merely recently started to experience many new things and with that comes thought. Maybe even a shift in opinion, maybe a softening as the years roll by. I say this with respect, I value your input as it's valid and well argued but I really would be Interetsted to hear your view in 20 years 😊. Seriously it does make a difference. Onto the next one 

Posted
10 minutes ago, BooBookitty said:

No, you cant. You have a brain sure, but that does not, in any way, mean you have the slightest idea of how a trans person feels. We are shaped by our chemistry, hormones, childhood, culture, trauma, experiences, identity and so much more. Everyone processes external factors in different ways. To say you understand a trans person just because you have a 'brain' doesnt make any sense what so ever.

Yes I can, you may be too stupid to do so. But I'm not.

 

Just because you don't have a faculty to be able to, don't assume everyone lacks the empathy and intelligence.

 

I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagree :-) 

Posted
Just now, Thir***point7 said:

Yes I can, you may be too stupid to do so. But I'm not.

 

Just because you don't have a faculty to be able to, don't assume everyone lacks the empathy and intelligence.

 

I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagree :-) 

There is one word which sums it up perfectly. Its called 'empathy'....perhaps read a dictionary to understand it :-) 

Posted
45 minutes ago, Thir***point7 said:

Unfortunately it isn't. Its a biological fact of life. And the more people are subverting what has been plainly understood for all of hunan history (go ask any kid to point a man and a woman out, they will do it instantly) is now being subverted by fascists posing as people wanting equality. How equal is it for a man who has transitioned to s woman with all the benefits of growing up as a man in relation to physicality to then compete against women? Its a travesty and women are the very first people put at risk. Serious risk. 

Again your totally right yet that's the key issue, they are biologically male or female yet emotionally the opposite. Born something other than what they see in the mirror, the confusion when young must be a weight to bear. Yes you are right there are extremists, you call them facists on both sides of the argument and I see them ALL clearly. I feel as good people we must try and understand others, here there is much to understand. Do I get all the complexities of this? Nope, but it's not really possible if it's really only something you have just starting mulling over. 

 

As far as athletes go, at this point I agree, it's a completely unfair advantage but the way you seem to emphasise "serious risk" i think deserves a response. 

Posted
31 minutes ago, Donnykinkster said:

As far as athletes go, at this point I agree, it's a completely unfair advantage but the way you seem to emphasise "serious risk" i think deserves a response. 

Less so than you'd imagine.

I can't off the top of my head remember all the ins and outs - but, for example, I couldn't declare myself a trans woman tomorrow and be able to compete as an athlete.

One of the tests before being eligible is for the level of testosterone in your body - now if you are a cis woman you can actually have a higher amount of testosterone than this but it wouldn't be held against you.  Trans women must be below this level to compete.  They also have to have been on assorted other hormones which will have undone any real training advantage.

We can, with a few googles, find examples of trans women who've won - but these are exceptions above norm.   Also - trans women are eligible for the Olympics but not one has qualified.

The sports bodies go out of their way to make sure perceived advantages are stripped away.

Posted
3 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

Less so than you'd imagine.

I can't off the top of my head remember all the ins and outs - but, for example, I couldn't declare myself a trans woman tomorrow and be able to compete as an athlete.

One of the tests before being eligible is for the level of testosterone in your body - now if you are a cis woman you can actually have a higher amount of testosterone than this but it wouldn't be held against you.  Trans women must be below this level to compete.  They also have to have been on assorted other hormones which will have undone any real training advantage.

We can, with a few googles, find examples of trans women who've won - but these are exceptions above norm.   Also - trans women are eligible for the Olympics but not one has qualified.

The sports bodies go out of their way to make sure perceived advantages are stripped away.

The problem as always is any info I had up until a year ago had has always been chosen material, i only saw what was on a tv screen. I never sought the truth, I think the truth of what I see now is so different to the truth I saw then. I react with emotion as you know and what i see right now is bullying and I'm not keen.Its Not the technical response your post deserves but a real one and I will think on your post. It's areas like this that friends whom I've spoken too in private won't open up, the real issues, the harder ones. These people much more knowledgable than I *** response, and that's a shame. What bothers me a little is why not more trans ***ps speak up? 

Posted
1 hour ago, Thir***point7 said:

Yes I can, you may be too stupid to do so. But I'm not.

 

Just because you don't have a faculty to be able to, don't assume everyone lacks the empathy and intelligence.

 

I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagre

1 hour ago, Thir***point7 said:

Yes I can, you may be too stupid to do so. But I'm not.

 

Just because you don't have a faculty to be able to, don't assume everyone lacks the empathy and intelligence.

 

I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagree :-) 

 

Ha! Of course. I'm stupid, I lack empathy and intelligence. Good argument. I think we got a little lost somewhere. Maybe if your replies were a little more coherent I wouldn't have jumped to the conclusion I did. I was simply stating a truth that you cannot fully understand how or why a trans person feels how they do as you havnt experienced what they have. This does not mean you cant have empathy.

Posted
11 hours ago, Dzydove said:

 While biology says male is male and female is female, the studies I've seen shows that a trans woman born a boy has a brain that thinks like a girl. I see it as a birth defect. 

Of course and I do believe this has been proved many times, a hard situation and one I cannot understand. However as a human with empathy that I do.understand.

Posted
49 minutes ago, Donnykinkster said:

What bothers me a little is why not more trans ***ps speak up? 

they do or they try.

but - on sites like this, for example, as great as it is it's very heteronormative - and you know, this is something I can also be guilty of upholding.  In my time on here we've had very few trans folk as regular contributors (a few who possibly were struggling with gender identity  at times).   

And while there are those who have found a sort of refuge in the kink community there are those who a targeted by chasers, those fetishised and those of course who still aren't made to feel wholly welcome.  If you had a munch of 20 people and one was trans and one other who is "trans people aren't real" and whatever slurs to go with it then very soon there has to be 19 people present.  And too often it's the trans person who feels they have to be the one to go because there is someone not making them welcome, denying their existence, denying their experiences, and then they see the other 18 people at the munch who've just kinda sat there with a lack of understanding and by failing to stand up for the trans person they're not silencing the oppressor. 

And that's just a daft straw argument - but it's true and it happens.  Someone who is trans shouldn't be made to justify their existence everywhere they go.  

So, I think generally; folk go where they feel safe.  So you get a lot of Queer circles, or where they'll stick together.   But, there is plenty that's been written - that goes around.  But, it's exhausting for many to keep having to justify themselves.  

Posted
On 7/8/2020 at 5:48 PM, Thir***point7 said:

Censoring people is always a bad thing. Its only when all views are free to be spoken that we can weed out the appealing ideas and the good ones. Last week someone attempted to get my thrown off this site as I do not belive trans women are real women. I have no issue with anyone to live their life how they want, unfortunately these days if you have the wrong opinion, even when it's backed up by science.

Okay then, First thank you @Donnykinkster for raising this particular subject.

I know that you Thir***, Donny and I are in the UK so I will restrict my comments to our legislation. Despite what people think the UK has no protections for freedom of s***ch enshrined in our countries own statutes. 

Although, we signed the Human Rights Act 1998 it does not give or offer freedom of s***ch, what it does offer protection for is:-

Article 10 Freedom of expression

  1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
  2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

Amnesty International are well regarded as fighters for freedom of expression on an international scale. They have one of the best definitions of this I think.

                                           Freedom of s***ch is the right to say whatever you like about whatever you like, whenever you like, right?  Wrong.

                                            'Freedom of s***ch is the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, by any means.'

The fact that someone who holds an unpopular view point finds that they are unpopular is not actually a result of  the lack of a freedom of expression, as they expressed it freely. In turn the "unfair" reaction they received is also a freedom of expression. 

When it comes to JKK Rowling receiving death threats that is a direct breach of UK statutory law and is prosecutable under the law. Freedom of expression has to be mitigated by regulation. 

That regulation is our responsibility to not breach while using those Freedoms, we tacitly agree to this while exercising them as per Article 10 of The Human Rights Act.

  • threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour intending or likely to cause harassment or a breach of the peace, (Includes hate speach)
  • incitement to religious hatred,
  • incitement to racial hatred,
  • incitement to terrorism, (glorifying, and dissemination included),
  • treason and advocating the abolition of the monarchy,
  • obscenity and indecency,
  • interfering with the courts,
  • defamation,
  • the personal online writings, video game, film, TV and radio censorship laws

Should you have got this far two last things, firstly, well done.

Secondly you do not need to go to Nazi wherever , China or North Korea to see freedom of s***ch very politely smothered, in the UK we technically have negative freedom of s***ch, and we always have.

Personally I believe it to be a very healthy thing, look what people do with unregulated freedom of s***ch. 

Posted

This topic is, of course, mostly about on-line freedom-of-s***ch---what is, and is-not appropriate in a public forum.  On that note, I have a bit of a story, that involves another discussion group.  This particular group centered around one of my other lifetime passions---collecting "insulators" (those porcelain and glass thingies on the power poles).  The group in-question turned out to be very-much an "Old Boy's Network".  So, I'm sure that most can see where this is about to lead.

I had a good friend on that insulator list, with whom I had had many discussions about power-lines and old streetlights.  One day though, he simply left the list.  In a private email, he told me why.  He was trans (or in the process) and he had taken his fill of *** from list members (I use "he", because he still identifies that way).  He was, of course, worried that I would not accept his choice.  I told him that I could hardly be judgemental, and I revealed my own past as a pro Dom.  He was one of the few folks outside of The Scene, with whom I had shared that fact.  To this day, we still communicate on a somewhat regular basis.  Some day, we might even meet, if for no other reason, than to see whose hair is longer.

It was not long after his departure from the insulator group, that I had my own run-in with the list's Old Boy Network---though mine was for a far different reason.  It all started, when the national insulator convention and show was scheduled in Colorado Springs---little more than a half-day drive from home.  Months in advance, I made a hotel reservation, as I began to save for this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

I am going to digress for a moment.  But, don't worry, there is method to my madness.  Just three weeks before the show, I needed to run to the nearby town of Dumas---a little over an hour away.  However, as I started to return to Pampa, things got weird.  Suddenly, the main street Dumas was gridlocked, for reasons still unknown.  As I turned down a side street, I suddenly got "the look" from a cop who was stuck in the traffic.  Why, again, unknown.  Later, once I was back on the highway out of Dumas, a white Jeep came s***ding up behind me, and proceeded to ride my ass, for the next thirty minutes.  There was no one else on this highway.  So, why wouldn't he pass me?

I was driving around the outskirts of Stinnett, with that Jeep still on my tail, when the Jeep suddenly pulled to the side of the road.  In my rearview, I could now see in the distance, a state-police cruiser, with lights flashing, closing at an insane rate of s***d!  I figured that he must be on an emergency call.  So, out of courtesy, I too, pulled to the side.  Quite to my surprise though, he whipped-in behind me!

The cop now claimed, that he had clocked me doing 62, in a 60 mph zone.  Really?!  (think 103 in a 100 kmh zone)  He then proceeded to ask me all kinds of personal questions, focusing mainly on my car.  I will admit---it was the first nice vehicle that I had ever owned.  I had bought with a small inheritance windfall.  It was nothing special---just a Toyota Corolla.  But, it was late-model, low-mileage, and clean.  The cop kept eyeing it, like a hungry dog eyeing a piece of raw meat.  Over and over, he asked if it was my car, even though my name was clearly on both the registration and the insurance.  At any moment, I expected him to accuse me of stealing it.  Finally though, after 30 minutes, he sent me on my way, with just "a warning".  It was truly the creepiest encounter that I had ever has with "The Law".

Every instinct told me, that something bad had nearly happened.  (those familiar with my instincts, realize that this was not just a trivial reaction).  Though the officer had been polite and respectful, his demeanor had clearly showed that something was wrong.  Plus, why chase me down, at such an unsafe s***d, over something so minor?  Why didn't he stop that Jeep, who was clearly following far-too-close?  And, what about that Jeep?  Undercover vehicle of some kind?  To what end?

Days later, questions about that incident still haunted me.  Finally, I did some research on the internet.  What I discovered, was an *** of police power, beyond belief.  It had all started, when the State of Colorado had legalized marijuana.  Infuriated, the authorities of all neighboring states, had set-up a 100-mile (160 km) "Drug En***ment Zone" around the border of Colorado.  Dumas and Stinnett were within that zone.  And, it was virtually martial law on all of the affected highways.  Anyone appearing to be returning from Colorado, was stopped, questioned, and searched.

But, that wasn't the worst of it.  Questionable cops were using this an an excuse to literally rob motorists by the side of the road---"impounding" , possessions, and even vehicles.  They were using a little-known, clearly unconstitutional statute called, "Civil Asset Forfeiture".  Under that law, cops can seize property, without ever charging anyone with a crime.  It can be done on mere "suspicion" (or alleged suspicion).  And, it is nearly impossible for the victims to get their property back.  The court costs alone, run into the tens-of-thousands.  The police departments can then use or such property as they see fit, while keeping the proceeds.  Welcome to the U. S. of A.!  For those incredulous, try a search on "policing for profit".  Police brutality is not the only major problem, that has folks up-in-arms.

Now, back to the subject of "free s***ch".  I told the insulator group, that I would have to cancel my much-anticipated trip to the National Convention. And, I told them why.  I did not want to risk driving back from Colorado, through that zone, in a nice car, with in my pocket, expensive camera gear, and possibly boxes of fragile glass and porcelain insulators.  I had a bad feeling, that I just couldn't shake.

As a result, I was publicly called every name in the book---"cop hater", "insurrectionist", "drug-pusher", "terrorist", "anti-American", and few others that I can't repeat.  One particular bigot---a big-shot on the list---even publicly said, that people like me "should be ground into dog food!"  This did not even include all of the threats that I received in personal messages.  Yet, the list moderator did nothing.  That is, until I told that one bigot, that he wouldn't be so blind, if he cut larger eye-holes in his pointed hood, and quit watching so many burning crosses.  For that, I got kicked-off the list, for "stirring trouble".  Apparently, "free s***ch" is in the eye of the beholder.  Not that the other political extreme is any better.

Posted
10 hours ago, Thebian said:

Okay then, First thank you @Donnykinkster 

Personally I believe it to be a very healthy thing, look what people do with unregulated freedom of s***ch. 

Thank you @Thebian for a great and informative read. I think your last paragraph is the one that really counts and I agree we don't always exercise our full right but for me that's a moral and quite right decision

Posted
17 hours ago, Thir***point7 said:

There is one word which sums it up perfectly. Its called 'empathy'....perhaps read a dictionary to understand it :-) 

And there we have what's missing from your posts "empathy" feelings. Something you seem to lack. 

Posted
18 hours ago, Thir***point7 said:

Unfortunately it isn't. Its a biological fact of life. And the more people are subverting what has been plainly understood for all of hunan history (go ask any kid to point a man and a woman out, they will do it instantly) is now being subverted by fascists posing as people wanting equality. How equal is it for a man who has transitioned to s woman with all the benefits of growing up as a man in relation to physicality to then compete against women? Its a travesty and women are the very first people put at risk. Serious risk. 

It's a scientific fact that the chemical balance in their brain cons to their gender.

Even if (And I have no idea) it's just it affects how they feel. It's chemical, biological.

Not every trans wants to be an athlete so I don't really see the relevance.

 

You have every right to "believe trans women aren't real women," doesn't make it true.

The fact you called someone "stupid" because they disagreed with you says a fair bit about how you see things.

 

If you had any empathy for trans people you'd recognise the sheer hell some have to go through just to be Who they really should be not telling someone you understand how they feel when they tell you don't. You can't!

 

This is about acceptance.

Posted

Freedom of s***ch....

I posted on a thread where I quoted a message from a young lad who's opening message was how he "needed" to r**e my arse. Once posted that one word was removed. I'm not against that but.... he had the freedom of s***ch to type it, to me, uninvited yet I don't have the freedom to type it here, where it's relevant?

This is NOT a criticism of how the site is moderated or that that word is censored. 

×
×
  • Create New...