Waitrose delivery driver

[MsMoorhead]

Kellie Jay-Keen reported by her Waitrose delivery driver!

I’m expecting the next move to be a claim that they’ve got a very simple proof that doesn’t fit in the margins they did in fact describe gender identity clearly and coherently several pages ago and they aren’t going to copy and paste it for the benefit of lazy people who can’t be bothered to read the thread properly.

Can you point me to some videos etc that might change my mind?

I do not recommend asking this unless you are exceptionally patient! They’ll point you to some longwinded idiot rambling on for sixteen hours.

Whereas KJ is very very clear
"I just don't think they're women"

(I never get tired of that one!)

Saving Discover the effort...

Just a point about Waitrose delivery drivers although I appreciate the thread has moved on - I've been using crutches or sticks around the house for months now, and if my husband hasn't been around every single delivery person has brought all the crates into the kitchen for me. Some have helped unload them too.

Not far off. First for the poster eagerly checking in for a “promised” explanation of gender identity, there was no promise or statement of intent to do so from me. Sorry to disappoint, but I’m not falling for the faux innocence “oh I just don’t know what gender identity is, please tell me”. You all know what it is. So quite simply, no I’m not going to copy and paste the terabytes of information regarding gender identity.

So..... no coherent or stable definition then.

It remains amorphous and indescribable.

The definition you say you seek is coherent, stable, and easily accessible to you.

You do realise the pointlessness of "debating" with people who have spent a lot of time thinking about an issue, if you are unwilling to address their points or answer questions.

If you were in a room with a bunch of vulnerable young teens you could just spout TWAW, be nice and half of them would lap it up. But here that approach is not going to work.

What is the point in posting on this thread if you are unwilling to actually try to say things that might change people's minds? I am not out hunting for those who dwell sub-bridge, but you are close to 'fessing up if you can't be bothered to even try to answer questions.

Look up playing chess with a pigeon. We've got a fine example right here. Beautifully played, Mon ami.

If it requires 'terabytes of information', how does anyone explain it to primary school children?

Well, as I said from the start. I’m a trans ally not interested in debating trans rights. I’m also not a TRA.

I came into the thread to discuss the matter at hand- the incident of KJK and her waitrose delivery. That’s it.

You can’t force me to participate in derailing the thread to debate gender identity or other trans rights issue.

This thread has been a live demonstration on the tactics that we see discussed.

Of course, there will be thousands of readers on this thread because it will appear in searches about KJK. Those readers will note this this move, they probably would have anticipated it.

@Helleofabore
Absolutely correct. Readers will identify the “what aboutery” attempt to derail the thread into discussing the definition of gender identity and hopefully learn from this thread that the best way to deal with “what aboutery” is to not rise to the bait. 😉

Sorry to disappoint, but I’m not falling for the faux innocence “oh I just don’t know what gender identity is, please tell me”. You all know what it is. So quite simply, no I’m not going to copy and paste the terabytes of information regarding gender identity.

1. 🤣
2. if it takes terabytes of information to explain, why do you think we all know what it is?
3. it’s like God, isn’t it? No one can explain it, no one can prove it’s real, no one can define it in a simple or logical way, but there have been terabytes written about it and “everyone knows what it is.”
4. well, I say “it’s like God” but with the caveat that genderism is much, much, stupider than any mainstream religion.

[This post is my long-winded attempt to get to the truth by reference to online definitions, only I seem to have got to the same answer that a very cynical and simplistic analysis would have got me to].

Some example definitions of gender identity - "an individual's personal sense of having a particular gender."

"Gender identity is a way to describe how someone feels about their gender. For example, some people may identify as a boy or a girl, while others may find neither of these terms feel right for them, and identify as neither or somewhere in the middle."

"One's innermost concept of self as male, female, a blend of both or neither – how individuals perceive themselves and what they call themselves. One's gender identity can be the same or different from their sex assigned at birth."

And a definition of gender - "Gender is the range of characteristics pertaining to femininity and masculinity and is about social and cultural differences rather than biological ones."

So a gender identity is an individual's personal sense of having a particular set of characteristics that are nothing to do with the biological body, but do have something to do with society's expectations of different biological bodies or on a social or cultural level. Society's expectations based on someone's sexed body are by definition based on generalisations and stereotypes.

So, a gender identity is by definition an individuals personal sense of having a particular set of characteristics that accord with gender stereotypes (or do not accord with gender stereotypes in the case of the most special of all the trans people - the enbys).

If we forget about NBs and other neo-genders and pretend that all trans people are TM or TW, then a gender identity is by definition an individuals personal sense of having a particular set of characteristics that accord with gender stereotypes that are normally associated with the opposite sex.

Now, obviously, nothing in the real world should be based on "an individuals personal sense of..." anything, it should be based on truth and compassion and fairness and reason and things like that.

If we completely eliminate an individuals personal sense of how they accord with sex-based stereotypes, then we have to abandon gender identity as way of organising society. Which leaves the trans community with gender expression or nothing. Access to women's toilets comes down to whether you're wearing a dress or not?

Haha, you're all so full of your own self-importance.

The people coming here from outside of the echo chamber are only here shits, giggles and screenshots.

On the contrary.

However, if believing that makes you feel good, please go ahead.

Considering the repetitive nature of the posts supporting the more extreme demands of the trans lobby groups, I do laugh whenever I see the term 'echo chamber' used in this way. 'shits & giggles' for sure.

The definition of gender identity is 'coherent, stable and accessible', and yet, simultaneously involves 'countless articles and entire books written by scientists, philosophers, journalists' and 'terabytes of information' to do it justice.

And, of course, as PurgatoryOfPotholes points out, it's quite capable of being taught to primary school children.

it would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous.

Exactly. It's a yearning to inhabit the stereotypes that society imposes on the opposite sex.

Even to the point of fetishising women's sexual objectification.

Hence the awful, albeit honest, quotes of people like Grace Lavery, Julia Serano, etc.

Gender identity ideology is a religion and as such, I reject it completely. I don't share your faith, therefore I'm under no obligation to observe any of the tenets, rules, dogma or instructions given.

Or, in simpler terms for those who find that complex - no.

Just caught up with this thread. Someone forgot: google exists.😂

Textbook.

Hence the awful, albeit honest, quotes of people like Grace Lavery, Julia Serano, etc.

Am I correct in thinking that Grace Lavery gave us the Venus Rising From the Hot Tub account of Grace's personal transformation into womanhood?