Open mike 10/04/2024

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, April 10th, 2024 - 166 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 …

166 comments on “Open mike 10/04/2024 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. dv 1
    10 April 2024 at 7:46 am

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350240619/anatomy-political-misfire-how-pms-accommodation-supplement-saga-unfolded

    Huge amt of time by civil servants to sort this out.
    Gota wonder how much that cost ….

    • ianmac 1.1
      10 April 2024 at 8:55 am

      How sad for Mr Luxon. He was entitled after all.

      Interesting to read the lines prepared by staff and the way he can't deviate or ad lib.

      • AB 1.1.1
        10 April 2024 at 11:36 am

        Is there a journalist reckless enough to direct a question to Hamish Rutherford, who lurks at Luxon's side in pressers, rather than to Luxon himself? As in "Can I ask Hamish a question? I'd prefer to talk to the ventriloquist, not his dummy”.

  2. Phillip ure 2
    10 April 2024 at 7:54 am

    Yr heart has to go out to all the media people whose lives are being messed up today..

    They will have mortgages…and the like..

    It's just ghastly…

    • Graeme 2.1
      10 April 2024 at 8:33 am

      Not a nice time be laid off with a mortgage that you've been paying down for a while.

      BNZ, and I presume all the others removed the re-draw facility from their existing mortgage agreements this week. So you've got to make a new application to borrow funds to tide you over the initial unemployment until you find a new job.

      Fun times.

  3. Nic the NZer 3
    10 April 2024 at 8:49 am

    Where voucher schooling has been used the consistent conclusion is that it does not work as advertised.

    https://larspsyll.wordpress.com/2024/04/07/the-swedish-for-profit-free-school-disaster-2/

    • ianmac 3.1
      10 April 2024 at 8:59 am

      Seymour was an advocate for voucher schools I think.

    • Traveller 3.2
      10 April 2024 at 9:18 am

      There is quite a body of research that would disagree.

      The impact of voucher programs: A deep dive into the research (fordhaminstitute.org)

      I'm not convinced about the appropriateness of voucher systems in the NZ setting, although we already have a quasi voucher system (with scholarships etc). NZ has "a much smaller market for – and culture of – private schooling than many other OECD countries" (Research-Note-The-State-of-Schooling.pdf), however that same research (from 2020) found that "state schools are underperforming compared with state-integrated and private schools", and that has to change.

      • Nic the NZer 3.2.1
        10 April 2024 at 9:40 am

        That research doesn't even address the question, let alone challenge it. Since vouchers are a state level choice about how to run the entire education system then the effectiveness of that choice needs to address the performance of the whole education system in comparison to public funding. Examples of successful students, teachers or institutions do not make that point, regardless of how successful examples they may be.

        We should also keep in mind that there is a survival bias to successful examples. The schools which fail and are subsequently closed due to their failure or absorbed into the public system are not around to study (and there are numerous examples of this style even in NZ, where we already saw the evidence of these schools undermining student testing at a national level).

        • ianmac 3.2.1.1
          10 April 2024 at 9:46 am

          I think that Finland does not allow any form of private schools but expects that every state school is of the highest standard and funds it accordingly.

          • mac1 3.2.1.1.1
            10 April 2024 at 10:01 am

            They also as a society value education and understand the benefits to everyone in the society so, as expounded in 'Viking Economics', people are happy to pay higher taxes to get the mutual benefits of an educated work force.

            What is happening here? We are cutting services, encouraging a two tier system of health and education, not ensuring enough quality graduates for our needs, allowing to go overseas many of those graduates we do produce because of the lack of employment.

            We are cutting taxes and impoverishing our country by doing so, developing an unfair society and we will pay the cost of all that.

            • Nic the NZer 3.2.1.1.1.1
              10 April 2024 at 10:30 am

              You should disconnect the taxation issue from the funding of education. Its a choice to undervalue education and to systematically reduce the salary of teachers over time and that choice is not constrained by the amount of taxation collected by the government. The actual restriction the government faces is in the number of educators who will work in the public education system and the ability to train them to and have them perform well in their teaching.

              This is a relevant point with Lars P Syll being a member of the MMT group of economists (you could find posts on his blog describing this fact). It over complicates things to link these together when its much more clear that this National led govt really doesn't value public education very highly as a profession.

          • alwyn 3.2.1.1.2
            10 April 2024 at 12:23 pm

            That isn't actually true. They do exist.

            There are private schools, although not very many. Apparently about 3% or pupils go to private schools. They teach the State Curriculum and are financed by the state,

            An acquaintance, whose son lives there has told me that this is a reasonable review of the system. I don't have personal knowledge.

            https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-education-systems/finland/organisation-private-education

          • bwaghorn 3.2.1.1.3
            10 April 2024 at 12:27 pm

            Yip ban private schools and health insurance,

            • Michael P 3.2.1.1.3.1
              11 April 2024 at 6:32 pm

              If the public education and health systems were of a high enough standard you wouldn't need to ban private schools and health insurance, they just wouldn't exist.

        • Traveller 3.2.1.2
          10 April 2024 at 12:26 pm

          "That research doesn't even address the question, let alone challenge it. "

          The comment you made was "Where voucher schooling has been used the consistent conclusion is that it does not work as advertised."

          The Fordham research shows that voucher schooling can and does work, and points out the nuances.

          "We should also keep in mind that there is a survival bias to successful examples."

          And we should also point out that there in education (as with other disciplines) there is strong ideological bias that is often directed against alternatives to education.

          • Nic the NZer 3.2.1.2.1
            10 April 2024 at 1:25 pm

            First I will just point out that nobody is proposing alternatives to education which appear to be, no education.

            Now otherwise you have again failed to contend the important question regarding vouchers (which are a change to the school system as a whole), which is do they make the overall school system better, improve performance overall, etc… The question is not can some schools succeed in their mission when they are paid in vouchers.

            Now you can very well claim that the structure of public education is mostly driven by ideology all you want (I guess with the unstated implication that its not objectively well structured due to that), but the onus is still on research to demonstrate that the voucher alternative is actually better overall. The evidence is on the contrary that institutional competition for funding has and does damage the primary purpose of these institutions and most frequently undermines the standards of assessment well before it improves performance in those standards.

            • Traveller 3.2.1.2.1.1
              10 April 2024 at 1:50 pm

              "Now otherwise you have again failed to contend the important question regarding vouchers (which are a change to the school system as a whole), which is do they make the overall school system better, improve performance overall, etc…"

              That's not the question you posed. You said "Where voucher schooling has been used the consistent conclusion is that it does not work as advertised."

              "…which are a change to the school system as a whole…"

              Vouchers are not a change to the school system as a whole. They are a means for allocating financial resources.

              "do they make the overall school system better, improve performance overall, etc… "

              I don't know. Fordham's research says they do, but there are exceptions and nuances.

              "The evidence is on the contrary that institutional competition for funding has and does damage the primary purpose of these institutions and most frequently undermines the standards of assessment well before it improves performance in those standards."

              What evidence? How do you define the 'primary purpose'?

              I could point to work that suggests that competition between institutions is indeed healthy for those institutions and for student outcomes, including Does Competition Work in Education? | Center for Excellence in Education (cee.org) and The Education Competition Index: Quantifying competitive pressure in America’s 125 largest school districts (fordhaminstitute.org). But no doubt you could point to studies that present a different picture because this is not settled. But to suggest that competition damages 'the primary purpose of these institutions' is in my view an unsustainable claim.

              • Nic the NZer …
                10 April 2024 at 2:01 pm

                That is the question I posed. You may well not have understood that when you replied, but that is the question. And yes, vouchers are a change to the overall school system. You could very well set a voucher school in NZ today which would of course have zero chance of accepting voucher pupils, because the voucher system needs a systematic legislative change to even exist.

                Finally, you seem to be search for just what is the primary purpose of education institutions? That would be to provide education, at least to their students.

                • Traveller …
                  10 April 2024 at 3:06 pm

                  "That would be to provide education, at least to their students."

                  I would suggest that any definition should include some kind of qualitative ambition. Anyway…

                  "And yes, vouchers are a change to the overall school system."

                  We'll have to agree to disagree. We have vouchers of sorts operating in the education system already, and we have choice in the system already. Vouchers are merely a mechanism to simply funding of those choices and any others the government may wish to introduce.

                  • Nic the NZer …
                    10 April 2024 at 3:31 pm

                    Your saying these existing funding mechanisms, which you are referring to as effectively vouchers, are not implemented via govt legislation and budgeting? I mean what are you even disagreeing with here. NZ's education system is overwhelmingly public even as far as it contains private schools which are still quite largely publicly funded.

                    • Traveller …
                      10 April 2024 at 3:41 pm

                      "Your saying these existing funding mechanisms, which you are referring to as effectively vouchers, are not implemented via govt legislation and budgeting?"

                      No, I'm not saying that.

                      "NZ's education system is overwhelmingly public even as far as it contains private schools which are still quite largely publicly funded."

                      They are publicly funded as state schools are. I'm not sure what your point is.

                    • Nic the NZer …
                      10 April 2024 at 4:15 pm

                      Good so we seem to agree then that implementing a voucher system is a change to the overall school system. This is very clearly quite important to my claim, that if we are going to change the school system then one of the government goals should be to improve overall that system.

                      I mean if the govt wanted they could instead set up a bunch of new charter schools and then fund those over and above the level of public schools and if they were not incompetent in doing that they might very well succeed in creating some relatively successful new charter schools. But the justification of the public interest of such a policy appears to be does that improve the overall performance of NZs school system.

                      That is the supposed promise of voucher funding, that incentives are setup to make the delivery of education more 'efficient' and incentivized than the public sector (where efficient in this context supposedly means quite unrealistically having better teaching outcomes). But if that incentive structure undermines the overall education system performance its quite clearly not justified as an education policy.

                    • Traveller …
                      11 April 2024 at 6:39 pm

                      "Good so we seem to agree then that implementing a voucher system is a change to the overall school system. "

                      Please don’t misrepresent me. I repeat, voucher systems are not a change to the overall school system. Voucher systems are simply a funding mechanism to facilitate choice, choice that is already in place in many cases.

                    • Nic the NZer …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:34 pm

                      Awesome. In that case it seems we already in NZ have the worlds most comprehensive voucher school system in place, no further school system reform necessary. School choice delivered.

                    • Traveller []
                      12 April 2024 at 9:12 am

                      What gives you the idea we have ‘the world’s most comprehensive voucher school system in place’?

                    • Nic the NZer …
                      12 April 2024 at 9:20 am

                      You have convinced me of this. Apparently legislation of the school system is not needed to implement this, so I willed it into existence in my own thinking based on what you told me.

      • mac1 3.2.2
        10 April 2024 at 9:47 am

        Did the 2020 research state the reasons why the underperforming happened, and therefore help understand what would be needed to achieve parity in performance?

        • Traveller 3.2.2.1
          10 April 2024 at 12:36 pm

          For some reason my link to the reasearch broke – here it is Research Note: The State of Schooling | The New Zealand Initiative (nzinitiative.org.nz)– download the PDF from there. The answer to your question is that the report examines outcomes, not reasons for the outcomes, however section 3 does look at "which socioeconomic factors predict school authority attendance".

          The full report concludes with this:

          "Putting educational ideology aside, this report shows the absence of evidence for which schools are succeeding and which are falling behind. For too long, families have had to rely on prejudiced anecdotal evidence, and misleading league tables and decile ratings to decide the ‘right’ school for their child. More needs to be done and more can be done, but we must first use the right tools. Without the right information and tools, New Zealand will remain blind to serious educational problems and the successes that should be celebrated."

          • tWig 3.2.2.1.1
            10 April 2024 at 7:10 pm

            NZ Initiative… rw thinktank. Why do you believe their views on a voucher system are worth espousing on a lw opinion site?

            A solution in search of a problem, seems to me. Greater resource targetting to low decile schools is a better answer, surely, than a 'free-market' approach. The aim should be to provide equitable education to all NZ children.

            For examples of failed 2-tier education systems, you have only to look to UK (academies/charter schools run for profit, with expensive business management that sucks resource from the students and from the public sector); or to Oz (where private fee-paying schools are paid significantly more by the government than state schools).

          • KJT 3.2.2.1.2
            10 April 2024 at 7:14 pm

            If you have winner and loser Schools then you have winner and loser children, through no fault of their own.

            Finland's system works because it aims for a high standard for their entire education system. Something ours also aspires to, but gets knee capped periodically by Governments wedded to dogma, rather than informed research.

            New Zealand's has suffered from too much knee jerk simplistic bombastic "solutions'" by, mostly right wing, rote learning, cannon fodder for industry ideology. A two tier Education system.

            They want to have a basic system for the "bottom feeders" and an elite system for their own children. Ironically they want other tax payers to subsidise a higher standard education for their children, with all the advantages of smaller class sizes, subject ranges, skilled Teachers and personalised Teaching they oppose funding in State Schools.

            • Traveller 3.2.2.1.2.1
              10 April 2024 at 9:26 pm

              "If you have winner and loser Schools then you have winner and loser children, through no fault of their own."

              It doesn't have to be that way. There is plenty of research that shows competition can improved educational outcomes, but certainly there have to be controls.

              "New Zealand's has suffered from too much knee jerk simplistic bombastic "solutions'" by, mostly right wing, rote learning, cannon fodder for industry ideology."

              My experience is that it has come from right and left. My children were exposed to educational philosophies such as the Numeracy Project (Un(ac)countable: Why millions on maths returned little | The New Zealand Initiative (nzinitiative.org.nz)) that was trialed under a National government but rolled out under a Labour administration. They were also unfortunate victims of the 'whole of language' experiment, which began as a system introduced in the 1970's to complement phonics, but somehow saw phonics based teaching relegated to such an extent that literacy rates fell alarmingly. My severely dyslexic child in particular suffered from this absurd ideological movement, which occurred under governments of left and right.

              I am not an educationalist, but I am close enough to the outcomes of the education system to be deeply concerned about the quality of education in this country, and what it means for the future of NZ.

          • mac1 3.2.2.1.3
            11 April 2024 at 2:07 pm

            "socioeconomic factors predict school authority attendance". What is a 'school authority attendance'?

            This does not seem to help, if it is about attendance figures, as the question concerned overall academic underperformance.

            Attendance rates no doubt is a factor but what else?

            Your final paragraph says in essence that the NZInitiative don't know, but criticise what information and argument based on that information is already published.

            • Traveller 3.2.2.1.3.1
              11 April 2024 at 3:22 pm

              "What is a 'school authority attendance'?"

              The very first paragraph of the link defines it for you:

              "This research note takes a closer look at school effectiveness across state, state-integrated, and private schools, otherwise defined as school authority (or type) using the Initiative's school performance tool."

              Research Note: The State of Schooling | The New Zealand Initiative (nzinitiative.org.nz)

              "Your final paragraph says in essence that the NZInitiative don't know, but criticise what information and argument based on that information is already published."

              The research examined school effectiveness; it makes no claims about 'why' because that isn't its purpose.

              If you want to understand why NZ's educational system has been in such decline, that is a far more detailed conversation. However, this piece gives some clues (System in freefall: why NZ children face education tragedy | The New Zealand Initiative (nzinitiative.org.nz)), including this:

              "Like the governments before it, the current Labour-led administration and its Ministry of Education have shown themselves keen to jump on fashionable bandwagons. Anything that sounds kind, caring, inclusive and modern is in. Anything appearing old-fashioned, rigorous or demanding is out. In this way, over time, NZ’s education system has been hollowed out. There is no canon of knowledge enshrined in the curriculum. There is a lack of rigorous assessment. New teaching approaches are thrown at the system without proper monitoring or evaluation. The result is that the successive tiers of education play catch-up, catch up. Secondary schools are teaching what primary schools should have. And tertiary institutions spend an incredible amount of effort making up for the deficits of secondary schooling. NZ once prided itself in having a world-class education system. It has now become a country in education free fall."

              • mac1 …
                11 April 2024 at 5:30 pm

                I am expected to treat what is little more than rhetoric as being worthy of the title of research? The use of exaggeration and generalisation is evident.

                " Anything that sounds kind, caring, inclusive and modern is in. Anything appearing old-fashioned, rigorous or demanding is out."

                • Robert Guyton …
                  11 April 2024 at 5:35 pm

                  "… kind, caring, inclusive and modern…"

                  The Business Roundtable to a T.

                • Traveller …
                  11 April 2024 at 5:52 pm

                  The research note is in the PDF that you can download from the URL.

                  • mac1 …
                    11 April 2024 at 6:10 pm

                    The conclusions from whatever research was conducted are no more than political press releases and contaminate the research to the point of having to doubt their reliability and freedom from bias.

                    • Traveller …
                      11 April 2024 at 6:36 pm

                      The conclusions are drawn from the research. And that research is far from being an outlier. It's generally accepted that NZ's education system has been in decline for decades.

                    • mac1 …
                      11 April 2024 at 7:29 pm

                      Traveller, you wrote early on, "I am not an educationalist, but I am close enough to the outcomes of the education system to be deeply concerned about the quality of education in this country, and what it means for the future of NZ."

                      I was a teacher and professionally worked with those concerns and for those outcomes.

                      One thing I taught as an English and History teacher were the dangers of such errors as hyperbole, exaggeration, false and rash generalisations. You have not yet acknowledged that danger in what you are quoting. If you can't see it, then your conclusions are as faulted.

                    • Traveller …
                      11 April 2024 at 8:10 pm

                      "One thing I taught as an English and History teacher were the dangers of such errors as hyperbole, exaggeration, false and rash generalisations. You have not yet acknowledged that danger in what you are quoting. If you can't see it, then your conclusions are as faulted."

                      Have you read the actual research paper? What is your assessment of the actual data and conclusions reached?

                    • mac1 …
                      11 April 2024 at 9:11 pm

                      "The conclusions are drawn from the research."

                      These are the conclusions."Anything that sounds kind, caring, inclusive and modern is in. Anything appearing old-fashioned, rigorous or demanding is out."

                      What does that say about the research?

                      But we've been here before………

                    • Traveller …
                      11 April 2024 at 9:14 pm

                      "These are the conclusions."Anything that sounds kind, caring, inclusive and modern is in. Anything appearing old-fashioned, rigorous or demanding is out.""

                      That's commentary. Have you read the actual research paper and it’s conclusions and recommendations?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      12 April 2024 at 8:12 am

                      Traveller wrote:

                      "The research examined school effectiveness; it makes no claims about 'why' because that isn't its purpose."

                      Then why are you promoting vouchers?

                      Did the Business Roundtable suggest them?

                      You've quoted them extensively in your comments.

                    • Traveller []
                      12 April 2024 at 9:08 am

                      There are two threads to this conversation. One is about the decline in the education system, the other about vouchers. My comment you quoted is from the former.

                    • mac1 …
                      12 April 2024 at 10:14 am

                      Traveller. now that has been sorted. My error- it is commentary and obviously now the NZInitiative's generalisation is their reaction to their reading of the research. What was the response of the authors of the research to that summation of their work, I wonder.

                      It didn't help your argument, by the way, to be quoting the NZInitiative's reaction to support your original arguments. Distractive at best.

                      Is the original research sound in your opinion?

                      I wish you well on your travels.

                    • Traveller …
                      12 April 2024 at 12:04 pm

                      "Is the original research sound in your opinion?"

                      Yes. And it's supported by other work including

                      Now_I_dont_know_my_ABC_final-1.pdf (theeducationhub.org.nz)

                      Ed-Hub_Long-literacy-report_v2.pdf (theeducationhub.org.nz)

                      "I wish you well on your travels."

                      And you!

  4. Phillip ure 4
    10 April 2024 at 9:58 am

    The guardian website has the roundup of late nite u s. comedians…(always a recommended watch..)

    And Jon stewart does an effective dissection of gaza/america's relationship with israel..

    (And he has the first funny God/gender-wars joke I have heard…)

  5. Tiger Mountain 5
    10 April 2024 at 10:21 am

    Re this COC Govt. once Winston has to hand over his Deputy PM possie to Atlas Dave he could well turn on them. Not suggesting it would involve principles!

    Pre the last election he had a letter prepared for the Governor General withdrawing support for PM Ardern, which he never sent in the end, but he is certainly capable of being the worm that turned…again.

  6. Robert Guyton 6
    10 April 2024 at 10:37 am

    "If you have looked hard at the manner of things, if you have surveyed the troubles of our time, and cannot discover a way forward, do not despair. Do better. Grieve: mount an altar to the sensuous feelings of loss that swim through you. In the stinging fumes that redden the eyes, you might partly recover a clear vision of where to go. You might come to see that forward movement is no longer possible in these moments, and that the way to go was never forward anyway – but awk-ward: into the blackness of catacombs, into the shadows of sanctuary, into the riven cracks signed with the pen of the trickster, into the heat of compost, into the position of a prostrated man who knows that when the storm roars the thing to do is to be still. In that stillness, entire worlds churn."

    ~ Bayo Akomolafe

  7. newsense 7
    10 April 2024 at 11:33 am

    There’s no Fair Go in Luxon’s New Zealand.

  8. newsense 8
    10 April 2024 at 11:42 am

    The Newshub shutdown is fake panic. It’s TINA, when it’s really what the very right wing US owners wish to do, which is erode our democracy and make us more pliant.

    The disaster of the media and a National government of whatever kind this is is real, but this is opportunism. There will be no more Dame Jacinda’s doing the correct thing supported by the country’s media. We will have opposition for its own sake and the further rise to prominence of the extreme.

    • Dolomedes III 8.1
      10 April 2024 at 12:34 pm

      What is your evidence that "the very right wing US owners wish to … erode our democracy and make us more pliant"?

    • Ad 8.2
      10 April 2024 at 12:47 pm

      It's a life crisis for 250 people and their families and subcontractors.

    • Anne 8.3
      10 April 2024 at 5:50 pm

      I agree. This situation suits NAct very well. Pretty much no competition any more. TVNZ journalists/reporters will know if they run stories which do not present the govt. in a good light they are likely to be dumped on by this govt., which has demonstrated they have no ethical standards. It's happened before under the Muldoon administration.

      Probably the reason Melissa Lee has been sitting on her a***e doing nothing. She's been told not to.

      • Traveller 8.3.1
        10 April 2024 at 9:38 pm

        Hi Anne. IMHO, doing nothing is entirely the correct response. Newshub is a private company that has failed. Other private media formats are rising up and taking their place. It's simply the circle of life. and while unfortunate for those personally affected, no amount of corporate welfare should be put in their direction.

  9. weka 9
    10 April 2024 at 11:52 am

    Day 2 of Tickle v Giggle in Australia. Do women have the right to single sex spaces?

    Evolutionary biologist Colin Wright is giving evidence for Giggle today. Presumably because it's now necessary to establish what biological sex is. Tickle is arguing that they are female because of having a gender recognition certificate, and therefore should be treated as a woman (and allowed in women's only spaces).

    Wright will be presenting evidence that there are two sexes in humans, and that humans cannot change sex.

    https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets2/status/1777841201007472750

    • weka 9.1
      10 April 2024 at 11:58 am

      correction to the above. Tickle has been able to legally change his birth certificate to female, in Queensland. Queensland has no gender recognition certificate process.

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

      The key piece of legislation in this case is the Sex Discrimination Act 1984, initially set up because of women's rights and so that Australia would comply with being a signatory to CEDAW

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

      The SDA was amended in 2013 to include gender identity and sexual orientation.

      https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A02868/latest/text

      • Tabletennis 9.1.1
        10 April 2024 at 12:38 pm

        https://twitter.com/hjoycegender/status/1777596165191586127

        Helen Joyce (Director of Advocacy Sex Maters UK)

        "What it means to "live as a woman" in one pithy tweet. Roxy Tickle's evidence that he is a woman hinges on his repeated and ongoing intrusion on women only spaces, where by definition he is not permitted, because he's a man not a woman. Then he turns up in court and says that the very fact that he intrudes on women's spaces is evidence that he's entitled to be there. Trans logic is circular logic"

        • Robert Guyton 9.1.1.1
          10 April 2024 at 1:29 pm

          " Trans logic is circular logic"

          Is that like saying all Māori are animists?

          Trans logic. What is "trans logic"?

          • Tabletennis 9.1.1.1.1
            10 April 2024 at 2:10 pm

            Dear Robert

            I do appreciate all your attention you give me, but it is getting a bit too creepy.
            So, in case this needs a translation for you: back off.

            • Robert Guyton 9.1.1.1.1.1
              10 April 2024 at 2:39 pm

              Attention?

              I don't understand what you mean by "trans logic".

              • Shanreagh …
                10 April 2024 at 3:31 pm

                I would have thought the logic adopted by trans people…..on its literal and plain meaning.

                We have discussed ad nauseam the most egregious examples of this logic namely that some mechanism exists to change one's biologic sex from male to female.

                From this cherished held to heart belief from TRAs come

                1 the ability for a man ro say he is a woman and enter and race against women in sports or sports teams despite research showing that a male passing through male puberty maintains strength, muscle and other sports advantages no matter how they dress currently.

                2 the notion that as a man says he is a women he is able to enter into women's toilets and changing rooms. NB this need for men is tied to a conditon known as AGP Autogynephilia is defined as a male's propensity to be sexually aroused by the thought of himself as a female.

                https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22005209/#:~:text=Autogynephilia%20is%20defined%20as%20a,of%20himself%20as%20a%20female.

                3 the idea that a man should be held in a prison designated as one for women only. Some womens prisons now hold prisoners who have raped women.

                The list of these leaps in logic is endless leading to the shorthand 'trans logic' and I am sure you actually know this.

                I suspect this is part of the reason for Tabletennis’ comment about it being ‘creepy’ as well meaning people have explained over and again how male sexuality, in the form adopted by the trans community has an impact on women.

                My fundamental belief about trans is that it is at heart misogynistic. Men may believe, even support, the notion that whatever other men want to do in the way of sexuality is ‘ok by them’

                • Robert Guyton …
                  10 April 2024 at 3:47 pm

                  Well, I surprised you are comfortable conflating all trans people with a certain style of logic – are they not individuals, with individualistic views of the world? It's just like saying "women's logic" isn't it?

                  I thought you'd be all over that sort of broad-brush misrepresentation.

                  • Shanreagh …
                    10 April 2024 at 7:36 pm

                    Thanks for the sarcasm and the deliberate, I suspect, bearing mind how long this issue has been discussed here, misreading of my remarks.

                    What I was explaining is the current set of beliefs adopted as part of the trans arguments.

                    'Logic' is some times used as a simile for belief.

                    It is common to group people into say 'cohorts' to look at them and their beliefs as a group. This does not mean that as being part of this group they lose their identity. Of course not. They may still vote Labour, or Democrat, support certain sports teams etc.

                    What we are saying is that here is a group of people who have decided to believe things that are ? possibly? lacking in logic. Prime among these beliefs is that by dressing as a woman a man becomes a woman.

                    For me it has a smidgen of similarity to the battle between proponents of trans- and con- substantiation.

                    The overriding belief is that a man can turn into a woman by adopting dress or womanface or by just saying they are a woman.

                    My belief is this belief or 'trans logic' can be seen through a lens of misogyny, ie inherent male beliefs. Others explain it through the lens of psychiatric makeup ie as a paraphilia/psychiatric illness. These all help people to understand why someone would say they are some thing they are not or belive some thing that is a biological impossibility.

                    Looking at children we can see the influence of social contagion and still, that some may do all they can to ensure their child does not present when grown up, as gay. It is tragic that any parent would do this to a child.

                    Again as David says below

                    It’s fairly obvious Robert.

                    • David …
                      11 April 2024 at 9:43 am

                      Shanreagh, Something that I have noticed as I have aged… There have always been men who get quite wound up with women who don’t know their place. As they get older they become rather peculiar, and have funny ideas about women/girls. Unfortunately I’ve had to deal with the consequences within my own extended family. For some reason Robert cannot comprehend that women themselves should have a say in their own issues, without the input from a man, or transwomen.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 10:07 am

                      David – are you the person who calls trans people "funny little men"?

                    • David []
                      11 April 2024 at 11:31 am

                      No Robert, I’m referring to those funny little men, especially older men, who are very controlling of women and girls. For some reason they get wound up by the idea that women and girls are able to decide and do things without the consent of men. Anyone would think that a woman must get their opinions from that woman’s male owner.

                      Presumably they have a gender hierarchy, at the top Men, then transwomen (a man who believes that he is a women), then much further down the list it is women.

                      In saying that, in my extended family a number several are gay/lesbian. I have noticed how a young nephew and his boyfriend, as well as some of his friends, have disturbing views of girls, particularly lesbians. Disgusting is a term that comes to mind, but as they are gay/bisexual/non binary, they believe that they can say whatever they like about women and girls.

                      Anyway, for the life of me, I can’t fathom why you seem to be so invested with this issue. If woman are concerned about transwomen in women’s spaces, then it’s a discussion for women to have.
                      It’s kinda obvious to me, and maybe others, that you as a man, have an issue with women discussing this, especially if they have the audacity to disobey you, and hold and express views that contradict yours.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 5:41 pm

                      David writes:

                      "If woman are concerned about transwomen in women’s spaces, then it’s a discussion for women to have."

                      which begs the question, "Why does David comment so regularly on this issue?

                    • David []
                      12 April 2024 at 12:26 pm

                      Robert, the reason why I comment on this issue is because so many men (including men who identify as a woman) are telling women what to do. And heaven forbid, should a woman, or group of women, decide that they want to have a say in women’s issues, men shut them down.

                      In my opinion Robert, I get the impression, that you are one of those men who who gets a little wound up, if woman do their own thing, without your approval.

                      I appreciate that you may disagree with this, but it is the impression that I get from your comments around this topic.

                    • Michael P …
                      11 April 2024 at 6:56 pm

                      "…'trans logic' can be seen through a lens of misogyny, ie inherent male beliefs."

                      Which of course doesn't mean that 'misogyny' is an essential part of being male.

                      What are 'male beliefs'?

                      And David you say “If woman are concerned about transwomen in women’s spaces, then it’s a discussion for women to have.”

                      Women (and girls) are the ones directly affected but it’s not just women that are concerned. Men have Mothers, Wives, Daughters, Girlfriends, etc so many men are also concerned.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  10 April 2024 at 8:51 pm

                  Shanreagh said;

                  "I would have thought the logic adopted by trans people…" and I have to ask if you believe all trans people think the same.

                  If you don't think that, and I hope you don't, you'll perhaps review your statement.

                  • Shanreagh …
                    10 April 2024 at 9:13 pm

                    As a cohort, as a group. The overwhelming prime belief is that a person can trans into a being that they are not, by the mere expression of the belief.

                    So if a man says 'I am a woman therefore I am a woman or if 'I shop in womens clothing stores therefore I am a woman,…..etc

                    My belief that I am a princess does not mean I am a princess.

                    The belief that, say Roxy Tickle has, that he is a woman does not mean that he is a woman

                    Biological facts cannot be upstaged by beliefs.

                    I suspect you know this.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      10 April 2024 at 10:37 pm

                      With apologies to Hughes Mearns:

                      Yesterday, upon the stair,
                      I met a trans who wasn't there
                      They were not there again today
                      I wish, I wish they'd go away…

                      Biological facts cannot be upstaged by beliefs.

                      Facts of all kinds have been regularly 'upstaged' by human beliefs, not to mention by new knowledge, since time immemorial.

                      https://undsci.berkeley.edu/understanding-science-101/how-science-works/even-theories-change/

                      I certainly prefer 'facts', but beliefs are powerful – such are the mysteries of the human mind, and imho our species still has much to learn, time and circumstances permitting.

                      Trump judicial nominee said transgender children are part of ‘Satan’s plan’, defended ‘conversion therapy’
                      [20 Sept 2017]

                      Can a person be born with the wrong gender?

                      Biological sex in humans has been immutable throughout history.
                      If, at some time in humanity's future, that was no longer the case, who might be opposed to people changing their sex, and why?
                      The devil is in the 'anomaly' wink

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 9:39 am

                      not quite sure what you mean there. Biological sex in humans is the way that we reproduce. It is inherently binary: we have the people that have the physiology that produces eggs and the ones that have the physiology that produces sperm.

                      Are you suggesting that in the future we might reproduce differently from that?

                      It’s not possible for humans to change sex, and I don’t see a potential mechanism by which that might be possible in the future. Afaik, sex is hardwired in soon after conception, and leads to two different pathways of development (egg/sperm people) that includes chromosomes, differences in physical body shape and size which then feeds into differences in strength and capacity. Short of imagining a magic wand, how would it be possible to change all that (barring intervention at conception, which precludes any notion of informed consent)?

                    • Molly …
                      11 April 2024 at 9:54 am

                      @Drowsy M. Kram

                      "Facts of all kinds have been regularly 'upstaged' by human beliefs, not to mention by new knowledge, since time immemorial."

                      Yes. When a new concept or theory is proposed that answers more questions than it creates. Usually accompanied by good evidence pertaining to this change. This is not the case regarding human sex.

                      "Biological sex in humans has been immutable throughout history.
                      If, at some time in humanity's future, that was no longer the case, who might be opposed to people changing their sex, and why?"

                      Biological sex in humans is binary and immutable.

                      Historical truth, contemporary truth, and future truth.

                      Your last question is the stuff of SF fan-fiction, not the basis for legislative and policy changes, nor for significant iatrogenic harmful medical interventions.

                      However, I would answer it will be those who understand biology, psychology, ethics and safeguarding.

                    • Nic the NZer …
                      11 April 2024 at 10:09 am

                      Sex is determined by a mechanism originating before conception. The sex of the zygote is determined by the chromosome carried by the fertilizing sperm. In humans its called either an X or Y chromosome with the egg providing an X chromosome. The resulting genome is usually either XX (female) or XY (male).

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 10:14 am

                      Drowsy M.Kram posed an interesting question:

                      "Biological sex in humans has been immutable throughout history.
                      If, at some time in humanity's future, that was no longer the case, who might be opposed to people changing their sex, and why?"

                      It should be possible to entertain such a question, for the purpose of testing one's beliefs; that's what Ursula le Guin does with her "impossible sci-fi stories" and we like Ursula here, don't we 🙂

                      I especially liked the last line,

                      "who might be opposed to people changing their sex, and why?"

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 10:35 am

                      I’d take this more seriously if I saw any attempt by you to challenge your own beliefs. Did you miss the three explanations of what biological sex is and why it can’t be changed?

                      If you want to do an abstract thought experiment and reference Le Guin, you’d need to give some kind of explanation for how it’s relevant to this conversation today. But of course you won’t, because explaining is losing and it’s only other people, not yourself, that bother sharing their ideas and clarifying.

                    • Nic the NZer …
                      11 April 2024 at 10:22 am

                      Politics as science fiction Robert?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 10:40 am

                      weka – which of my beliefs are you referring to; ones I've stated, or those claimed by others on my behalf?

                      A quoted example would suffice, please and thank you.

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 10:59 am

                      take your pick. Any belief you hold in this conversation today, expressed or not, tell us what it is and how you challenge that belief. You talk about others needing to be challenged but I don’t see you applying that principle to yourself.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      11 April 2024 at 10:45 am

                      @RG (10:14 am)

                      Yes, Le Guin is a great favourite of mind/mine – so imaginative, and what would Homo sapiens be without the gift of imagination.

                      Embracing uncertainty can open up new possibilities – "the future’s not ours to see" – mind you, I don’t fancy the idea of thought police!

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 10:58 am

                      the problem here is that you appear to be both arguing that trans people are being disappeared and arguing in a conversation about the necessity of centring biological sex in law, policy and culture. Did you mean to erase women’s culture, or was that accidental.

                      I can’t tell if RG doesn’t care about women’s sex based rights, doesn’t understand them, or is simply arguing abstract whatevers for the sake of his own thought experiment agenda, but you I have more expectation of.

                      If a woman cannot call a man a man without permission from that man, there are no women’s rights.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 10:52 am

                      Nic – Drowsy has, I believe, posed a question that requires a suspension of belief, in order to uncover base motivations in those taking part in the thought experiment. Hunkering down and declaring that the proposal is impossible is a not-unexpected response. It's a thought exercise, designed to stretch thinking and reveal calcification of thought (I reckon). I find it interesting, in a way similar to reading science fiction 🙂

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 11:06 am

                      again, this would only have credibility if you demonstrated any kind of self reflection about your own beliefs. You think expressing biological sex matters hinders the thought experiment, but I see it as enhancing it. I can both do an imaginative exercise about fantasy of humans changing sex and hold an understanding of material reality. You on the other hand appear to want to ignore biological sex/material reality in favour of fantasy, how very binary of you.

                      You also utterly fail to take any account of why material reality matters. Transcendence of/denial of material reality is the patriarchal wet dream. It’s the core of male dominated religions that kill nature and hate women, as well as being core to trans activism where it has transhumanism as an end goal. It’s also why we have climate change and the ecological crisis. That the loss of women’s rights is happening at the same time isn’t a coincidence.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:09 am

                      So weka, you won't or can't provide one single quote to back your assertion?

                      Come on.

                      You wrote:

                      "Any belief you hold in this conversation today"

                      Okay.

                      "Drowsy M.Kram posed an interesting question".

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 11:19 am

                      You wrote:

                      “Any belief you hold in this conversation today”

                      What I actually said,

                      If you want to do an abstract thought experiment and reference Le Guin, you’d need to give some kind of explanation for how it’s relevant to this conversation today. But of course you won’t, because explaining is losing and it’s only other people, not yourself, that bother sharing their ideas and clarifying.

                      And you have yet again failed to answer. You don’t have to of course, and that leaves people free to come to their own conclusions.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:09 am

                      I can’t tell if RG doesn’t care about women’s sex based rights, doesn’t understand them, or is simply arguing abstract whatevers for the sake of his own thought experiment agenda…

                      I don't know either, weka, but I suspect – Lord save us from men (and women) with agendas.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:13 am

                      Well, Drowsy, you could ask.

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 11:17 am

                      Well, Drowsy, you could ask.

                      Why would anyone bother doing that when you so consistently fail to share or clarify your thinking, or answer direct questions?

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:16 am

                      No need to ask for myself, Robert.
                      I could ask on behalf of others, if that would be helpful smiley

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:18 am

                      Go on then, give it a whirl!

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:24 am

                      Wot?

                      weka[]

                      11 April 2024 at 11:19 am

                      You wrote:

                      “Any belief you hold in this conversation today”

                      What I actually said,

                      If you want to do an abstract thought experiment and reference Le Guin, you’d need to give some kind of explanation for how it’s relevant to this conversation today. But of course you won’t, because explaining is losing and it’s only other people, not yourself, that bother sharing their ideas and clarifying.

                      And you have yet again failed to answer. You don’t have to of course, and that leaves people free to come to their own conclusions.

                      weka[]

                      11 April 2024 at 10:59 am

                      take your pick. Any belief you hold in this conversation today, expressed or not, tell us what it is and how you challenge that belief. You talk about others needing to be challenged but I don’t see you applying that principle to yourself.

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 11:30 am

                      possibly the wrong quote, but if can’t see what I was meaning, or go back and figure it out yourself, I’m not doing the work for you.

                      You selectively quote to support your own point or position and make it harder to follow the other person’s argument. It’s dishonest.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:31 am

                      Ok Robert, here goes.

                      It appears that you have been given three options/characterisations to choose from, none of which seem particularly appealing (to me):

                      RG doesn’t care about women’s sex based rights,

                      [RG] doesn’t understand them [women’s sex based rights], or

                      [RG] is simply arguing abstract whatevers for the sake of his own thought experiment agenda.

                      I suspect it's none of the above, although it might be the third one – who knows what agendas lie in the hearts of men (and women.)

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:40 am

                      Thanks, Drowsy, I appreciate your courage in joining the fray. If you're happy, I'll quote and add my responses in italics.

                      "It appears that you have been given three options/characterisations to choose from, none of which seem particularly appealing:"

                      It certainly does appear that way. Yes, I have been "given"(unasked) those options. Again, yes, they aren't particularly appealing.

                      RG doesn’t care about women’s sex based rights,

                      [RG] doesn’t understand them [sex based rights], or

                      [RG] is simply arguing abstract whatevers for the sake of his own thought experiment agenda.

                      I suspect it's none of the above, but who knows."

                      You are quite right in your suspicion that, " it's none of the above ".

                      As to who knows, well, I know 🙂

                      The claim is often made, that I don't answer questions posed to me.

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 11:42 am

                      and in the absence of you saying what it is, I will continue to make my own conclusions based on what you have been doing on TS on this topic for some time.

                      The context for my three points was that I expect more from Drowsy. I have zero expectations of you now.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:42 am

                      "possibly the wrong quote," she says, breezily…

                      Certainly the wrong quote and to me, it matters.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:45 am

                      weka!

                      " It’s dishonest."

                      Are you accusing me of dishonesty?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:48 am

                      That's unkind. I'd like a second (mod) opinion, please.

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 11:52 am

                      it’s got nothing to do with me being a mod, and I’m not moderating you (if I was, it would be in bold), it’s my personal opinion.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 12:00 pm

                      Just wondering, weka, how many "Robert Guyton to weka" comments have been posted on TS over the years. My guess would be hundreds, at least. Despite that high level of interaction, you claim that I don't answer your questions. On the face of it, that would seem unlikely. If there were no "Robert Guyton to weka" comments, a person might wonder if I was refusing to engage with you, but that's clearly not the case. Is it possible, do you think, that you haven't been recognising that I am responding to you in an open, honest way, but that you aren't perceiving it thus?

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 1:15 pm
                      1. my comment was specifically about this topic. Other topics I see you sharing your thinking.
                      2. you appear to be conflating ‘replying to a comment’ with ‘answering a question’ or ‘clarifying one’s point’
                      3. it’s not just me, you do this with a range of people.
                      4. it’s possible and likely you are not being intentionally dishonest. However telling me that basically I’m the one with the misperception again demonstrates an unwillingness to examine your own beliefs despite using rhetoric to challenge others.
                      5. in the past day I have pointed out multiple times where you are avoiding clarifying or answering directly. In the face of that you mostly have continues to avoid clarifying or answering directly. 🤷‍♀️
                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 1:41 pm

                      it’s like you want to play but only on your terms. This is why, I think, David makes the points he does. I think he is wrong in the characterisation, but I can see why he gets that impression, and you never do anything to show that you are not what he says.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      11 April 2024 at 1:09 pm

                      I have zero expectations of you [Robert Guyton] now.

                      That's disappointing. To quote the wisdom of GoT:

                      A good act does not wash out the bad, nor a bad act the good. Each should have its own reward.
                      – King Stannis Baratheon [“I am your King!”]

                      I expect more from Drowsy.

                      What “more” do you expect, I wonder.

                      We all have views on this (and that), what's good (and bad), and one's own views are invariably the best (or so it seems to me), but I could never "have zero expectations" of either weka or Robert.

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 1:17 pm

                      on this particular topic, it’s RG’s behaviour I am pointing to. Who knows what his actual views are, he almost never says. We are left to guess, and then he objects. It’s such a long standing pattern of behaviour, I’m surprised I have to even explain it. But unlike RG, I think explaining is winning, for us all.

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 1:21 pm

                      as an example, from today, I laid out three potential explanations for RG’s behaviour/position. RG played some word games with that and eventually said it was none of them. What he didn’t so was say what he actually thinks. This is how he often/usually engages on this topic. All the time. He had the opportunity to clarify and he chose not too.

          • David 9.1.1.1.2
            10 April 2024 at 6:26 pm

            It’s fairly obvious Robert.

            Funny little men, who are so desperate to control women, that they indulge in circular logic that just goes around in circles and goes nowhere.

            Transwomen could always organise their own spaces, but for some reason they seem to be determined to take over women’s* spaces, & tell them what to do.

            * Women in this case meaning actual real women. Not men who believe that they are women.

            • Robert Guyton 9.1.1.1.2.1
              10 April 2024 at 6:38 pm

              David; that's just ditzy!

              Have you anything constructive to say on the issue?

            • Robert Guyton 9.1.1.1.2.2
              11 April 2024 at 11:03 am

              David wrote:

              "Transwomen could always organise their own spaces…"

              Please expand on this claim, David. Perhaps with regard public toilets. Or changing rooms at public swimming pools.

              Cheers!

              • weka …
                11 April 2024 at 11:08 am

                Plenty of discussion out there about third and NB spaces if you care to educate yourself.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  11 April 2024 at 11:10 am

                  Are you covering for David?

                  • weka …
                    11 April 2024 at 11:24 am

                    David made a valid point about TW organising their own spaces.

                    You framed that as a claim and asked him to expand on that, specifically on toilets and changing rooms.

                    I pointed out that there has been widespread discussion on that.

                    You attempt a derail.

                    My conclusion is that you have no intention of educating yourself and will continue with your sophistry (although tbf, a chunk of wha you do doesn't even meet the bar of sophistry).

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 11:26 am

                      I addressed my request to David, in response to a claim he made.

                      Still waiting for his response, though not holding my breath.

                      You may conclude whatever you wish. I'm hanging out for David's reply.

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 11:31 am

                      Still waiting for his response, though not holding my breath.

                      😂

                    • David []
                      11 April 2024 at 3:00 pm

                      Engaging with Robert reminds me of the parable of the donkey & the tiger..

                      As a kiwi bloke who is on the wrong side of 50 I have learned many things.

                      In this case, shall I say women’s issues.

                      When a woman (real/actual women, not transgender women) is in need to hear a man’s opinion or view on women’s issues, she will then advise you (the man, or transgender person) what your options/views will be. Your response will be, yes dear you are right, as usual.

                      Following this little piece of advice will allow you to enjoy the rest of your day.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 3:40 pm

                      I asked David to explain his claim, as it seemed to me he was quite wrong in making it.

                      You suggested I do my own research.

                      I chose rather, to ask David; I still can't see the error in that. Perhaps, weka, you could explain why directing a question about a claim made by an individual, to that individual, is insufficient?

                      David wrote;

                      ""Transwomen could always organise their own spaces…"

                      I don't think that's a reasonable claim. I hope David will respond and respond in a way that's more useful than this drivel 11 April 2024 at 3:00 pm

                    • David []
                      12 April 2024 at 12:33 pm

                      Robert, I find little point in replying to you, as you either don’t understand, or deliberately misunderstand what others are saying.

                      As for “drivel” you’re just reinforcing my thoughts regarding your attitude around this issue.

                      If you want to believe weird stuff, that’s up to you.

          • Molly 9.1.1.1.3
            10 April 2024 at 8:30 pm

            "Is that like saying all Māori are animists?"

            No.

            • Robert Guyton 9.1.1.1.3.1
              10 April 2024 at 8:54 pm

              It seems very much like that, claiming that one group of people have one “logic", which is what you are supporting.

              It's just not the case., is it.

              • Molly …
                10 April 2024 at 9:17 pm

                "It seems very much like that," – but it's not.

                The reasoning behind "Transwomen are women" is an example of circular logic.

        • Robert Guyton 9.1.1.2
          10 April 2024 at 1:46 pm

          A home-owner could live as a homeless person, simply by getting out on the street and living rough.

          • Mikey 9.1.1.2.1
            10 April 2024 at 6:05 pm

            But that doesn't mean s/he is a homeless person. Is that your point?

            • Robert Guyton 9.1.1.2.1.1
              10 April 2024 at 6:08 pm

              My point is, they live as a homeless person. just a someone might live as a woman.

              • Shanreagh …
                10 April 2024 at 7:10 pm

                Sure they could live as a women meaning dress as a women etc. Living/dressing does not alter biology though.

                The leap in logic occurs when the wish to live/dress then is magicked by some alchemy to say they are a woman. This cannot happen any more than me dressing as a princess will make me a princess or dressing in a green suit will make me into Kermit the frog.

                To take the princess analogy further having dressed as a princess I make it my life's work to insist that all that I meet treat me as a princess. First I insist, ie compelled in speech to call call me 'Your Highness', I may change my surname to reflect a long obscure set of Germano-Spanish Portugese royalty that I say are my ancestors. I then force people to curtsy to me. I may change my name my Deed Poll to Princess Susannah. I then insist on getting some sort of payment from the Govt.

                All the way along kind people are helping me to check out that I am seeing the world correctly, to get help, to offer help. They may try to stop me gatecrashing events where real royalty is. Because I am so fixed in my ideas I may be arrrested if I breach protocols/boundaries around real Royalty as I am a threat, as imposters always are, to real Royalty.

                To live as a woman does not involve compelling people to act as if you are a woman ie being part of your delusions. It does not involve going into womens safe spaces or into womens sports teams or even into womens prisons.

                Aside from seeing drag performers, I worked with one man who dressed as a woman and he never expected that we belived he was a woman and he always used the mens toilets at work. A gentle soul we all treated him with kindness/caring. He did not change his name to a female one. He was good at his job, he just like dressing as a woman.

                Funny little men, who are so desperate to control women, that they indulge in circular logic that just goes around in circles and goes nowhere.

                as David says or the violent, foul men of the type that Weka has pictures. often caught on camera masturbating in front of women in toilets, of raping women in prisons.

                As I said above the whole concept now is one of misogyny, adopting womanface. Many are fetishists or autogynephiliacs. Many would benefit from counselling and care.

                What we as a society do not need to do is to pander to their delusions by making woman the props to support deluded men.

                I suspect you may know this though.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  10 April 2024 at 9:03 pm

                  "Sure they could live as a women meaning dress as a women…"

                  along with other womanish behaviours… live as a woman.

                  Yes, that's correct and what I was saying.

                  "Living/dressing does not alter biology though."

                  I didn't say it does. You folk read that in, as you do.

              • gsays …
                10 April 2024 at 7:10 pm

                Doesn't make them homeless as they have a home, just as it doesn't make them a woman.

                And you reckon David was being ditzy!

                Edit; “Trans logic. What is “trans logic”?
                Trans Woman is a woman = Trans logic.

                • Shanreagh …
                  10 April 2024 at 7:38 pm

                  Edit; “Trans logic. What is “trans logic”?
                  Trans Woman is a woman = Trans logic.

                  Got it in one gsays.

                  That is the prime illogical belief.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    10 April 2024 at 7:44 pm

                    I genuinely believe you folk have messed-up thinking and I mean that most kindly.

                    • Molly …
                      10 April 2024 at 8:29 pm

                      Doesn't matter how you mean it.

                      Point out the error in calling it circular logic:

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      10 April 2024 at 8:41 pm

                      "It", Molly?

                      Calling what "circular logic?

                    • gsays …
                      10 April 2024 at 8:44 pm

                      "…messed up thinking…"

                      You are the one that wants us to share your belief that someone with a home is homeless.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      10 April 2024 at 8:48 pm

                      "You are the one that wants us to share your belief that someone with a home is homeless."

                      That's not what I said, gsays, I wrote:

                      "My point is, they live as a homeless person. just a someone might live as a woman."

                      as as as as as as

                      Can you see the difference?

                    • Molly …
                      10 April 2024 at 9:21 pm

                      @Robert Guyton

                      "It"? – that which you mean kindly.

                      "Calling what "circular logic?"

                      Going around in circles a bit yourself here, so linking to my reply to get you back on the straight and narrow:

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-10-04-2024/#comment-1995893

                • Robert Guyton …
                  10 April 2024 at 8:46 pm

                  gsays; do you believe all trans people believe/claim that "Trans Woman is a woman"?

                  Or are you painting all trans people with the same brush, in the same way someone might say, "All women…blah, blah, blah"?

                  If you don't mean that, then you might look at your statement,

                  Trans Woman is a woman = Trans logic." with fresh eyes.

                  • gsays …
                    10 April 2024 at 8:57 pm

                    Shanreagh has replied to you at 9.1.1.2.1.1

                    The answers to your many questions are there.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      10 April 2024 at 8:58 pm

                      They have missed it, just as you have.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      10 April 2024 at 9:27 pm

                      So Robert if a man dresses as a woman then presumably there is no onus on society to go along with the belief that this dressing/living has somehow made him a woman?

                      Then while dressed as a woman surely a man would have no expectation of going into women's safe spaces or to play in women's sports.

                      He remains a man just dressed a little differently so he uses the male toilets and continue to play in men's sport.

                      Presumably you will agree with this as I have confined to to just dressing as a woman.

                      The examples of the trans logic we are facing is

                      1 when a person feels that dressing means morphing into a woman,

                      2 that dressing entitles a man to go into women's toilets

                      3 that dressing entitles a man to play in women's sports.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 8:14 am

                      So Shaneagh if you go to a party as a pirate, you could just as easily go to a party as a woman. You could spend your time living as a homeless person, even though you owned a home. If there is such a thing as trans logic, there will also be lesbian logic. Is there?

                    • Shanreagh …
                      11 April 2024 at 8:32 am

                      Robert

                      The examples of the trans logic we are facing is

                      1 when a person feels that dressing means morphing into a woman,

                      2 that dressing entitles a man to go into women's toilets

                      3 that dressing entitles a man to play in women's sports.

                      Are you able to address these? After all this is the topic of the conversation.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 8:46 am

                      It may have been the topic of your conversation, Shanreagh, but it wasn't mine. I asked only about just 2 things. I'm disinterested in the other points raised by others here and have made no comments about them, consequently I don't feel compelled to answer questions on them.That you (and others) think I hold certain views about them is a mistake that compounds every time one of you claims this or that about my position.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      11 April 2024 at 9:02 am

                      I don't understand what you mean by "trans logic".

                      Robert Guyton 9.1.1.1.1.1

                      10 April 2024 at 2:39 pm

                      It is this I am trying to explain. Perhaps it would be clearer if you accepted I have (tried) to answer this, thanked me and then moved on to your different questions.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 10:00 am

                      Thank you, Shanreagh, for trying. You've given me examples of what you believe are manifestations of "trans logic", but that's not what I'm asking for. I'm trying to understand how anyone can describe/define the way a group of people think by calling it, "X-logic". For example, can we justifiably use the term, "lesbian logic", or "Asian logic". Do you think, "trans logic" means the logic employed by trans people? Would you also say, "Asian logic" when describing the way Asians view the world?

                    • weka []
                      11 April 2024 at 12:26 pm

                      What’s meant here is TRA logic. It’s an ideological belief set and political movement that uses circular logic.

                      it’s a mistake to see TRA = trans or vice versa.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      11 April 2024 at 3:57 pm

                      weka – your comment @

                      11 April 2024 at 12:26 pm

                      "What’s meant here is TRA logic. It’s an ideological belief set and political movement that uses circular logic.

                      it’s a mistake to see TRA = trans or vice versa."

                      seems to be, at last, addressing my original question:

                      "What is "trans logic"?

                      Dozens of responses later and I'm still in the dark, but perhaps what you have said will cast some light: are you meaning that the phrase, "trans logic" is not a valid one, and that TRA logic is?

                    • weka []
                      12 April 2024 at 9:14 am

                      ‘trans logic’ is vague. What Joyce was talking about is the ideology. Which obviously is not something that all trans people subscribe to. It’s better to think about TRA logic, or gender identity ideology logic. Circular reasoning is not uncommon there.

  10. Visubversa 10
    10 April 2024 at 12:32 pm

    The long awaited Cass Review final report is out.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/09/cass-review-nhs-children-gender-dysphoria

    It covers all the things that Gender Critical people have been saying for several years including:

    • Acknowledgment of the lack of evidence for the benefits of cross-sex hormones, the need for caution and the importance of data collection and follow-up. NHS England must now follow the recommendation for a review of cross-sex hormones and include them in a broader research programme.
    • The recommendation for provision of specialised NHS services for detransitioners and those who regret their medical transition. This is an urgent requirement.
    • Insufficient research on social transition, inconclusive evidence of any benefits but clear risk of creating persistence of an identity that would in all likelihood have resolved by itself. Governments should use this information to end the practice of social transition in schools carried out by untrained adults. The impact on other children of adults pretending a child has changed their sex is outside the terms of reference for this report, but it is something the government must address.
    • Recognition that no formal science-based training in psychotherapy, psychology or psychiatry teaches or advocates ‘conversion therapy.’ Normal “exploration of complex psychosocial challenges and/or mental health problems an adolescent may be experiencing is essential to provide diagnosis, clinical support and appropriate intervention”, and it is harmful to equate this approach to ‘conversion therapy.’
    • Tabletennis 10.1
      10 April 2024 at 12:46 pm

      Visubversa
      "The long awaited Cass Review final report is out."

      And now see what the Te Whatu Ora is going to do with this information…Their long awaited report on the use, safety and effectiveness, of puberty blockers has still not seen the light of day.

    • tWig 10.2
      10 April 2024 at 7:56 pm

      And to balance the Cass report, a critique from those raising trans children in the UK.

      Points from the critique:

      1. Parents interviewed by Cass were looking for depathologisation of trans children, and decentralisation of supporting services away from a single UK centre, and into mainstream medicine, as seen in other countries.

      Instead, the report focusses on unpicking why children are trans, as if it's a mental health problem, not on providing the best medical support for trans kids and their families.

      2. The review panel was 'naive', having no one experienced with the trans research community in the UK or internationally involved in the report output. Cass herself has no experience of trans people in her social circle. This is like reviewing Maori health initiatives without anyone Maori being part of debate, vs only being interviewed.

      3. As an outcome of this, the Cass report is unbalanced in naming 'trans ideology' as a bias, without a corresponding recognition of the significant anti-trans bias pushed over the past 5 years in the UK.

      4. No trans treatment processes from outside the UK were evaluated for effectiveness as potential alternative models to to GID service. Once again, the Cass framed trans kids as a 'mental health problem' issue, completely erasing the identity of trans kids and their families.

      • weka 10.2.1
        11 April 2024 at 7:32 pm

        Instead, the report focusses on unpicking why children are trans, as if it's a mental health problem, not on providing the best medical support for trans kids and their families.

        I'd like to know if that's really true. I haven't read the report, but everything I have since in the last day, including interviews with Hilary Cass, shows that there are issues with large numbers of children with concurrent mental health issues, abuse histories and undiagnosed autism. All things that GIDS was ignoring in favour of affirmation only.

        I used to think that transness wasn't a pathology, and I think that could be true, but needing hormones and surgery suggests to me that it is. And what is gender dysphoria if it's not a mental health issue? I think that the need to transition via extreme body modification is something that is largely culturally imposed. If we lived in societies that valued gender non-conformity, then the whole born in the wrong body bullshit wouldn't exist like it does.

  11. Joe90 11
    10 April 2024 at 3:30 pm

    I move we scrap official limits on the acceptable number of politicians clubbed to death, too.

    Pricks.

    An official limit on the acceptable number of sea lion deaths in commercial fishing nets is no longer necessary, Fisheries Minister Shane Jones says.

    Despite the number of sea lion pups inexplicably plunging by almost a third last year, Jones has scrapped the Fishing Related Mortality Limit (FRML), which sets the maximum number of sea lion deaths each year before a squid trawl fishery in the Southern Ocean has to close.

    The New Zealand sea lion, or rāpoka, is the world’s rarest and with a population of just 10,000 features on an international “red list” of endangered species.

    Last year, an annual count was so low it triggered a government review of squid fishing in their foraging grounds, around the remote subantarctic Auckland Islands.

    https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/350240291/death-limit-endangered-new-zealand-sea-lions-scrapped

    • Bearded Git 11.1
      10 April 2024 at 4:28 pm

      Joe-IMHO very few of the things this government is doing are vote winners.

      Standardistas need to compile a list of these stupid/crazy/crap policies to roll out at the next election and say "do you really want to continue with this lot in charge?"

    • Tabletennis 11.2
      11 April 2024 at 2:56 pm

      @Joe
      "An official limit on the acceptable number of sea lion deaths in commercial fishing nets is no longer necessary, Fisheries Minister Shane Jones says."

      I believe the only reason Shane Jones became an MP again, so he can abuse use his position to give any conservationist, NGO, conservation volunteer, animal lover, etc the middle finger.

      Yet there is no kai to be found on a dead planet.
      This government doesn't seem to include the costs, to the tax payer, associated with all the hours put into legislation and laws such that we do not have a society where some people have all the rights and others non.

  12. Robert Guyton 12
    10 April 2024 at 5:30 pm

    "Teanau Tuiono's Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill, which would correct one of the great historical crimes of the Muldoon era. National will likely vote that down too, out of racism. "

    ACT are supporting the bill!
    http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/04/members-day.html

  13. ianmac 13
    10 April 2024 at 7:13 pm

    Question Time on Demand today seems stuck on 28 March. Anyone else get it?

    • Robert Guyton 13.1
      10 April 2024 at 8:42 pm

      It is stuck. Can't understand why that might be.

    • Traveller 13.2
      12 April 2024 at 12:49 pm

      The Parliament website has changed it's format, and you're probabaly looking at a cached version.

      Go to home page – New Zealand Parliament (www.parliament.nz).

      Click 'Watch'.

      Select 'On Demand' from the top banner bar.

      Under "Selected Video" you will see a date that is currently playing, or you can select a date from the filtering dialogue box on the right hand side.

      The site no longer allows you to choose a particular question form a list of questions. On the right there is a scrolling list of speakers. You will need to scroll down to the name of the person asking the first question, or the particular question you are interested in, click on the name and the video will begin.

      I'm finding it very clunky, but it does work. Hope that helps.