Categories Society
The Equality and Diversity section of your job application has 'gender' in what appears to be a list of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010.
However...
1/15
However, 'gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
Sex is the protected characteristic under the Act, but that is not on your list.
2/15
You then ask for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Male
Female.
3/15
Again, 'gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
4/15
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
5/15
The more thinking I do the less serious - and more ludicrous - the entire thing looks. And the more obvious it becomes that this is the proposal of deeply unwell individuals who are not thinking clearly.
Can you game out where it would go it theoretically Trump did enact some EO demanding the impounding of voting machines? As that\u2019s clearly the game. Like he signs it, then what? Do marshals listen or refuse? Do states sue and get an emergency injunction and that\u2019s the end?
— Bryan Duva (@duva60) December 21, 2020
On the legal side, I read through the list of emergency powers - the whole list - that was assembled by the Brennan Center. Nothing on that list fits. Nothing comes even
It seems extraordinarily unlikely that any executive order along the lines of what has been discussed would be legal. In this case, it can be taken as a given that one or more targeted jurisdictions would dash right off to the courthouse.
Standing would not, it should go without saying, be likely to be an issue. I doubt redressability would either. I think it's very likely that restraining orders and injunctions would be swiftly issued.
That's the legal side, to the extent it's possible to speculate on that at all at this point. Basically, there's no readily apparent legal basis for such a thing, so it probably wouldn't be legal.
That's the easy part. Now for the nuttier side - the logistics.
The equal opportunities section in your job application asks for the 'gender' of the applicant with options:
Female (including trans female)
Male (including trans male)
Non-binary
Other.
1/12
'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.
https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u
2/12
Sex is the protected characteristic and the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' and 'Male' as defined in the Act and consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that. 'Other' is not a valid option.
https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF
'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.
3/12
'trans female', 'trans male' and 'Non-binary' are also not valid options are not used or defined in the Act.
4/12
You then ask "Is your gender the same as the gender you were assigned at birth?"
'Gender' at birth is a meaningless concept and 'gender' is not 'assigned' at birth: sex is observed and recorded and is immutable.
5/12
Baudrillard noticed, before any reactionary blogger uttered such a critique, that we are now caught in a perpetual simulation and re-enactment of the revolutionary liberation that has long passed
The relatively static norms in our society have been called by the names of change and progress. Most people are conservative by nature, so they conform to the norm of \u201cprogress.\u201d Because of this sleight of hand, deeply conservative people believe themselves to be revolutionaries
— Zer\u0335o\u0335\u0304 \u0336\u0300\u0347H\u0334\u0302\u0332P\u0335\u031a\u0354 Lovecraft \U0001f6e1 (@0x49fa98) March 28, 2019
When younger people resent “the boomers” one gets the sense that what they resent most of all is that they have MISSED the orgy, and now they can’t discern their parents from the crowd.
After the orgy comes the gender war. I do not call it the sex war because let’s bite a bullet, gender is only mostly correlated with sex, and lefty males are spiritual women, and THEY KNOW IT which is why they are so sympathetic to gender
Most dissident political opinion is driven by resentment of the opposite sex.
— Zer\u0335o\u0335\u0304 \u0336\u0300\u0347H\u0334\u0302\u0332P\u0335\u031a\u0354 Lovecraft \U0001f6e1 (@0x49fa98) December 19, 2018
Leftwingness is primarily female and is driven by resentment towards men.
Rightwingness is primarily male and is driven by resentment towards women.
Since the dawn of agriculture at least—female historians of both sexes tell us—we have been living in Men’s world, where women were brutally subjugated by men. Women’s liberation is the total reversal of this, a vengeful subjugation of men. This is dubious but let’s lean into it
(A thread for whoever feels like reading)
Neighborhood gents, what\u2019s something you\u2019ve learned about feminism (or gained a better understanding of) that you think other men should know?
— feminist next door (@emrazz) February 19, 2021
Note - the quoted is a friendly/good faith replier. https://t.co/048kuxxX6q
I have observed feminists on Twitter advocating for rape victims to be heard, rapists to be held accountable, for people to address the misogyny that is deeply rooted in our culture, and for women to be treated with respect.
To me, very easy things to get behind.
And the amount of pushback they receive for those very basic requests is appalling. I see men trip over themselves to defend rape and rapists and misogyny every chance they get. Some accounts are completely dedicated to harassing women on this site. It’s unhealthy.
Furthermore, I have observed how dedicated these misogynists are by how they treat other men that do not immediately side with them. There is an entire lexicon they have created for men who do not openly treat women with disrespect.
Ex: simp, cuck, white knight, beta
All examples of terms they use to demean a man who respects women.
To paraphrase what a wise man on this app said:
Some men hate women so much, they hate men who don’t hate women
Just finished an extremely helpful and fun workshop on theorising organised by @aruggeri_eu (who never stops working for his students)! Was great catching up virtually w/ @natrupesinghe @EvgenijaKroeker @CeciliaCorsini Mikael & Ellen!
— Giuseppe Spatafora (@gspataf95) January 29, 2021
“By theorizing I mean the process that comes before a theory is presented in its final form” Swedberg 2016, 7
“Although everyone is for "more theory," most of us have rather little understanding of how to get "more theory”.”
Dina A. Zinnes, 1980, 315
How do we shape, draft and calibrate our theory? It is assumed we learn about theorizing via emulation, comparison and practice. Theorizing is a process and we should not confound it with the outcome(a theory). There are pre-theoretical steps/tips that can facilitate the process.
Caveats: this is my way to help theorising. These suggestions are just a theorizing “banister”, nothing more. You will have to climb the stairs for your theory.
What we're aiming at: a theory is a tentative conjecture about the cause of some phenomenon of interest. Logical statement based on assumptions that explain a causal mechanism from which we can derive observable hypotheses and therefore expectations.