Pregnant People

Don't call pregnant patients 'mothers': Doctors are banned from using the word over fears it will upset those who are transgender

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-mothers.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

Don't call pregnant patients 'mothers': Doctors are banned from using the word over fears it will upset those who are transgender

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-mothers.html

---

Are doctors really banned, or is it the Daily Mail playing silly buggers again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

Don't call pregnant patients 'mothers': Doctors are banned from using the word over fears it will upset those who are transgender

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-mothers.html

---

I read yesterday that transgender activists are upset that the women's march over the weekend was not inclusive to biological men who identify as women, as the protest presented an "oppressive message" that having a "vagina is essential to womanhood."

I just don't know what to say anymore, I really don't, I'm losing all sense of logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kris

Are doctors really banned, or is it the Daily Mail playing silly buggers again?

---

They can't say Christmas either, instant sacking if they do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kris

Are doctors really banned, or is it the Daily Mail playing silly buggers again?

---

no, you literally cant say the word mother, christmas or sing ba ba black sheep any more.
its the law

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

Don't call pregnant patients 'mothers': Doctors are banned from using the word over fears it will upset those who are transgender

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-mothers.html

---

Ok, sorry if this offends any non-binary people whose sexuality they were assigned at birth has now changed, but in my defence, I'm the wrong side of fifty so grew up in different times, but I'm confused.

Presumably, this pregnant person was assigned female equipment at birth yes? Presumably, being pregnant, she shagged a bloke yes? So, does that make her/him/it a homosexual or bisexual man or a heterosexual woman or a lesbian?

Oddly, I just found this link to the BMA website https://www.bma.org.uk/advice/work-l...orking-parents where it says, and I quote.."read our advice on your rights as a pregnant woman"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TH63

Ok, sorry if this offends any non-binary people whose sexuality they were assigned at birth has now changed, but in my defence, I'm the wrong side of fifty so grew up in different times, but I'm confused.

Presumably, this pregnant person was assigned female equipment at birth yes? Presumably, being pregnant, she shagged a bloke yes? So, does that make her/him/it a homosexual or bisexual man or a heterosexual woman or a lesbian?

Oddly, I just found this link to the BMA website https://www.bma.org.uk/advice/work-l...orking-parents where it says, and I quote.."read our advice on your rights as a pregnant woman"

---

You don't have to be the wrong side of fifty to be confused.

Also in the telegraph for DM haters
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...d-transgender/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R

You don't have to be the wrong side of fifty to be confused.

Also in the telegraph for DM haters
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...d-transgender/

---

The difference with this report as opposed to the DM report is that the DM stated that Doctors were banned from labelling pregnant women "expectant mothers". The Telegraph says this is mere guidance, and extends beyond the "Pregnant Mothers" headline grabbing story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kris

The difference with this report as opposed to the DM report is that the DM stated that Doctors were banned. The Telegraph says this is mere guidance, and extends beyond the "Pregnant Mothers" headline grabbing story.

---

Is that my fault? :hehe:

"Boy Scouts, Reversing Century-Old Stance, Will Allow Transgender Boys"
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/u...boys.html?_r=0

"New guidelines allow transgender children to join the Guides"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7540446.html

I came across these while I was reading comments on the pregnant people stories, the impression I get is that Women are not very happy about their identity as 'mothers' being taken away, when I look at it from that view I can't say I blame them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R

I read yesterday that transgender activists are upset that the women's march over the weekend was not inclusive to biological men who identify as women, as the protest presented an "oppressive message" that having a "vagina is essential to womanhood."

I just don't know what to say anymore, I really don't, I'm losing all sense of logic.

---

Sounds like they are both c*cks and c*nts at the same time anyway

I hear a lot about these but never see them in real life.

Apart from gingerbread man changing to ginger bread character in my local supermarket.

?.

Is it possible to be a biological male who is self identified as a lesbian?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TH63

Is it possible to be a biological male who is self identified as a lesbian?

---

Ladsbian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue in the Face

Sounds like they are both c*cks and c*nts at the same time anyway

---

:hehe: In all honesty I don't think it's actually these people that are the ones doing the complaining if you see what I mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordKenwyne

I hear a lot about these but never see them in real life.

Apart from gingerbread man changing to ginger bread character in my local supermarket.

?.

---

Gingerbread person if you don't mind :hehe: in traditional stories he was a man, not sure why that has to change?
I keep hearing about them too, "transgender children" is a phrase that worries me if I'm honest, why are children wanting to change their gender before they are old enough to even know their own minds?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TH63

Is it possible to be a biological male who is self identified as a lesbian?

---

:hehe:

I'd mentioned before - only to be ridiculed by RJK - that part of the globalist agenda is to pit men against women, with the aim of ultimately eradicating the Y-Chromosome. There can be no doubt that the traditional family has been under ideological assault for decades; the Soviets preferred their women to work, legalised abortion and homosexuality, and provided state-run childcare from birth. These policies have been gradually adopted by the "West", along with children being adopted by, for example, two gay men.

I believe that breaking these former taboos is tied up with transhumanism, robots, cyborgs and cloning. The last taboo to be broken will be cloning, maybe with a chimera element to it. Once people accept clones/chimeras there will be no taboos left to break and the globalists will have created their perfect society with workers and sex-slaves loving their servitude.

To quote from 1984:

"The old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love or justice. Ours is founded upon hatred. In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy--everything. Already we are breaking down the habits of thought which have survived from before the Revolution. We have cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and woman. No one dares trust a wife or a child or a friend any longer. But in the future there will be no wives and no friends. Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R

:hehe: In all honesty I don't think it's actually these people that are the ones doing the complaining if you see what I mean.

---

I do, I was just having a bit of fun.

The eternally outraged are a breed of moral narcissists who now have Twatter as a platform to give them the attention they crave which in any other era they woudn't have had the talent or appeal to have had. They think that attacking the morality of others elevates themself. When, in essence, they're just creating opposition that otherwise didn't exist. The Twatter phenomenon is made worse by the fall of the print media. Journos think they have gauged public opinion by opening a tab on their browser, whereas they used to actually leave the office and interact with people.

If the era of Obama gave us the hypocrtical social justice warrior, then I reckon the blowback of the Trump era will be the overly outspoken who are outraged by outrage. I don't want to fall into either trend if I can help it, but if I think of a punch line I'll use it. Especially if its a bit dodgy. :biggrin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue in the Face

I do, I was just having a bit of fun.

The eternally outraged are a breed of moral narcissists who now have Twatter as a platform to give them the attention they crave which in any other era they woudn't have had the talent or appeal to have had. They think that attacking the morality of others elevates themself. When, in essence, they're just creating opposition that otherwise didn't exist. The Twatter phenomenon is made worse by the fall of the print media. Journos think they have gauged public opinion by opening a tab on their browser, whereas they used to actually leave the office and interact with people.

If the era of Obama gave us the hypocrtical social justice warrior, then I reckon the blowback of the Trump era will be the overly outspoken who are outraged by outrage. I don't want to fall into either trend if I can help it, but if I think of a punch line I'll use it. Especially if its a bit dodgy. :biggrin:

---

You may well be right.

In the old days, the morally outraged would have no other outlet except writing to points of view to complain about a partial exposure of breast or utterance of the word 'crud' before midnight.

Nowadays people seem to think that because it's on the internet, somewhow it's a barometer of public opinion. It's not of course, its just that the only people who can be arsed to complain about something are whinging sanctimonious people with nothing better to do with their time. The fact that most people aren't that bothered seems to get overlooked as though somehow it's only the complainers that actually have an opinion.

Take that petition the other day for example. Over a million people signed to say trump shouldn't be allowed a state visit. By my reckoning that means that about 59 million people either disagree with banning him or more likely, couldn't give a shit about it. So we're then faced with a day of media outlets spunking themselves over the fact that about 2% of the population signed a petition asking for something that the other 98% don't want.

On a personal level I don't agree with Trump or his policies, but if him being in power pisses off the morally outraged on Twitter then I hope he sticks around for a few years. Hopefully by then these people will realise that their morally outraged hypocrisy has no real effect on the world and they'll find something better to do with their time.

I thought this weeks term was cisgender,or is that a different branch of broken brained wierdos?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by severncity

I'd mentioned before - only to be ridiculed by RJK - that part of the globalist agenda is to pit men against women, with the aim of ultimately eradicating the Y-Chromosome. There can be no doubt that the traditional family has been under ideological assault for decades; the Soviets preferred their women to work, legalised abortion and homosexuality, and provided state-run childcare from birth. These policies have been gradually adopted by the "West", along with children being adopted by, for example, two gay men.

I believe that breaking these former taboos is tied up with transhumanism, robots, cyborgs and cloning. The last taboo to be broken will be cloning, maybe with a chimera element to it. Once people accept clones/chimeras there will be no taboos left to break and the globalists will have created their perfect society with workers and sex-slaves loving their servitude.

To quote from 1984:

"The old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love or justice. Ours is founded upon hatred. In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy--everything. Already we are breaking down the habits of thought which have survived from before the Revolution. We have cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and woman. No one dares trust a wife or a child or a friend any longer. But in the future there will be no wives and no friends. Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy."

---

You can see why it has raced up the charts, to be honest out of all the things I've seen on the internet over the years looking in to the deep dark world of Feminism is one thing that has really upset me, I can see the long term damage it can do, I'm not saying it's all of them but the hatred for men from some of them is abnormal, especially when they all have fathers/brothers and sons themselves, they attack women for saying they are proud mothers or for saying they want to be stay at home mums, poor Adele got a bit of a grilling not long ago when she said even though she has had a great career she only felt fulfilled when she became a mum, they promote "Toxic masculinity" "rape culture" and tell women that they have to teach their sons not to be rapists, it's all pretty grim imo, if there is no agenda behind it it makes me even more worried if you see what I mean, here is an example of an article presented in a slightly different way, I know race and gender are not the same thing but it highlights how vile it is.
http://www.factsoverfeelings.org/blo...-what-happened

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue in the Face

I do, I was just having a bit of fun.

The eternally outraged are a breed of moral narcissists who now have Twatter as a platform to give them the attention they crave which in any other era they woudn't have had the talent or appeal to have had. They think that attacking the morality of others elevates themself. When, in essence, they're just creating opposition that otherwise didn't exist. The Twatter phenomenon is made worse by the fall of the print media. Journos think they have gauged public opinion by opening a tab on their browser, whereas they used to actually leave the office and interact with people.

If the era of Obama gave us the hypocrtical social justice warrior, then I reckon the blowback of the Trump era will be the overly outspoken who are outraged by outrage. I don't want to fall into either trend if I can help it, but if I think of a punch line I'll use it. Especially if its a bit dodgy. :biggrin:

---

I know you do, I am the same, I'm finding it very hard to balance on my fence atm :hehe:

I'm a lesbian trapped in a man's body

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wales-Bales

Don't call pregnant patients 'mothers': Doctors are banned from using the word over fears it will upset those who are transgender

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-mothers.html

---

You peddle alot of daily mail stuff on here. Never met anyone who reads the daily mail as much as you seem to. And so openly proud to show it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R

You can see why it has raced up the charts, to be honest out of all the things I've seen on the internet over the years looking in to the deep dark world of Feminism is one thing that has really upset me, I can see the long term damage it can do, I'm not saying it's all of them but the hatred for men from some of them is abnormal, especially when they all have fathers/brothers and sons themselves, they attack women for saying they are proud mothers or for saying they want to be stay at home mums, poor Adele got a bit of a grilling not long ago when she said even though she has had a great career she only felt fulfilled when she became a mum, they promote "Toxic masculinity" "rape culture" and tell women that they have to teach their sons not to be rapists, it's all pretty grim imo, if there is no agenda behind it it makes me even more worried if you see what I mean, here is an example of an article presented in a slightly different way, I know race and gender are not the same thing but it highlights how vile it is.
http://www.factsoverfeelings.org/blo...-what-happened


I know you do, I am the same, I'm finding it very hard to balance on my fence atm :hehe:

---

That is a great link, shows that third-wave feminism is prejudice disguised as enlightenment.

This afternoon, I've googled the phrase "sex differences in juvenile primates" to see the published literature on whether young apes and monkeys display sexually dimorphic behaviours, especially in the ways that they play. Overwhelmingly the answer is yes, they do.

Male juvenile non-human primates prefer rough and tumble play whereas female juvenile non-human primates prefer nurturing play. There are many studies that show this and some take into account and adjust for the fact that the apes/monkeys are, to an extent, socialised into this behaviour as well as having their behaviour determined by their chromosomes.

For example: https://animalwise.org/2012/01/26/bo...s-in-primates/

The comments section for this article was hijacked by a feminist named JZGongen. Her views are very revealing, even though she claims not to be a 3rd waver.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barry Dragon

You peddle alot of daily mail stuff on here. Never met anyone who reads the daily mail as much as you seem to. And so openly proud to show it.

---

It's great innit :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TH63

Is it possible to be a biological male who is self identified as a lesbian?

---

We will do our very best to accommodate you on here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by severncity

That is a great link, shows that third-wave feminism is prejudice disguised as enlightenment.

This afternoon, I've googled the phrase "sex differences in juvenile primates" to see the published literature on whether young apes and monkeys display sexually dimorphic behaviours, especially in the ways that they play. Overwhelmingly the answer is yes, they do.

Male juvenile non-human primates prefer rough and tumble play whereas female juvenile non-human primates prefer nurturing play. There are many studies that show this and some take into account and adjust for the fact that the apes/monkeys are, to an extent, socialised into this behaviour as well as having their behaviour determined by their chromosomes.

For example: https://animalwise.org/2012/01/26/bo...s-in-primates/

The comments section for this article was hijacked by a feminist named JZGongen. Her views are very revealing, even though she claims not to be a 3rd waver.

---

Interesting read, "I’m using a fuzzy version of the word “rape”. To clarify, male chimps will intimidate, harass, or strike female chimps so they can copulate." ahh just like men then :hehe: they are not happy unless they have got the word rape in somewhere, they hijack stuff like that all the time.

Scientists are getting fed up with them..

https://heatst.com/world/science-has...mod=sm_fb_post
"Prominent neuroscientist Larry Cahill spoke out this month, confessing that scientists are censoring themselves because they are afraid of being called sexist for telling the truth."

Is Modern Feminism Incompatible With Science?
http://www.acsh.org/news/2016/10/26/...-science-10366

"former feminist Toni Airaksinen warns about the dangers of modern feminism, particularly as taught in women's studies classes, which she has described as a "rabbit hole" that leads to a "perverse wonderland where up is down."

:hehe: That is a perfect description, it has really played with my head this week tbh, I know people on here think I'm a bit mad but it was way too mad for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by severncity

I'd mentioned before - only to be ridiculed by RJK - that part of the globalist agenda is to pit men against women, with the aim of ultimately eradicating the Y-Chromosome. There can be no doubt that the traditional family has been under ideological assault for decades; the Soviets preferred their women to work, legalised abortion and homosexuality, and provided state-run childcare from birth. These policies have been gradually adopted by the "West", along with children being adopted by, for example, two gay men.

I believe that breaking these former taboos is tied up with transhumanism, robots, cyborgs and cloning. The last taboo to be broken will be cloning, maybe with a chimera element to it. Once people accept clones/chimeras there will be no taboos left to break and the globalists will have created their perfect society with workers and sex-slaves loving their servitude.

To quote from 1984:

"The old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love or justice. Ours is founded upon hatred. In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy--everything. Already we are breaking down the habits of thought which have survived from before the Revolution. We have cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and woman. No one dares trust a wife or a child or a friend any longer. But in the future there will be no wives and no friends. Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy."

---

This bit is definitely accurate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

This bit is definitely accurate.

---

I read a mans comment last night saying he had just lost a 35 year friendship over Donald Trump, crazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrs Steve R

Interesting read, "I’m using a fuzzy version of the word “rape”. To clarify, male chimps will intimidate, harass, or strike female chimps so they can copulate." ahh just like men then :hehe: they are not happy unless they have got the word rape in somewhere, they hijack stuff like that all the time.

Scientists are getting fed up with them..

https://heatst.com/world/science-has...mod=sm_fb_post
"Prominent neuroscientist Larry Cahill spoke out this month, confessing that scientists are censoring themselves because they are afraid of being called sexist for telling the truth."

Is Modern Feminism Incompatible With Science?
http://www.acsh.org/news/2016/10/26/...-science-10366

"former feminist Toni Airaksinen warns about the dangers of modern feminism, particularly as taught in women's studies classes, which she has described as a "rabbit hole" that leads to a "perverse wonderland where up is down."

:hehe: That is a perfect description, it has really played with my head this week tbh, I know people on here think I'm a bit mad but it was way too mad for me.

---

The comments in your second link are well worth reading. The notion of gender is torn to shreds repeatedly but the two feminists involved in the debate are metaphorically putting their fingers in their ears and saying "la la la la".

When confronted with the assertion that 99% of people have gender aligned with their sex and, what's more, couldn't give a flying **** about their own gender, the feminazis argument is that people display a wide range of what they term "gender fluidity":

"There is a great deal of gender fluidity in many cultures, including our own. We have manly men and sissy men, corporate men who don't perform the ultra-masculine role of, say, professional wrestlers, and even men who are cross-dressers. Women in the U.S. can be butch, or Texas beauty-queen girlie, and lots of things between."

My answer would be "so what?" If people can choose where they place themselves in the spectrum of gender, due to its or their own "fluidity", how does identifying this, labelling it and studying it help anybody? When I go down the City I swear and shout. When I'm with my grandson I hug and kiss him. That doesn't make me a machoman or sissy. It just shows that I'm a relatively normal man capable of a range of behaviours. Sometimes I wear clothes like combats and boots, and have a full beard - that makesme look more manly. At other times I wear t shirts, jeans and am clean shaven - less manly. Nothing to do with gender.

A great comment was:

"Gender is a social construct, but homosexuals are born that way. Nothing like a little consistency."

That had the feminists in a flap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by severncity

The comments in your second link are well worth reading. The notion of gender is torn to shreds repeatedly but the two feminists involved in the debate are metaphorically putting their fingers in their ears and saying "la la la la".

When confronted with the assertion that 99% of people have gender aligned with their sex and, what's more, couldn't give a flying **** about their own gender, the feminazis argument is that people display a wide range of what they term "gender fluidity":

"There is a great deal of gender fluidity in many cultures, including our own. We have manly men and sissy men, corporate men who don't perform the ultra-masculine role of, say, professional wrestlers, and even men who are cross-dressers. Women in the U.S. can be butch, or Texas beauty-queen girlie, and lots of things between."

My answer would be "so what?" If people can choose where they place themselves in the spectrum of gender, due to its or their own "fluidity", how does identifying this, labelling it and studying it help anybody? When I go down the City I swear and shout. When I'm with my grandson I hug and kiss him. That doesn't make me a machoman or sissy. It just shows that I'm a relatively normal man capable of a range of behaviours. Sometimes I wear clothes like combats and boots, and have a full beard - that makesme look more manly. At other times I wear t shirts, jeans and am clean shaven - less manly. Nothing to do with gender.

A great comment was:

"Gender is a social construct, but homosexuals are born that way. Nothing like a little consistency."

That had the feminists in a flap.

---

:hehe: I hadn't read the comments on that one tbh but I've been reading them on various articles all week and their views change depending on the subject and sometimes change mid argument, here a few pages I found on fb, there is quite a bit of mockery on them but also some links to interesting articles.
https://www.facebook.com/evilfeminism
https://www.facebook.com/Humanity-vs...07609579339834
https://www.facebook.com/RevealingFeminism

You might like the vegan feminists too.

"What is a Rape Rack?: Why Feminism Applies to Cows" :shrug:
https://veganfeminist.blogspot.co.uk...m-applies.html

Fifty shades of chicken
http://veganfeministnetwork.com/tag/misogyny/