This is an odd argument

THIS HATEFUL, MURDEROUS IGNORANCE

The thing about bigots is that often, they have no idea what they’re talking about. Sometimes that’s because they’re stupid. But all too often it’s wilful stupidity, where the information is widely and easily available but they either don’t look for it or refuse to believe it.

Here’s an example from this morning. Over on Mumsnet, aka Prosecco Stormfront, the anti-trans lot are appalled at the idea of trans women being able to change the gender marker on their passports without having to present medical evidence, report to a panel and so on.

The thing they’re concerned about has been law for 49 years.

Not only that, but the law simply codified something that’s been happening since at least 1942.

“You know what, I’m not sure the law’s right about these blackamoors you know…”

“Mr. Wilberforce, it’s been the law in Virginia for a 100 years now and that’s just a codification of something some 170 years old. When will you stop this hateful, murderous, ignorance?”

The idea that protesting about what the law currently is constitutes either bigotry or ignorance is a pretty good one, no?

21 comments on “This is an odd argument

  1. “The idea that protesting about what the law currently is disagreeing with me constitutes either bigotry or ignorance is a pretty good one, no?

    FTFY

  2. So we found out via you today that this is less than 0.1 mil* of the UK population, less those who have committed suicide in their despair at the results of the op.

    Can we work out a way for the world to give the entire topic the bandwidth it deserves?** Something classically liberal, along the lines of “OK, the 0.1 mil of the population, wear a dress and call yourself Dolores if you must, and I’ll even be polite and call you Dolores, even totally fine if you want your passport changed, but don’t force me to change the scientific beliefs.

    *: Brought to you by the society for the reintroduction of lesser used metric notations.

    **: i.e., some orders of magnitude less than it currently has.

  3. ‘the anti-trans lot’

    I don’t believe it exists. She attacks a phantom.

    ‘are appalled at the idea of trans women’

    There’s no such thing. There are men and there are women. ‘Trans’ changes nothing.

    ‘being able to change the gender marker on their passports’

    Passports have sex, not gender. And no one can change their own passport.

    ‘without having to present medical evidence, report to a panel and so on’

    The medical evidence would be valid to prove a mistake was made, not to adjust for social whims. Present evidence you are male or female. How you feelz is irrelevant.

  4. “There are men and there are women.”

    And there are tiny numbers of hermaphrodites – I assume their interests are entirely suppressed in this struggle for Social Justice for the Insane.

  5. What I don’t understand is why what I and the rest of the public think about the matter is important. The minorities have laws to protect them, in some cases more comprehensive than the ones which protect me, and I am not active on the issue. I’d just rather not hear about it. Is THAT the problem? That I must hear about it, at length? And not quite like it. In fact, it is to provoke normal people, isn’t it? Not about benders at all.

  6. dcardno

    “either bigotry or ignorance ”

    Not just bigotry or ignorance, MURDEROUS bigotry! Murderous I tell ye

  7. Didn’t we just see some murderous bigotry on London Bridge? Again?

    Oh, oops, sorry that must have been yet another western misunderstanding of “diversity”.*

    *: all in favour of diversity, when it isn’t just cover for occupation by a different monoculture…

  8. Today’s terrorist attack in London, two dead so far that matter, no doubt Met chief will hope to praise diversity in their backgrounds.

  9. What I don’t understand is why what I and the rest of the public think about the matter is important.

    Actually, it isn’t. Carrie Marshall isn’t interested what you or I think about anything. As with any narcissist, what concerns Carrie Marshall is Carrie Marshall, and the idea that we couldn’t give a flying handshake about her simply will not do. Ergo, we are all a part of a sinister “anti-trans lot”. It reinforces her sense of importance, let’s her feel heroic, and gives her an excuse for the setbacks she experiences.

    She’s a real-life variation on Daffyd Thomas… the only gay in the village. The one thing that would terrify Carrie Marshall more than anything? Acceptance.

  10. Bigmouth is Marxist scum–and sucks-off her favourite death cult with 150 million put in the ground by them already while the slag accuses others of being “murderous”.

    The real reason to be against trannies is that they have allowed themselves to be used by the scum of Marxism to try and enshrine the pure evil of Marxist subjectivism into world law.That is reality to be defined as what the scum of the left say it is 1984 style. In the book 2+2=5 if the shite of the Party say it does. And in our world men can become women or vice versa by declaring they have.

    Pure Marxist evil.

  11. I normally don’t bother reading the Carrie Marshall stuff but I did wonder why a female hack was so caught up in the tranny madness, until I clicked through to photos of ‘her’ band.

    I really should have guessed that ‘Carrie’ is a bloke in a dress. About as feminine as Gareth Chilcott. And a lot less sane.

    I’m with JerryC – why argue with this loony? You might as well craft responses to a mad tramp who thinks he has a radio in his head telling him the secrets of the galaxy…

  12. As an obvious simpleton, my MURDEROUSLY bigotted opinion is that anyone in posession of a set of “meat and two veg” is a bloke. End of! Once they’ve completed a full “transition”, then I’m willing to accept that they may be permitted to use the other bogs.

  13. You might as well craft responses to a mad tramp who thinks he has a radio in his head telling him the secrets of the galaxy…

    So no more Ragging on Ritchie either, then.

  14. Legislation is not Law.

    The Law protects us. Legislation takes that protection away for political gain, to benefit others who have bought, one way or another, a slice of political influence.

    Originally the primary duty of Parliament was to protect the Law, and thus the citizen, against legislation; now it is the primary source of Legislation which subverts the Law.

  15. Thing about the word bigot is that in almost all cases the person using it could, by their own definition, be described as a bigot.

  16. @Mr Ecks

    The real reason to be against [many] trannies [and LGB] is that they have allowed themselves to be used by the scum of Marxism

    Spot on. The Left shouty minority making public dislike LGBT more and more. People are biting back about being compelled by state to pander to, like & accept others. Doesn’t surprise me.

    Young Americans’ LGBTQ Acceptance Plunges 63% to 45% in Two Years

    Twitter wants its users to accept [LGBT] ‘fake news’ Andy Ngo

    Left blame Trump – doesn’t surprise me

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.