Open mike 08/04/2023

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, April 8th, 2023 - 191 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

191 comments on “Open mike 08/04/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

    • Robert Guyton 1.1
      8 April 2023 at 8:40 am

      "It’s a deceptively complicated question: What is a..?"

      [Hi Robert, as per my earlier comment, you’re in premod until you respond to these two mod requests. This means your comments won’t appear on site until then.

      .https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-04-04-2023/#comment-1944127
      .https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-04-04-2023/#comment-1944129

      Hoping we can sort this out promptly and then things can go back to normal. Thanks – weka]

      [2 week ban for ignoring moderation – weka]

      • weka 1.1.1
        8 April 2023 at 9:39 am

        mod note above for you Robert.

      • Anne 1.1.2
        8 April 2023 at 10:35 am

        @ Robert:

        Assuming the question in question is the question "what is a woman".

        Well, our cave ancestors all those millenia ago managed to figure it out, so I don't understand why some in modern day civilisation are have so much trouble. 😉

        • Shanreagh 1.1.2.1
          8 April 2023 at 10:46 am

          yes Anne…….best answer for ages. smiley smiley

          And we like to think we have moved on from those days…..

          • Anne 1.1.2.1.1
            8 April 2023 at 11:43 am

            Yes it was tongue in cheek Shanreagh. Glad you picked up on it and replied in kind. 🙂

            We are never going to fully agree on this issue. Our viewpoints are often a result of past experiences, and I did have a very unusual experience which perhaps has coloured my personal view.

        • RedLogix 1.1.2.2
          8 April 2023 at 12:49 pm

          Considering what a dangerous world they lived in, our deep ancestors had to have been a lot smarter and tougher than we give them credit for.

          I reckon if most of us moderns were popped back a millennia or so in some magical time machine, we likely wouldn't last 10 minutes.

        • Visubversa 1.1.2.3
          8 April 2023 at 12:59 pm

          They have always known what a woman was. They knew when they refused us any legal rights. They knew when they demanded access to our bodies for sex and used force if we declined. They knew when they paid us less, fired us for getting engaged or married, and would not let us do certain jobs. Up to about 5 years ago, they knew.

          Now, they just pretend they don't.

          They pretend they don't know for 2 reasons.

          The first is that it suits them to pretend they don't know. They resented our attempts to be our own people, to have our own rights and protections. They resented our rights to say "no". Many of them are very happy to employ that old male enforcement – violence and the threat of violence – especially sexual violence. They really want us to know that they are violent – so they write it on their placards. "TERFS can suck my big Trans cock".

          The second is that it is convenient to not know. And it is fashionable. A lot of $$$$ has gone in to making sure that people have all the excuses in the world to not know. They have been told that it is about Gay rights, about human rights, that it is about a vulnerable and oppressed minority.

          The question is also an indication of your fealty or otherwise to the ideology. Putting your pronouns on your email signature, calling people "cis" , wearing a button or a lanyard is just as much a statement of belief as wearing a crucifix or similar.

          The answer is going to annoy one group or another.

          If the answer is the dictionary definition "Adult, Human Female", the wrath of the Transcult will descend on you.

          If the answer is "anyone who says they are", which is the correct ideological statement, about 90% of the population will say "what"?

          Your answer shows which group you favour.

        • Sabine 1.1.2.4
          8 April 2023 at 1:14 pm

          that is what we all thought when Chippie said " That is an unexpected question from the left field and i don't have a 'preformulated answer' for it.

        • Incognito 1.1.2.5
          8 April 2023 at 4:28 pm

          Imagine the confusion when the Titanic went down and it was women & children first to the lifeboats but nobody could answer that quintessential existential life-saving question cheeky

          • weka 1.1.2.5.1
            8 April 2023 at 4:30 pm

            Apparently Luxon now can (almost).

            https://twitter.com/aniobrien/status/1644492576224055296

            • Charlotte Rust 1.1.2.5.1.1
              8 April 2023 at 5:33 pm

              Luxon has had the luxury of seeing Chippy stumble and his pr have been able to formulate a soundbyte for him. There is no way if blindsided he could’ve given a coherent answer.

              • hetzer …
                8 April 2023 at 5:39 pm

                Nevertheless a clear and simple response and position to a very simple question.

                • Charlotte Rust …
                  8 April 2023 at 7:27 pm

                  Yes and what surprises me about Hipkins is that given the PP rally and media interest that one of his team had not already flagged that this could be something that could be asked at anytime by media and front footed it. I think Ardern would have had a succinct reply in reserve.

                  • weka …
                    9 April 2023 at 8:42 am

                    I'm guessing its a function of No Debate. If you believe that GI is virtuous and GC is right wing bigotry, then you will be listening to NZ's version of Stonewall instead of feminists who have been pointing and saying 'look, there's a political shitstorm for the left in the UK around women's sex based rights'.

                    Even with Sturgeon the mainstream progressive narrative was burnout, misogynistic abuse, and maybe her husband's financial mess. Whereas to anyone paying actual attention past No Debate, that Sturgeon interview where she said the rapist was a TW but wouldn't say if he was a woman was a masterclass is how to fuck one's career and political party.

                • Incognito …
                  8 April 2023 at 8:38 pm

                  Luxon’s a useful parrot, for now.

              • weka …
                8 April 2023 at 5:49 pm

                I agree. And yet this has been playing out in the UK for a long time, so why weren't Labour prepared? It's almost like they don't know there is a gender/sex war going on and have bought into the idea that GC pol is based in bigotry and doesn't have any coherent politics or arguments. I hope Hipkins' PR and prep people got a talking to.

            • Incognito 1.1.2.5.1.2
              8 April 2023 at 7:49 pm

              Exam cheating

          • Anne 1.1.2.5.2
            9 April 2023 at 6:41 pm

            laugh

      • weka 1.1.3
        8 April 2023 at 11:16 am

        Hi Robert, I've read your note in the back end and won't publish as requested.

        One of the problems here is that both sides are not taking notice of moderation. I've been cutting you, Shanreagh, Molly etc slack, hoping you would sort it out. I can see that neither side is willing, so will be moderating sooner from now on across the board. This is election year and the only way this site can have a functional commentariat is if moderation is respected. The entrenched conflict in the past few weeks is not unusual here, I've seen it many times before. If commenters don't work within the boundaries of the site there is no way to get out of that.

        The bottom line is that commenters cannot ignore moderation. In this case, I've asked you to link to something for evidence, and to clarify your soundbite comment. You've refused, twice, to do so. I don't know why you've refused, but we have moderation for a reason and it's really clear that there are patterns of behaviour on both sides that are causing problems. What I am moderating you for is consistent with moderation across all commenters and over a long period of time. I'm afraid I cannot treat you differently to other commenters in that respect.

        I don't consider that you are trolling, so you are wrong about that. That is yet another example of how communication has broken down. I also object to your characterisation of my position in all this, because you simply haven't had any real conversations with me about my views, values and politics.

        What I do know is that TS works best when people bring their thinking and arguments to the table, and present them in clean ways largely free of abuse. Both sides have been failing on this.

        I will be looking at who ignored my general moderation notes the other day (haven't had time until now), and reminding them. If you decide to come back I'm thinking two things. One is that if you continue to ignore moderation and treat the place as if the rules don't apply to you, then you will most likely get banned again, and eventually a long ban. Two is that if you feel unfairly treated by commenters, then please contact one of the mods and explain what you see the problem is. Without that it's hard to act.

        Incognito is aware of all of this too, I'll leave it to them to comment if they want.

      • weka 1.1.4
        8 April 2023 at 11:28 am

        with my mod hat off, I'm gutted. I feel like I am losing a friend. More than one probably.

        • hetzer 1.1.4.1
          8 April 2023 at 12:45 pm

          In my opinion the tolerance you showed to that contributor seemed endless.

          We are poles apart politically Weka, but I doubt you have lost friends, you certainly have gained my respect in making what I suspect was, for you, a difficult call.

          • RedLogix 1.1.4.1.1
            8 April 2023 at 12:53 pm

            I moderated here for about 10 yrs before giving it away; it is not an easy task, and at moments a total bitch. On this matter I would say weka is speaking total truth.

          • weka 1.1.4.1.2
            8 April 2023 at 12:56 pm

            thanks hetzer, much appreciated.

          • Incognito 1.1.4.1.3
            8 April 2023 at 1:42 pm

            The primary problem was not moderation. Believing this is missing the (main) point. Propagating it is diverting and/or deflecting away from taking ownership and thus of avoiding responsibility, which is ironically typical of the whole debate debacle.

            Any strong relationship can withstand the occasional argument & disagreement. How you work through it, with trust and respect, is something for the two people involved to decide, and IMO is better done off-line.

            • weka 1.1.4.1.3.1
              8 April 2023 at 2:43 pm

              I'm not sure who you mean is not taking responsibility, but from my perspective the primary problem was moderation and disrespect of it, and me (atm, it could be any mod though). Not just with RG either.

              • Incognito …
                8 April 2023 at 3:38 pm

                I disagree! Moderation became an (not the) issue later on when things were already going off the rails badly. It may have been or become the issue for you as Mod, especially once you put on your Mod hat.

                Yes, disrespecting other commenters and Mods in particular has become a bit of an issue across the board. Because of this and because it is Election Year (and because I’m very busy with my paid job) I have shortened my Mod fuse.

                I’ve said this before, just recently in a comment, when one is banned, a contributing factor is often other comments/commenters – bans are almost never ‘single-car accidents’, i.e., entirely self-inflicted. In my opinion, this was a large factor in the repeated dismissal of Robert’s comments and ultimately of his dismissal from this site. Undoubtedly, others won’t see it the same way (at all?) and (completely?) wash their hands off it, which is reflective (and symptomatic) of some of the things that have been and are still being said here since (but also before) the Albert Park event.

                Wading into ‘the debate’ is like walking into a North-Korean minefield playing Russian roulette with a loaded double-barrel shotgun with an inevitable fate (demise) awaiting. For some, despite good intentions …

                • weka …
                  8 April 2023 at 3:45 pm

                  I disagree! Moderation became an (not the) issue later on when things were already going off the rails badly.

                  so what is the issue then?

                  Yes, patterns of behaviour arise in the context of debates that involve other people. But anyone who takes the position that the rules don't apply to them and they can just ignore them, is obviously a problem for maintaining robust debate.

                  There were problems on all sides, but this one today came down to the basics. I can't see how it is tenable to have people here who believe that they can do what they like without regards for the debate norms and moderation.

                  I intervened a number of times before today and both sides appear to have been ignoring that. I let it slide. Won't be doing that again.

                  • Incognito …
                    8 April 2023 at 6:16 pm

                    so what is the issue then?

                    The way I see it things were derailing badly well before you started formally modding and I’ve already said this. That was the primary issue – and it remains unresolved now Robert has been red-carded and sent off the field.

                    Other commenters can be quite persistent too and some have disappeared for good or copped long bans – the ban list is getting longer. The ones that keep trying need to walk a very fine line, which begs the question whether this is the debate people here want and on those terms.

                    Yes, not properly responding to Mod notes justifies a ban, no question about it and I don’t care who it is but I tend to give some people (a little) more credit than others based on track record and history of behaviour. I think you do too. Actually, I do care and find it harder to ban some than others …

                    At that point, and from Robert’s perspective, the outcomes were inevitable.

                    From my perspective, as TS commenter, it is regrettable.

                    • weka …
                      8 April 2023 at 6:21 pm

                      The way I see it things were derailing badly well before you started formally modding and I’ve already said this.

                      Ok. Can you please explain how you see the things that were derailing badly? People were in a right over quite a number of days, which is no unusual for TS. I don't see how that per se is the problem here. Are you saying that it was a failure of moderation in addition to people doing something (as yet unnamed)?

    • Hunter Thompson II 1.2
      8 April 2023 at 11:21 am

      The self-styled "guardians of the land" at work.

      Actions speak louder than words.

  2. Shanreagh 2
    8 April 2023 at 10:45 am

    Here is a link from an article by Luke Malpass from Stuff.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/131700713/this-election-may-be-negative-but-it-wont-be-about-imported-culture-wars

    I have never rated Luke Malpass and the first part of this article reinforces why I do not.

    First of all it is clear that he has talking points:

    'Culture Wars'

    Ever since Plunket asked his questions of the PM this has been framed as a 'culture war' imported from overseas conveniently forgetting that NZ women fought hard against the NO Debate: Self ID concept. SUFW was taken to court by people seeking to have a declaration made that SUFW was a hate group for running a meeting where women could speak about No Debate.

    https://www.franksogilvie.co.nz/news/case-brief-whitmore-v-palmerston-north-city-council

    The framing of the issue as a culture war is to minimise what is happening. It relegates it to an issue not much more important than whether exposure to all sorts of music, singing is good for developing minds….interesting but not seen as important in the 'heavy & weighty' ideas of government or should I provocatively say male politicians and journalists? .

    It's a done deal

    'however, it was effectively put to bed in December 2021 with a law passed that allows for gender self-identification on birth certificates. It will come into effect in 2023.

    The interesting thing about this is that there appears no real appetite among elected officials to get into a culture war on this issue leading into the election'.

    legislation is not static. Just because it is there does not mean

    1 it is good legislation

    2 it deserves to be there forever.

    All parties I think were dealt a very clever snow job in relation to Self ID. It was framed as an equitable and perhaps honourable thing to help a so-called marginalised group. From its earliest appearance this concept has caused concern amongst women

    From at least 2018 in UK there was concerns that led to the billboards

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-45650462

    • Molly 2.1
      8 April 2023 at 10:56 am

      I think it's relevant to add that despite the #NoDebate political and public climate, 6,609 submissions were made in terms of the changes to BDMRR in 2021:

      https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FSpeakUp4WomenNZ%2Fposts%2F1210846262756868&show_text=true&width=500&quot

      Of the 6,609 submissions, 73% are against the changes with just 25% supportive of them!
      The remaining 2% represent duplicated/ supplemental/ unclear submissions.
      Of the 73% of submissions that are against the changes, 20% are either stated to support SUFW or appear to have been created using our submission builder.

      • Shanreagh 2.1.1
        8 April 2023 at 11:09 am

        Very relevant. Thanks Molly.

        Many people saw this issue fitted into the concept of the Emperor having no clothes, not just one little boy.

      • Incognito 2.1.2
        8 April 2023 at 11:11 am

        Numbers on their own are rather meaningless and only useful to bean counters and amateur statisticians with an abacus – not all submissions are equal in the same way as not all comments here on TS are equal when it comes to constructive debate.

        • Molly 2.1.2.1
          8 April 2023 at 11:24 am

          Numbers can be indicative, even if they are not conclusive.

          IIRC, SUFW had more details of their analysis on their Facebook account at the time, but I don't have a Facebook account, so just provided the link and quote I had booked.

          Weight the information as you wish.

          • Incognito 2.1.2.1.1
            8 April 2023 at 11:36 am

            Those numbers are indicative of how emotive the topic-issue is, IMO. They tell us nothing about the content of the submissions other than a most-superficial binary categorisation of “For” vs. “Against”. This might be good enough for some to base conclusions on that can feed into a narrative but it is a mug’s game nonetheless. A unanimous vote in Parliament as the legislative end result has more weight, which does not mean that we have achieved perfection.

            • Molly 2.1.2.1.1.1
              8 April 2023 at 11:48 am

              That's an interpretation, Incognito.

              As I mentioned IIRC SUFW did analyse the submissions further.

              Perhaps someone else will post, if they have access to Facebook, or have bookmarked it.

              SUFW have updated their website, and I can't find it there.

      • Ad 2.1.3
        8 April 2023 at 11:14 am

        And one of the most exhaustively consulted bills in decades.

        And voted 100% in favour across every single Member of Parliament.

        https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/457575/parliament-unanimously-passes-bill-allowing-change-to-birth-certificates

        Reversing a key provision of this law would require at least one party to put up a bill in the next parliament repealing it. There isn't one.

        • Molly 2.1.3.1
          8 April 2023 at 11:19 am

          "Reversing a key provision of this law would require at least one party to put up a bill in the next parliament repealing it. There isn't one."

          I know.

          More's the pity.

          • Belladonna 2.1.3.1.1
            8 April 2023 at 3:09 pm

            Perhaps there's hope… There isn't one yet

            The more this becomes a political issue, which has the potential to gut the vote to political parties, the more their self-interest will encourage them to change.

        • Shanreagh 2.1.3.2
          8 April 2023 at 11:25 am

          As I said Ad

          All parties I think were dealt a very clever snow job in relation to Self ID. It was framed as an equitable and perhaps honourable thing to help a so-called marginalised group. From its earliest appearance this concept has caused concern amongst women

          Are you not prepared to accept that it does cause concern amongst women?

          I think a provision about biological sex such as RT Hon Kemi Badenoche has said she will investigate could go along way. It works from the UK Equality Act

          https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/apr/04/kemi-badenoch-could-rewrite-law-to-allow-trans-exclusion-from-single-sex-spaces

          There is reference to safe spaces in our legislation that was put out as being able to lessen the concern for women. I am not sure it is strong enough to withstand legal challenges from the very wealthy trans lobby.

          • Ad 2.1.3.2.1
            8 April 2023 at 11:30 am

            Do yourself a solid favour Shanreagh and make an appointment with your local MP, or any MP you like, and try and change their mind.

            It’s election year; maybe you’ll find yourself an aspiring Parliamentary Patron Saint of Lost Causes.

            • Shanreagh 2.1.3.2.1.1
              8 April 2023 at 11:33 am

              Uncalled for Ad.

              Reported

              • Ad …
                8 April 2023 at 11:36 am

                If you're commenting about politics you're going to get practical political advice.

                You want the law changed; you know what you have to do.

                • Shanreagh …
                  8 April 2023 at 1:14 pm

                  Ad

                  Your last sentence was not practical advice. It was designed to place me in the echelon of so called 'deluded' women like the ones who will huge amounts of money to the Battersea Dogs Home or Margaret Doucan who donated $10,00s to the Wellington SPCA. All served to me with a snide side of religious stuff …..St Jude.

                  I have been donating to the only organisation that I believe is trying to make a difference and that is Speak Up for Women.

                  https://www.speakupforwomen.nz/

                  Unfortunately to do this I have had to stop the admittedly small donation/s I was making to NZ Labour and NZ Greens. But I am sure you will be able to cover these donations by upping yours so they can both continue on their female exclusionary ways.

                  I have also bought myself T shirts ex PP and one ex Mana Korero Wahine.

                  • Ad …
                    8 April 2023 at 1:19 pm

                    Now you can spend the rest of the weekend feeling both politically homeless and offended.

                    Maybe try Twitter.

                    [stop trolling. I’ve got enough to do already without having to sort out a flame war – weka]

                    • Shanreagh …
                      8 April 2023 at 1:59 pm

                      Labour /Greens won't get my little bit of money.

                      Labour may get my party vote depending on how they shape up with climate change and 3 Waters.

                      I am unsure of the candidate yet. It won't be the Labour one though as our local was one of the shouters outside the SUFW meeting trying to debate the No Debate ideology. ie trying to disrupt the free speech of others.

                      I actually know I won't get much traction here……I've been commenting here on women's issues long enough and this issue in particular to know that. There are a good band of women here who I value and a few open hearted males who are trying to understand the issues and who I also value. I comment mainly to inform this group.

                      I do derive sustenance from and access to some sparkling research from Twitter and blogs from around the world. I have brought some of it here from time to time to move/inform the argument from a left woman's point of view.

                      I also try not to insult or belittle others in the pursuit of my women’s issues.

                    • left for dead …
                      8 April 2023 at 2:14 pm

                      Too be clear,I’m speaking of you ADVantage.
                      Don't no whats wrong with you fellow,do you think your better/smarter than the rest of us. How about less of the ad hominem.

                    • weka …
                      8 April 2023 at 2:46 pm

                      mod note.

        • Anker 2.1.3.3
          8 April 2023 at 12:07 pm

          https://fyi.org.nz/request/14305-the-results-of-the-2020-election-vote-compass-question-on-gender-self-identification?unfold=1

          Yes but as you will see Ad and Incognito the public didn't support this bill. It was introduced by stealth and never campaigned on.

          I think you will find that as more people realize how gender ideology has infiltrated the GReens and the Labour Party, the public service and the msm and start to realize what it is all about, even more people will swing in against self id.

          Despite the massive hit job by the msm, politicians and the Labour Party, people saw with their own eyes what happens when you stand up to tras. Saturday Albert Park a day of great shame. Women there to listen peacefully to other women, threatened, assaulted, spat at and police activity avoiding intervening. Of course the pure trans joy crowd don't realize what a peaking experience this has been for many. People see with their own eyes the sort of authoritarianism that shuts down peaceful protest by women.

          There is a new gender critial group on FB that in a week gannered nearly 2000 women in under a week. SUFW has been deluged with women wanting to join since Posie. If you read the comments in the Daily Blog, a left wing blog, the overwhelming majority are disgusted with gender ideology and what happened in Albert Park. They are saying they won't vote Greens.

          Re an unanious vote in Parliament for the bill. The truth is many who don't agree with gender ideology are too scared to speak up. Politicians know that up till now it was career ending to defy the authoritarian cult of gender.

          • Ad 2.1.3.3.1
            8 April 2023 at 12:13 pm

            Let's accept then that there is no way the law will be changed in this Parliament or the next.

            Let's also accept just for arguments' sake that no political party with MPs, and no current Member of Parliament, wants to change the law either.

            What then is your practical avenue for your voice of concern about women being deprived of human rights here?

            If some great pool of latent fear that New Zealand human rights really is being stripped away, then your legitimate avenue is to take case to the Human Rights Commission.

            Go for it. Make the case and the report will be tabled in Parliament.

            If you see some human activity that needs greater regulation, trust me New Zealand is one of the most law-regulated countries in the world, and you will find a regulator to take a case with.

            Report back on how you get on.

            • Anker 2.1.3.3.1.1
              8 April 2023 at 12:26 pm

              Thanks Ad for the advice. We are strategising all the time on this.

              We have taken a lot of heart from the own goal the tras at Albert Park scored.

              The current Human Rights Commissioner was at Civic Square in Wellington on the 26th with the trans rights activists. After the violence in Albert Park, we were too scared to go to Civic Square, especially after the Wellington Mayor, Tory Whanau, had promised Let Women Speak the same response they got at Albert Park. We did meet to support each other. There we a lot of shocked women, who couldn't believe yet again their voice had been shut down, this time by violence and intimidation.

              Paul Hunt is no friend to us. We will have to wait for the new government in October (I hope) to bring in a commissioner who is concerned with everyone's human rights.

          • You_Fool 2.1.3.3.2
            8 April 2023 at 12:31 pm

            It's comments like this that make me lament the fate of humankind.

            We have a marginalized community being targeted by another marginalized community with no give on either side and both sides high on rhetoric and low on facts.

            Where are the practical examples of a man falsely claiming to be a women to enter a safe space for women where he only was able to because of self-id? The actual women I have talked to are not worried about it because that same male could do that now if they wanted to, with or without a law…

            Surely there could be some actual discussion on this where the Trans community is treated with respect and women feel safe?

            Although I am not convinced any real woman is feeling unsafe because of this law as it seems more and more to be imported outrage manufactured to incite people who should know better… but then i wouldn't actually know… that is just my view from the outside looking in

            Next we will be talking about the trans-agenda in schools and how they are brain washing our kids…

            • Molly 2.1.3.3.2.1
              8 April 2023 at 12:49 pm

              We have a marginalized community being targeted by another marginalized community with no give on either side and both sides high on rhetoric and low on facts.

              So far, so rhetorical. Where are your facts?

              "Where are the practical examples of a man falsely claiming to be a women to enter a safe space for women where he only was able to because of self-id?"

              Convoluted way of saying that any man – if they so wish – can enter a female-only space, so why not break those single-sex boundaries?

              When single-sex provisions are protected by legislation, policy and guidelines, breaching of single-sex boundaries are more noticeable and easily identified. The fact that this kind of argument is accepted as evidence of no harm, has led to the elimination of single-sex provisions in many policies and guidelines.

              "The actual women I have talked to are not worried about it because that same male could do that now if they wanted to, with or without a law…"

              That is not the issue. Your actual women have not considered the wider impacts, although they are right on this to a degree.

              "Surely there could be some actual discussion on this where the Trans community is treated with respect and women feel safe?"

              Women do not have to feel unsafe to say "No." Although it may be a factor for some, it is not the only one.

              Trans community are treated equally to everybody else when they are requested to use the facility provided for their sex-category. That is equality. That is respect.

              "Next we will be talking about the trans-agenda in schools and how they are brain washing our kids…"

              Already concerned.

              Shaneel Lal apparently has been employed as a Youth Advisor for the Ministry of Education for over five years. This may explain the current state of the recent RSE curriculum, and the direction to third party organisations for curriculum resources.

              https://hpe.tki.org.nz/assets/healthpe/pdfs/J000765-MoE-RSE-Where-do-I-go-to-for-2.0-EG.pdf

              • Anker …
                8 April 2023 at 12:54 pm

                Thanks Molly for answering You_fool.

                I would add that it is hard to argue that the trans community is marginalized when they are so embedded in Government depts, msm and education etc etc. That line doesn’t stack up. They have more power and influence than almost any other group. Why do people think Hipkins was so reluctant to give a straight forward answer about what is a women..

                And the police response in Albert Park, seem to indicate that tras are influencing the police

                • You_Fool …
                  8 April 2023 at 1:03 pm

                  See now I know you have no desire to see anything work out… and why I know that this shit is just transphobia and possibly an attempt to get fundamentalist dogma as law… it may be the top of the slippery slope but it is still part of the same hill…

                  Trans need the safe spaces for the same reason women do,because we have a society which had spent hundreds of years allowing SDE men to think they can do what they want with other people's bodies… sure we could spend some time and energy on fixing that but then we couldn't demonize a whole other

                  • Visubversa …
                    8 April 2023 at 1:12 pm

                    One word for you "Fool" – autogynephilia. We are not talking Carmen and Georgina here. We are talking about Gender Ideology. We are talking about men who are sexually aroused by the thought of themselves as women. Mostly straight men. Sexually attracted to women.

                    https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/this-never-happens?s=r&fbclid=IwAR1sWzaCaN5R4HquY3Ikv4C3yhoEWimm9xo8d5tsOr_gYt4eRucFdbpmZzY

                  • weka …
                    8 April 2023 at 1:16 pm

                    SDE?

                    women's sex based rights aren't fundamentalism. But I agree that the war is getting so partisan that some people are now refusing to have any sense of rapprochement. Both sides are doing this. It's the worst political fight I have ever seen.

                  • Molly …
                    8 April 2023 at 1:20 pm

                    "Trans need the safe spaces for the same reason women do,because we have a society which had spent hundreds of years allowing SDE men to think they can do what they want with other people's bodies… sure we could spend some time and energy on fixing that but then we couldn't demonize a whole other"

                    Everyone needs a safe space. Not necessarily for the same reasons.

                    Since you are advocating for facts, could you provide some to answer these initial questions about safety, that I posted in response to a comment made by Kit several days ago:

                    Single-sex provisions are because there are material, practical, privacy, dignity, fairness and safety reasons that returns value to all for such categories.

                    Safety is only one factor for the provision of single-sex spaces but since it is the one you focus on, let's address it:

                    1. Safeguarding is based on risk assessment statistics. That evidence provides the criteria for the best broad stroke categories that will significantly reduce the likelihood of harm for all users. In cases where users are in various states of undress or vulnerable, the provision category that provides the best outcomes is that of sex.

                    2. Therefore, the continuation of the benefit is reliant on maintaining single-sex spaces.

                    3. A compelling argument supported by robust evidence is required before single-sex provisions should be relinquished.

                    4. What kind of evidence should be part of the discussion?

                    a. Are men who identify as women included in current safeguarding statistics? (Yes.)

                    b. Is there evidence that men who identify as women pose a significantly lower risk than any other man? (No, statistically they hold the same risk factor. In fact, in terms of convictions, their risk for sexual offences is higher than men without gender identities)

                    c. Are they are higher degrees of risk if they continue to use the single-sex provision that they belong to? (There has never been any evidence put forward that this is the case, it is often an assumption that other men are unable to cope with a non-conforming male.)

                    d. If they are at higher degree or risk, is it higher than other vulnerable males? (ie. unaccompanied children, males with mobility issues, males impaired by substance abuse, homeless males, males with mental incapacity etc. I can think of many men who are vulnerable in ways that Alex Drummond from Stonewall is not, and they still respect the boundaries of single-sex provision)

                    e. That vulnerability – when it is finally evidenced and defined – still must be of such statistical significance that it outweighs the benefits (in terms of safeguarding only) of division by sex.

                    People within the transgender community are being treated equally to everyone else when they are expected to respect the social contract and boundaries of single-sex provisions.

                    They are not excluded in any way, because they are included with all others of their sex, in those single-sex provisions.

                    "All human beings need to be able to access public bathrooms, and those bathrooms need to be places of safety and security. "

                    Yes. As mentioned provision divided by sex, delivers that to a high degree.

                    Trans people by every measure are at the greatest risk of violence when made to use the wrong bathroom,

                    This is rhetoric unless it is supported by robust and impartially collected statistical data. Have you got any?

                    and are the only group society considers it acceptable to deny the use of these public spaces at all"

                    Not true. They can use the public space of their sex category without impediment.

                    Link to my comment that I've quoted from below:

                    https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-02-04-2023/#comment-1943590

                    • You_Fool …
                      8 April 2023 at 7:56 pm

                      I don't think any of this was a response to me, or was it?

                      in any regard… err… citation needed?

                    • Molly …
                      9 April 2023 at 11:47 am

                      @You_Fool

                      Yes, it was. laugh

                      But during my absence the conversation has moved on somewhat.

                      What citation do you want in regards to my comment, and I'll provide?

                  • Anker …
                    8 April 2023 at 1:27 pm

                    Were you responding to me you fool?

                    If you are, I am not religious at all, let alone fundamentalist.

                    "You have know desire to have anything work out". Well we gender critical people have never been engaged with by politicians etc who maybe we could have worked things out with"

                    I reject the accusation of transphobia. It is the response of people who have no proper arguements. About a month ago I was in our local dairy and had a very pleasant interaction with a trans woman. I know he was a man, his voice, height and hands gave it away. But I take people as I find them. But women fought hard for their sex based rights and anyone encroaching on that will not be welcome by me.

                    You know what……it isn't my job to have things work out for trans people. That is up to them to lobby for their own safe spaces. I would encourage them to do so without imposing on ours.

                    • You_Fool …
                      8 April 2023 at 5:28 pm

                      Why do you fight with fundamentalist arguments then? why do you make transphobic statements? seems strange to me for someone who is neither of these things

                    • Anker …
                      8 April 2023 at 10:47 pm

                      You fool can you tell me what of my arguements are "fundamentalist"?

                      What statements have I made that are transphobic? I never quite understand what that word means.

                      I got peaked into being gender critical because a very dear relative of mine and her partner (lesbians) have faced harrasment and intimidation and cancellation by trans rights activists. It was vicious and the shutting down of the two lesbian women was abhorant to me. This has nothing to do with trans people but the activists involved in this malicious activity (who may have been trans, heterosexual, gay whatever). Their activism centred around a compulsion to say that trans women are real women. Neither my relative or her partner could say that, because they don't believe it. Neither do I. I don't believe it is possible to change your sex, there is overwhelming evidence that this is the case and I refused to be coerced into saying so. that is one of the many signs to me that gender ideology has strong authoritarian tendcancies. Confirmed of course by an angry mob shutting women down with violence and intimidation.

                • Molly …
                  8 April 2023 at 1:12 pm

                  "And the police response in Albert Park, seem to indicate that tras are influencing the police"

                  The woman who was the police coordinator to the #LetWomenSpeak event, said the following (timestamped for convenience):

                  https://youtu.be/TJ9FqiNcV80?t=577

                  "I'm (not?) going to go back to the fact that that nasty sweaty man in pink, actually came over and spoke to me beforehand, and I said "You're not going to hurt us – are you?" and he said, I'm the organiser of the counter-protest and – um – I've just come to see what you are doing. And then he went off, and said, I've got a call here from the police. They're meeting me. And that was at about…."

                  (Plunket interrupts: Whoa, Hang on. So, the police would meet with him, but not you?)

                  "…Absolutely. Absolutely. I saw the number come up on his phone. Absolutely,"

                  • weka …
                    8 April 2023 at 1:22 pm

                    "And the police response in Albert Park, seem to indicate that tras are influencing the police"

                    Here's another explanation. Many people in NZ want to be kind to trans people, and thus support their push for rights without understanding the issues very well. Some New Zealanders have people they care about who are trans and their rights matter a great deal to them. It doesn't require a TRA/police conspiracy theory to try and make sense of what happened, nor does it require making trans people the enemy.

                    We don't know what happened other than the police didn't do their job. We don't know why or who was involved in the decisions. With luck we will eventually know once the events are investigate by the PCA.

                    • Molly …
                      8 April 2023 at 1:28 pm

                      The women in the link I provided, is relating her experience as the police liaison for the event. She said that up until the 26 March, her contact with the police was as expected, professional, detailed and open.

                      It was only on the day, when there was a failure to meet set appointments, or organise the barriers, or return calls that her experience was negative.

                      I don't think reporting her experience – is coming to any sort of conclusion. It does however – raise possible questions – or directions for OIA's to be submitted to get clarification.

                    • weka []
                      8 April 2023 at 1:36 pm

                      I’m familiar with what happened on the day and the first hand accounts. I was responding to Anker’s sentence which you led with.

                    • Anker …
                      8 April 2023 at 1:35 pm

                      I don't think describing that the police were absent despite liaising with the Let women speak group for weeks before, is a conspiracy theory. It is what is being reported and is easily viewed in the on-line footage at Albert Park.

                      On another note the Police were at the Michael Fowler centre for Pride in 2021 when a gender critical woman , a lesbian tried to gain access to the event and was refused because of her gender critical views. The police attended in order to exclude this frail, elderly women.

                      To keep balance though, I note PP was very grateful to the police who kept her safe and saw her out of the country. She said the were great.

                    • weka []
                      8 April 2023 at 1:38 pm

                      I don’t think describing that the police were absent despite liaising with the Let women speak group for weeks before, is a conspiracy theory.

                      Of course. But you said,

                      And the police response in Albert Park, seem to indicate that tras are influencing the police

                      Which does suggest police collusion with activists. If that’s not what you meant, perhaps you could clarify.

                • weka …
                  8 April 2023 at 1:14 pm

                  If you conflate gender/trans ideology/TRAs, with trans people generally, like you just have, then you will get people like You_Fool calling you transphobic and with some justification. This is an own goal and it's utterly unnecessary.

                  • You_Fool …
                    8 April 2023 at 5:27 pm

                    quick questions, is "Tras" meant to be a new insult against transpeople? Genuinely confused…

                    • weka …
                      8 April 2023 at 5:31 pm

                      TRA = trans right activist.

                      I didn't used to use it because it seemed like people were trying to make a connection between MRA (men's rights activists who are anti feminist and often sexist/misogynistic), but now I think things have moved on sufficiently that it's accurate enough.

                      It's important to see a distinction between trans people (who believe a range of things just like other groups do), and the activists pushing gender identity ideology. Trans people deserver respect and to have their rights upheld like other people do. TRAs deserve to have their positions and values challenged for the regressive politics they are and for the negative impact on women, lesbians/gays, and children

                    • You_Fool []
                      8 April 2023 at 6:33 pm

                      So tras = terf

                    • weka []
                      8 April 2023 at 6:41 pm

                      TRA = trans rights activist

                      TERF = trans exclusionary radical feminist (used as a slur by TRAs).

                      They’re two different and opposing sides of the war

                    • You_Fool []
                      8 April 2023 at 6:53 pm

                      I mean they are the same concept… a definition that had meaning but just gets waved at anyone that needs othering

                    • weka []
                      8 April 2023 at 9:20 pm

                      Not quite. Terf is the word associated with extreme online violence, including sexual violence, being targeted at women.

                      TRA is politicising language in a different way.

                      But what is the word you would use to describe activists who promote gender identity ideology?

                    • Anker …
                      8 April 2023 at 10:38 pm

                      I use it for shorthand for trans rights activists. A lot of these people aren't transgender.

                      I heard a lesbian women talking about Albert Park and her perspective is that the Rainbow community now includes some heterosexual people who refer to themselves as non binary.

                      To date no one has ever given me a satisfactory definition of non binary.

                    • Anker …
                      8 April 2023 at 10:56 pm

                      Hi You Fool have responded to your question about my "fundamentalist" beliefs and "transphobia". Didn't seem to be able to reply to your question about this, but it is on this thread.

                  • Anker …
                    8 April 2023 at 10:36 pm

                    You are correct Weka we need to wait to see what the police complaints authority has to say.

                    I am usually someone who is on the side of the police. Their failure to act in Albert Park needs to be called to account

                • Shanreagh …
                  8 April 2023 at 1:43 pm

                  My big question no one from the trans side is answering is

                  Why does the safe space for the trans community have to be the same safe spaces that are precious to women?

                  Trans community are treated equally to everybody else when they are requested to use the facility provided for their sex-category. That is equality. That is respect.

                  Surely if transpeople are unsafe using the facility for their sex then the work needs to be done around making not only the facilities better say more cubicles (I don't know) or men's attitudes to non conforming males.

                  I have not had an answer, except the response from Visubversa. This response is so common world wide when we seek to understand why, that I have no reason to doubt it.

                  ……autogynephilia. We are not talking Carmen and Georgina here. We are talking about Gender Ideology. We are talking about men who are sexually aroused by the thought of themselves as women. Mostly straight men. Sexually attracted to women.

                  https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/this-never-happens?s=r&fbclid=IwAR1sWzaCaN5R4HquY3Ikv4C3yhoEWimm9xo8d5tsOr_gYt4eR

                  But You_fool hopefully may be able to let us know……..please.

                  It would move the debate along immeasurably.

                  We would know then about building/maintaining/altering separate safe spaces for women and the Trans community easily accommodated I would have thought in the current men's spaces. Plus getting behind an attitudinal change to ensure that men are more accepting of gender non conforming males.

                  • You_Fool …
                    8 April 2023 at 5:25 pm

                    Good question, why isn't it been talked about? Or if it has why is one side ignoring the other about it?

                    This is actually my primary issue, we have women's rights basically descending into all-out transphobia that seems to be stoked by fundamentalist christian/religious ideals vs a trans community which is now being attacked and ostracised on 2 side

                    Why is it that this can only be about yelling at each other?

                    No one answered my question, what is it about self-id that inherently makes women unsafe? Or if you prefer, what is it about self-id that makes a women less of a women? As far as I can see the only arguments have nothing to do with Self-ID as all the worries would be the same with out self-id if the offending male wanted to offend all the same. Nothing changes

                    • weka …
                      8 April 2023 at 5:38 pm

                      Self ID is both a legislative change and a sociopolitical change. It means that any man at any time can say they are a women and must be treated as if that is literally true.

                      This has led to rapists being housed in women's prisons and sexually assaulting women prisoners.

                      That has already happened. Women are so angry now, because we told society this would happen and we got told to shut the fuck up bigot terfs.

                      The prison example is just the most obvious and easy one to use to explain the problem. I'm happy to talk about other aspects if you want.

                      Generally gender conforming men don't use women's spaces. So when a man is in a women's toilet for example, it's going to get challenged. Self ID undermines that because we are being told that any man can be a woman. Self ID means that any man can be a TW without any kind of transition at all.

                      Women cannot predict which males will be violent to women. This is why we have single sex spaces. From this safety perspective, there is no difference between men, men pretending to be women, and TW. They are all male and of the class of people that commit violence against women in sufficient numbers and times to require female only spaces.

                      There are other reasons for women's spaces too, not just safety. Privacy, dignity, women's culture.

                    • weka …
                      8 April 2023 at 5:46 pm

                      Good question, why isn't it been talked about? Or if it has why is one side ignoring the other about it?

                      No Debate has been an intentional political strategy, started by UK trans lobby group Stonewall and enforced first by liberals and then by institutions. People who spoke up, mainly but not only women, have lost their jobs/careers, been doxxed, been abused, had police harassment, been arrested for tweeting.

                      Because of that, many, many people are afraid to speak, because of risk to their jobs, careers, and social life.

                      This is actually my primary issue, we have women's rights basically descending into all-out transphobia that seems to be stoked by fundamentalist christian/religious ideals vs a trans community which is now being attacked and ostracised on 2 side

                      Why is it that this can only be about yelling at each other?

                      I'm a left wing, gender critical feminist. This war has nothing to do with fundamentalist Christians for me. The people I follow are mostly left wing gender critical feminists and other socially progressive GC people.

                      In the US it's different because fundamentalists have such a strong influence on politics there. And in other places there is an element of conservatism involved.

                      Think of it as a war with three sides:

                      1. GCFs (mostly left or centre left), and other GC people who span the political compass. Support gender non-conformity, oppose gender identity trumping biological sex.

                      2. Conservative religious people. Oppose gender non-conformity.

                      3. Gender identity ideologists/TRAs. Say they support gender non-conformity while simultaneously enforcing gender conformity. Push the idea that sex isn't real or is no longer that relevant.

                    • You_Fool []
                      8 April 2023 at 6:37 pm

                      See I hear this whole 3side thing but the arguments are only 2 sided either being Trans is a thing or it is not… hence my equating it with fundamentalism.. nothing here seems to suggest that there is a 3rd side

                    • weka []
                      8 April 2023 at 6:43 pm

                      What do you mean ‘being trans is a thing or not’?

                      Obviously there are plenty of GC people who know that trans people exist and are fine with that. And many GC people are left wing and progressive.

                    • You_Fool []
                      8 April 2023 at 6:52 pm

                      That gets said but that isn't the arguments being raised… the arguments seem to be that Trans women are men and should stick to the penis having rooms

                    • weka []
                      8 April 2023 at 9:18 pm

                      trans women are biologically male (if you disagree you’d have to make the case). And because trans woman now means any male can say they are a TW at any time, then they should stay out of women’s space.

                      Many GCFs argue for third spaces (myself included). The obvious solution to the prison problem is to build specialist units for males that are particularly vulnerable.

                    • Belladonna …
                      8 April 2023 at 6:45 pm

                      See I hear this whole 3side thing but the arguments are only 2 sided either being Trans is a thing or it is not…

                      Perhaps you could link to TRA advocating for their own spaces, carved out from existing men's spaces, rather than infringing on women's ones.

                      Even, if was accompanied by a "we don't think this is an issue, but you (GCF) clearly think it is – so how's this for a solution"

                      That would be an example of this 3side thing from the TRA side.

                    • Anker …
                      8 April 2023 at 10:59 pm

                      You Fool, If we are in a changing room, in a state of undress and a male bodied person who identifies as a women comes in, then the self id laws have just made two current crimes legal ie. vouyerism and exhibitionism.

                      I don't want male bodied people in my change rooms, my daughters change room or young girls change rooms. That's pretty much in on the change room issue.

                    • Molly …
                      9 April 2023 at 11:53 am

                      @You_Fool

                      "… the arguments seem to be that Trans women are men and should stick to the penis having rooms".

                      Actually, that is not an argument. It is a maintenance of existing single-sex provisions.

                      Because – as you know – sex and gender identity are two different classification systems.

                      The one that applies in this case is sex.

                      An argument needs to be provided as to why these boundaries should be broken.

                      Do you have one?

            • Liberty Belle 2.1.3.3.2.2
              8 April 2023 at 7:14 pm

              "We have a marginalized community…"

              "There’s only one problem with it. It’s not true. It’s not even remotely true.

              Neither marginalised, abused nor vulnerable | Madison Smith | The Critic Magazine

          • Incognito 2.1.3.3.3
            8 April 2023 at 4:18 pm

            It was introduced by stealth and never campaigned on.

            Let me just check with you: are you referring to the same BDMRR 2021 that Molly referred to @ 2.1 that attracted 6,609 submissions? The same Act that has a history that goes back to 2016 (and beyond)?

            https://www.dia.govt.nz/bdmreview—history-of-the-BDMRR-Act

            The rest of your comment is side-salad to me, to be tossed aside.

            • weka 2.1.3.3.3.1
              8 April 2023 at 4:26 pm

              from memory,

              • the initial change to the Bill was done at select committee without consultation. Don't remember why that didn't hold, but it's clear that they were trying to have it go through without debate.
              • there was never a wide debate in NZ about the women's rights issues
              • it didn't go through an election campaign.
              • Incognito …
                8 April 2023 at 4:39 pm

                I don’t rely on (my) memory. For example:

                The Bill was introduced to the House by the then National Government in August 2017 and was read for the first time in December 2017. It was unanimously referred to the Governance and Administration Select Committee.

                …

                The Governance and Administration Committee reported back in August 2018 on the Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Bill. There were 67 submissions, including 26 oral submissions. Individual submissions can be viewed here: BDMRR Bill submissions

                …

                The Bill was deferred in 2019 due to interest groups not having the opportunity to submit on the recommended amendments introduced by Select Committee after public submissions had closed.

                https://www.dia.govt.nz/bdmreview—history-of-the-BDMRR-Act

                If people allege stealth they’d better support it with facts! It says more about the person crafting the stealth narrative than about what actually happened.

                Not everything a Government does or does not during a 3-year election cycle can and must (or should) be campaigned on! Is our trust in our political system and politicians so low that we have to have everything in writing before we (can) vote for them?

                • weka …
                  8 April 2023 at 4:46 pm

                  well yes, in this case trust in our political system if very low, as evidenced by the number of left/centre left people currently saying they are politically homeless.

                  Your quote doesn’t address the ‘stealth’ issue of how the changes were made to the Bill initially. I’ll see if I can find some explanation on line later (someone else might here might have it handy too).

                  • Incognito …
                    8 April 2023 at 8:19 pm

                    To me, ‘stealth’ means undetected, hidden, and secret. And in this context it is by design for nefarious reasons. This is just not consistent with the information that is out there.

                    These sorts of unfounded or ambiguous allegations only damage the dwindling trust that is still left. NB one would think that the Left has more trust in Government than the Right but even that notion seems to have been turned on its head.

                    • weka …
                      8 April 2023 at 9:15 pm

                      I'm afraid it has.

                      What word would you use for the introduction of change to a Bill during select committee without doing that in an upfront and public way?

                • Anker …
                  8 April 2023 at 5:23 pm

                  The Bill introduced in 2017 was focussed on admin of Births Death and Marriages.

                  https://www.publicgood.org.nz/wp/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/What-they-do-in-the-shadows-Part-1.pdf

                  If you go to page 5 of this document you can read about the stealth like process

                  In 2018, a Bill to introduce gender self-identification through a major change to the Births, Deaths, Marriages and Relationships Registration Act (BDMRR) was considered by the Justice Select Committee. This Bill had been intended as a technical rewrite to allow for technology and other changes related to registrations, because the Act “lacked coherence, and was difficult to read and understand”.

                  Provisions to allow selfidentification of gender, with no requirement for medical or legal evidence and the removal of the Family Court process, were introduced after the select committee process. A successful campaign made the case that the scale of the proposed changes needed proper consultation and an impact assessment. Crown Law provided advice that the Bill’s provisions, as proposed, risked making the category of ‘sex’ impossible to define12 and the legislation was deferred in early 2019.

                  • weka …
                    8 April 2023 at 6:23 pm

                    thanks, I was hoping someone would have that to hand.

                    My next point would be the reason commenters on one of NZ's largest left wing blogs don't know about that is because of No Debate.

                    (I'm reasonably confident the BDMRR stealth change has been discussed on TS before)

                  • Incognito …
                    8 April 2023 at 8:36 pm

                    Is it ‘stealth’ or ‘stealth-like’? And what do you really mean when you use these terms? And whether there’s some kind of maleficent intention behind it, because that’s the vibe your allegations and comments give off to me.

                    I read the section and I read how complex the matter was (and possibly still is).

                    • weka …
                      8 April 2023 at 9:13 pm

                      I can think of two potential understandings.

                      1. they were oblivious to the GC views and put it in when they did simply as an administrative thing.
                      2. they knew that there would be objection (based on overseas experience) and so tried to slip it in.

                      I’m very doubtful that 1 is possible. I don’t think 2 has to be maleficent, more the actions of people who consider their cause righteous.

                    • Anker …
                      8 April 2023 at 10:24 pm

                      Stealth or stealth like, what do I really mean?

                      Good question. I mean that Labour/Greens brought the bill in with as little public scrutinay as possible. And I think they did that, because they didn’t want to listen or consider anyone who opposed the bill. There is good evidence for what I say, including the behaviour of those women MP’s at the select committee. Anyone who was opposed to the bill was treated with hostility and accused of transphobia amongst other things. It was a shock to see our MPs behave in this way.

                      Thanks for accepting the material I linked by Jill and Jan. I hoped to find more, but am a bit busy nowadays.

                      The BDMRR Bill introduced by National was basically a non contraversial bill re admin of BDand M records. It went through select committee and then post select committee the Greens added the gender ID part. Tracey Martin (the Minister at the time) mothballed the bill, after advice that there were some conflict of rights that would need addressing. So people like me thought that that was done and dusted pretty much. As a member of the Labour Party in the numerous surveys they sent out in 2020 they never asked me about gender id. They asked about a range of other issues, trying to ascertain what the membership thought was important. Labour didn't put gender id in their manifesto either (they did put the conversion therapy bill in). So it was a big surprize that they resserected the bill. Most people I talk to who don't follow politics closely have no idea about the bill. And I can't quite remember how it played out, but it possible that they tried to avoid a select committee process on gender id. Don't quote me on that, that is my memory.

                      I am not sure what the justification is for allowing anyone, particularly males to change their sex on their birth certificate. A birth certificate is a historical record relating to details of your birth. I changed my name, and despite doing this, my original/maiden name is still on my birth certificate.

                  • Molly …
                    9 April 2023 at 11:44 am

                    Also, it is worth looking at the scope of the Working Group that was set up after that issue was brought up:

                    https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/BDMR-Engagement/$file/Report-of-the-Working-Group-for-reducing-barriers-to-changing-registered-sex-(full-report).pdf

                    And the people who were part of it:

                    39. The Working Group has six members:

                    Kate Scarlet (Chair) Senior Community Lawyer and co-founder of Naming New Zealand

                    Jack Byrne Senior health and human rights researcher with expertise in legal gender recognition for trans and non-binary people.

                    Jeannie Oliphant Sexual Health Physician (FAChSHM) based at Auckland Sexual Health Service and vice president of The Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa (PATHA).

                    Mani Mitchell Executive Director and founder of the Intersex Trust Aotearoa New Zealand, Counsellor/Clinical Supervisor MNZAC

                    Fleur Fitzsimons Parent to a transgender child and a Wellington City Councillor with portfolio responsibility for community wellbeing

                    Ahi Wi-Hongi  National Coordinator for Gender Minorities Aotearoa, and a Māori, transgender, human rights advocate who works to improve public health access for gender minorities.

                    The report is worth the read to see how many recommendations are made across ministries and policies from this small group, with quite a paucity of supporting data.

                    Shanreagh, also posted back in 2021 a comment pertinent to the consultation, particularly in regards to the heavily redacted regulatory impact statement:

                    https://thestandard.org.nz/womens-space/#comment-1806572

                    I'll reproduce in full here so people don't have to link through, then link again:

                    Shanreagh:

                    Here is a 2019 opinion by Crown Law on the BDMRR Bill.

                    https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2019-02/Crown%20Law%20advice%20BDMRR%20Bill%20_0.pdf

                    I wonder if there is any update on that.

                    As a public servant used to seeing and assessing Regulatory Impact Statement that go up with any proposed legislation I read the RIS for this bill with amazement. It is the 'thinnest' RIS that I have ever seen, and I have seen a few.

                    https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2021-06/ria-dia-isi-may21.pdf

                    Someone has had a no to seeing the redacted material from the RIS.

                    https://fyi.org.nz/request/15936-information-redacted-in-bdmrr-ris

                    I see where the rude approaches to people with a differing view are supported.

                    https://genderminorities.com/2021/07/30/bdmrr-submission-guide/

                    Instead of upholding the right to disagree the authors of this paper have labelled the views of those who do not agree with them as 'anti-trans' and 'nonsense.'

                    Some I have spoken to who are against the wide open and possibly anti bio female Govt proposals, are in fact supportive of extending rights to gender minorities. But of course that does not suit the narrative that has been built up.

          • weka 2.1.3.3.4
            8 April 2023 at 4:28 pm

            wow, I hadn't seen that Vote Compass OIA request before, thanks.

  3. Shanreagh 3
    8 April 2023 at 11:06 am

    Max Rashbrooke makes us think again

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/131713265/max-rashbrooke-what-you-get-when-noone-is-focused-on-the-common-interest

    I also attended one of those low decile schools, it has served me well throughout my whole life. Sure there were disadvantages…my year had a time when our teacher was away, he was an acknodleged maths/arithemetic teacher and our reefif teachers were really not fit for purpose. My whole class suffered with not having basic concepts taught. Not atlking times tables but maths etc as a way of seeing or interpreting the world. This could have happened anywhere though

    The good thing though is that we did have other specialists such as the itinerant art teachers such as Sandy Adsett who would visit, we also had swimming coaches teaching swimming in our pool.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Adsett

    https://pataka.org.nz/whats/exhibitions/sandy-adsett-toi-koru/

    But even though the concept/reality of social mixing, schooling is full of benefits it is almost like the convention that co-ed schools are better for boys while single sex schools are better for girls….whose girl child is to be 'sacrificed' so boy children can be socialised.

    Intractable really.

    • Peter 3.1
      8 April 2023 at 12:14 pm

      Were there, are there advantages for girls being in co-ed schools? I am dead certain the girls from our house who attended co-ed schools learned a lot more about people across the board and the way the world works by being at co-ed.

      Which is standing them in good stead in their adult working lives.

      • Belladonna 3.1.1
        8 April 2023 at 12:36 pm

        Not educationally.

        The single-sex approach seems to overwhelmingly result in better grades for girls.

        https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/single-sex-over-co-ed-schools-girls-do-better-in-nearly-all-academic-measures-report/IFU4DDE5BXZU7TZGL6OJCEBYGY/

        And, I'd argue, not in co-curricular activities.
        In co-ed schools – the primary sports team (for example) is almost never the girl's one.

        Increasingly, it seems likely that single-sex schools are better for boys, educationally, as well.

        This is a slightly older article, but I don't think things will have changed.

        https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/09/why-a-single-sex-education-could-be-best-for-boys.html

        I can offer an anecdotal set of examples as well. My teen (15) goes to a single sex school – while local kids the same age (Mums are friends of mine) – go to co-ed schools. The amount of time, energy and stress that goes into romantic relationship building, crash, and recovery – is 10x greater in the co-ed sphere. And, that has to have an impact on learning.

        Lest anyone be concerned, my teen participates in multiple out-of-school activities – which are co-educational – so – not devoid of experience in relating to the opposite sex.

        Yes, kids from the co-ed educational background then go through that set of relationship dynamics later on; but by then their brains have had more time to rewire, and are better prepared to deal with the emotional fallout.

    • Belladonna 3.2
      8 April 2023 at 1:04 pm

      I don't think that Rashbrooke's (and your) experience in a low-decile school can be adequately translated into the experience today.

      The problems facing today’s schools are orders of magnitude greater – with issues like foetal alcohol syndrome and meth babies, combined with mainstreaming of kids with learning and/or behavioural challenges, and the inability of schools to manage the safety of both pupils and staff (i.e. the MoE won't let the schools exclude dangerous or disruptive kids, and won't provide the staff required to manage them safely).

      None of those were true when Rashbrooke was attending his low decile secondary school (notably, after attending a high-decile primary) – also, based on his age, his secondary was almost certainly streamed – as virtually all were at that time.

      Speaking to Block residents, I’ve heard understandable concerns that such schools may have worse facilities, struggle to retain the best staff, or enrol disproportionately troubled students who consume teachers’ attention.

      It's easy to point the finger (as the anonymous educator does in the article)

      “There is no doubt in my mind that laced all the way through here is prejudice and racism and inequity.”

      But has that educator actually addressed the stated concerns of the parents? If those concerns had been shown to be invalid (which they have not), then the educator's comment might be valid.

      There is a reason why 'good' (as in high-performing) schools attract a premium price for the surrounding real-estate.

  4. joe90 4
    8 April 2023 at 11:16 am

    Tl;dr – Taibbi was wrong. About everything.

    https://twitter.com/mehdirhasan/status/1644064242419617803

    And this is exactly what the rest of Hasan’s interview (and what I’ve described above) lays out in great detail: Taibbi isn’t just sloppy with facts, which is problematic enough. He leaves out the very important context that highlights how the big conspiracy he’s reporting is… not big, not a conspiracy, and not even remotely problematic.

    He presents it as a massive censorship operation, targeting 22 million tweets, with takedown demands from government players, seeking to silence the American public. When you look through the details, correcting Taibbi’s many errors, and putting it in context, you see that it was an academic operation to study information flows, who sent the more blatant issues they came across to Twitter with no suggestion that they do anything about them, and the vast majority of which Twitter ignored. In some minority of cases, Twitter applied its own speech to add more context to some of the tweets, and in a very small number of cases, where it found phishing attempts or people impersonating election officials (clear terms of service violations, and potentially actual crimes), it removed them.

    There remains no there there. It’s less than a Potemkin village. There isn’t even a façade. This is the Emperor’s New Clothes for a modern era. Taibbi is pointing to a naked emperor and insisting that he’s clothed in all sorts of royal finery, whereas anyone who actually looks at the emperor sees he’s naked.

    https://www.techdirt.com/2023/04/07/mehdi-hasan-dismantles-the-entire-foundation-of-the-twitter-files-as-matt-taibbi-stumbles-to-defend-it/

  5. Incognito 5
    8 April 2023 at 11:20 am

    Snobbery beyond the pale. Another solid piece by Max Rashbrooke.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/131713265/max-rashbrooke-what-you-get-when-noone-is-focused-on-the-common-interest

    Which soulless marketer dredged up the name “the Block”? It has connotations of dystopian gated communities with hidden TV crews poking through windows for the sake of ‘reality TV’.

    • Ad 5.1
      8 April 2023 at 11:29 am

      It's not like the state is sitting on its hands in Porirua.

      https://poriruadevelopment.co.nz/

      Having been brought up myself in working class kindergarten, primary, intermediate and secondary schools, and a working class family, I'd observe that only a few kids I grew up with ever got out of that situation.

      Not sure when our class mobility was ever high, but it's pretty low now.

      • Incognito 5.1.1
        8 April 2023 at 12:29 pm

        We moved around a lot when I was young but during my primary school years, I lived and grew up in a new-build block in the middle of a small but very mixed community that was highly integrated. There was some initial friction because of loss of space (land) & views, as with almost all new developments in an already reasonably filled-in area. Although I was young, looking back I’d say the income range of the households would have quite big – it was a literal stepping-stone for many, including my parents after about 6 years, for moving up & away to posher areas. Those posh areas were more homogeneous and much less exciting & fun for a child growing up. My primary school was as mixed as the area I lived in but with a higher representation of lower/working-class children and it was great!

        You could say that I’ve experienced class mobility (i.e. upwards) strapped in the backseat and at high speed. In other words, I don’t have a typical Kiwi experience and background as far as all this goes. I do note that NZ society is much more class-based than I’m used to and the number of snobs I’ve met over the years here are too many for my abacus.

        The State can only do so much – details are decided by local authorities & developers.

        • Ad 5.1.1.1
          8 April 2023 at 12:49 pm

          At risk of replicating the Four Yorkshiremen Sketch, Max Rashbrooke ought to give a bit of credit for what the state has been up to in large scale urban planning since 2010.

          Kainga Ora together with Piritahi are underway with the largest civic masterplanned developments we've had since the mid 1970s: Hobsonville, Oranga, Mt Roskill, Mangere, Northcote, and more.

          https://kaingaora.govt.nz/developments-and-programmes/industry-hub/piritahi-one-year-on/

          Then of course there's the Christchurch rebuild in partnership with Christchurch Council and Kai Tahu and Fletcher Building, and all the other large scale planning in its satellite town centres.

          And then the very smart developers who get the need for community building.

          Max has a left melancholic propensity to moan about the bourgeoisie around him without lifting his eyes to the good.

          • Incognito 5.1.1.1.1
            8 April 2023 at 4:25 pm

            To be fair to Max, there’s only so much he can cover in one opinion piece for Stuff. And I don’t consider him a ‘cry-baby’.

    • Shanreagh 5.2
      8 April 2023 at 11:32 am

      I don't see it that way. Porirua East is one of the single most deprived areas in the Wellington area. it is often at the wrong end of the scales for health, deprivation.

      It suffers from white flight/income flight (if there is such a name where you have the money to either buy in the zone you want, or pay for a lawyer to argue a case why you don't go to this school) with its school. The Block is what some call it.

      Max Rashbrooke went to what would be called a lower decile school as did I. neither of us have regrets, I am reading. I don't call that snobbish.

      • Incognito 5.2.1
        8 April 2023 at 11:56 am

        I don't see it that way. [my italics]

        I don’t know what your “it” is. If you think I called Max Rashbrooke a snob then you have the wrong end of the stick.

        Don’t be afraid to call a spade a spade instead of coming up with plausible explanations or excuses for status quo [anywhere] in NZ.

        As for the name “Block”, I’ve lived in really unsavoury areas, and ghetto blocks or prison blocks are not associations that I want to have when I receive my mail. I have also lived in ‘sub-urbia’ and I’m glad that those days are over too. Town planners in other countries seem have different philosophies and not all of those are strictly country-specific. Obviously, my views are a personal thing.

        • Ad 5.2.1.1
          8 April 2023 at 12:52 pm

          More a kind of reverse snobbery.

          If parents have the capacity to do so, why should they not be free to invest and form their own private school indeed their own private world of self-reinforcing wealth and privilege?

          Inside the answer to that question is a big upcoming election debate on education and implied class mobility.

          • Belladonna 5.2.1.1.1
            8 April 2023 at 1:39 pm

            And, indeed, a chunk of them do.
            Others use the value of their home ($500K difference between the street in the Grammar zone and the one outside, for the same house) as a proxy.

            I've heard the ACT party on education vouchers. Do you see this coming up as an election issue for other parties as well?

            • Visubversa 5.2.1.1.1.1
              8 April 2023 at 1:51 pm

              In a past life, I worked in the Buildings Division of the Education Department in Auckland. The chap who sat at the desk behind me did all the number crunching for school zoning. When he was not in, I had to answer his phone. (No voicemail in those days).

              I had a shedload of fun while working my notice telling stories to people who rang to enquire as to where the Grammar zone was likely to be when their "Little Lord Fauntleroy" hit the magic age.

              I told one woman she should buy the house next to Hillary College in Otara as by the time her lad got to secondary school, they would probably be bussing them in like in Alabama.

          • Incognito 5.2.1.1.2
            8 April 2023 at 5:24 pm

            Sure, they could also home-school their kids, hire private tutors, and vote for ACT and Partnership Schools. Or they could support the Public Good of public schools in the area, which is what their taxes provides for. Unless that’s not good enough …

            Forget about class mobility for a moment and let’s focus on being able to have a dignified job that supports a dignified life – the grass in the other class is not greener despite the scattering of daisies in spring.

  6. Sabine 6
    8 April 2023 at 1:25 pm

    For what its worth, the Labour Party UK would lock that child molester up in prison with females.

    For what its worth, under the Labour Government (Ardern/Hipkins) in NZ a four time rapist got 9 month home D and if that person would have identified as a women they would have she/her them and the victims would have to refer to their rapist as a ‘she/her’ and that they were raped by ‘her penis’.

    And for what its worth, this year we locked an entire male into a womens prison for a few years. His crime? Going into a restaurant in Jan/Feb last year, stabbing his ex girlfriend and two others.

    The Soup throwing person would also be declared a ‘woman’, their crime would be counted as female on female violence and should they be considered guilty and should any judge in NZ have the guts to actually serve this person with time, they would do time in a female prison.

    So frankly when it comes to crime, sexual assault neither Labour UK nor Labour NZ are acting decently.

    Keir Starmer no more can define what a women is, even though Keir Starmer is certain that some have dicks.

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

    • Incognito 6.1
      8 April 2023 at 5:46 pm

      A single charge of common assault and you’re already pre-empting the verdict and sentence!? Wow! Where did you study Law? I hope the Judge will be a woman, as this will remove at least one prejudice from suspicious minds. Or maybe not.

  7. Incognito 7
    8 April 2023 at 3:18 pm

    Recently, Socratic thinking (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_questioning) and the Socratic method (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method) have cropped up a few times here on TS. It was associated with a misconception based on the assumption that the questioner (aka ‘teacher’, who happened to be a real teacher in real life) possessed knowledge & answers but assumed a veil of ignorance. In other words, the questioner was not debating in good faith here.

    I believe that assumption to be incorrect. Socratic questioning can be used in debate to tease out beliefs, biases, knowledge gaps, et cetera, in both questioner and the person(s) being questioned (aka ‘student’). The aim is to arrive at a discernible truth that both parties (can) agree to and build on.

    This method of questioning was made popular, for example, by Michael Sandel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Sandel#Teaching) in his excellent series Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?

    So, I reject the accusations and criticism that were aimed at the questioner here on TS on these grounds.

    W. K. C. Guthrie in The Greek Philosophers sees it as an error to regard the Socratic method as a means by which one seeks the answer to a problem, or knowledge. Guthrie claims that the Socratic method actually aims to demonstrate one's ignorance. Socrates, unlike the Sophists, did believe that knowledge was possible, but believed that the first step to knowledge was recognition of one's ignorance. Guthrie writes, "[Socrates] was accustomed to say that he did not himself know anything, and that the only way in which he was wiser than other men was that he was conscious of his own ignorance, while they were not. The essence of the Socratic method is to convince the interlocutor that whereas he thought he knew something, in fact he does not."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method#Method

    Socrates obviously was a smart cookie but more so, he was wise – his long beard gave it away cheeky

    • weka 7.1
      8 April 2023 at 3:53 pm

      whatever Robert was trying to tease out, it would have worked way better to have stated it up front. I don't know what he was trying to do, because he wouldn't say.

      if the idea is to "arrive at a discernible truth that both parties (can) agree to and build on", it patently failed here.

      I'm not stupid, and can usually grasp concepts that I disagree with or haven't come across before. But there are limits to that when ideas are presented obliquely. Being patronised elsewhere that I can't see the bigger picture hasn't helped my impression that it just boiled down to not understanding what the gender critical feminist position is but still deciding it is wrong anyway.

      This debate isn't going to go away. Having watched this play out in other countries that are years further down the track than we are, once women (and the public generally) find out what is going on many women get angry, very angry, at having their rights removed without being consulted. You can see Anker's comments above for an example of how women just stop caring at some point about trans people and put their energy into looking after their own rights. This arises from No Debate, and it just gets worse the longer No Debate is pushed. It's terrible, and the worst thing that could be happening at this point in time, and the left is ignoring those of us that are ringing the warning bell.

      • weka 7.1.1
        8 April 2023 at 4:12 pm

        let me put it another way. For many women this isn't an issue of philosophical difference that can be teased out or where women can be taught to think properly. And this fact is being missed by many.

        • Incognito 7.1.1.1
          8 April 2023 at 7:46 pm

          Please don’t be misled by the reference to Socrates, which was not introduced into this debate by me, BTW. I think it was mis-labelled (or mis-appropriated) and then used to dismiss Robert’s comments.

          This about applying critical thinking tools to debate of a complex issue. Debating is what we do here on TS. The better the tools and skills of the participants, the better the debate. So far, it has not been a very good debate, IMO, also judging by the outcomes.

          The topic of debate is very real and has real-life impact. I don’t think that anybody is denying this!

          • weka 7.1.1.1.1
            8 April 2023 at 9:12 pm

            So far, it has not been a very good debate, IMO, also judging by the outcomes.

            Yes, you've been saying that but you haven't actually explained what that means. How is it not a good debate? What are the outcomes that make that so?

            • gsays 7.1.1.1.1.1
              9 April 2023 at 9:14 am

              I have followed these dicussions and have learnt a fair bit.

              eg The process of the rewrite of the BDMRR Bill and then the Green changes occuring post select committee to include gender self ID .

              The range of those in the self ID community. From young teens and pre teens dicovering their identity/sexuality and autogynephylia in middle aged men through to the furries,

              The reinfircement of the observation that the left looks for traitors, the right looks for recruits. Also it has strengthened my resolve to be wary of ideologies/ideologues. Very little in life is so simple.

              TBH, I was a tad sceptical about the GCF position, there was a whiff of misandry about it – 'penis is bad', the GCF views appeared to be coming from an older, conservative (status quo conservative not right wing conservative) voice and initially, the horror stories were all coming from overseas.

              Through following the korero here on TS the scepticism has abated. Yes, a warranted wariness of males exists, the conservativeness is akin to my own and now the horrible part of 'the struggle' is here. Witness Albert Park; the assault of a senior citizen that largely goes unacknowledged or gets the 'once-over lightly' in MSM. eg RNZ's media watch.

              It is possible to hold a position where women's access to safe spaces is acknowledged and upheld while still maintaining a trans individual's mana. So far, this has been expressed largely by the GC side of the debate.

              Another aspect that I have come to understand in this time is; Your rights are my responsibility.

      • Shanreagh 7.1.2
        8 April 2023 at 4:44 pm

        Weka, I agree with this totally.

        You can see Anker's comments above for an example of how women just stop caring at some point about trans people and put their energy into looking after their own rights. This arises from No Debate, and it just gets worse the longer No Debate is pushed. It's terrible, and the worst thing that could be happening at this point in time, and the left is ignoring those of us that are ringing the warning bell.

      • Incognito 7.1.3
        8 April 2023 at 7:35 pm

        I don’t think Robert knew exactly what he was trying to tease out either. He was asking questions and others started to distrust his line of questioning, or became tired and frustrated because of his persistence and/or the fact that they didn’t seem to get their intended/desired traction with him, and accused him of assuming a veil of ignorance (Socratic questioning) and trolling. When he denied this, there was more disbelief and condemnation. And so on and so forth.

        I don’t follow your comment about not being stupid and being patronised!?

        You are 100% right that this is not going to go away. I don’t understand why others (“stealth”) and you’re saying that there was no consultation when there clearly was, as far as I can tell. I do understand that there’s anger and it is pretty obvious that there’s a lot of it, which is not a good foundation for debate of a difficult topic.

        I don’t think that even the TS commentariat is representative of ‘the Left’. I’ve raised this in another comment: if No Debate is an or the issue why then is the debate here so narrow and bordering on being exclusive of diverging let alone contrarian opinions? Even questioning is met with unfair scrutiny and scepticism if not contempt and distrust that induces an experience of gatekeepers testing everyone who wants to participate and the ones that don’t are told “Thou Shall Not Pass!”. You cannot have it both ways – the kaupapa of TS is robust inclusive debate and this is not what I’ve been observing.

        • weka 7.1.3.1
          8 April 2023 at 9:34 pm

          When I asked Robert repeatedly to explain his thinking, he didn't. When I said I saw no evidence that he understands GCF positions, he said he does. When I asked him to demonstrate this, he refused. I can totally see why some people started to think he was trolling. The debate techniques he was using, intentionally or not, were almost impossible to work with.

          I don’t follow your comment about not being stupid and being patronised!?

          Robert said some patronising things that are in the Trash.

          I don’t understand why others (“stealth”) and you’re saying that there was no consultation when there clearly was, as far as I can tell.

          I'm not saying there was no consultation. Maybe others are using inaccurate language? But there was the point in time when MPs tried to get changes to a Bill in a surreptitious way. And later when the consultations were under way, MPs were rude and obnoxious even to people submitting. This is a big part of distrust of government process for NZ GC people I think.

          I do understand that there’s anger and it is pretty obvious that there’s a lot of it, which is not a good foundation for debate of a difficult topic.

          Women are angry and that's reasonable given the situation. People arguing from anger isn't new here either. The foundation of the debate is women's rights and the injustice of what is happening. Most of the time I see commenters making arguments despite the anger. It's not like they're here slagging people off (mostly).

          I’ve raised this in another comment: if No Debate is an or the issue why then is the debate here so narrow and bordering on being exclusive of diverging let alone contrarian opinions? Even questioning is met with unfair scrutiny and scepticism if not contempt and distrust that induces an experience of gatekeepers testing everyone who wants to participate and the ones that don’t are told “Thou Shall Not Pass!”. You cannot have it both ways – the kaupapa of TS is robust inclusive debate and this is not what I’ve been observing.

          Can you please point to come examples? The only people here who can stop others from speaking are you and me and other mods.

          How is debate narrow? How is it bording on being exclusive? Do you mean the number of replies to RG's comments? Or what?

          Even if what you say is true, that there are people gatekeeping (not sure how that is being done), what's the problem? No-one is obliged to respond to anyone and there are plenty of other people to talk with.

          I'm not sure if you understand what No Debate is. No Debate in a TS context would be Lynn and micky succumbing to the external pressures to not have GC debate here and shutting me down. Or the revers No Debate would be all anti-terfers, pro-trans and even question people being banned because of their beliefs.

    • hetzer 7.2
      8 April 2023 at 3:55 pm

      My son kept asking my daughter, "why?" over and over and over. It was driving her crazy!

      I said "son, stop socrates-ing your sister!"

      They actually both seemed to like this one so im not sure it still qualifies as a Dad joke

      (ps not my joke )

    • Belladonna 7.3
      8 April 2023 at 4:10 pm

      Given that Michael Sandel is acting in a formal teaching role in your example – it still seems to be a methodology which works most effectively in teaching rather than in debate.

      • Incognito 7.3.1
        8 April 2023 at 6:22 pm

        Teaching and debating both involve learning and gaining understanding and this is the key point of my example that connects the two. Of course, if you think debate is a point-scoring competition with a clear winner and a deflected loser then you might have a point.

    • Blade 7.4
      8 April 2023 at 4:32 pm

      I'm a more utilitarian type of person. I hate becoming caught up in subjective abstracts when looking for practical answers. Ironically, most of the learning methods I use, created by educator, Win Wenger, have the Socrates method ( and feedback) as their base. However, he has created new methods that are superior to the former in my opinion.

      http://www.winwenger.com/socrates.htm

      http://www.winwenger.com/einsoc.htm

      • Incognito 7.4.1
        8 April 2023 at 7:59 pm

        I hate becoming caught up in subjective abstracts when looking for practical answers.

        Excellent! You feel right at home here then on a progressive political blogsite that aims for high-quality robust debate of anything related to and ranging from political ideology to realpolitik.

    • Shanreagh 7.5
      8 April 2023 at 4:53 pm

      Socrates obviously was a smart cookie but more so, he was wise – his long beard gave it away

      Yet on my twitter feed about a bearded man coming up with an anti female pronouncement written on a T shirt we have this response

      Here we have a specimen of the lesser Bearded Willy-wagger, a subtype of the Bearded Willy-wagger species. It’s main attribute is its propensity to shriek loudly at women with opinions it dislikes. It’s unmistakable mating call is TWAW! TWAW! TWAW! TWAW!

      But I couldn't possibly comment.

      [1 day ban for continual posting of quotes without links. Please reply to my mod note comment below with the link, when you return – weka]

      • Belladonna 7.5.1
        8 April 2023 at 5:11 pm

        Also, in the context of the debate – to ascribe wisdom as coming from a bloke with a beard (no matter how much it's intended as a joke)….. rather jars.

      • weka 7.5.2
        8 April 2023 at 5:14 pm

        mod note.

      • Incognito 7.5.3
        8 April 2023 at 8:26 pm

        When I mentioned the beard, I had Robert in mind [obviously]. It was meant as a joke.

      • Shanreagh 7.5.4
        10 April 2023 at 12:24 pm

        Weka, The moderation is acknowledged.

        I had a complete techno meltdown yesterday with my keyboard resorting to a mix of letters & figures and my phone not keeping the charge. New keyboard makes all the difference.

        References are from

        Incognito

        8 April 2023 at 3:18 pm

        God Zilla

        9:39 PM · Apr 9, 2023

        Here we have a specimen of the lesser Bearded Willy-wagger, a subtype of the Bearded Willy-wagger species. It’s main attribute is its propensity to shriek loudly at women with opinions it dislikes. It’s unmistakable mating call is TWAW! TWAW! TWAW! TWAW!

        To be honest one of the reasons I did not link was because God Zilla was replying to horrible 'Terf' type anti women stuff. But I guess we are all old enough to be able to deal with this anti women stuff.

        I support this from Belladonna

        8 April 2023 at 5:11 pm

        Also, in the context of the debate – to ascribe wisdom as coming from a bloke with a beard (no matter how much it's intended as a joke)….. rather jars.

        But then years ago I did not get some of the 'humour.' Many feminists had 'no sense of humour' apparently.

        Hope that this is OK.

        • weka 7.5.4.1
          10 April 2023 at 12:54 pm

          thanks for the links.

          To be honest one of the reasons I did not link was because God Zilla was replying to horrible 'Terf' type anti women stuff. But I guess we are all old enough to be able to deal with this anti women stuff.

          This says to me that you still think you get a choice about when to link and when not to. If you quote you have to link. Every time. I've told you this before.

          If you don't want to link, then don't quote.

          If you link to something you find problematic, you can explain your thinking on that in your comment so that people know.

          • Shanreagh 7.5.4.1.1
            10 April 2023 at 1:10 pm

            OK I will do – explain my reservations about the content of the posts that led to the reply I quote if it happens again.

          • Shanreagh 7.5.4.1.2
            10 April 2023 at 1:19 pm

            Thank you Weka. I will link fully and explain my concerns about material that may emerge if links behind are clicked.

        • Incognito 7.5.4.2
          10 April 2023 at 12:54 pm

          Some people here could do with some deep-breathing techniques to loosen up. Or they could realise that context often makes all the difference and that people have different experiences and knowledge that gives them their unique personal context.

          I’m not going to quote Nietzsche again though – once is enough today and it is already losing its meaning and impact here on TS.

          • Shanreagh 7.5.4.2.1
            10 April 2023 at 1:17 pm

            Sorry I don't understand what you are trying to say. All I was doing was to say that for long time feminists we are often accused of having no sense of humour, so yes I do agree with Belladonna.

            I did not want to link to anti women stuff (if a person clicked to the posts that led to God Zilla posting),

            I have accepted the moderation, will link fully and will express my concerns at the time of linking in future.

            I made a mistake in not linking, can we just leave it please…..please.

            • weka 7.5.4.2.1.1
              10 April 2023 at 1:25 pm

              Feel free to not respond to this comment from me Shanreagh.

              One of the problems I see atm (for the mods to sort out) is that it's become more unclear when a comment is from a moderator and when it is from one of us without our mod hat on. In this case, I think you could just have ignored Incognito's comment if you've had enough, but mine needed a response and I can see that it's hard to tell. I've already been thinking about this a bit, there are time when it's better not to use bold in-comment notes. I've seen this confusion in the past too.

              • Incognito …
                10 April 2023 at 2:27 pm

                ??

                No Mod hat anywhere in sight as far as I was concerned, so I have no idea why or how there could or would be any confusion about it.

                For a number of reasons, one of which is to stay more impartial, I have not jumped into (recent) debates. However, the recent banning of a regular and highly respected commenter compelled me to start commenting on the ways discourse has been suffering badly here on TS, in my opinion. This has almost (!) nothing to do with Moderation per se, IMO, as I’ve already stated previously – explaining indeed starts to feel like losing.

                • RedLogix …
                  10 April 2023 at 2:39 pm

                  And for what it is worth, be assured I am very aware of how difficult it can be to tread the path of impartiality. And especially to be seen to be doing so. When I said elsewhere that I have no desire to tangle with moderation, it is with this in mind, that I truly have no desire to make your task any harder than it already is.

                  In my mind it is usually better to step back from confrontation, than to persist to prove a point for little gain. I imagine all of us have made the error of failing to draw a distinction between our ego's and our opinions at one time or another.

                  • Incognito …
                    10 April 2023 at 3:55 pm

                    Accepted and appreciated!

                    In Election Year, we want to avoid any extra work for the Mods and certainly no ‘tangles’ with the Mods (which is begging for self-martyrdom at the best of times, as per the site’s Policy, as you know).

                    At this point, I’d like to ask you, please refrain from making subtle or not-so–subtle digs at any (!) Moderation that disrespect and undermine any (!) of the Mods’ hard work and well-intended efforts.

                    Thank you in advance,

                    Incognito

                • weka …
                  10 April 2023 at 3:24 pm

                  I thought I'd said what I thought the problem was. I use comments for moderation at times (instead of putting mod notes in bold inside someone else's comment). I've been thinking lately that people are getting confused as to when I (or you) comment, whether it's a mod note or not.

                  If people are confused about my moderation tech, they may be thinking that it applies to yours as well.

                  • Incognito …
                    10 April 2023 at 5:09 pm

                    Whilst you may have point, generally speaking, I still don’t see how it applies to this specific case and why you brought it up here. Never mind, I want to let this go and move on.

                    Besides being less involved in the various discussion threads I’ve adapted a few other ways of modding to improve clarity, such as:

                    Mod note cont.: (https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-07-04-2023/#comment-1944252) or [Consider this a Mod note] (https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-21-12-2022/#comment-1927691) at the beginning of my longer responses wearing my Mod hat but avoiding the bold font and all that other usual Mod stuff.

                    I fully expect commenters to read replies to their comments and take note, especially if they clearly come from a Mod who’s been modding them. I’ve wasted too much time chasing up offenders who play blind and shtum and follow-up with quick(er) action nowadays.

                • weka …
                  10 April 2023 at 3:29 pm

                  If you have a specific problem with how I moderated RG (other than banning a long term, respected commenter), I really wish you would say clearly what the problem is. You may well be seeing things I have missed. From my perspective he was moderated because he is one of the commenters who believe he is somehow exempt from the rules and mod requests. That was pretty clear.

                  If the issue is how he ended up in that position, all I can say is I don't think his disrespect for moderation is new or specific to the G/S wars, it's just that he's not really been that deep into the hard core debates before and so it hasn't shown up as much. He's not unusual in his position, there are others who likewise thing moderation can be ignored, and they usually end up with a ban after requests and warnings as well 🤷‍♀️

                  I hope when he comes back that 1) he pays attention to moderation and respects it, and 2) he changes his debate style and starts sharing his thinking. I would actually like to hear that.

                  • Incognito …
                    10 April 2023 at 5:44 pm

                    If I have a specific problem with your specific moderation of RG, I will discuss this with you in the back-end.

                    FWIW, RG was worn down by the relentless pile-on from a small gang of commenters, wave after wave, comment after comment, and he had reached the end of the road, for him. That was pretty clear and he said as much in his defence; his idiosyncratic persistence (aka ‘stroppiness’), which is generally a positive trait, pushed him off the reserve. It is not the end of the world for RG, I’d imagine, but some of the culpability was not his to own. IMO.

                    You seem to cycle back to moderation being the issue for me, which is inaccurate, as I’ve already stated quite a few times (I’ve lost count now).

                    As to what the problems are in and with the commentariat, I’ve touched upon and highlighted already many issues, as I see them, and working my way through them. It is an ongoing process for me too, not unlike the process that RG was going through, ironically. My thoughts & views are scattered over many comments now, which might not help to get a clear succinct picture, especially when it means reading all those comments over a few days and stitching all the info together. I do realise that!

                    I reiterate that respect for moderation here on TS is paramount.

                    It would be preferable if everybody would pay a little more attention to clarity, accuracy, unambiguity, etc., in/of their comments and less effort on responding as often and quickly (aka ‘slow down’) as possible and/or trying to score ‘debating points’. However, I believe we do have to respect people’s individual (idiosyncratic) styles and ways of learning and debating, et cetera. But most of all, we ought to be able to assume that people here come in good faith and are genuinely interested in robust debate. I believe this assumption has become less certain in recent times and been invalidated by a few, be it unwittingly or not so much …

  8. Shanreagh 8
    8 April 2023 at 4:39 pm

    Thank you for all this information Incognito.

    The experience I have had with Socratic questioning was in my law studies (over 4 years) and in with one CE in particular who used it to 'drill down' to the essential message from skilled and knowledgeable people.

    So these were two examples where the questioner had a position of more knowledge. While often the questions were rapid fire and made you think on your feet I only ever had the view that the questioner was seeking to impart knowledge (firstly) & gain knowledge (secondly – as we can always learn from others)

    I have not seen it used from a position of ignorance ie to gain knowledge but accept from your data that it can be used for that.

    The kind of questioning used by people who do not know and who are information seeking is usually (from my experience) much more tentative and has a framing around it.

    The rapid fire technique with the lack of opinion, framing or knowledge sharing made me suspect 'tone' perhaps that the questioner had a viewpoint but was not sharing this. I then 'leapt in logic' (based on my experience) that he had more knowledge/opinion than he was giving out.

    There are many articles on asking good questions.

    This is a simple one.

    https://hrdailyadvisor.blr.com/2015/03/30/asking-the-right-questions-is-key-to-finding-the-right-answers/

    Also, leaders must know that there is a rhythm to asking questions if they want to get the best answers. In my experience, you can’t dive right in with the tough direct question if you want a really good answer. In essence, you need to warm up your audience before hitting the toughest, most meaningful questions. You need to build a rapport with the audience. You need to develop trust if you want honest and insightful answers.

    For instance, it might help to start with a general question such as, “What do you think?” Once you have your audience talking and sharing their ideas and opinions, then you need to make questions more specific to get to the heart of the matter. But if you jump right in with the specifics, it’s likely that your audience won’t respond as well because the question will come across as abrupt and jarring. Build a rhythm by asking simple, more general questions first, and let your questions build to the more specific and difficult as you establish trust with your audience. (my highlighting)

    Perhaps I was incorrect to ascribe Socratic to it, it was my experience of Socratic (it was called Socratic) and is used, or used to be, in some Law schools. I think I did put some refs, I know I looked it up but probably slanted to a legal use.

    Whatever the type of question it was, they were in my view, unsuccessful. It almost felt that they had turned into leading or trick questions designed to catch out the unwary.

    • Incognito 8.1
      8 April 2023 at 8:11 pm

      Thanks. The backgrounds of commenters here are widely different, of course. I think there was definitely an element of Socratic questioning in Robert’s comments, perhaps unwittingly, but your assumption of his baseline knowledge was a little off. It was a petty, actually a real shame, that you didn’t accept his word that he was genuine and commenting with honesty and respect.

      Your very last sentence phrased it perfectly: it had become a battle of wits & wills to trip (up) the opponent into a ‘gotcha!’ moment and claim (moral?) victory. This belongs in the realm of Social Media and Talkback shock-jocks, not on a site that aims for robust political debate, IMO.

  9. Molly 9
    8 April 2023 at 5:25 pm

    For a look at a local transport company making changes without regulatory encouragement, a good article from NZ Trucking:

    Switch: On https://www.nztrucking.co.nz/switch-on/

    (The four Quick reads from Test links are also worth the read to add further detail to an already informative article).

    Nuance and numbers

    “It’s not a science experiment or a greenwashing thing. The trucks are going to do the job the old ones did,” Mark says as we take a walk around the Wiri depot. “The trucks spend a lot of time stationary loading and unloading – we don’t need a big range.”

    Grant opens the Daimler telematics app on his phone to illustrate the fleet benchmarks. “The 26 Euro-6 vehicles we can access data on are averaging 2.3km/l this week (between Sunday and Friday), over 31,000km, at an average speed of 22kph. The extremes are 1.8 and 3.3km/l.”

    Mark explains the potential savings. “For diesel, we may look at 2kpl at $1.20. Fuelling an EV is four to 15 times cheaper, depending on how you source or produce your energy.”

    He points to the array of solar panels on the roof of one of the buildings. On average, they produce 500kWh daily, enough to run three of the Scanias.

    However, the setup is yet to be complete so, for now, the Scanias charge off a portable 40kW charger connected to the grid at Wiri and a 120kW charger (the maximum the trucks can handle) at Onehunga.

    “There are all these little nuances,” Mark says. The megawatt charging standard coming in 2024 will revolutionise it, so we have to design our charging infrastructure for that. We can connect to the grid to trickle charge at night when the cost is low and have a 300kW solar setup and a 2mWh battery storage system to charge at a megawatt off- grid. That’s a couple of million dollars…

    “But we’ve burnt a million litres of diesel a year for the past 15 years… so investing in the long term, we can drop energy to a fraction and fix that cost for decades with a microgrid.”

  10. Charlotte Rust 10
    8 April 2023 at 7:17 pm

    I listened to this podcast from Sam Harris, my partner subscribes so I was able to listen to the whole thing. Excellent breakdown of language around gender, the two extremes of the trans debate going up against each other with no ground for the middle, many unable to express their thoughts and concerns etc, politics and much more. I haven’t listened to ‘The Witch Trials of JK Rowling’ yet but intend to.

    https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/314-the-cancellation-of-j-k-rowling

    • weka 10.1
      10 April 2023 at 3:42 pm

      the witch trials podcast is excellent. It's quite balanced, although obviously it's not taking the JKR is a naziterf position, which is pissing off some of the anti-terfs. But it’s probably a good thing to listen to for people that don’t really understand the situation. I also learned some stuff about social media and its role in the whole thing.

  11. pat 11
    8 April 2023 at 7:46 pm

    A particularly good (and imo sensible) interview on RNZ this evening with a spokesperson for the Fa'afafine community …unfortunately I have no direct link but it may possibly be found within the following…

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/tagata

  12. Visubversa 12
    8 April 2023 at 8:52 pm

    This may be useful – about the Yogyakarta Principles and how they ignored the rights of women.

    "The Principles were drafted and signed by a group of lawyers, human rights experts and trans rights activists, including Robert Wintemute, professor of human rights law at King’s College London. Since then Wintemute has had second thoughts. He says women’s rights were not considered during the meeting and that he should have challenged some aspects of the Principles. Admitting he “failed to consider” that trans women still in possession of their male genitals would seek to access female-only spaces, Wintemute, who is gay, says: “A key factor in my change of opinion has been listening to women.”

    The Principles merge lesbian and gay rights with the right to protection and expression of “gender identity”. They provide a foundation for the view that “gender identity” — based on the feelings of an individual — trumps biological sex."

    https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/april-2021/the-trans-rights-that-trump-all/?fbclid=IwAR1-sPvx5yZjSJtdcic-nQ_Q5JsHKV37dP-mML-PUz63ukMaJAMTDjHfpuc

    • Shanreagh 12.1
      10 April 2023 at 12:39 pm

      Visubversa

      I had no idea.

      Having worked all those long years in the PS & being involved in the drafting and maintenance of Conflict of Interest registers I find it unbelievable that a person who is a signatory to these Yogyakarta Principles has not recused himself from involvement in the trans & women discussions.

      To say that my world view has been a little shattered would be an understatement.

      It is so concerning as I understand that the safe spaces regime is part of the Human Rights Act & Paul Hunt and his staff are the ones who will look at concerns around access to safe spaces. I was always of the view that the safe spaces regime in NZ was eminently challengeable by the trans lobby, made more difficult perhaps by having an insider. Perhaps he will recuse himself from dealing with this?

      Seriously though, how was/is it possible to be appointed to such a post with being a signatory to something such as these principles.

      Here is guidance on how the HR Commissioner is appointed.
      https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Guidance-for-the-appointment-of-Human-Rights-Commissioners.pdf

      Here are the current Commissioners. They were appointed in 2019. So if appointed for 5 years the terms will expire in 2024.
      https://tikatangata.org.nz/about-us/our-people

      Announced 2018
      https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/new-appointments-human-rights-commission

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.