Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Community

Charity and fundraising auctions for the Canberra community

Won’t someone think of the Trannies? Cries Simon

By johnboy - 9 July 2012 151

Simon Corbell has released the ACT Law Reform Advisory Council’s report: Beyond the Binary: legal recognition of sex and gender diversity in the ACT. He’s been sitting on it since March.

The report recommends a focus on the need for correct and consistent terminology for sex and gender diverse people in ACT legislation and government documentation to enable equal access to services for all people in the Territory.

The report urges a reconsideration of the current policy and procedures to give legal recognition to a persons’ sex or gender identity.

It also calls for the relaxation of criteria that must be met for a person to change their legal sex and gender status.


UPDATE 09/07/12 16:57: The Greens are pointing out that this stuff was largely recommended in 2003 and maybe now would be a good time to do something about it.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
151 Responses to
Won’t someone think of the Trannies? Cries Simon
Morelia 1:55 pm 09 Jul 12

p1 said :

Although, to be fair to JB I think trannie is probably a little less negative then f*g or d**e (btw, I had to think a minute before I realised what word you were referring to there) as it is just a shortening of an acceptable word, which is something of a tradition in Australian English. I certainly imagine JB used it in this vein.

“Homo” is “just a shortening of an acceptable word” as well. Tradition doesn’t equal sensitivity. In fact, it usually negates it.

PBO 1:41 pm 09 Jul 12

I for one will not be supporting the construction of a 3rd toilet for these ppl, who knows what the symbol on the door would be.

It would be chaos in pubs for those who want to eat, drink and be mary…..

VYBerlinaV8_is_back 1:07 pm 09 Jul 12

Wraith said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

The real question is HOW gender could be legally recognised. Drivers license? Passport?

The Mick Dundee method works well…….

Ha! 🙂

Wraith 1:04 pm 09 Jul 12

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

The real question is HOW gender could be legally recognised. Drivers license? Passport?

The Mick Dundee method works well…….

p1 1:00 pm 09 Jul 12

Mysteryman said :

I think the idea of having certain words only acceptable “within a community” to be a bit of a double standard. Which is strange, considering that often the “community” is campaigning against double standards.

That is kinda how I feel.

M Rose said :

Even in the “in the community”/”outside the community” debate, it still should not have been used here, as it has context as an derogatory slur, and it is offensive to many people. I doubt the word ‘f-g’, ‘d–e’ or, for that matter, ‘n—er’ would ever have been used.

I wasn’t meaning to hijack the thread or change your intent – it was just something that your post made me think of. Although, to be fair to JB I think trannie is probably a little less negative then f*g or d**e (btw, I had to think a minute before I realised what word you were referring to there) as it is just a shortening of an acceptable word, which is something of a tradition in Australian English. I certainly imagine JB used it in this vein.

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 12:53 pm 09 Jul 12

dungfungus said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

The real question is HOW gender could be legally recognised. Drivers license? Passport?

The submission covers this by having DFAT issuing passports with “X” instead of “M or F” in the gender section.
This creates an unintented consequence for any travelling Super Hero X-Men

😀

dungfungus 12:48 pm 09 Jul 12

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

The real question is HOW gender could be legally recognised. Drivers license? Passport?

The submission covers this by having DFAT issuing passports with “X” instead of “M or F” in the gender section.
This creates an unintented consequence for any travelling Super Hero X-Men

dungfungus 12:43 pm 09 Jul 12

I am totally ambivalent about this issue.

M Rose 12:23 pm 09 Jul 12

p1 said :

M Rose said :

A lot of transgendered people find that term to be heinously offensive, particularly when used by someone outside the community.

Without commenting on JB’s wisdom when writing the headline, I have always found the idea that a word can be fine when used “within” the community, but terribly offence when used by others to be an odd one. The use of the “N” word by black American rappers is a perfect example.

I guess it is the same as greeting your best mate with ‘how ya doin ya barstard’, but on a community wide scale.

I appreciate that there’s a debate there that people would like to have. Personally, I was just trying to find the best way to express the difference between a non-transgendered person using the word, and a transgendered person using the word to describe themselves, inviting other people to use the word to describe them personally, reclaiming the word or otherwise.

Even in the “in the community”/”outside the community” debate, it still should not have been used here, as it has context as an derogatory slur, and it is offensive to many people. I doubt the word ‘f-g’, ‘d–e’ or, for that matter, ‘n—er’ would ever have been used.

Mysteryman 12:10 pm 09 Jul 12

p1 said :

M Rose said :

A lot of transgendered people find that term to be heinously offensive, particularly when used by someone outside the community.

Without commenting on JB’s wisdom when writing the headline, I have always found the idea that a word can be fine when used “within” the community, but terribly offence when used by others to be an odd one. The use of the “N” word by black American rappers is a perfect example.

I guess it is the same as greeting your best mate with ‘how ya doin ya barstard’, but on a community wide scale.

I think the idea of having certain words only acceptable “within a community” to be a bit of a double standard. Which is strange, considering that often the “community” is campaigning against double standards.

p1 11:58 am 09 Jul 12

M Rose said :

A lot of transgendered people find that term to be heinously offensive, particularly when used by someone outside the community.

Without commenting on JB’s wisdom when writing the headline, I have always found the idea that a word can be fine when used “within” the community, but terribly offence when used by others to be an odd one. The use of the “N” word by black American rappers is a perfect example.

I guess it is the same as greeting your best mate with ‘how ya doin ya barstard’, but on a community wide scale.

Skidbladnir 11:40 am 09 Jul 12

Way to go on the headline, there.
Managing to offend everyone involved with the policy in one step?

Truly, trolling is a art.

Seriously, its like putting a “Congratulations, fags!” headline on an article announcing same-sex marriage policy progress.

neanderthalsis 11:35 am 09 Jul 12

M Rose said :

A lot of transgendered people find that term to be heinously offensive, particularly when used by someone outside the community. If we changed the topic of this article to homosexual rights, I would equate this title with “Won’t someone think of the f—-ts/d–es? Cries Simon” Is that something you would be likely to write?

But “Please won’t somebody think of the GLTBI&OMN-HSPWDMBLIWTGOF” does not have the same ring to it.

VYBerlinaV8_is_back 11:34 am 09 Jul 12

The real question is HOW gender could be legally recognised. Drivers license? Passport?

M Rose 11:06 am 09 Jul 12

A lot of transgendered people find that term to be heinously offensive, particularly when used by someone outside the community. If we changed the topic of this article to homosexual rights, I would equate this title with “Won’t someone think of the f—-ts/d–es? Cries Simon” Is that something you would be likely to write?

1 2 3 11

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site