Is the New York Times biased against transgender people? - Page 7 - Politics and Society -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

It must be nice to live in the imaginary world where everything is so binary. Where exercising one's individual rights never infringes upon anyone else's rights and there is regulation of society by laws and norms that no one ever breaches.

it's pretty easy when the rights in question are simply the right for a group of people to exist.

Quote

03-08-2023 , 06:39 PM

#152

BDHarrison

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 4,529

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjjou812

Claiming the issue is binary is pretty ridiculous.

On a very basic level, there is a binary issue of whether or not gender can differ from sex assigned at birth. Supporters of trans rights are applying the basic concept of human rights to transgender people out of a belief that their claimed circumstances are real. Everything on the anti-trans side logically follows from the premise that sex assigned at birth is immutable and transgender is a denial of truth.

Quote

03-08-2023 , 08:51 PM

#153

Luckbox Inc

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 61,059

Quote:

Originally Posted by BDHarrison

On a very basic level there is the issue of whether gender exists at all, or is merely just attitudes and stereotypes.

Quote

03-09-2023 , 12:07 AM

#154

Dunyain

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2023 Posts: 2,676

Quote:

Originally Posted by BDHarrison

On a very basic level, there is a binary issue of whether or not gender can differ from sex assigned at birth. Supporters of trans rights are applying the basic concept of human rights to transgender people out of a belief that their claimed circumstances are real. Everything on the anti-trans side logically follows from the premise that sex assigned at birth is immutable and transgender is a denial of truth.

I think a lot of people just don't like self righteous, pompous *******s telling them what to think and say. And trans right activists seem to fit this characterization a lot, and I think a lot of the pushback comes just from this.

I am not going to claim I have had a lot of intimate relationships with any trans people. I haven't, although I have had superficial relationships and have been able to navigate those without any issue at all. But that doesn't mean I am going to be ok with some pompous activist telling me what I am allowed to think or say, and telling me I am a bigot if I disagree.

Quote

03-09-2023 , 12:34 AM

#155

BDHarrison

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 4,529

I think some people mistakenly label righteousness as self-righteousness.

Quote

03-09-2023 , 12:57 AM

#156

uke_master

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 15,911

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc

On a very basic level there is the issue of whether gender exists at all, or is merely just attitudes and stereotypes.

This seems poorly formed. Even borrowing your framing of "just attitudes and stereotypes" this is still a phenomenon in humans that exists.

Quote

03-09-2023 , 08:23 AM

#157

shortstacker

banned

Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 2,211

Quote:

Originally Posted by BDHarrison

I think some people mistakenly label righteousness as self-righteousness.

Quite so.

As is also the case that self-righteousness is sometimes mislabeled as righteousness.

Quote

03-09-2023 , 08:29 AM

#158

shortstacker

banned

Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 2,211

Quote:

Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce

Kareem Abdul Jabbar(the NBA hall of famer with millions of followers had this to say:

Which left a lot of people speechless because it's so perfect.Their response has been the exact opposite of what should have happened and it looks like it's because they simply don't value transgender opinions.

I read the new york times, and found a lot of their articles on these issues to be quite good( deborah sontag for example) but that doesn't excuse the creepy and dehumanizing tone in many of their articles in regards to gender affirming care and transgender people themselves. Americas real finest news source, Vogue, has been sounding the alarms in regards to NYT coverage for quite some time. For example I recall reading this: https://www.teenvogue.com/story/rece...affirming-care

Transgender people are people and NYT should listen to their opinions instead of platforming transphobes.

Doing both those things is fine imo.

Quote

03-09-2023 , 09:05 AM

#159

Luckbox Inc

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 61,059

Quote:

Originally Posted by uke_master

This seems poorly formed. Even borrowing your framing of "just attitudes and stereotypes" this is still a phenomenon in humans that exists.

How do you know that?

Quote

03-09-2023 , 02:13 PM

#160

uke_master

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 15,911

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc

How do you know that?

How do I know people form attitudes and stereotypes? Just basic observing humanity?

Quote

03-10-2023 , 11:45 PM

#161

14cobster

adept

Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 1,008

Quote:

Originally Posted by BDHarrison

ahem

Quote

04-01-2023 , 11:43 PM

#162

eobmtns

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 2,466

I'm ready to pull the trigger on my NYT subscription which I've had since 2000 (before they charged money for it). It's not the NYT I used to know. It's become a right-wing paper with a few articles about Black people thrown in for virtue signaling.

Quote

04-01-2023 , 11:45 PM

#163

Luckbox Inc

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 61,059

Quote:

Originally Posted by eobmtns

Yeah back when the NYT was cheerleading for every war imaginable they were doing great for the left.

Quote

04-05-2023 , 02:19 PM

#164

shortstacker

banned

Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 2,211

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc

Yeah back when the NYT was cheerleading for every war imaginable they were doing great for the left.

War sells newspapers. Peace does not.

Quote

04-05-2023 , 02:34 PM

#165

Luckbox Inc

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 61,059

Quote:

Originally Posted by shortstacker

War sells newspapers. Peace does not.

If only that was why they did it.

Quote

04-05-2023 , 08:18 PM

#166

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 36,711

Quote

04-05-2023 , 08:29 PM

#167

natediggity

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 15,728

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

i am shocked that this is a total misinterpretation. Seek help.

Quote

04-05-2023 , 08:47 PM

#168

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 36,711

Quote:

Originally Posted by natediggity

i am shocked that this is a total misinterpretation. Seek help.

Learn to read, buddy.

Quote:

The legislation requires children to participate in school activities based on the gender they were assigned at birth, from elementary school to college. Challenges could require them to undergo genital inspections, or require a birth certificate for proof of the child’s gender.

Quote

04-05-2023 , 08:56 PM

#169

natediggity

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 15,728

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

Learn to read, buddy.

Challenges "could" require......

Learn to read, buddy.

There is a smidgen of a difference between "would" and "could."

Last edited by natediggity; 04-05-2023 at 08:58 PM. Reason: you obviously aren't a lawyer (or well read)

Quote

04-05-2023 , 10:45 PM

#170

ganstaman

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 10,851

Quote:

Originally Posted by natediggity

Challenges "could" require......

Learn to read, buddy.

There is a smidgen of a difference between "would" and "could."

Where's the word "would?" The headline says that the law "allows" for the genital inspections. Is that really a "total misrepresentation" of "could require?" I'd you said the headline was a smidge exaggerated I'd disagree but not argue, but saying it's a total misrepresentation is too much.

Quote

04-06-2023 , 05:06 AM

#171

Bobo Fett

Carpe Diem

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 56,895

Quote:

Originally Posted by natediggity

i am shocked that this is a total misinterpretation. Seek help.

Certainly appears not to be a misrepresentation, but of course different sources will spin it differently.

But here's the thing...who the **** cares? The important thing is the bill itself. If anyone here is supportive of it, I'd love to hear why they think this is a good thing, or even necessary.

Quote

04-06-2023 , 09:55 AM

#172

shortstacker

banned

Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 2,211

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

Go Kansas!

Quote

04-06-2023 , 09:59 AM

#173

shortstacker

banned

Join Date: Dec 2016 Posts: 2,211

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobo Fett

I believe the context is boys only being allowed to play sports with boys. That is, a boy can't run in the girl's track meet.

Quote

04-06-2023 , 09:59 AM

#174

wreckem713

old hand

Join Date: Apr 2019 Posts: 1,395

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobo Fett

Can you explain the bill to me as if I were a transitioning 9-year old

Quote

04-06-2023 , 12:10 PM

#175

Bobo Fett

Carpe Diem

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 56,895

Quote:

Originally Posted by shortstacker

I believe the context is boys only being allowed to play sports with boys. That is, a boy can't run in the girl's track meet.

Yes, I understand the context, thanks. What I don't understand is why anyone thinks this is necessary. Are they super concerned with the blight that is 7 year old transgender girls bumping all the "real girls" off the soccer team? Are supporters of the party that allegedly believes in small government now thinking that what is actually needed is more government overreach because local school boards, and the schools themselves, simply can't figure this out on their own? That government knows how to educate better than professional educators?

Quote

Page 7 of 9

First

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 7 of 9

First

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Last