web analytics

Open mike 15/07/2021

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, July 15th, 2021 - 174 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 …

174 comments on “Open mike 15/07/2021 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Robert Guyton 1
    15 July 2021 at 8:05 am

    "Last night, about a crowd of 160 people attended an AAG meeting in Gore.

    The audience listened to topics including why there is no evidence there is a climate emergency and three pieces of legislation of concern to farmers.

    Retired science teacher Peter Foster, of Waikouaiti, and AAG co- founders Ms Pennycock and Robert Wilson addressed the crowd.

    Mr Wilson said he always encouraged people to do their own research to find out if what the group shared was true.

    ‘‘Don’t take everything we say as gospel.’’

    "Pretty early on there were some wild conspiracy theories being peddled, regarding the United Nations’ Agenda 21, and that organisation’s leading of a shadowy global cabal dictating to our Government.

    "Having worked within government, frankly, that’s nonsense, but because there’s an underlying tension founded on legitimate policy concerns currently, it could be persuasive for some, which is unhelpful."

    He said a young farmer attempting to voice his concerns about the direction of the meeting was shouted down by other audience members.

    "When you get people stirred up enough, it’s easy to incite them to civil disobedience.”"

    Mayor Bryan Cadogan

    https://www.odt.co.nz/rural-life/rural-people/rural-group’s-‘wild-conspiracy-theories’-criticised

    • Ad 1.1
      15 July 2021 at 8:19 am

      A lot will hinge on the scale of the protests this week. If there's a decent showing, Act will capitalise.

      • Robert Guyton 1.1.1
        15 July 2021 at 8:50 am

        There will be a huge turnout. Even the more level-headed of our rural brothers are darkly intimating ongoing and escalating actions.

        • Sanctuary 1.1.1.1
          15 July 2021 at 10:00 am

          Canterbury farmers inparticular have already shown they have a Pinochet like relationship with democracy is it threatens their water rights. Basically, they'll threaten resorting to violence if the government actually gets serious about dirty dairying / water pollution and allocation of water.

          This action is merely a front for a group of latifundia corporate farmers who are preparing to fight to the death to protect their ability to help themselves to scarce public water and pollute waterways at will.

          • greywarshark 1.1.1.1.1
            15 July 2021 at 11:18 am

            latifundia – a large landed estate or ranch in ancient Rome or more recently in Spain or Latin America, typically worked by peasants or slaves.

            Interesting word Sanctuary. And it is my view that is the direction we are going in here in all of NZ. We aren't a British colony any more but various governments are racing towards making us a Global-Wealth one.

            Your summation of the 'rentier' farming situation is probably correct, and the rural rent-a-crowd that turn up to such meetings find fat pockets and promises of more, a valuable prompt to action.

    • Anne 1.2
      15 July 2021 at 9:55 am

      "Pretty early on there were some wild conspiracy theories being peddled, regarding the United Nations' Agenda 21, and that organisation's leading of a shadowy global cabal dictating to our Government".

      Oh that one is widespread. They are conflating neo-liberal dogma (which they would have voted for) and global market cooperation. I suspect they imagine there's a huge cave somewhere with lots of sinister little green men plotting to bring down the world and rebuild it again in their own evil image.

      I also love the way they project their behaviour of falsehoods, manipulation and deceit onto the shoulders of the internationally renowned experts supported by their respective governments and the United Nations.

      NB. I can't cut and paste quotes anymore. Typed it in long hand.

      • Forget now 1.2.1
        15 July 2021 at 11:30 am

        There's also the socially toxic notion of Sovereign Citizenry. But I am finding it hard to quote on Mobile today myself – something to do with recent updates?

        This at the end from the AAG cofounder seems worth typing though:

        Don't take everything we say as gospel.

    • Shanreagh 1.3
      15 July 2021 at 5:00 pm

      Sadly this talk of conspiracy theories and other ideas does not surprise me.

      I spent a month visiting friends and family in the farming community in Southland earlier in the year. After finding we were not able to talk about the March 15th tragedy ( 'PM had no right wearing the hijab scarf' and 'gun legislation over reaction') or the Covid pandemic ('PM called the lock down too late', 'unfair to call the Bluff cluster the Bluff wedding cluster as most did not live in Bluff and anyway the virus was caught at the after match function in Invercargill the next day')

      …I then mentioned how I was doing my bit by completing the MOH flutracker each week and the reports that came out were always interesting

      https://info.flutracking.net/reports-2/new-zealand-reports/

      Stony silence with the distinct impression that govt depts wanting anonymised information on whether you had a sore throat, or a sniffle, cough or runny nose so they could track this through the community was beyond the pale. Big Govt at its worst…..

      This is a community where the Nats held out against the prevailing swing to Labour, where there are still instances of what I call cruelty to animals with cattle forced to calve, yet again, in bogs and knee deep mud

      https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/rural/2021/07/animal-welfare-campaigners-condemn-otago-southland-farmers-caught-grazing-stock-on-substandard-paddocks.html

      Where I saw instances of tradies advertising on their websites, presumably as a selling point, that they support guns by saying the staff go hunting etc.

      Hunters sure, each to our own hobbies, but as a selling point and either oblivious or uncaring as to the effect on possible clients who did not support this type of life?

      This is anecdotal sure but it shocked me to the core…….

  2. millsy 2
    15 July 2021 at 8:14 am

    Mods — I withdraw all allegations that I made about Glenn Greenwald at the end of last month.

  3. Sacha 3
    15 July 2021 at 8:27 am

    Move on. https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/gender-and-society/300356898/settling-the-debate-oldtime-politicians-grasping-at-gender-and-race-for-relevance

    Society is just moving on. Younger generations are very comfortable with diverse genders, and are being brought up in age of increasing social awareness.

    Gen Z is leading the way.

    We also recognise that old arguments have caused real hurt to vulnerable minority groups. From a place of privilege, these people can argue that minorities should be afforded fewer rights. They wrongly suggest indigenous or trans identities are not valid.

    • Sacha 3.1
      15 July 2021 at 8:31 am

      Brilliant analogy for how nonsensical some of the discussion around here has become lately.

      https://twitter.com/postingdad/status/1415046197237084166

      https://twitter.com/postingdad/status/1415047798240645122

          • Nic the NZer 3.1.1.1.1
            15 July 2021 at 8:56 am

            As a junior coach, its clear Football doesn't need a campaign to convince parents their kids will be safer in Football rather than Rugby.

            • tc 3.1.1.1.1.1
              15 July 2021 at 9:53 am

              Totally ! Also a game which offers a lot more opportunity globally than rugby ever will.

            • Morrissey 3.1.1.1.1.2
              15 July 2021 at 11:29 am

              Of course, as you well know, Nic, rugby is also a kind of football. The very creation of the word "soccer" in nineteenth century England is confirmation of that fact: it was necessary to distinguish Association Football from Rugby Football.

              • Nic the NZer …
                15 July 2021 at 11:33 am

                Finally somebody who groks it. Morrissey, if only you had written that thread it would have contained humour.

              • left for dead …
                15 July 2021 at 8:06 pm

                Morrissey. It is rugby (union) not football.

                • Morrissey …
                  15 July 2021 at 9:17 pm

                  ?? When did rugby football (or rugby union football if you want to be super-precise) stop being football? Has it suddenly changed into hockey? Do they play with a puck instead of a football now?

          • CAnker the pig fucker 3.1.1.1.2
            15 July 2021 at 10:04 am

            tee hee, but actually gender critical women say yes we have nothing against "rugby" we just don't want them rugby players bringing their balls on to our playing fields or in our change rooms!

            • Rosemary McDonald 3.1.1.1.2.1
              15 July 2021 at 10:34 am

              ….gender critical women say yes we have nothing against "rugby" we just don't want them rugby players bringing their balls on to our playing fields or in our change rooms!

              And here was me thinking the whole 'shape of the balls' analogy was out of place in this discussion! laugh

            • Nic the NZer 3.1.1.1.2.2
              15 July 2021 at 11:07 am

              The only controversial thing in that thread is the use of Soccer ahead of Football. You will be language policed in some contexts for that (I have been as a masters player and coach before) but since postdad doesn't fit in Football this comedic opportunity fell wanting on their lack of knowledge.

              • Morrissey …
                15 July 2021 at 11:33 am

                Most people in this country, and in Australia and the United States use the clear and uncontroversial term "soccer" for the association game. "Football" usually means rugby football in this country, Australian Rules football across the ditch, and in America it is (ridiculously) that game played on a gridiron where hardly anything happens and hardly anyone is allowed to touch the ball, let alone kick it.

          • Chris 3.1.1.1.3
            15 July 2021 at 11:32 am

            What do the heads of the NZ Police and NZ Rugby have in common?

            A misguided belief their subordinates are positive role models.

          • TeWhareWhero 3.1.1.1.4
            15 July 2021 at 1:46 pm

            What's that saying about sarcasm being the lowest form of wit? Okay, I'll accept low grade satire and I accept it's from someone who's on a high from being dealt a get-out-of-misogyny-jail-free card to add to his already trump-filled hand courtesy of being a white, young, able-bodied, educated, socially & geographically mobile bloke. After all, it's not just okay to attack TERFs – it's positively de rigeur for those on Neo-liberalism's left wing. Get your progressive credentials upgraded by giving an easy target a kicking- what's not to like?

      • weka 3.1.2
        15 July 2021 at 10:10 am

        thanks for letting us know you don't understand what the GCF politics are. Not to worry, there are many the same including postdad.

        One of the best things I've been reading is Kathleen Stock's Material Girls. She's a philosopher at University of Sussex and is at the forefront of the GCF movement in the UK. The starting premise for the book is that we have to understand each other's position in the best possible interpretation if we want to debate in good faith. The first part of the book is outlining the GA (gender activist) positions as she understands them as made by GAs.

        This is in stark contrast to the bullshit on all sides where people run arguments about their opposition when they don't even know what the opposition believes (Standardistas will be familiar with my short patience for people who make up shit about what other people think, it makes it impossible to debate when that happens). If you want to know what SUFW believe, talk to them. You don't have to agree but you will at least understand then what is being talked about.

    • Muttonbird 3.2
      15 July 2021 at 8:49 am

      I was thinking of posting that article but didn't because I thought it would raise the temperature too much.

      Glenn McConnell is very young. More activist reporter than respected journalist at this stage. I find while his premise is usually sound and is firmly grounded in the new generation, his language when getting those ideas across is a bit loose and sometimes needlessly overdramatic. He'll get better.

      This one is pretty brutal but it's important because he does speak to the trans community who are without political (?) funding like SUFW are:

      But when you speak to transgender Kiwis about Speak Up For Women, you hear stories of fear and hurt.

      They point out that Speak Up For Women is unusually invested in how transgender people live their lives. The group has lobbied against gender-affirming medicine for transgender teenagers, calling it “experimentation on children”.

      In other submissions and posts, the group has suggested transgender people were pushed into it by families who thought it “easier” to be trans rather than gay. That’s clearly nonsense, and such claims only act to attack the mana of transgender people.

      I agree with the basic premise that conservative groups are highjacking race for relevance, see Don Brash, David Seymour, Judith Collins, etc.

      It's not so clear cut with SUFW. However the same is true that right wing politics has highjacked gender issues, SUFW now heavily involved at the highest level in NZ with Ani O'Brien now working for Judith Collins.

      • millsy 3.2.1
        15 July 2021 at 9:01 am

        I have been studying Ani's Twitter feed for a while now, and it was only a matter of time before she joined National's team.

        The concern trolling gradually intensified.

      • CAnker the pig fucker 3.2.2
        15 July 2021 at 9:40 am

        Ok Sacha and Muttonbird.

        I am going to stick to the issues here. I think you are saying Muttonbird that SUFW receive govt funding? If so that is untrue. You have made a lot of assertions about SUFW which are untrue. Including that they are religious conservatives. If you go to their website and click on about us, or some such tab you will see that many of its members have very long histories of social activism, particularly for feminist issues.

        You are saying that people say that SUFW have lobied against gender affirming medicines for children. That is true. The evidence for puberty blockers is unconvincing, and NICE (National Institue of Clinical Evidence) in their meta analysis of their efficacy say that there is no evidence they help with mental health problems, body image or gender dysphora. I have posted the link on here before. Happy to find it and post it again. They also recommend that if these drugs are prescribed that the be done so as part of a well conducted research trial with the need for high levels of consent by participants. I feel very concerned that kids at 16 years old are been given full masectomies and then hysterectomies at 18 years old. What about you? Are you o.k. with that? And cross sex hormones? The young person of 23 in the Listener article who is a biological women now has a male voice and an adams apple and really regrets her decision to transition. It unclear how effective de-transitioning will be. How do you feel about this. Is this o.k. with you? Breast binding in young women, causing breathing difficulties.

        Because one thing I notice in these debates is I rarely get a response to these sorts of questions from people who oppose the SUFW arguements.

        The sciene of trans women in sports is well established. I have already posted on here a radio nz article about Ross Tucker, a sports scienctist, who did a report for International Rugby. Happy to post the link again. While hugely apologetic to the trans community, he said the reality was biological women face a 30% increase in injury from tackling if trans women play. He also outlined in what way males have signicant advantages over women in sports. The 10,000 fastest male runners can beat the fastest women. Do you see this as an issue? Do you see why we might want to keep women's sport for women as set out in the Human Rights Act?

        The issue of change rooms and public toilets. Let me be very clear here. In the Human Rights Act of 1993 it specifies that women have separate facilities for public safety and decency. I don't want to share these facilities with males who identify as women and haven't transistioned. SUFW are already hearing reports of this happening in NZ and women being put off going to places like gyms etc because of it. Personally as I have already revealed on this website I was the victim of an attack in a public change room, so I have an extra sensitivity here. If I were to see a biological male in a change room, it would potentially trigger quite a reaction for me.

        I object to the changes of language being forced upon us. A person on the Daily Blog yesterday posted that someone has made a serious complaint at their workplace because they refused to use pro nouns or state whether they believe trans women are real women. This imposition on an ideology/belief system of people particularly in a workplace really concerns me. Up till recently no one has put me in a position where I have to concur with their belief system or face consequences. The NZ I know allows for people to agree to disagree. I want to keep it this way.

        I also reject what I see as the de=humanizing de-construction of women in the change of language such as chest feeders, people who menustrate, birthing units.

        And Sacha re your recent comment that you are going to give up giving up on explaining the language 101 (I am sorry that is not a direct quote,). I am pleased about that. Your attempts to correct my language were unsolicted and I am happy to leave it to the moderators on this site to pull me up if they think my words or comments are offensive.

        So you are welcome to put up humour. It is a little provocative, but gee I can take it. I rather stick to the issues around here, which I have always attempted to do.

        But of course happy to put gender critical humour up if that's going to be how the issues get debated from your side.

        • weka 3.2.2.1
          15 July 2021 at 10:19 am

          Good to hear your thinking and research here anker.

          Here's the SUFW About https://speakupforwomen.nz/about-us/

        • Sacha 3.2.2.2
          15 July 2021 at 12:36 pm

          I am not interested in turning this nonsense into a conversation. Does not warrant it. The tiny number of activists obsessed with other people's genitals can carry on howling into the wind.

          • weka 3.2.2.2.1
            15 July 2021 at 1:57 pm

            Sacha, I’ll catch up later on the thread but briefly I’ve seen a couple of your comments that are catching my moderator eye. This is not usual with you so rather than us going down that track can I respectfully suggest taking a step back for a while?

        • Muttonbird 3.2.2.3
          15 July 2021 at 5:34 pm

          I think you are saying Muttonbird that SUFW receive govt funding?

          I did not say that. I expect they receive funding from a number of sources. I suspect funding is increasing from wealthy right wing actors who are willing to highjack GC activism and use it as a weapon with which to attack the government.

          You have made a lot of assertions about SUFW which are untrue. Including that they are religious conservatives.

          Didn't say that either, although there is a similarity between GC theory’s absolutism and Christian fundamentalist absolutism on relationship matters.

          Because one thing I notice in these debates is I rarely get a response to these sorts of questions from people who oppose the SUFW arguements.

          I haven't gotten into discussion about hormone therapy and surgery because I'm not qualified. I haven't gotten into discussion about transgenders in sport because I acknowledge it's a work in progress. And I haven't gotten into discussion about toilets because it's not my place.

          All of these things I don't respond to because to do so would be another case of a man 'inserting themselves' into places they are not welcome.

          My comment @ 3.2 was about the strange marriage of convenience between SUFW and the National Party, and a little bit about what some young kids have to go through when adults argue over the top of them.

          • CAnker the pig fucker 3.2.2.3.1
            15 July 2021 at 5:53 pm
            • All good Muttonbird. Thanks clarifying. Sorry if I misinterpreted what you said.
            • yes labour and the Greens will lose support to the right. They have lost my support. Mainly because they have tried in introduce these changes eg gender self I’d by stealth. And when women have written to the minister of women, she has ignored their letters and not listened to their concerns.
            • joe90 3.2.2.3.1.1
              15 July 2021 at 7:06 pm

              Mainly because they have tried in introduce these changes eg gender self I’d by stealth

              Discussions about amending the Births, Deaths, Marriages and Relationships Registration Act have been underway since early 2015. In late 2018 SUFW arrived at the party.

              https://www.dia.govt.nz/bdmreview

              • CAnker the pig fucker …
                15 July 2021 at 10:43 pm

                The changes to gender self ID were added well after 2015. In fact they were added at select committee after the public submissions were closed. Crown Law thus advised Tracey Martin that the process was undemocratic and she moth balled the bill for this and other reasons.

                Labour did not campaign on this issue. It was under their Rainbow policies.

                As a party member, I was never asked about it, although they frequently sent out surveys of what issues were important to us.

                • weka …
                  16 July 2021 at 12:25 am

                  Indeed. From Joe's link,

                  Bill deferred – February 2019

                  The Minister of Internal Affairs, Hon Tracey Martin deferred the Bill after advice from Crown Law highlighted issues with clauses inserted by the Select Committee after public consultation had closed. These clauses would allow individuals to change the sex on their birth certificate via an administrative process based on self-identification. This is a substantial change from the current Family Court process that requires evidence of medical treatment.

                  my emphasis.

        • left for dead 3.2.2.4
          15 July 2021 at 8:29 pm

          Totally in support with Anker,Weka etc.

          Edited,tried to cancel this but couldn't

          Not my support,just in adding my two cents

        • Foreign waka 3.2.2.5
          15 July 2021 at 8:32 pm

          Anker 3.2.2 Thank you and I applaud you.

      • gsays 3.2.3
        15 July 2021 at 9:42 am

        An acquaintance of mine and their teen attended their first Trans support group meeting.

        The meeting was disrupted then abandoned because of protest action.

        This causes a lot of distress especially for my acquaintance as she has been at the forefront of a lot of feminist political action. Doubly so as there were a lot of familiar faces amongst the protestors.

        To confront vulnerable people seeking support doesn't sit right with me and I favour direct action.

        • CAnker the pig fucker 3.2.3.1
          15 July 2021 at 9:57 am

          Iam not aware that SUFW is organising any such protests. I have not heard of this as a strategy. I don't endorse this.

          Can you give more details of where it was. "A lot of familiar faces in the crowd" suggests it was a big crowd.

          The only protests I am aware of was outside of pride where some lesbians were excluded.

          But no I don't endorse protesting outside a support group.

          • gsays 3.2.3.1.1
            15 July 2021 at 12:02 pm

            By familiar faces I mean she felt betrayed by some who disrupted the meeting as they had been on the 'front lines' together on other activist events.

            • CAnker the pig fucker 3.2.3.1.1.1
              15 July 2021 at 12:56 pm

              Was the support group held at a private home? Or in a public facility like a library? Or a health centre?

              People do have a right to protest, but I don't support this type of protest as such.

              Does anyone with good connections to SUFW know if this is something they have organised?

            • CAnker the pig fucker 3.2.3.1.1.2
              15 July 2021 at 10:43 pm

              How did they disrupt the meeting gsays?

              • gsays …
                16 July 2021 at 7:44 am

                From memory, the teen got upset and didn't feel safe. There was hollering and chanting.

                I am not certain whether the disruption occurred outside the meeting or if they came inside.

                The bigger picture is a bit sad. From a crusty, distant lens looking in, I feel the teen's state of being is more about wanting some attention or love, less about gender dysphoria. I can only hope the underlying issues within the teen can be resolved in a less stressful, non-interventionist way

        • I Feel Love 3.2.3.2
          15 July 2021 at 9:58 am

          Absolutely gsays, the London protests etc affect vulnerable teens thinking they're hated & weird & unwanted.

          I'm a father of 2 teen girls & all they're hearing is anger & hate & intolerance from the SUFW crowd, they don't want any part of it.

          • Rosemary McDonald 3.2.3.2.1
            15 July 2021 at 10:11 am

            ….is anger & hate & intolerance from the SUFW crowd,

            Can you provide examples of what SUFW has said that indicates "hate" and "intolerance"?

            And you really, really need to provide evidence because of potential future criminal charges should Certain Legislation is passed.

            It is going to become very, very important that we clearly define what is mean't by "hate" n this brave new world.

          • CAnker the pig fucker 3.2.3.2.2
            15 July 2021 at 12:57 pm

            Where do your daughters hear the anger and hate from I feel love? Is it on-line?

      • weka 3.2.4
        15 July 2021 at 10:16 am

        If you want to understand the overmedicalisation of GNC children more fully, start listening to detrans women, especially the lesbians. Anyone denying there are issues with this is ignorant.

        Trans communities get funding from a range of sources. Look up the funding for orgs like Stonewall and Mermaids in the UK.

      • TeWhareWhero 3.2.5
        15 July 2021 at 1:02 pm

        I know the people who started SUFW and most are leftwing feminists – a large number are lesbian. Ani O started out as what I’d call centre-left and it’s true she’s moved rightward. But she wouldn’t be the first person to find her commitment to left-wing politics wasn’t strong enough to withstand the hysterical abuse she received on social media when she first expressed a gender critical viewpoint, or the far worse abuse she received when she stepped up to act as the group’s spokeswoman. I disagree trenchantly with Ani on many levels but she has been abused and demonised in ways and to degrees that are so disproportionate, anyone with an analytical brain linked to their political conscience should ask why that is.

        If you persistently misrepresent a person or a group – by use of hyperbolic rhetoric through to brazen lies – as being extremist rightwing; if all that comes out of so-called progressives on social media, and increasingly out of mainstream media, is the hyperbolic claim that SUFW are literal Nazis who want to deny the very existence of trans people – why would you be surprised when vulnerable young trans people say they are terrified of them?

        If you demonise, and deny a group of women the right to speak, why would you be surprised if that group falls into the waiting arms of the ever-opportunistic right?

        The only surprise here is how stupid the Nats seem to be in not realising the massive potential this has for fomenting divisions in the broad coalition of interests currently supporting the LP. Maybe they're keeping their powder dry.

        When the euphoria of having been dealt a get-out-of-misogyny-gaol-free card has subsided a bit, maybe ask, who benefits from all this?

        • CAnker the pig fucker 3.2.5.1
          15 July 2021 at 1:31 pm

          Here here TeWhareWhero!

        • weka 3.2.5.2
          15 July 2021 at 3:17 pm

          Neoliberalism and the death cult intent on destroying all of life is laughing all the way to the bank.

          thanks for doing the mahi today of unpacking all of this, very much appreciated

        • Muttonbird 3.2.5.3
          15 July 2021 at 4:39 pm

          Ok, so that's confirmation that GC theory and Conservative Politics are linked ideologies.

          Not a comfortable position for a lot of feminists to be in, I suspect.

          Of course it's all Labour's fault…

          • weka 3.2.5.3.1
            15 July 2021 at 5:24 pm

            What do you mean by ‘linked ideologies’?

          • TeWhareWhero 3.2.5.3.2
            15 July 2021 at 6:49 pm

            Ok, so that's confirmation that GC theory and Conservative Politics are linked ideologies.

            Well, that's an extraordinary logistical leap you've made there. Are you illustrating my point that critics of GCF are more interested in hyperbolic rhetoric than in honest political discussion? Apologies if I have completely missed the point you are making.

            • Muttonbird 3.2.5.3.2.1
              15 July 2021 at 7:01 pm

              I don't think you have missed the point I am making.

              It's clear to me GCF ideology is very similar to Conservative Politics. They share absolutism on gender issues. The proof in New Zealand is that Ani O'Brien now works in the office of Judith Collins. That is no accident.

              You say it's because Labour drove her away with their liberal politics. I say there is a symbiotic relationship now between the National Party and SUFW. O'Brien realises in joining the National Party she can promote her single issue cause, and the National Party realises they can use GCF issues to attack the government.

              And what are they both actually attacking the government over?

              Inclusion.

              • weka …
                15 July 2021 at 7:52 pm

                Are you saying that the National Party wants to abolish gender so that humans are free to live whatever gender expression they want? That National believe that women are oppressed on the basis of biological sex and that women's reproductive and other labour is appropriated by patriarchal societies to the detriment of women and the solution is to end both gender roles and patriarchal systems? Because I think you might want to run that past Judith to check and then do some reading on what GCF actually is.

                In the meantime, try referring to Ani as GC when in reference to National, then you will make more sense.

                (GC and GCF feminism are not the same thing).

              • CAnker the pig fucker …
                15 July 2021 at 10:50 pm

                Muttonbird would you consider reading my post at 3.2.2? That's what I am concerned about and it seems a few of the people on this thread agree. These are the issues or some of them, that has got many of us involved in this debate.

                Again, my understanding is there are some people in SUFW who voted National, but more are on the left.

    • CAnker the pig fucker 3.3
      15 July 2021 at 9:52 am

      I have never suggested that trans or ethnic identies aren’t valid Sacha. I don't think gender critical feminists are suggesting trans have fewer rights than others. I think they should have the same rights as others, but not more. By that I mean that their gender identity shouldn't trump my rights as a biological women

  4. Rosemary McDonald 4
    15 July 2021 at 8:54 am

    Why is "sex" a required field on a Birth Certificate?

    What does it actually denote?

    When/If the Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Bill is passed and a person can have the "sex" field changed, is this a once only opportunity or can a person, at a later date, change their sex again?

    e

    • Sacha 4.1
      15 July 2021 at 9:02 am

      Just because govt agencies have conflated sex and gender does not mean we need to keep doing it.

      • Sacha 4.1.1
        15 July 2021 at 9:06 am

        That detail on a birth certificate is about identity, not about reproduction.

        • Nic the NZer 4.1.1.1
          15 July 2021 at 9:12 am

          Your saying the infants sex is a component of their identity?

          • Forget now 4.1.1.1.1
            15 July 2021 at 9:45 am

            More that the sex a baby is assigned at birth (usually without chromosomal testing – on the basis of visible genetalia, which doesn't really work for intersex or gender diverse), provides a framework within which that child will be socialized. Their identity develops over time in response to the interaction of their genes with their social and physical environment.

            If anything is personal information, it is your genetic profile, and other medical details. Why anyone else other than your doctor feels entitled to access to that information is beyond me. The move to change sex on birth certificate wouldn't be such a big thing if it wasn't needed to prove your existence so much.

            • RedLogix 4.1.1.1.1.1
              15 July 2021 at 9:51 am

              This is not a comment.

            • weka 4.1.1.1.1.2
              15 July 2021 at 10:00 am

              The sex of most babies is observed in utero.

              I agree that the issue here is how sex is used by society to classify people. But knowing what the sex is is important and in nearly all humans this is observable before or at birth. This is not about gender identity. That's an issue that arises next.

              GCFs argue that kids should be allowed to grow up free from gender norm constraints. As far as I can tell, GAs (gender activists) want to dictate the conditions under which gender is used by society, rather than freeing people from the constraints.

              • Forget now …
                15 July 2021 at 11:18 am

                Sex is important, and informs medical choices. But it is also intensely personal. Arguably useful as a variable in medical research, but there would be ethical considerations and anonymisation of results in that.

                The Gender Critical (some of whom are not remotely feminist) do not seem so very critical of gender to me, Weka. But then, they are unlikely to be much more of a single unified mindset than the trans community and its halfhearted allies.

                However, this is Aotearoa, not (as one might think by a cursory glance at our current head of state); England. That's literally on the other side of the world! Many colonialists attitudes about the proper way of being human are still bubbling through NZ. Takatapui were an accepted part of Maori culture (as fa'afafine and leitis are for Samoan and Tongan), but long decades (/centuries) of whitewashing NZ through religious indoctrination and other forms of cultural cleansing have left them in an endangered position. I am glad Kerekere is there to represent us in parliament.

                In any case, ethnic groups' customary practices are already protected in the HRA. Even if GC groups may find it easy to recycle lines from Conservative-ruled Britain, it is unclear why pakeha trans people (importantly, not just trans women) should be left unprotected against such sophistry.

                But at least the GC do have a thicker veneer of civility than some trans averse people. Though I still don't like the war metaphors – they seem to foster a bunker mentality.

                • Nic the NZer …
                  15 July 2021 at 11:30 am

                  But, oh font of all wisdom, is it acceptable for a maori post-calonialist infant in NZ to be dressed in pink or blue?

                • Rosemary McDonald …
                  15 July 2021 at 12:02 pm

                  …(some of whom are not remotely feminist)

                  What makes them 'not remotely feminist'?

                  Perhaps we should define 'feminist'?

                  • Forget now …
                    16 July 2021 at 12:10 am

                    Not all who are Gender Critical are female, let alone feminists. (some) Evangelical Christian pastors may be fully as absolutist in regarding sex as a necessary precursor to gender (if they adknowledge the distinction at all).

                    Like say the Superstraights (I won't link as they were too toxic even for reddit!) who had a similar kind of; transphobia with extra steps. The whole; "are traps gay?" sewer. At least GCFs are less rapey.

                • weka …
                  15 July 2021 at 3:24 pm

                  Don’t know where you get your ideas from about GCFs and GC people, but the left wing GCFs I know support gender non conformity and thus have no problem with historical cultural acceptance of GNC people. The large number of lesbian and gay GC people likewise are unlikely to have a problem with takatapui.

                  you appear to be arguing with something in your own thinking rather than what I am saying.

            • Nic the NZer 4.1.1.1.1.3
              15 July 2021 at 11:00 am

              So if the medical professionals with hold their expertise, I wonder (not really) if the parents will be able to work the infants sex out and begin what socialisation they think is appropriate and natural anyway.

        • Rosemary McDonald 4.1.1.2
          15 July 2021 at 9:58 am

          That detail on a birth certificate is about identity….

          So a mewling, puking bairn emerges with it's gender identity fully formed?

          With respect, Sacha…rubbish. "Sex" on a baby's birth certificate indicates biological sex…basically… that upon observation by a suitably trained person the infant's genitals indicate male or female. Correct in about 98% of instances.

          …not about reproduction.

          Of course not, silly! It's a newborn baby! So wrong to even think about the future sex -life of this child.

          And only an arrogant fool would speculate as to how this child might express itself genderwise in the future.

          • weka 4.1.1.2.1
            15 July 2021 at 10:02 am

            although lets not forget that girl babies are born with the ova that will become the later generation if she has a baby 😉 And it's sex as well as gender that will largely determine how she is treated in society as she grows up.

          • Sacha 4.1.1.2.2
            15 July 2021 at 12:33 pm

            Official identity documents are talking about observable social presentation – ie: gender. They have just been stupid enough to use 'male' and 'female' to describe it. But fill your boots if that's all you have to campaign on.

            • Nic the NZer 4.1.1.2.2.1
              15 July 2021 at 12:46 pm

              Oh dear, it seems the entire medical profession is doing it wrong because they keep recording the infants sex on their birth certificate. No doubt you have an improved procedure for them to use instead, which you will now be able to explain to us?

              • Sacha …
                15 July 2021 at 12:48 pm

                Like I say, fill your boots if you want to misunderstand what the information is used for. What they have been calling it is the problem.

                It is exactly the same as the official transition from Race to Ethnicity.

                • Nic the NZer …
                  15 July 2021 at 1:24 pm

                  Your the one claiming that birth certificates contain irrelevant information, which everyone should subsequently ignore (along with all the other markers of gender, e.g infants assigned name and biology). That puts the onus on you to explain how thats supposed to work.

                  • Sacha …
                    15 July 2021 at 1:32 pm

                    Sheesh. Collect genders. Call them by the names for genders.

                    Collect sex as well. Call them by the names for sexes.

                    Use the latter for health and the other very few relevant situations.

                    Use the former for everything else official data is used for.

                    • Nic the NZer …
                      15 July 2021 at 1:44 pm

                      Good so an inch of progress then.

                      So if im a medical professional faced with a small infant just what do I put in the 'gender assigned at birth' box and how do I determine that then?

            • Rosemary McDonald 4.1.1.2.2.2
              15 July 2021 at 1:15 pm

              They have just been stupid enough to use 'male' and 'female' to describe it.

              So, what is the correct way of describing it?

              And are you trying to say that a person's birth certificate, the first ever identity document, should not record the sex of the person?

              And are you also saying that the words "male" and "female" should no longer be used to describe actual, physical, biological sex?

    • Muttonbird 4.2
      15 July 2021 at 6:29 pm

      Just thinking out loud. What if self-ID on birth certificates and other documentation was an edited feature. That is sex at birth was still recorded, but also the change according to the individual.

      In no particular order:

      1. No idea whether this satisfies GCF concerns about self-ID. But I suspect they’re ok with it.
      2. No idea whether the trans community or individuals would be happy either. But I suspect they are not ok with it.
  5. Minerals 5
    15 July 2021 at 9:23 am

    I'm a long time reader, first time commenter. It's absolutely astounding how left-wing men seem to have taken up the mantel in denying the ability of women to self identify as a class with protected characteristics. Nothing like reading Sacha patronisingly explaining to women how their views are invalid.

    Prioritising gender over sex enables men to again dictate to women what rights they should have, and if they don't like it, they're the bigot. This is the compounded by the bizarreo claim that is in fact gender critical feminists who are the ones oppressing trans individuals. If anyone hadn't noticed, it's not as if the corporations, government (local and central) are supporting the right to protected sex characteristics, rather than the trans lobby. You only need to look at the co-opting of Stonewall in the UK and the attempts to silence gender-critical feminists to understand that they are the are in fact the ones that are being marginalised.

    • CAnker the pig fucker 5.1
      15 July 2021 at 9:59 am

      Minerals 100% agree. Welcome to the Standard!

    • weka 5.2
      15 July 2021 at 10:03 am

      I largely agree with this, but there is no doubt that many trans people are having a hard time in society due to transphobia (individual and systemic). It's possible to uphold the wellbeing and rights of both groups.

      • Rosemary McDonald 5.2.1
        15 July 2021 at 10:18 am

        It's possible to uphold the wellbeing and rights of both groups.

        Agree. But this is going to require mutual respect. And an acceptance of biological reality.

        This is next to impossible when the Trans Lobby shouts "Transwomen are women!", the GCF say .."Hang on a minute…" and the Trans Lobby shout "TERF!".

        • weka 5.2.1.1
          15 July 2021 at 10:38 am

          True. It's also next to impossible with GCs running round shouting about men in dresses and grooming.

          • Janice 5.2.1.1.1
            15 July 2021 at 11:13 am

            I feel like the person who pointed out that the emperor had no clothes, and all the people who had been admiring his new clothes were embarrassed about being taken in by the hype surrounding the emperor's outfits. A man in a dress is a man and will always be regardless of his (claimed) right to access women spaces, and what it says on his birth certificate. They must create their own spaces then they will be respected.

            • weka 5.2.1.1.1.1
              15 July 2021 at 3:31 pm

              It’s a GC fail imo to reduce trans women to man in dress. It presumes that trans is one thing instead of a range of experiences. Obviously a TW wearing trousers is still a TW. Feminists can’t have it both ways, either we say presentation via gender norm clothing doesn’t matter or it does.

              and if we insist on making charicatures out of TW we can hardly complain about being written off as terfs.

              none of what I just said negates women’s rights to women’s space and politics.

            • greywarshark 5.2.1.1.1.2
              15 July 2021 at 5:07 pm

              I don't know how this works in but I respect James Morris wish to change to woman Jan Morris from fully functioning man. He took the hormones, had the op, went through the whole thing after a lot of genuine thought, and was one of the early changers.

              Also Eddie Izzard has had a varied life as a comedian, being himself and dressing up as a 'stage' woman, with high heels, lots of makeup etc. Now in his maturity he wishes to stay in his woman role. I don't know if he has had the op, or taken the hormones. (Incidentally Jan found them rather tiresome.)

              But since homosexuality became legal, the troubled minds of sex obsessed young people, stirred and shaken by first television, and films, and then the internet and social media, it has become a bizarre fashion, not a considered adult decision. I have heard some alarming things here, and met feminists who would have been on the lesbian side in the 1970s, often falling out with the heterosexual ones, often married. Then the guiding idea was to get equality of treatment, respect and wages and women then have noticed how successful they have been in much of this, wages still down. But then feminists were for strength, standing tall, going forward. Now the theme seems victimisation, and making a case for unfairness, coming from a sad, negative position rather than positive but with still a way to go, on both sides too.

          • TeWhareWhero 5.2.1.1.2
            15 July 2021 at 3:05 pm

            You know I don't agree with hyperbolic rhetoric or abuse on either side or on any issue – but as someone who's been engaged with socialist feminism for over half a century and the transgender debate since the early 1990s, and having watched the on-line debate go from a gentle simmer to an insane boil since 2015, I can say the abuse and the hyperbole did not start with feminists (although Raymond's polemic served to raise the political temperature several degrees). I have no doubt that hiding among the pseudonymous accounts on social media are parties who, for predatory or vexatious personal reasons, or political ones, are interested in turning the heat up even further. People who contribute to that can hardly claim genuinely to have women's or trans peoples interests at heart. It's just too easy for the blokes who have inserted themselves into this – to point to the extremes of the GC movement and use that to label and demonise the whole of it. If they don't engage with the fact that there are a host of life long socialists and feminists who question facets of the current transgender orthodoxy – but instead choose to tar all with the same brush – that's being ethically and politically lazy. Or worse, it's evidence of an unresolved resentment of women – oh, but perish the thought that such a thing could be the case here.

            • weka 5.2.1.1.2.1
              15 July 2021 at 3:36 pm

              One of the things occupying my thoughts today is just how many GAs really have no idea of what women are saying, of what is about to play out, or of how much this is tediously familiar for feminists. The more women understand that progressive men are literally positioning themselves against our interests the more solidarity we will experience with each other. Immensely grateful to the UK feminists who built the template for this.

              • McFlock …
                15 July 2021 at 3:53 pm

                A friend of mine was ruminating the other day upon the fact that one of her girlfriends had a dick, while the other was considering getting one and becoming a boyfriend. I listened to her for quite some time over a cuppa.

                Conflating "no idea of what you are saying" with "no idea of what women are saying" is a conceit. Disagreeing with you does not mean disagreeing with all, or even a majority, of women (in the most gender-critical interpretation of the word, of course).

                • weka …
                  15 July 2021 at 4:43 pm

                  QED 🤷

                  that you decided as a politicised left wing man to #notallwomen me, even though it’s easy enough to parse from my comment that I was talking about gc women, instead of asking me what you might be missing, is exactly what I have been talking about. Men’s support of feminists is conditional, it’s not solidarity.

                  you’ve known me long enough to know I’m good with disagreement. What I’m not enjoying here is the massive gap in understanding. Seeing a left wing man reduce feminist perspectives here to an obsession with genitals suggests one if two things. That he doesn’t understand the politics he wants to argue against, or that he doesn’t give a shit and is happy to both misrepresent and marginalise. I was doing men here a courtesy that it was ignorance rather than sexism.

                  most of what I’ve seen from left wing men on Twitter in recent days is ignorance but am willing now to consider it wilful.

                  have a read of what I wrote about Stock’s book and good faith debate. Being able to disagree is dependent upon understanding the best interpretation of the oppositions politics.

                  We should be so lucky

                  • McFlock …
                    15 July 2021 at 5:28 pm

                    No, when you repeatedly use clear language that apparently then needs to be "parsed" to pretend you're not othering everyone who disagrees with you (other women and the men who can apparently understand their position more than your position), that definitely needs explicit clarification.

                    Many left wing men are listening to women. Just not so much to the women who will apparently have Sean Plunket as a guest speaker.

                    • weka …
                      15 July 2021 at 8:03 pm

                      "that definitely needs explicit clarification."

                      Then ask.

                      Obviously you are listening to some women, you're not in a monastery. But if you want to understand GCF, then imo you need to listen to and talk with GCFs, not liberal feminists. Liberal feminists are not good at explaining GCF. I see the arguments that many lw men are making against GCF and it's not disagreement, it's idiocy. If you make the effort to understand your opponent's position and then disagree, I will respect that.

                      Or, just keep listening to liberal feminists, and not understanding GCF, and watch the same shit fight war that is happening in the UK happen in NZ.

                    • solkta …
                      15 July 2021 at 8:10 pm

                      Yeh that's the thing, the feminists that i actually know are all staunch supporters of trans rights. Then i come on here and weka tells me that i am not listening to feminists and proceeds to tell me what feminists think. Support for anybody in politics is conditional on the quality of their ideas and the potential harm of those ideas.

                    • McFlock …
                      15 July 2021 at 8:17 pm

                      Seemed pretty damned clear to me. How was I supposed to know what you wrote needed to be parsed through some filter to qualify what groups were actually being discussed.

                      Anyhoo, I'm still at work (and pissed off about it), and we seem to have reached the point of the script where we both accuse the other of not properly reading what we wrote and that we've been horribly misrepresented and how sad it is that the other won't take the time to listen to a position we've heard dozens of times before, so I'm going to take a break for at least an hour or two, maybe the day.

                    • Incognito []
                      15 July 2021 at 8:44 pm

                      Respect!

                    • solkta …
                      15 July 2021 at 8:23 pm

                      @weka

                      I would like to see you try and tell Jan Logie that she is a liberal.

                    • CAnker the pig fucker …
                      15 July 2021 at 8:27 pm

                      Sean Plunket, Not a guest speaker. Just attending the meeting McFlock.

                    • weka …
                      15 July 2021 at 8:41 pm

                      have a good break McFlock.

                    • weka …
                      15 July 2021 at 8:42 pm

                      Are you saying that Logie isn't liberal?

                      the irony there is that the Greens very effectively shut down women talking about gender critical politics, so fat chance of getting to say anything to her.

                    • weka …
                      15 July 2021 at 8:44 pm

                      Yeh that's the thing, the feminists that i actually know are all staunch supporters of trans rights. Then i come on here and weka tells me that i am not listening to feminists and proceeds to tell me what feminists think. Support for anybody in politics is conditional on the quality of their ideas and the potential harm of those ideas.

                      Ok, solkta, summarise for me in five bullet points what the gender critical feminist position is.

                    • solkta …
                      15 July 2021 at 9:30 pm

                      I'm not going to play your games weka, we have been round this too many times. The point is that you often say what women think and what feminists think when you are presenting just the views of some.

                      No Logie is not a liberal. That is another of your games, radicals think like you, liberals think like them. There was a really bigoted rant in the Green's mag that got canned. It was a shame that the editors did not pick it up and require it be re-written. Have you tried to talk with Jan?

                      Like Sacha and McFlock i've had enough of the BS and will be taking a break.

                    • McFlock …
                      15 July 2021 at 11:08 pm

                      @anker:

                      Sean Plunket, Not a guest speaker. Just attending the meeting McFlock.

                      My mistake. Mind you, if I were in wellington tonight I still would have preferred being in the crowd outside, rather than inside with the likes of him and apparently Jordan Williams.

                    • weka …
                      16 July 2021 at 12:20 am

                      @solkta, I was referring to GP members trying to talk about gender critical issues internally, although the removal of the article in the newletter was also problematic.

                      Yes Logie is a liberal, as am I. It's not all we are, but it's part of the picture.

                      If a woman who isn't a radfem or GCF has some beliefs aligned with GCF thinking eg around self ID, what am I supposed to call her other than 'woman'? Woman is a useful collective noun for referring to shared experience, it doesn't mean every woman is included. It's a given that there are lots of women who disagree with the GCF positions.

                      Likewise with the word feminist.

                      The thing about this debate is that the women who disagree with the GCF position aren't talking about feminism or women, they're generally talking about trans people and denying that there are any issues for women. I refer to them as GAs (formerly TAs). It's not that they're not feminist, it's that they're not actually advocating for women in that instance.

                      I haven't told you you're not listening to feminists, I've said there are left wing men arguing against the GCF position and don't appear to understand what it is. I suggested to McFlock that listening to liberal feminists wouldn't help with that. If you have a link to Logie explaining clearly what the GCF position is, I would actually like to see that (I like and respect her despite our differences on this issue), but it's still not my point. GAs misrepresent GCF positions, sometimes out of ignorance, sometimes as part of the war.

                • TeWhareWhero …
                  15 July 2021 at 7:15 pm

                  A friend of mine was ruminating the other day upon the fact that one of her girlfriends had a dick, while the other was considering getting one and becoming a boyfriend. I listened to her for quite some time over a cuppa

                  That could be a recruitment campaign for choice feminism.

            • Incognito 5.2.1.1.2.2
              15 July 2021 at 9:01 pm

              I have no doubt that hiding among the pseudonymous accounts on social media are parties who, for predatory or vexatious personal reasons, or political ones, are interested in turning the heat up even further.

              How ironic then that the one commenter who pulled out of the discussion is the only one AFAIK who has not been hiding behind a pseudonym. We even have a name for this kind of hypocrisy on this site (see https://thestandard.org.nz/policy/#banning). Make of that what you will.

      • Foreign waka 5.2.2
        15 July 2021 at 8:53 pm

        Weka 5.2 – this is in the first instance based on biology and the survival factor that accompanies the separation of genders. We are talking about the human brain development over thousand of years, facilitating the development of social groupings which in turn allowed the human race to develop to where we are today. Instinct should tell us what the successful continuation should look like.

    • Sacha 5.3
      15 July 2021 at 12:44 pm

      Nothing like reading Sacha patronisingly explaining to women how their views are invalid.

      Oh I've tried providing links to women writing about the philosophical basis of this without interpreting it myself, but the people speaking here have been too lazy or ignorant to read it and decide for themselves. Hoping more of you who do not normally comment have been.

      • Sacha 5.3.1
        15 July 2021 at 1:11 pm

        And I have had a gutsful of this place being used to normalise speech like this.

        https://twitter.com/StrayDogNZ/status/1415466174721052675

        • TeWhareWhero 5.3.1.2
          15 July 2021 at 2:42 pm

          I agree Rachel Stewart is amping this up in a way that is unhelpful – ably assisted by those who oppose her – and I'm not going to give her a pass just because she's been in receipt of a mass of hateful abuse in the past. These are issues, the political dissection of which require a scalpel wielded by a steady hand and guided by a cool head – not people wielding barbed wire or glass encrusted baseball bats, or waving metaphorical shotguns. People on the left loved Stewart when she was using that trade mark heavy-handed wit to beat farmers about the head, now they loathe her. Politics is a fickle beast but it's an odd thing when two of the NZ white left's most reviled people are lesbians. We do live in strange times.

          • Rosemary McDonald 5.3.1.2.1
            15 July 2021 at 2:49 pm

            …but it's an odd thing when two of the NZ white left's most reviled people are lesbians.

            This hasn't gone unnoticed. When recognized within the context of the history of women dragging themselves out from under the oppression by men, not at all odd.

            Tragically.

            SSDD

          • weka 5.3.1.2.2
            15 July 2021 at 3:38 pm

            I’m watching the social dilemma currently and more and more thinking this will only resolve if we also take the debate off sm and into the physical world.

            • Cricklewood 5.3.1.2.2.1
              15 July 2021 at 6:36 pm

              Yes, very easy to hammer something out on the internet that you wouldn't dare say to someones face, twitter facebook etc have allowed various groups of like minded people to form who are forever egging each other on and further entrenching there positions. Social media is dehumanizing people in many respects.

            • gsays 5.3.1.2.2.2
              16 July 2021 at 7:51 am

              Your comment is spot on about coming off SM and the engagement needed in the real world.

              A couple of the links featuring Posie Parker that Joe 90 posted made for unpleasant reading/watching. The motivation seemed to be more about extreme passion, dare I say, hate.

          • McFlock 5.3.1.2.3
            15 July 2021 at 3:45 pm

            Two out of how many?

            I mean, slater and the crop of fascist-wannabees are pretty reviled, Talley, Juco and most of the rest of the nat caucus… still seems like largely a sausage-fest to me.

      • CAnker the pig fucker 5.3.2
        15 July 2021 at 1:14 pm

        Some of us have already done our own reading on both sides of the debate Sacha.

        • Sacha 5.3.2.1
          15 July 2021 at 1:17 pm

          Yet have nothing to say about the existing body of feminist theory about gender..

        • Mika 5.3.2.2
          15 July 2021 at 4:15 pm

          I agree. The more people read on the issues, the more they are persuaded by the gender critical argument. That's why gender identity activists try to shut down all conversation- their ideology just doesn't stand up to much scrutiny.

      • Rosemary McDonald 5.3.3
        15 July 2021 at 1:19 pm

        ….but the people speaking here have been too lazy or ignorant to read it and decide for themselves.

        Don't agree with Sacha and/or the material he presents here = ignorant and lazy.

        OK. Understand completely.

        • Sacha 5.3.3.1
          15 July 2021 at 1:28 pm

          Said nothing at the time or since to indicate that you even read the link.

          • greywarshark 5.3.3.1.1
            15 July 2021 at 5:11 pm

            Sacha 12.48 It is exactly the same as the official transition from Race to Ethnicity.

            It definitely is not. And I see it is impossible for you to stop your antagonism about it.

            • Incognito 5.3.3.1.1.1
              15 July 2021 at 7:42 pm

              FWIW, in contrast to a few other commenters here, I firmly believe that for some time now Sacha has been trying hard to engage in good faith and have a genuine but robust debate on this topic and Sacha’s comment history supports this notion, IMO. You seem to confuse criticism and disagreement with antagonism and I’d have thought you would know better.

              I note that you refused to engage with Sacha’s point on the comparison with “the official transition from Race to Ethnicity”, i.e. you’re avoiding genuine debate, which is your prerogative but also ironic because usually you’re a strong advocate of intellectual rational debate.

              Anyhow, Sacha will no longer discuss the topic, which may be good for some but does not bode well for the debating culture here on The Standard, as I consider Sacha one of the better commenters here and of high integrity.

              • greywarshark …
                16 July 2021 at 3:03 pm

                I'm not debating about the matter of being able to assign one's chosen gender at will on a birth certificate and legally assume that gender, because it isn't open for debate in my view.

                and SUFW (Stand Up for Women) is not a TERF organisation I am told. And TERF means – trans-exclusionary radical feminist – for those who have been thinking about the ongoing political problems that are so boringly ongoing, poverty, child illness, lack of health care, lack of this and that which are needed and could be expected in this modern age.

  6. joe90 6
    15 July 2021 at 9:34 am

    It's almost like these people volunteered to contract covid.

    /

    The county's medical services director, Dr. Christina Ghaly, told the Board of Supervisors Tuesday that none of the county-operated hospitals have admitted a single COVID-19 patient who was fully vaccinated.

    "Every single patient that we've admitted for COVID has been not yet fully vaccinated, and that's hard for the health-care workers to see,'' Ghaly said. "They've spent hours, effort, energy trying to care for patients, and at this point this really is a preventable illness, a preventable infection.''

    https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/coronavirus/southern-california-coronavirus/covid-coronavirus-infections-los-angeles-county-vaccine/2637613/?

  7. joe90 7
    15 July 2021 at 9:39 am

    Happy Bastille day!

  8. SPC 8
    15 July 2021 at 11:09 am

    As they say in Gilead

    1. only women (with demonstrable capability to have children) can be handmaid’s for infertile couples – vote GOP.
    2. the children of pregnant single women belong to an infertile married couple (one born male and one born female) – vote GOP
    3. only those who need to pay for their contraception to avoid pregnancy are allowed in female places (we are not keen on females who do not want sex with men in our female places) – vote GOP
    • greywarshark 8.1
      15 July 2021 at 11:47 am

      This sex stuff is actually an attack on humanity and goes beyond correcting imbalances that have long existed between men and women. It combines so many doubts and uncertainties and losses through tech and piratical adventuring including wars, it has gone OTT.

      Calm down, don't be captured by the hysterical and historical, and rely less on laws which are gradually becoming swingeing, and instead, getting to know about each other's cultures as a regular classroom period at school, for the first step. Teach about philosophy rather than religion, teach about self-image and personal capability and self-respect. Don't leave it to parents to pass on their half-masticated tasteless titbits that lodge and grow in children's brains until virtually embedded.

      Address the needs of people being impacted by others in society, which would include both the angry, abusive and instigators and those affected by those behaviours.

      But lazy governments who talk democracy, fairness and equality, and don't even try for equity, are satisfied with a public stirred up that can be manipulated by a word or sentence, while other important matters are ignored. And then criminalise the perp or drop heavy financial costs on them, usually poor people. And that shows that government is concerned about it! They don't want to stop thinking with their bottoms and as they remain firmly fixed in their comfy chairs, no light or air ever falls on what passes for their thoughts.

      To take a step away from our ravaged human culture, here is a comedy that might let people switch off the Outrage Button for a while. A six-part series with laughs about five women, including four Muslim, all non-white, trying to form a successful musical band in We Are Lady Parts.. It's streaming on Neon and Sky Go.

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/stuff-to-watch/300351564/we-are-lady-parts-neons-entertaining-and-endlessly-hilarious-new-uk-sitcom

      • SPC 8.1.1
        15 July 2021 at 1:00 pm

        Na, sex stuff is only an attack on humanity if it is without consent ..

        Once upon a time, safe women's spaces meant places where no one could be openly lesbian because other females might be sexually insecure. So the special one was the only openly lesbian female at Yale University Graduate School.

        Then came the TERF'S, women insecure about those not born biologically female in women's spaces (which began with hetero sexual right wingers who support marriage between a man and a woman). And some lesbian women (who had been active in feminist causes, including women's refuges) supported the cause. But the special one (who claimed the best idea man had was God) was now openly transgender.

        But others also openly lesbian did not come out as transgender, they remained lesbian cisgender, and yet were more openly in support for the breadth of the rainbow cause than the chosen one.

        So they tried to de-platform the chosen one for being anti transgender (those identifying as women but were born male) – to be fair the chosen one annoyed as many feminists as she could before she became transgender and did the same to them.

        To quote a cisgender male who was also to annoy people of the cultural group he was born into "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a transgender lesbian to please everybody" (something about having too rich or fine a taste in flesh).

        Then came the queer friendly feminist cisgender female solo parent who created a character who rebelled against her creator, with these magical words "Trans rights are human rights”.

        So many are betrayed by what they create. But it always begins with a woman giving birth or one born to a woman writing something on some platform.

        • greywarshark 8.1.1.1
          15 July 2021 at 1:15 pm

          We create our own cultures SPC, or have them forced on us despite our wishes or expectations.

          So our experience of 'humanity' is always affected by the current beliefs and practices. But as you say it always starts with a woman giving birth, and preparing for that happening is something the body does involuntarily. This should be acknowledged and indeed should be revered, both by others and the female herself.

          Sexuality is usually expected to be enjoyable, but if women and men take sexuality too lightly, the life force inside each of us is not acknowledged, and I think we become neutered mentally; which is different from undergoing vasectomy or permanent contraception.

          • greywarshark 8.1.1.1.1
            15 July 2021 at 5:21 pm

            SPC Once upon a time, safe women's spaces meant places where no one could be openly lesbian because other females might be sexually insecure.

            What would be involved by being open lesbian? Holding hands, kissing each other, for instance? That surely would not upset other women who might be 'sexually insecure'. There is an expectation that explicit sexual behaviour be done in private. That isn't unreasonable is it?

            • SPC 8.1.1.1.1.1
              15 July 2021 at 10:19 pm

              You must have missed the time when women were supposed to conform in how they appeared (high schools still do this to a degree).

    • millsy 9.1
      15 July 2021 at 12:01 pm

      Yes, it is for the right to pollute our waterways.

      I actually emailed those mayors to explain themselves, but they came back with obtuse answers.

      I cannot find any example where rolling back water quality regulations leads to clean water.

      [please stick to one e-mail address here, i.e. the one that has been pre-approved]

  10. Jimmy 10
    15 July 2021 at 11:40 am

    Hipkins needs to put his ass kicking boots on, and tell the MOH to sort out their shit before giving him a graph to release. Does no one there actually sense check or proof read? How embarrassing.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/300357755/covid19-baffling-graph-showed-twice-as-many-second-vaccine-doses-as-first

  11. gsays 11
    15 July 2021 at 12:15 pm

    Since I have mentioned it a couple of times, I figured I should put the link up now that it's in the 'paper'.

    https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/health/125747793/emergency-department-nurses-issue-notice-to-fix-workplace-safety-risks

    • tc 12.1
      15 July 2021 at 1:36 pm

      Keep it up national as the electorate isn't driven as much by the MSM memes and tricks of the past anymore.

      They also know how to use the web to see where your ideas come from as a guide to where you're going.

  13. SPC 13
    15 July 2021 at 1:23 pm

    At one point he brought up Afghanistan, saying Merkel "saw the progress that could be made" for women and girls in the country through the West's involvement.

    "It's unbelievable how that society changed from the brutality of the Taliban," he said.

    "And now all of a sudden, sadly, I'm afraid Afghan women and girls are going to suffer unspeakable harm."

    "Is it a mistake to withdraw?" asked interviewer Ines Pohl.

    "You know, I think it is, yeah. Because I think the consequences are going to be unbelievably bad," said Bush.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/george-w-bush-warns-us-withdrawal-from-afghanistan-will-have-unbelievably-bad-consequences/QMSN3FNZR3RCF6MJYLEAJXWGIU/

    George W Bush in response to Joseph Biden saying the USA was not in Afghanistan to nation build, that it was not a forever war.

    Meanwhile in southern Iraq Shia militias (Teheran approved hit lists) are killing secular women – as was reported by the BBC in late in 2020 before Biden became POTUS.

    This story is now not compatible with Biden's policy to return to the nuclear deal with Iran while continuing the Trump Pompeo line of using human rights as a stick to beat China with (ya can see how BBC plays the game and became complicit in the WMD story in 2002).

  14. greywarshark 14
    15 July 2021 at 1:31 pm

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/whoseatingnewzealand/446839/nz-has-reached-peak-milk-fonterra-cfo-warns

    Peak milk. That's an interesting idea. What else are we at the peak of, and might hope to see return to a more balanced level? And not balancing on a tightrope either.

  15. Chris 15
    15 July 2021 at 2:24 pm

    WTF have the cops got to do with this?

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/125760782/mobled-rehab-will-only-line-the-pockets-of-gang-leaders–police-association

    Cahill has always seemed like an idiot and this confirms it. He needs to know to stay out of things that don't concern him.

    • Descendant Of Smith 16.1
      15 July 2021 at 7:43 pm

      Sugar tax is a silly idea. Simply regulate the maximum allowed in any food or food type – that was originally in the draft WHO guidelines that manufacturers use – but didn't appear in the final report. Turned out later the conference to establish the guidelines was significantly funded by the sugar industry -hence the missing maximum.

      Ban it completely in things like bottled water though – shouldn't be allowed to be called water if it has added sugar – or salt.

      .

  17. Eco Maori 17
    16 July 2021 at 5:15 pm

    The Sandflys are still telling shit to people about me and my Whano and fucking with me and my Sons employment. What they are doing is and has stuffed up my Whano future prosperity. Who cares we are just dum black Maoris in their books.

    Ka kite Ano