-
@Hooroo said in NZ Politics:
@Bones said in NZ Politics:
@Siam I can just imagine the party you and @Rembrandt would have. Whoopee! 😊
I just shake my head at the thought. The Winger of women
Nice input. Let's turn the fern into twitter.
The truth of these times is that no public person will go on record answering this question: " what is a woman?
There are 2 answers.
One will get you cancelled by media and the other will get you cancelled by the electorate.
Just ask Jo Swinson. How would Cindy's answer differ from Jo's?
So yes, as we face a multi year recession, I want to see which future pm has the pragmatism to get nz on it's feet again earning and producing and which pm is going to waste resources placating the media and the activist 5%.
The original discussion centred on religious leanings of a pm candidate. Wokeness exhibits all the characteristics of religion : grossly unsupported by data or research, an unquestionable dogma where non believers are regarded inferior or unenlightened, a distorted concept of well established truths, and a means to power and division of society.
"What is a woman" has become a litmus test for the question posed earlier in the thread about what a politician actually believes in versus what they want the public to think they believe in.
If my premise is such malarkey, then jot down the answer, sign it and include your workplace ( innocent enough eh?), then post it on a newspaper Facebook page. A simple test of my ridiculous notion.
That'll shut me up. 🙂
Oh, one more for you. In 6 months time we're going to get hate speech laws in response to the despair, depression and suicides of those ruined by the recession. It'll be deemed that stigma caused these maladies.
This is the most important aspect about COVID according to the head of WHO. "More dangerous than the virus itself". Does Cindy share the same priorities?
-
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
The truth of these times is that no public person will go on record answering this question: " what is a woman?
That's because it is a really stupid question that aims solely to wind up people's emotions about others, provide ammo to attack the person that answers the question, and succeeds.
The question 'what is a man?' is equally as stupid
Are either a relevant question?
-
@Crucial said in NZ Politics:
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
The truth of these times is that no public person will go on record answering this question: " what is a woman?
That's because it is a really stupid question that aims solely to wind up people's emotions about others, provide ammo to attack the person that answers the question, and succeeds.
The question 'what is a man?' is equally as stupid
Are either a relevant question?
Stupid question?
Who, exactly, has made it ammo to attack? What's so difficult about answering it? Whose version of the answer?
Why can't Cindy answer that honestly to the electorate?
Let the electorate decide. Lets find out definitively what NZers really think about identity politics, then fair dues to the winner. A mandate to proceed. This is now a vital election, let's know about the person at the helm of a lilting ship.
Or should we censor the question lest the answer be analysed by voters?What is a human? Equally stupid?
What's your answer to what is a woman?
Mine involves chromosomes, reproductive capabilities and immutable characteristics.
-
@Kirwan said in NZ Politics:
@Godder said in NZ Politics:
@Kirwan I was agreeing with you via sarcasm, but we don't really have a sarcasm indicator, so I obviously failed miserably.
Sorry, missed that completely.
I think Godder has to raise his emoji game
-
@Crucial said in NZ Politics:
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
The truth of these times is that no public person will go on record answering this question: " what is a woman?
That's because it is a really stupid question that aims solely to wind up people's emotions about others, provide ammo to attack the person that answers the question, and succeeds.
The question 'what is a man?' is equally as stupid
Are either a relevant question?
Absolutely is a stupid question. Also true that there are consequences for many people that answer it, which is even more stupid.
-
@canefan said in NZ Politics:
@Kirwan said in NZ Politics:
@Godder said in NZ Politics:
@Kirwan I was agreeing with you via sarcasm, but we don't really have a sarcasm indicator, so I obviously failed miserably.
Sorry, missed that completely.
I think Godder has to raise his emoji game
-
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
@Crucial said in NZ Politics:
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
The truth of these times is that no public person will go on record answering this question: " what is a woman?
That's because it is a really stupid question that aims solely to wind up people's emotions about others, provide ammo to attack the person that answers the question, and succeeds.
The question 'what is a man?' is equally as stupid
Are either a relevant question?
Stupid question?
Who, exactly, has made it ammo to attack? What's so difficult about answering it? Whose version of the answer?
Why can't Cindy answer that honestly to the electorate?
Let the electorate decide. Lets find out definitively what NZers really think about identity politics, then fair dues to the winner. A mandate to proceed. This is now a vital election, let's know about the person at the helm of a lilting ship.
Or should we censor the question lest the answer be analysed by voters?What is a human? Equally stupid?
What's your answer to what is a woman?
Mine involves chromosomes, reproductive capabilities and immutable characteristics.
my counter.
What does it matter?
-
@Crucial said in NZ Politics:
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
@Crucial said in NZ Politics:
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
The truth of these times is that no public person will go on record answering this question: " what is a woman?
That's because it is a really stupid question that aims solely to wind up people's emotions about others, provide ammo to attack the person that answers the question, and succeeds.
The question 'what is a man?' is equally as stupid
Are either a relevant question?
Stupid question?
Who, exactly, has made it ammo to attack? What's so difficult about answering it? Whose version of the answer?
Why can't Cindy answer that honestly to the electorate?
Let the electorate decide. Lets find out definitively what NZers really think about identity politics, then fair dues to the winner. A mandate to proceed. This is now a vital election, let's know about the person at the helm of a lilting ship.
Or should we censor the question lest the answer be analysed by voters?What is a human? Equally stupid?
What's your answer to what is a woman?
Mine involves chromosomes, reproductive capabilities and immutable characteristics.
my counter.
What does it matter?
Funny how people get their knickers in a twist about this. I would give the question the treatment it deserves, and ignore it. I'm not sure the majority of the electorate think about let alone have any sort of strong opinion about identity politics. It's just that those on telly and in the media give more of a shit about it than the rest of us put together
-
It matters when things like the Hate Speech legisliation are coming. If Cindy believes anyone can be a woman, and enshrines that in law then we have a problem, right?
The sport issues have been well documented, with woman's sport being turned into a farce even in NZ.
It's worth having the conversation now so we can agree on what extreme politics we want to keep out of law.
-
@canefan said in NZ Politics:
@Crucial said in NZ Politics:
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
@Crucial said in NZ Politics:
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
The truth of these times is that no public person will go on record answering this question: " what is a woman?
That's because it is a really stupid question that aims solely to wind up people's emotions about others, provide ammo to attack the person that answers the question, and succeeds.
The question 'what is a man?' is equally as stupid
Are either a relevant question?
Stupid question?
Who, exactly, has made it ammo to attack? What's so difficult about answering it? Whose version of the answer?
Why can't Cindy answer that honestly to the electorate?
Let the electorate decide. Lets find out definitively what NZers really think about identity politics, then fair dues to the winner. A mandate to proceed. This is now a vital election, let's know about the person at the helm of a lilting ship.
Or should we censor the question lest the answer be analysed by voters?What is a human? Equally stupid?
What's your answer to what is a woman?
Mine involves chromosomes, reproductive capabilities and immutable characteristics.
my counter.
What does it matter?
Funny how people get their knickers in a twist about this. I would give the question the treatment it deserves, and ignore it. I'm not sure the majority of the electorate think about let alone have any sort of strong opinion about identity politics. It's just that those on telly and in the media give more of a shit about it than the rest of us put together
It is purposely a question to draw someone into a pointless debate to try and either score points or entice them into a tangle trying to not allow points to be scored. If they refuse to answer then it is another reason to criticise them.
Just plainly a stupid and pointless question. A skilled interrogator could make anyone look foolish by asking them 'What is the colour green?'
It befuddles me also, why some get their knickers in a twist over this. Is it because they are looking for an answer that pigeonholes an attitude? Do they feel the need to be defined themselves by association?
Personally I don't give a shit if someone defines themselves a a man/woman/dog/alien from Mars. If they are a good person, they are a good person. If not, then they aren't.
-
@dogmeat said in NZ Politics:
@Siam I'm pretty certain you don't think Cindy's a siren - so why is our ship singing, diddling or jiggling?
Hahaha. Bless you mate🤣. Kudos. Shit. Listing then?
My tepid metaphor blown out of the water. Fair dues👍 -
@Kirwan said in NZ Politics:
It matters when things like the Hate Speech legisliation are coming. If Cindy believes anyone can be a woman, and enshrines that in law then we have a problem, right?
The sport issues have been well documented, with woman's sport being turned into a farce even in NZ.
It's worth having the conversation now so we can agree on what extreme politics we want to keep out of law.
100% this.
A while back we seemed to get to a point where we would differentiate between gender - how one identifies - and sex, the biological factors that determine whether you are male or female, which made perfect sense. Amazingly those lines are now being blurred, and we have biological males making a farce of women's sports for example.
I think it's a pretty important topic that I'd like people in government to provide some clarity around to ensure our laws are appropriate - we treat males and females differently under the law for a good reason.
-
@Kirwan said in NZ Politics:
It matters when things like the Hate Speech legisliation are coming. If Cindy believes anyone can be a woman, and enshrines that in law then we have a problem, right?
The sport issues have been well documented, with woman's sport being turned into a farce even in NZ.
It's worth having the conversation now so we can agree on what extreme politics we want to keep out of law.
IMO the discussion is more around practical application in areas such as sport. Whether organisations are allowed to define eligibility without having to resort to some chromosome terminology.
True that this requires a little give and take on all sides but this is just language evolution and usage. The problem is quite minor when you boil it down, just complicated to solve.This is a women's sport.
"I'm a woman", can I play?
"No you aren't"
"That hurts me"Do we now say 'XX' and 'XY' competitions? I don't know? It sounds silly to my old ears but in the scheme of things it is no big deal what you call something.
As for 'Hate Speech', absolutely we need a debate on where to draw the line. If something has a high propensity to cause mental harm or continue a stereotype that has quantifiable effect on a person then it should be looked at. Define that line then adjusting and applying it over time is tricky but you can't pay lip-service to things like youth suicide and mental health and allow free verbal 'attacks' on people at the same time.
We are an evolving society. I get the desire not to head off full tilt down a path but not the one to not head down the path in the first place. -
@Crucial I don't either mate. And nowadays it is a stupid question.
But who made it stupid?What forces at play made such a simple question such a career landmine?
Knickers in a twist, maybe, certainly concerned that people are fearful of their favoured candidate answering a 4 year old's question about the world. What are you scared of?
-
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
@Crucial I don't either mate. And nowadays it is a stupid question.
But who made it stupid?What forces at play made such a simple question such a career landmine?
Knickers in a twist, maybe, certainly concerned that people are fearful of their favoured candidate answering a 4 year old's question about the world. What are you scared of?
Quite simply because it isn't a four year old asking the question, it is most likely someone setting up a strawman.
Is it really such a simple question? Maybe your belief of a simple answer is the only reason you think the question is simple?
-
@Crucial said in NZ Politics:
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
@Crucial I don't either mate. And nowadays it is a stupid question.
But who made it stupid?What forces at play made such a simple question such a career landmine?
Knickers in a twist, maybe, certainly concerned that people are fearful of their favoured candidate answering a 4 year old's question about the world. What are you scared of?
Quite simply because it isn't a four year old asking the question, it is most likely someone setting up a strawman.
Is it really such a simple question? Maybe your belief of a simple answer is the only reason you think the question is simple?
It's not a strawman, the answer tells the voters if the politican has common sense or not, and if they hold extreme opinions that most of us disagree with.
-
@Crucial said in NZ Politics:
@Siam said in NZ Politics:
@Crucial I don't either mate. And nowadays it is a stupid question.
But who made it stupid?What forces at play made such a simple question such a career landmine?
Knickers in a twist, maybe, certainly concerned that people are fearful of their favoured candidate answering a 4 year old's question about the world. What are you scared of?
Quite simply because it isn't a four year old asking the question, it is most likely someone setting up a strawman.
Is it really such a simple question? Maybe your belief of a simple answer is the only reason you think the question is simple?
I think you're right about that.
But it'll need to be comprehensively resolved before it forms the basis of laws.
That's the "knickers in a twist" part
NZ Politics