Fired - for stating that women don't have penises

[jimnyc]

Yup, wouldn't want people to ever think that the ladies can't get one for themselves! That would be racist! Or sexist? Or maybe homophobic? Who knows, but it's something wrong if you don't accept it! Yeah, right, and Bruce is actually "Caitlyn" and he's not a "man".

I don't know what's worse, the thought of the future of some countries, and America, as islam is growing and making things worse wherever the disease spreads too. Or that someday we will be a very weak country and a 3rd world shithole full of all kinds of hippie, gay loving, white man hating society of sorts. I am truly worried for the future of our great country. :(

---

Editor of Philosophy Journal Fired for Saying Women Don't Have Penises

Not even atheist humanists are safe from the long, punishing arms of the transgender mafia. Recently, Angelos Sofocleous was fired from his job at Durham University's philosophy journal Critique for retweeting a tweet that fellow students called "transphobic." The tweet in question included a link to an article from the Spectator called "Is it a crime to say 'women don't have penises'?" The article is about women's activists who had police called on them for placing stickers saying as much around their city in protest of men usurping women's rights.

In a typical 2018 overreaction, Sofocleous's retweet of that article caused great gnashing of teeth and loud weeping in the outrage corners of the internet. As a result, Sofocleous was dismissed from his position at the Durham publication and forced to resign as president-elect of the Humanist Students group. "Humanists," Sofocleous told PJM, "strive to have a rational and logical approach in life, and face issues with evidence and claims, not with belief and faith. As such, humanists have trust in the scientific method, which they believe to be the only source of truth in the world."

Strangely, the extremely scientific fact that women do not have — and have never had — penises didn't seem to sway the humanist students toward rational thought. They kicked Sofocleous right out of their sphere. Criticisms of Sofocleous were swift and mostly unintelligible. Responding to Sofocleous's true statement that engaging in debate does not mean your opponent has equal moral status, a writer at the ironically named "Freethoughtblogs" wrote:


This is where the fetishizing of free speech and debate goes bad. I get to deny your basic humanity and your right to exist, and you now need to convince me otherwise. I get to freely make assertions that don’t challenge my privileged status but do potentially do great harm to you, and I have no responsibility or obligation to others — others who may even consider those statements “wrong beyond doubt” — to make defensible statements, and the onus is entirely on you to address them, and if you don’t, you are an intolerant tribalist. Why do you get so angry when I merely want to deny your civil rights, or enslave you, or kill you? That’s not very logical.

Rest - https://pjmedia.com/trending/editor-of-humanist-journal-fired-for-saying-women-dont-have-penises/

[Abbey Marie]

I just peeked- still no penis!


:bsmeter:

[FakeNewsSux]

I just peeked- still no penis!


:bsmeter:

Not so fast Abbey. I identify as a black lesbian a work and last time I looked, I don't need an addadicktome.

[Abbey Marie]

Not so fast Abbey. I identify as a black lesbian a work and last time I looked, I don't need an addadicktome.

I’m sorry, FNS! I had no idea!

:coffee:

[FakeNewsSux]

I’m sorry, FNS! I had no idea!

:coffee:

Next time you might want to check your white privilege! :laugh2:

[Abbey Marie]

Next time you might want to check your white privilege! :laugh2:

Yes, lots of privilege in the Bronx housing projects where I grew up!

:coffee:

[Noir]

My understanding of the position presented by Angelos Sofocleous was that ‘women don’t have penises’ is incoherent because it makes base assumptions about sex and gender, that are in and of themselves unhelpful and illiberal.

I do not think that would be the consensus of the majority of posters here, but that’s kinda lost in the whirl of the story.

[jimnyc]

My understanding of the position presented by Angelos Sofocleous was that ‘women don’t have penises’ is incoherent because it makes base assumptions about sex and gender, that are in and of themselves unhelpful and illiberal.

I do not think that would be the consensus of the majority of posters here, but that’s kinda lost in the whirl of the story.

Women by nature are born without penises. A woman CANNOT have a penis without altering ones self for whatever confusing reason. There's certainly not assumption when it comes to stating that women don't have penises, as that's no assumption, that's a fact. Now, I'm more than certain that the LBGT group or similar, will see it as unhelpful, as it doesn't agree with them. But it hardly changes the fact. Whatever floats their boat if they want one, and even get one. I think it's nutso, but if that's their cup of tea, go for it and don't look back!

[Noir]

A woman CANNOT have a penis without altering ones self for whatever confusing reason.

So if a woman without a penis has surgery to get a penis, is she then a woman with a penis or not?

[jimnyc]

So if a woman without a penis has surgery to get a penis, is she then a woman with a penis or not?

A woman that has a penis attached via surgery, is now a woman that has altered herself to be just like a man. She can continue with all the male drugs and what not to make further changes, including to the voice and what not. But she is still a woman, that has had surgery to be like a man.

I see your point now, that it would then therefore be a woman, with a penis. Just not as one would think at first glance. I'm confident that folks are more so thinking that a woman can have a sex change, get a penis, and perhaps then be a "man"? I wouldn't understand the point of getting a penis to still stay the same sex, but nothing would surprise me anymore these days!

Unnecessary confusing, but IMO not because of anyone writing, but rather because of the folks themselves, how people want to be seen/known/called... it gets a little tricky and confusing. Bad enough with the pronouns and addressing someone who has had a sex change, differently. But a woman, with a penis. Dunno, I guess you still address her as a woman? A penis without the desire to change sex, even more so then would sound like some sort of perversion if you ask me.

Anyway, all sounds like a play on words as opposed to reality.

[Noir]

Anyway, all sounds like a play on words as opposed to reality.

It’s really not though - do you personally know anyone who is transsexual?

[jimnyc]

It’s really not though - do you personally know anyone who is transsexual?

I wrote all that, you cut it all out and reply with one sentence? Kinda actually shows my point actually....

If someone is a transexual.... first off, they would usually identify with a gender, and then dress and do everything else accordingly. That doesn't matter though.... fact is, even a transexual, would still be 'literally' the sex they were born with. Anything else beyond that is "change", but they still are the sex they were born with.

Born with a penis - you are a man.
Born with a vagina - you are a woman.

[FakeNewsSux]

It’s really not though - do you personally know anyone who is transsexual?

I personally know six transsexuals that also happen to be coworkers. My employer receives generous tax credits and invaluable social justice cred that protects them from lawsuits. One night, a couple of years back, I approached a black lesbian coworker and expressed my confusion over my feelings toward our coworker "Adam", a transsexual. I told her that I didn't know the appropriate attitude toward "Adam". I wondered if I should be impressed that 'he" was bold enough to mutilate "his" body in order to correct God's mistake or should I indite "him" for succumbing to societal hetero normative orthodoxy and deny "his" true lesbian nature and become a "man". I also asked her if "his" lesbian partner was no longer a member of the LGBT community since she was now technically in a heterosexual relationship and if it was fair for "Adam" to make this decision for her. My lesbian coworker, a devout Baptist, started started screaming, "God doesn't make mistakes!" over and over again.

I also thoroughly understand the gender fluidity game. For personal advantage, I self identify as a black lesbian at work. In all grievances filed by me, in response to any disciplinary action taken against me, I point out to the knuckle dragging, racist, misogynist pigs that they better check their attitude or I will have to take action with the NLRB to address their intolerable work environment. Management has given up on taking disciplinary actions against me. My plan has worked like a charm. No longer do I have to wear the scarlet letter of 'old white guy'. Live by the social justice hammer, get smashed by the social justice hammer.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

My understanding of the position presented by Angelos Sofocleous was that ‘women don’t have penises’ is incoherent because it makes base assumptions about sex and gender, that are in and of themselves unhelpful and illiberal.

I do not think that would be the consensus of the majority of posters here, but that’s kinda lost in the whirl of the story.

Are you a male or female?

I tell ya what... if you're confused, look between your legs.

[Elessar]

This is all silly.

Unless some medical doctor, or physiologist PHD can refute me, all the operations and
drugs cannot alter two things in a mammal, human or otherwise:

DNA! You have that for life and it cannot be altered;
X and Y Chromosomes...born with them, cannot change them!

[Abbey Marie]

So if a woman without a penis has surgery to get a penis, is she then a woman with a penis or not?

Depends on your definition of penis, I suppose.

Real, double X chromosome women, don’t have penises.
Surgically altered/mutilated women might have what looks like a penis attached to their (female) bodies.

Faux appendages, like Snap- On Tools, are kind of like a permanent Halloween costume.

If I put on “black face”, am I a black woman, or just a woman wearing black makeup?

[jimnyc]

Depends on your definition of penis, I suppose.

Real, double X chromosome women, don’t have penises.
Surgicallyaltered/mutilatedwomen might have what looks like a penis attached to their (female) bodies.

Faux appendages, like Snap- On Tools, are kind of like a permanent Halloween costume.

If I put on “black face”, am I a black woman, or just a woman wearing black makeup?

Yup, there are a few out there that SWEAR that they are black - and they talk and act black and all that - but are as white as the background on this editor page! So since they "identify" as black, are they in fact now black? Also had similar with that Dolezal woman or whatever her name was, doing her hair up, and getting darker and darker tans, and swore she identified as black. Is she truly black, just because she says she is?

And then I saw someone who identifies as a child, and then dresses and acts like a baby, and gets help and treatment as if a baby. Is this really a baby?

The point is, a ton of folks out there identify as "other" than they are. And many make dramatic changes of sort to be other than they are. But HAVE they changed or are they different than what their DNA states?

No. The only common denominator is that there are some seriously confused and weird people on this earth. Women are women, men are men, black people are born black and ARE black, and white folks are born with all they have. These things are all identifiable and all easily checked via dna markers and such.

And whatever, whatever floats their boats, I suppose. Ain't harming me, I hope, other than my eyeballs and a small corner of my brain. But I do think that things need to be looked at realistically, and society shouldn't go down a hole where 50+ genders appear out of nowhere and society is "forced" to acknowledge and do crap to "accommodate" their disability or whatever you want to call it.

[Noir]

Faux appendages, like Snap- On Tools, are kind of like a permanent Halloween costume.


I’ve never heard it described like that - do you think the same of all cosmetic surgery, or just when it involves sex organs?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I’ve never heard it described like that - do you think the same of all cosmetic surgery, or just when it involves sex organs?

Noir, I identify as Superman. So If I get the costume, wear it and walk around acting that way , am I Superman?
Or am I just another nut acting out my fantasies? Do I get to lift cars over my head, fly or see through walls?
Come on now, answer truthfully --if you know how to do that.
By the way, I'd not chose to be Superman, I'd chose Robin Hood, at least I am very , very good at traditional ARCHERY.--:laugh:
Just because reality is oft a bitch doesnt mean one should play silly fantasy crap out in real life and then demand that other people go along with it.
Yet dem party ans liberals do that, demand that and - ARE JUST LIKE DAMN NAZI'S ABOUT IT... -Tyr

[Noir]

I personally know six transsexuals that also happen to be coworkers. My employer receives generous tax credits and invaluable social justice cred that protects them from lawsuits. One night, a couple of years back, I approached a black lesbian coworker and expressed my confusion over my feelings toward our coworker "Adam", a transsexual. I told her that I didn't know the appropriate attitude toward "Adam". I wondered if I should be impressed that 'he" was bold enough to mutilate "his" body in order to correct God's mistake or should I indite "him" for succumbing to societal hetero normative orthodoxy and deny "his" true lesbian nature and become a "man". I also asked her if "his" lesbian partner was no longer a member of the LGBT community since she was now technically in a heterosexual relationship and if it was fair for "Adam" to make this decision for her. My lesbian coworker, a devout Baptist, started started screaming, "God doesn't make mistakes!" over and over again.

Some interesting questions that are worth exploring - if for nothing more than an understanding of a relationship that would otherwise be alien to you.

It’s a shame the other person involved just picked up on the god thing and ran with that - unless she was just uncomfortable with the convo and saw that as the most polite way out.

[jimnyc]

I’ve never heard it described like that - do you think the same of all cosmetic surgery, or just when it involves sex organs?

Why is it, that instantly when someone makes a comment like Abbey did, that it always automatically means that they 'think something else' as well?

Well, if you say that, then you must obviously mean this as well, and that. I don't get it. It's nothing more than trying to stretch what folks state into more, to distort it in any way possible. Why not address and discuss the actual things done and said, instead of always made up stretched comparisons?

With that said, in MY opinion, yes ALL cosmetic surgery is in fact like putting fake things on for life - as that IS what you're doing. Whether it be a woman, putting on an appendage, and then thinking that the DNA changed somehow. :rolleyes: Or someone with fake boobs. Different but the same. But really shouldn't be tied together. Once someone tries with the "well, if you mean this, then you must mean this as well' - is only looking for off ended ways to dispute what the person said instead of attacking it directly head on.

[FakeNewsSux]

Some interesting questions that are worth exploring - if for nothing more than an understanding of a relationship that would otherwise be alien to you.

It’s a shame the other person involved just picked up on the god thing and ran with that - unless she was just uncomfortable with the convo and saw that as the most polite way out.

Considering the percentage of actual transsexuals in our society, I believe that I work with something like 1000% more than the average, so I don't believe that these relationships are alien to me. In fact, I feel that I've had more of a day to day relationship with trans folks than 99% of the rest of the population. Sadly, its been my experience that most of the trans folks that I have encountered haven't dealt with the questions such as the ones I posed. It seems that ones that I have had contact with don't appear to be at peace with their decision. The personal problems that they thought they would address with the change didn't go away, now they just have to be dealt with from a different perspective. Instead of actually getting the psychological help they need, it looks like they fell victim to activists with a political agenda in exchange for temporary encouragement and support.

I always wondered about the automatic, unquestioning alliances between groups of sexual deviants (and I don't mean this as a pejorative, simply that they deviate from the social norm). How strong a bond do these individual actors in the LGBTQ etc. groups have since the only thing they have in common is their rejection of societal norms. I agree that the lesbian coworker punted on her response but I feel that her response spoke volumes. Her fellow travelers have ingrained in her the forced solidarity with the trans community even though it is a rejection of her lesbian nature. It's easy to be in full throated support of sexual diversity when it validates ones victimhood or portrays one as a social justice warrior speaking truth to power. It's quite another thing to place undue social pressure on vulnerable, confused folks to recruit them into the cause rather than direct them to get the help they need.

[jimnyc]

Some interesting questions that are worth exploring - if for nothing more than an understanding of a relationship that would otherwise be alien to you.

Seriously, Noir, with respect - you aren't LBTGQ or having appendages, or are a transexual - are you? Then if not, your knowledge and understanding on the subject is no better or worse. Just because you agree on something some of us disagree about, doesn't mean you are more knowledgeable about it, but it also could.

I don't have to be mean to someone I see as such, but that also doesn't mean I need to be understanding or accepting.

[Noir]

Why is it, that instantly when someone makes a comment like Abbey did, that it always automatically means that they 'think something else' as well?

I literally said “do you think” not “then you also think” - asking someone what they think and telling them what they think are not nearly the same.

[Noir]

Seriously, Noir, with respect - you aren't LBTGQ or having appendages, or are a transexual - are you? Then if not, your knowledge and understanding on the subject is no better or worse. Just because you agree on something some of us disagree about, doesn't mean you are more knowledgeable about it, but it also could.

Don’t get where you are going with this as it kinda concludes in a tautology of ‘You’re not more knowledgable, unless you are.’ ?


I don't have to be mean to someone I see as such, but that also doesn't mean I need to be understanding or accepting.

I think most people would take ‘they weren’t mean to me’ as a good first base to aim for.

[jimnyc]

I literally said “do you think” not “then you also think” - asking someone what they think and telling them what they think are not nearly the same.

Agreed, but when someone continually tries to pull in comparisons when another person makes a statement/opinion, I often see it as them trying to put words in anothers mouth indirectly, trying to make it sound like they may have meant something else.

I agree that's not exactly how you did it, but I very often still don't see the need to bring in outside things and not really address the meat of the discussion or what someone actually said.

MY opinion, ya disagree, just ignore and move on, my bad for disrupting then.

[jimnyc]

Don’t get where you are going with this as it kinda concludes in a tautology of ‘You’re not more knowledgable, unless you are.’ ?



I think most people would take ‘they weren’t mean to me’ as a good first base to aim for.

No, stick to exactly what I said, instead of again moving forward. My point is - that unless you are a woman that has attached a penis to herself, your opinion or knowledge here on the subject is no more different or valuable than anyone else here. Just as mine ain't worth a nickel more than yours!

[Noir]

No, stick to exactly what I said, instead of again moving forward. My point is - that unless you are a woman that has attached a penis to herself, your opinion or knowledge here on the subject is no more different or valuable than anyone else here. Just as mine ain't worth a nickel more than yours!

Sure, that seems fairly reasonable - though it is a strange variant of ‘appeal to authority’ which should at least be approached with caution.

[Noir]

Agreed, but when someone continually tries to pull in comparisons when another person makes a statement/opinion, I often see it as them trying to put words in anothers mouth indirectly, trying to make it sound like they may have meant something else.

I agree that's not exactly how you did it, but I very often still don't see the need to bring in outside things and not really address the meat of the discussion or what someone actually said.

MY opinion, ya disagree, just ignore and move on, my bad for disrupting then.

In your opinion how should I of worded the question I was trying to ask?

[jimnyc]

In your opinion how should I of worded the question I was trying to ask?

Perhaps I should have not just butted in. There's no rule or anything here, was just raising my brows with the questions was all. So ya don't need to answer any of my crap.

At any rate, I just didn't see the need for additional questioning, questioning that brought in things not necessary. If someone offers an opinion on an attached penis, I just didn't see the point in extending it and seeing how they feel about other attachments, and ones that really aren't out of the norm as much as attaching a penis. If she says yes about attaching a fake finger, or arm, or foot - or a breast increase or any "typical" cosmetic surgery for that fact. I don't see the need to compare a penis attachment to things that may be more "normal" - which of course would then lead to "why is it ok for this for some and not ok for this for others" type of questioning. IN MY OPINION. So that's why I always question when things go 'off topic' with questioning like that, which TO ME always sounds like questions that are in some manner placing words or opinions in the others mouth.

[jimnyc]

In your opinion how should I of worded the question I was trying to ask?

Alternatively, you also could have said "Fuck off, Jim, I was asking Abbey a question, not you, so mind your own". No banning or even thread ban, you would have been spot on to an extent! :beer:

[Abbey Marie]

I’ve never heard it described like that - do you think the same of all cosmetic surgery, or just when it involves sex organs?

Which other plastic surgeries involve both attaching a faux appendage, and trying to change someone’s species or gender?
I can reply if you give an example or two.

[Abbey Marie]

Seriously, Noir, with respect - you aren't LBTGQ or having appendages, or are a transexual - are you? Then if not, your knowledge and understanding on the subject is no better or worse. Just because you agree on something some of us disagree about, doesn't mean you are more knowledgeable about it, but it also could.

I don't have to be mean to someone I see as such, but that also doesn't mean I need to be understanding or accepting.


You mean you didn’t know that Noir is smarter than the rest of us? We always need to be schooled for our intellectually-shallow opinions.

:coffee:

[jimnyc]

You mean you didn’t know that Noir is smarter than the rest of us? We always need to be schooled for our intellectually-shallow opinions.

:coffee:

I'll say this much about him: For a younger guy, from another country, I do think he's a pretty smart cookie. Certainly a lot smarter than our average liberals here in America. My primary issues with Noir are obviously a lot of his political stances, and sometimes in the manner of how he replies. I think he often likes to question and analyze things, even if I totally disagree with the direction in which he tends to go to. But I much more enjoy debating things with someone who keeps going like that, or questions things, as opposed to non-stop one liners or lack of getting into the actual topics at all - in other words, sometimes others prefer nonstop sarcasm and very little to no discussion about facts and such.

But yeah, sometimes he comes here while eating his Irish cereal and likes to school us Americans about America. Or perhaps it's some shepherd's pies because it's dinner time? I have no clue what the time differences are! LOL :coffee:

[Noir]

Which other plastic surgeries involve both attaching a faux appendage, and trying to change someone’s species or gender?
I can reply if you give an example or two.

Adding or removing a sex organ has absolutely nothing to do with someone’s species 0,o

Regardless - sticking with an example as close to each other as possible - if two people where having cosmetic surgery to attach a penis, one had xx chromosomes and the other xy chromosomes, would you consider that differently?

(If the chromosomes are not your differentiator then what is?)

[jimnyc]

Fwiw, thinking about this odd stuff, I think ANYONE having a penis attached to themselves, is just fuc^%ng odd, weird and a little nutso. UNLESS that person is a male, and perhaps had some form of accident and is having his own reattached or one placed on themselves to function properly.

[Abbey Marie]

Adding or removing a sex organ has absolutely nothing to do with someone’s species 0,o

Regardless - sticking with an example as close to each other as possible - if two people where having cosmetic surgery to attach a penis, one had xx chromosomes and the other xy chromosomes, would you consider that differently?

(If the chromosomes are not your differentiator then what is?)

So, to be clear, you have no examples as I requested? Then you should just honestly admit that you don’t, instead of deflecting.

I’ll not go down the new rabbit hole with you. I can’t believe I even need to state something so obvious, but, barring some weird accident, the person with the xy would already have a penis.

I added species because we were talking about Halloween costumes.

And now, I’m done with the games. Nighty night.

[FakeNewsSux]

So, to be clear, you have no examples as I requested? Then you should just honestly admit that you don’t, instead of deflecting.

I’ll not go down the new rabbit hole with you. I can’t believe I even need to state something so obvious, but, barring some weird accident, the person with the xy would already have a penis.

I added species because we were talking about Halloween costumes.

And now, I’m done with the games. Nightly night.

Oh, you were talking about Halloween costumes! I thought you were talking about some type of 'two headed monster' created by attaching one to an xy person.
:laugh:

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Fwiw, thinking about this odd stuff, I think ANYONE having a penis attached to themselves, is just fuc^%ng odd, weird and a little nutso. UNLESS that person is a male, and perhaps had some form of accident and is having his own reattached or one placed on themselves to function properly.
Not even going to bother searching this, but from what I recall hearing/reading/something... they pull a woman's vagina inside out to create a penis, and just the opposite for a man.

It's sick, demented, just grotesque in my opinion.

[SassyLady]

I just peeked- still no penis!


:bsmeter:

Me either! And, I'm perfectly happy with that fact!

[aboutime]

But doesn't such a statement sound like a Complaint from a Gay man?????:laugh::laugh:

Or..maybe a Disappointed View???:laugh::laugh::laugh: