Peak Guardian

[hackmum]

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/09/polyamory-trans-documentary-love-unlimited

'The film says my son and his partner regard themselves as non-binary “in that they identify as neither exclusively masculine nor feminine”. Wrong, says my son, when I discuss it with him: they see themselves as neither exclusively male nor female, but his partner strongly identifies as femme.'

They won't be happy until every one us of has identified themselves into one of several thousand ultra-specific boxes and have the associated barcode* tattooed onto our foreheads. (This is posted half in jest.)

• thinking about it, a QR code would seem to be more fitting

No nauticant not all of us. They need a "cis" lumpenproletariat against which they can define themselves as special.

Ah, that sounds familiar from the world of politics. You have group A who want to enforce their will on group B, but are canny enough not to enforce it on the mass of group C because group C would wake up and go "you what? no way will we put up with that".

The author is "associate editor, culture for the Guardian". I don't know what an "associate editor" is but presumably has an amount of power in what is and is not published.
I'm not pointing that out to single out this person as responsible for the one sidedness on the debate in the Guardian but people with that kind of power need to use it fairly and be open to challenge.

And on the same day, an article with old photos of Grayson Perry cross dressing. Plus (!) an article in the sports section on 1940s racing driver Bob Cowell, who had surgery in 1954 to re-emerge as Roberta Cowell. One of the comments notes that women racing drivers were not happy when Cowell won the Ladies Classes. Plus ca change........

What I don’t understand is why they think anyone cares about somebody’s consensual sex life. She’s so proud of her child because they sleep with multiple people on a regular basis and it’s total overshare and literally no one other than them cares. Are we supposed to be shocked? Impressed? Envious? Bleh.

The Guardian needs to sort itself out. Nothing liberal about telling women to stfu.

I reckon, polyamory is the next civil rights movement. I see the promotion of it creeping into msm.

Has anyone else noticed they changed the headline for the article? It was something about a mum behind the times originally. I suppose there was some reason that wasn't good enough either. I feel for the poor woman.

Are we supposed to be shocked? Impressed? Envious? Bleh

google polyamory and you will see various articles. It's no doubt done with the intention of normalising it. We can all then learn to "tolerate" it, the great virtue of the far left.

I've said this a few times, but I really think since the west has largely removed its Christian values, it will now free fall into total chaos and self destruction. Done away is any kind of restraint and it's just a free for all.

You're always saying stuff like how we're all going to Hell in a handcart because we don't read the Bible or something. Out of interest, which decade (or century if we're going back a fair bit) would you say was the high water mark for civilisation in the UK?

"My son is rather dull, but I feel that the rest of the world should find him as endlessly fascinating as I do."

I've met poly propagandists in real life and they have to be at the top of the "that's nice, dear, not sure why you think anyone cares" list.

God is there anything more boring than having a bunch of people you don't know from Adam telling you all about who they're shagging

*Eve

Nauticant-
Living in the Uk means you have standards of living much better than many other countries in the world. Western civilization has achieved huge amounts. Our laws, morals, ethics, language and society have been underpinned and shaped by religion.

1968 moon landings the crew read from the book of genesis on the moon.
2018- people claim they cant decide what a woman is anymore.
All existing morals are being replaced by moral relativism, and hedonism. Without the restraint of religion people are free to do whatever they please, - in the interests of self, regardless of who it harms. It's already happened with Trans activism, next all the stuff that's going to follow ie polyamory. Everything that's going to be harmful to society. Who do you trust to not lead you to harm? Who is going to set the new moral standards now religion is largely displaced? Governments have always been prone to corruption. People are largely driven by self interest.
Usually when sexual freedoms increase, actual freedom decreases as a sort of trade off- look up free love in Russia and how messed up things got there, due to communism.
Speaking of communism- communists usually try to get rid of religion because it's competition for the mind, it prevents control when people have something higher they believe in. I see parallels with what's happening here to communist china under Mao. Getting rid of the "olds"- culture, religion etc and infiltrating he mind if the young.
how is embracing everything that's going to make society dysfunctional progressive- what are we progressing towards?

My sense of ethics is doing just fine without any Jesus in it, thanks.

Yours might be kittens but it's everyone else's you need to worry about

actually (and I realise this is probably my modernity and decadence speaking) I think my morals are rather better than those promulgated by the abrahamic religions

That article is bonkers. It doesn't make any sense. What on earth is 'femme'? (I know it's French for woman).

it means 'wears lipstick' I think

Fuck knows what the point of that article was. Just a load of poorly written, look-at-how-incredibly-open-minded-and-liberal-I-am ramblings. Clearly demonstrates how and why the standard of journalism at the guardian has sunk so low though, if she's an associate editor.

and what are you basing morals on? And do you think anyone will care what your morals are on the whole, when enforcing their own? other people will have their own set of morals based on their interests that will likely entirely conflict with your own.
All people think themselves good in their own eyes, by their own standards, a thief, says well at least I'm not a burglar etc.
What kind of morality, who's morality other than your own do you trust? Because your own morality doesn't dictate how people will treat you.

This may come as a shock, Missy, but people all over the world have managed to form ethical systems without believing in Jesus for millenia. Do you really need to turn every single thread into a referendum on religion? Is there not a board that would be more suitable for debating that?

My sense of ethics is doing just fine without any Jesus in it, thanks.

And mine. It's also doing pretty well without any genderism in it!

I do sometimes wonder if an increasingly secular society becomes more vulnerable to other forms of magical thinking because we no longer have Jesus and other religious iterations to invest in.

I mean, genderism is just another religion, right?

It is in a lot of ways, but I tend to feel more like it attracts the kind of people who otherwise would have become emo or something rather than the ones who would otherwise have gone to church/temple/mosque. So a weird hybrid between a subculture and a cult.

I wonder if the basis of all of it isn't that there are (and have been) a lot of people who just can't cope for whatever reason with being embodied and who are prepared to believe in any old crap that allows them to disembody themselves

I kind of agree with above post about the abandonment of shared norms and where that leaves people. In respect of religion the biblical phrase used would be "each man does what is right in his own eyes" and this leads to chaos and destruction.
There is an element of truth in that but doesn't have to be. Having had experience of an unpleasant religious group I have come to conclusion that we have to take responsibility and embrace our freedoms not reject them because we can't deal with the aggro. That does not mean everyone doing their own thing. On the contrary it means behaving with maturity and consideration of others while trying to work our way through the myriad of moral choices that modern life throws up. It is not relinquishing our morals, it is taking possession of the freedoms that humanity has gained and trying to find solutions in common.
I'm not a fool - people do shit stuff. What I know is that as a woman I would rather live now (when we are apparently descending into moral chaos) than any other time in history. As far as I can tell things are better than they ever have been and we are doing fine without the dogmas. I haven't died in childbirth, my daughters can go to school, I have a bank account, mortgage , contraception, I am not subject to male violence without recourse. I could go on and on.
These are troubling times Missymoo, they always are, but we will collectively get to the right place in the end.