Gender fluidity? What next?

[easytiger95]

So is the problem transgender people on TV? Or gay detectives on TV? Or TVs on TV? Or just too many detectives altogether on TV (whether they are TV or LGBT)?

If I see another CSI....

Always amuses me when people who would happily watch scenes of violence get the vapours when gay lads appear on screen. I'd have far more of a problem with the little tigercub watching someone getting his head stove in then watching two lads having a kiss.

I sometimes associate ye with loyally flying the "progressive cause's" flag based on pure emotion EasyTiger but you've hit the nail on the head there.

Well, I'd hope to bring a fair amount of logic to my political leanings, but I don't think emotion is necessarily a bad thing. For instance, i think the gay marriage referendum was carried mainly due to emotional intelligence in the electorate rather than raw logic - most people i spoke to, whatever their previously stated positions, tended just to say they felt it was the right thing to do. Hard to argue with that (as it was hard to argue people with genuinely held religious beliefs which I may not subscribe to but i do respect).

But really, my basic problem with all this is the misdiagnosis of this "phenomenon" which seems to be a permissive liberal society is the cause of people "choosing" to be gay, LGBT etc whilst I would point to the facts (and they are facts) that LGBT people have always been in society since it began - that at various different times and cultures, they were acknowledged more openly than they were for the past 200 years in Western culture say, and our liberal society simply allows them to be visible and have their essential humanity acknowledged and respected.

Live and let live, you know? Which as well as being emotional and progressive/liberal , is the essence of the New Testament.

[foxcommander]

Certain to be good family viewing....round up the kids...

From RTE (pushing the liberal agenda hard these days)

Hart to Hart, the classic TV mystery series which starred Robert Wagner and Stefanie Powers, is set to be remade with a gay couple as its heroes.

US entertainment site Deadline, which broke the story, says that the "modern and sexy" retelling will follow attorney Jonathan Hart and investigator Dan Hartman as they try to balance work and their new life together.

Inclusion of gays in mainstream society is "pushing the liberal agenda"?

How awful for you! You must be at your wits end trying to shield your children's eyes from seeing gay couples out and about!

One wonders why such inclusiveness is not also part of the conservative agenda?

RTE has been fairly top heavy with these sorts of stories recently.

Little foxes sure wouldn't be watching Hart to Hart, Will & Grace or Ellen in my house. Or that dreadful Graham Norton.

I dont even know the first two shows your on about foxy, which goes to show ye if ye swtich the thing off you wont have unwanted rubbish coming into your house.

I understand why you wouldnt like graham Norton, he's like a chicken on a fryin pan, and while hilarious in small doses, gives me a sore head after 15minutes or so. Also does he still do his silly innuendos? They are repetitive and nauseating and not suitable for children.

On the other hand I dont know what you could have against Ellen, she's mild mannered and charming. I could only conclude that your dislike is just old fashioned discrimination.

I would be doing well to watch 2hours of TV in the week and by far the worst thing that I see on the box are those viagra adverts. Is there no watershed in America or does it not apply to adverts?

In that case, you probably shouldn't let your kids watch TV at 10.30pm on a Friday night (or even later if watching in the south). There's this thing called a watershed at 9pm. I think 90 mins is a safe enough buffer.

EDIT: I see MR2 beat me to it.

Easy on lads lets not take it out of context, I was replying directly to Foxy

If kids where up at that hour it would really be pathetic gallsman wha?

For the record in my house once the Angeles is finished the TV goes off. Even the 6 o'clockk news presenters are a bit too flamboyant these days. Fiona Bruce started it with her eyebrows but she used to be held off until 9 on the bbc. Then came Julian Simmons at 7.00. But RTE pulled it back further with having Anne Doyle on at 6? And those new presenters don't even get me started!

Even I find Norton's patter vile and too over the top disgusting 

Sure they went and ruined the angelus as well as to please the PC brigade...

[omaghjoe]

So is the problem transgender people on TV? Or gay detectives on TV? Or TVs on TV? Or just too many detectives altogether on TV (whether they are TV or LGBT)?

If I see another CSI....

Always amuses me when people who would happily watch scenes of violence get the vapours when gay lads appear on screen. I'd have far more of a problem with the little tigercub watching someone getting his head stove in then watching two lads having a kiss.

I sometimes associate ye with loyally flying the "progressive cause's" flag based on pure emotion EasyTiger but you've hit the nail on the head there.

Well, I'd hope to bring a fair amount of logic to my political leanings, but I don't think emotion is necessarily a bad thing. For instance, i think the gay marriage referendum was carried mainly due to emotional intelligence in the electorate rather than raw logic - most people i spoke to, whatever their previously stated positions, tended just to say they felt it was the right thing to do. Hard to argue with that (as it was hard to argue people with genuinely held religious beliefs which I may not subscribe to but i do respect).

But really, my basic problem with all this is the misdiagnosis of this "phenomenon" which seems to be a permissive liberal society is the cause of people "choosing" to be gay, LGBT etc whilst I would point to the facts (and they are facts) that LGBT people have always been in society since it began - that at various different times and cultures, they were acknowledged more openly than they were for the past 200 years in Western culture say, and our liberal society simply allows them to be visible and have their essential humanity acknowledged and respected.

Live and let live, you know? Which as well as being emotional and progressive/liberal , is the essence of the New Testament.

I associate progressiveness with using reason and thinking to enact change over tradition.

Which is sometimes good sometimes not. Thinking things through depends on having all the facts available and considering all scenarios and consequences of a change, which is almost impossible. Whats more in a democracy it is unlikely that the majority will apply any reason whatsoever to a decision being taken.

Tradition relies on walking a well trodden path that is being slowly, organically corrected through generations, through acting out life.

Truth is we need both, but for safety, tradition should be the basis.

BTW I hate the term "liberal" to me that means you should be able to do what the individual believes is correct. Society cant operate like that, we need to live with an accepted set of rules based on common morals, otherwise society falls apart. Individual freedoms are a benefit of society and need to be carefully balanced against their overall consequences. However with that said granting those freedoms can have benefits for society that are not immediately apparent.

As far as the New Testament goes, it is amusing that it could still be considered progressive even after countless generations of Western society supposedly adhering it.
It should by now be the basis of our thinking but its not, without reasoned thought our instinct would still appear to be instinctively individualistic, exhibiting traits such as selfishness and self righteous. We still have to overcome these instincts by reasoning them away.

On the other hand people often use religion to hide behind these instincts which are detrimental to themselves, their relationships and society in general, all the while ignoring its overall message, there's a great example on this board.

But I believe there are generally two type of people, traditional and progressive. Because religion has been around a long time the traditionalists associate with it and progressives disassociate. But as you say what could be more progressive than religion? In the case of my own its a case of believing in something that can't be physically proved and involves living your life contrary to your instincts for the benefit of others? That's truly progressive and requires the ultimate in open mindedness.

[Eamonnca1]

I see an RTE presenter wishes to be known as two Christian names one male and one female to reflect his/her gender fluidity?

Can this world get any more insane or confused?

You could believe in an invisible man in the sky taking a personal interest in the details of your life. If that's not insane or confused I don't know what is.

Or believing that eating only plants is good for your health despite evidence to the contrary, take your pick, we all have our own way of going mad Eamon

Keep it relevant eh?

If you lived in a country where there's shit in the meat you'd probably only eat plants too.

[Eamonnca1]

Tony, you can't wrap your head around things because you are a black or white kind of thinker.  You don't see greyness or ambiguity.  Rather than seeing gender as a continuum, like the sliding volume control on your stereo, you see things as two separate buckets. Everything has to be one thing or the other, which is why you have problems with same-sex marriage/ homosexuality etc.  You need rules otherwise you freak.  I tend to think that wisdom entails coming to terms with life's greyness.  As Dante wrote, 'It pleases me as much to doubt as it does to know.'

It's a wonder you lads are associating with GAA, a backward organisation that only has games for men, with women having their own competitions. Or maybe you don't bother with that old country stuff in America and have unisex changing rooms and competitions for everyone.  It's a pity Joe Canning wasn't playing camogie for Galway yesterday, they may have won.

The GAA in America has camogie and ladies football under its wing. Some clubs even play co-ed.

[Rossfan]

The GAA in America is also semi pprofessional in some places.

[omaghjoe]

I see an RTE presenter wishes to be known as two Christian names one male and one female to reflect his/her gender fluidity?

Can this world get any more insane or confused?

You could believe in an invisible man in the sky taking a personal interest in the details of your life. If that's not insane or confused I don't know what is.

Or believing that eating only plants is good for your health despite evidence to the contrary, take your pick, we all have our own way of going mad Eamon

Keep it relevant eh?

If you lived in a country where there's shit in the meat you'd probably only eat plants too.

Except I do...shit in the meat v chemicals on the plants, which is worse? Who knows?

[armaghniac]

Tony, you can't wrap your head around things because you are a black or white kind of thinker.  You don't see greyness or ambiguity.  Rather than seeing gender as a continuum, like the sliding volume control on your stereo, you see things as two separate buckets. Everything has to be one thing or the other, which is why you have problems with same-sex marriage/ homosexuality etc.  You need rules otherwise you freak.  I tend to think that wisdom entails coming to terms with life's greyness.  As Dante wrote, 'It pleases me as much to doubt as it does to know.'

It's a wonder you lads are associating with GAA, a backward organisation that only has games for men, with women having their own competitions. Or maybe you don't bother with that old country stuff in America and have unisex changing rooms and competitions for everyone.  It's a pity Joe Canning wasn't playing camogie for Galway yesterday, they may have won.

The GAA in America has camogie and ladies football under its wing. Some clubs even play co-ed.

You need to hunt down those that still have force outdated notions of gender on their teams.

[Eamonnca1]

The GAA in America is also semi pprofessional in some places.

Allegedly.

[J70]

Certain to be good family viewing....round up the kids...

From RTE (pushing the liberal agenda hard these days)

Hart to Hart, the classic TV mystery series which starred Robert Wagner and Stefanie Powers, is set to be remade with a gay couple as its heroes.

US entertainment site Deadline, which broke the story, says that the "modern and sexy" retelling will follow attorney Jonathan Hart and investigator Dan Hartman as they try to balance work and their new life together.

Inclusion of gays in mainstream society is "pushing the liberal agenda"?

How awful for you! You must be at your wits end trying to shield your children's eyes from seeing gay couples out and about!

One wonders why such inclusiveness is not also part of the conservative agenda?

RTE has been fairly top heavy with these sorts of stories recently.

Little foxes sure wouldn't be watching Hart to Hart, Will & Grace or Ellen in my house. Or that dreadful Graham Norton.

Seriously? Will and Grace? Ellen?

I'll give you Norton as unsuitable for kids, but that's nothing to do with his sexuality.

What about Modern Family?

[AZOffaly]

Most things after 9 are not suitable for kids. I wouldn't like my little lad watching hetero people boning either!

[foxcommander]

Certain to be good family viewing....round up the kids...

From RTE (pushing the liberal agenda hard these days)

Hart to Hart, the classic TV mystery series which starred Robert Wagner and Stefanie Powers, is set to be remade with a gay couple as its heroes.

US entertainment site Deadline, which broke the story, says that the "modern and sexy" retelling will follow attorney Jonathan Hart and investigator Dan Hartman as they try to balance work and their new life together.

Inclusion of gays in mainstream society is "pushing the liberal agenda"?

How awful for you! You must be at your wits end trying to shield your children's eyes from seeing gay couples out and about!

One wonders why such inclusiveness is not also part of the conservative agenda?

RTE has been fairly top heavy with these sorts of stories recently.

Little foxes sure wouldn't be watching Hart to Hart, Will & Grace or Ellen in my house. Or that dreadful Graham Norton.

Seriously? Will and Grace? Ellen?

I'll give you Norton as unsuitable for kids, but that's nothing to do with his sexuality.

What about Modern Family?

Won't watch modern family. If I want to see Ed O'Neill I'll stick with the Bundys.

[J70]

Certain to be good family viewing....round up the kids...

From RTE (pushing the liberal agenda hard these days)

Hart to Hart, the classic TV mystery series which starred Robert Wagner and Stefanie Powers, is set to be remade with a gay couple as its heroes.

US entertainment site Deadline, which broke the story, says that the "modern and sexy" retelling will follow attorney Jonathan Hart and investigator Dan Hartman as they try to balance work and their new life together.

Inclusion of gays in mainstream society is "pushing the liberal agenda"?

How awful for you! You must be at your wits end trying to shield your children's eyes from seeing gay couples out and about!

One wonders why such inclusiveness is not also part of the conservative agenda?

RTE has been fairly top heavy with these sorts of stories recently.

Little foxes sure wouldn't be watching Hart to Hart, Will & Grace or Ellen in my house. Or that dreadful Graham Norton.

Seriously? Will and Grace? Ellen?

I'll give you Norton as unsuitable for kids, but that's nothing to do with his sexuality.

What about Modern Family?

Won't watch modern family. If I want to see Ed O'Neill I'll stick with the Bundys.

Modern Family on its worst day is streets ahead of Married With Children on its best. Brilliant writing.

And for kids, on the one hand you have an idiotic chauvinist with an obnoxious wife with massive cleavage and hair,  a hyoer-sexualized teenage daughter and a son who thinks of nothing except getting laid. On the other you have three well adjusted families dealing, in a comic way, with normal issues, just one of happens to be a gay couple.

I know which I would deem more suitable for kids.

[laoislad]

Certain to be good family viewing....round up the kids...

From RTE (pushing the liberal agenda hard these days)

Hart to Hart, the classic TV mystery series which starred Robert Wagner and Stefanie Powers, is set to be remade with a gay couple as its heroes.

US entertainment site Deadline, which broke the story, says that the "modern and sexy" retelling will follow attorney Jonathan Hart and investigator Dan Hartman as they try to balance work and their new life together.

Inclusion of gays in mainstream society is "pushing the liberal agenda"?

How awful for you! You must be at your wits end trying to shield your children's eyes from seeing gay couples out and about!

One wonders why such inclusiveness is not also part of the conservative agenda?

RTE has been fairly top heavy with these sorts of stories recently.

Little foxes sure wouldn't be watching Hart to Hart, Will & Grace or Ellen in my house. Or that dreadful Graham Norton.

Seriously? Will and Grace? Ellen?

I'll give you Norton as unsuitable for kids, but that's nothing to do with his sexuality.

What about Modern Family?

Won't watch modern family. If I want to see Ed O'Neill I'll stick with the Bundys.

Modern Family on its worst day is streets ahead of Married With Children on its best. Brilliant writing.

And for kids, on the one hand you have an idiotic chauvinist with an obnoxious wife with massive cleavage and hair,  a hyoer-sexualized teenage daughter and a son who thinks of nothing except getting laid. On the other you have three well adjusted families dealing, in a comic way, with normal issues, just one of happens to be a gay couple.

I know which I would deem more suitable for kids.

In fairness most of that could apply to Modern Family also!

[J70]

Certain to be good family viewing....round up the kids...

From RTE (pushing the liberal agenda hard these days)

Hart to Hart, the classic TV mystery series which starred Robert Wagner and Stefanie Powers, is set to be remade with a gay couple as its heroes.

US entertainment site Deadline, which broke the story, says that the "modern and sexy" retelling will follow attorney Jonathan Hart and investigator Dan Hartman as they try to balance work and their new life together.

Inclusion of gays in mainstream society is "pushing the liberal agenda"?

How awful for you! You must be at your wits end trying to shield your children's eyes from seeing gay couples out and about!

One wonders why such inclusiveness is not also part of the conservative agenda?

RTE has been fairly top heavy with these sorts of stories recently.

Little foxes sure wouldn't be watching Hart to Hart, Will & Grace or Ellen in my house. Or that dreadful Graham Norton.

Seriously? Will and Grace? Ellen?

I'll give you Norton as unsuitable for kids, but that's nothing to do with his sexuality.

What about Modern Family?

Won't watch modern family. If I want to see Ed O'Neill I'll stick with the Bundys.

Modern Family on its worst day is streets ahead of Married With Children on its best. Brilliant writing.

And for kids, on the one hand you have an idiotic chauvinist with an obnoxious wife with massive cleavage and hair,  a hyoer-sexualized teenage daughter and a son who thinks of nothing except getting laid. On the other you have three well adjusted families dealing, in a comic way, with normal issues, just one of happens to be a gay couple.

I know which I would deem more suitable for kids.

In fairness most of that could apply to Modern Family also!

Yeah, but the tone is less raunchy and there is a bit more to the show than JUST that