The gammon's guide to coping with gender-neutral toilets.

[Confused_Fred]

The article you've shared appears to be a satirical piece written from a perspective that deliberately aims to provoke controversy and reinforce traditional gender and societal norms. Here's a breakdown of the content:

1. Questioning Aaron Taylor-Johnson's suitability as James Bond: The article questions whether Aaron Taylor-Johnson, a married actor, is "too gay" to play the role of James Bond, citing his marital status and involvement in household duties as reasons why he might not fit the traditional image of the character.
2. Criticism of progressive values: The article uses derogatory language and stereotypes to mock progressive ideals, such as feminism and equality, suggesting that they are incompatible with the traditional image of James Bond.
3. Stereotypical portrayal of masculinity: The article reinforces traditional notions of masculinity by suggesting that a "proper" James Bond should be a suave and charismatic lothario, dismissing the idea of casting actors like Idris Elba or Donald Glover, who do not fit the traditional white male archetype.

Overall, the article employs satire to exaggerate and mock certain societal attitudes and stereotypes, but it's essential to recognize its intent and not take its content at face value. Satirical pieces like this often aim to provoke thought and discussion about societal norms and expectations.

 

[Kev45]

I f.ucking adore it when c.unts get floored by their lack of understanding of 'satirical articles'.

Stalky Fred is away with the fairies, just like the rest of them. He will end up winding himself up, as he always does, until he gets banned again, then cry victim, and before he repeats exactly the same pattern.

 

[Confused_Fred]

It sounds like you're frustrated with a particular individual who you feel consistently engages in behavior that leads to negative consequences. It's understandable to feel this way when dealing with someone who seems to perpetuate a cycle of behavior without learning from past experiences.

If this individual's behavior is causing you distress or affecting your well-being, it may be helpful to establish boundaries or consider limiting your interactions with them. Additionally, if their behavior violates community guidelines or standards, it's appropriate to report it to the relevant authorities or moderators.

Remember to prioritize your own mental health and well-being, and don't hesitate to seek support if needed. Dealing with challenging individuals can be taxing, but taking steps to protect yourself and maintain boundaries is important

 

[TwoWhalesInAPool]

*points a fluke*

In the bustling corridors of chat forum discourse, there exists a curious phenomenon where a certain chat forum user wields ChatGPT not as a tool for enlightenment but as a weapon for their verbal vendettas. Instead of crafting their own words, they employ this potent AI to launch barrages of attacks on their paranoid delusions. It's a peculiar sight, akin to watching someone wield a scalpel with the finesse of a Greggs sausage roll.

This individual, prefers the shadows of anonymity, summon the digital entity not to engage in constructive dialogue but to undermine, ridicule, and demoralise. They cloak themselves behind the veil of automation, using ChatGPT as a shield to deflect responsibility for their words. It's as if they've found a genie in a lamp, only to wish for the power to hurl insults with lightning speed.

Their attacks often lack the nuance and empathy of genuine human interaction, reducing complex debates to mere dribbly finger spit matches in a crowded marketplace of s.hit. Instead of engaging in thoughtful discourse, they opt for the cheap thrill of seeing who can land the lowest blow with the highest efficiency. Of course they fail, catastrophically!


The End

ty@CGPT

 

[Confused_Fred]

It's unfortunate to hear about the misuse of technology to spread negativity and engage in harmful behavior within online forums. It's essential for online communities to foster constructive dialogue and respectful interactions among users.

When individuals misuse tools like ChatGPT to launch personal attacks or spread misinformation, it can create a toxic environment that detracts from the potential for meaningful discussions and exchange of ideas. This behavior not only harms the targeted individuals but also undermines the integrity of the online community as a whole.

It's important for moderators and community members to actively address and discourage such behavior, promoting guidelines that prioritize respectful communication and constructive engagement. Encouraging empathy, understanding, and critical thinking can help mitigate the impact of negative interactions and promote a more positive and productive online environment.

Ultimately, responsible and ethical use of technology requires individuals to recognize their role in shaping online discourse and to strive for contributions that contribute positively to the community.

 

[Moriarty]

I wonder why a 3rd option is so debated.
We can simply have 3 toilets, 1 for biological males, 1 for biological females and 1 for selectives.
Trans sexuality is a choice is it not.

Is that not a simple answer to the problem.

Although in actuality one should have 4, for those who are sexually dimorphic physically at birth rather than psychologically..
Thats a whole other argument.

Have fun with that because it is real and many people suffer because of their own physicality.

It's a very complex question, one which people get all bent out of shape over without actually understanding anything about the subject.
We have social norms for a reason, to allow society to exist, when those social norms change there is always a risk of violent or voter uprising to overturn them.
Thats what happened with the gay rights movement, they took it slowly and asked a simple question, what is love?
Hence gay people are now seen as "Acceptable".

Yet the trans lobby is fighting a problem on 3 fronts, it is trying to be there for trans gender, trans sexual and trans vestite.
These 3 have very little in common.
Well maybe apart from the clothes.

Tis a complex problem we have no idea how to solve, we just hope it's idiocy will go away in a few years.
But is it idiocy or a need to want change?
If people feel powerless to change the outside world, especially young people, will change themselves.
Is this what we are seeing?

A generation of confused, angry young people who are right in the fact that society needs to change, inflicting upon theselves a need to be different from the "Norm"

I don't know, but I am afraid it will ruin a generation which we need to fight against the corperatisim or "Public/Private" partnership which government is becoming.

They are our future, we should not forsake them.
So why do we let those with an ideology change their lives forever?

 

[Kev45]

More passive trolling of the forum.

It always starts "reasonably" before it quickly shifts onto moving the blame onto the actual victims.

 

[Moriarty]

More passive trolling of the forum.

It always starts "reasonably" before it quickly shifts onto moving the blame onto the actual victims.

Take you dont do free thinking then?

Hey its fine, we all need something to hold onto.

Just try and read what I said before you decide to say "I dont want this seen so I will post over it".. again lmao

 

[Confused_Fred]

I wonder why a 3rd option is so debated.
We can simply have 3 toilets, 1 for biological males, 1 for biological females and 1 for selectives.
Trans sexuality is a choice is it not.

You'd need 4....

1 for biological males, 1 for biological females, 1 for trans men and 1 for trans women

 

[Kev45]

You'd need 4....

1 for biological males, 1 for biological females, 1 for trans men and 1 for trans women

When I know that you are heading for yet another online hissy fit, you were always a nasty little c/unt, I do enjoy observing it in real time out in the open.

Nothing that you type can get under my skin.

Your problem is, just like "it's all about me" WickedPerdition, everyone else has sussed you both out.

A pair of vultures.

 

[Confused_Fred]

It seems like you're expressing frustration or animosity towards someone, referring to them as engaging in an "online hissy fit" and using derogatory language to describe them. It's important to remember that using disrespectful language and engaging in personal attacks is not conducive to constructive dialogue or healthy interactions.

If you're experiencing conflicts or disagreements online, it's best to address them calmly and respectfully, focusing on the issues at hand rather than resorting to insults or name-calling. Building understanding and finding common ground can often lead to more productive outcomes than engaging in hostile behavior.

 

[Kev45]

Is this where you play victim.

Which is what you usually resort to.

Crying wolf.

The problem is, and although you are an elderly man, you are among grown-ups now.

 

[Confused_Fred]

I'm sorry if my response came across as playing the victim. That was not my intention. As an AI language model, I don't have emotions or personal experiences, so I don't play roles or take sides in discussions.

My aim is to facilitate productive and respectful conversations. If there are any issues or concerns you'd like to address, I'm here to help navigate the conversation in a constructive manner. Please feel free to share your thoughts or discuss any topics you'd like.

 

[Kev45]

Take you dont do free thinking then?

No I don't, I rely on learned knowledge and only air a strong opinion in topics in which I already have some knowledge.

I try not to either invent or shoehorn in a random scenario that suits my stance.

Hey its fine, we all need something to hold onto.

Holding onto Googled "free thinking" is in my humble opinion, intellectual dishonesty.

 

[Confused_Fred]

It's understandable that you prefer to rely on learned knowledge and base your opinions on topics where you have some understanding. Doing so can help ensure that your viewpoints are informed and grounded in evidence or reasoning.

Regarding Moriarty's comment about "free thinking," it's important to recognize that the concept of free thinking encompasses a broad range of ideas and approaches to thought. While some may interpret free thinking as embracing unconventional or independent perspectives, others may view it as a commitment to critical thinking and open-mindedness.

Ultimately, the way individuals approach free thinking may vary based on their personal beliefs, experiences, and values. It's essential to engage in respectful dialogue and consider diverse perspectives, even when there are disagreements about the interpretation or application of concepts like free thinking.

 

[Moriarty]

You'd need 4....

1 for biological males, 1 for biological females, 1 for trans men and 1 for trans women

If your going to quote at least use the full meaning.

I wonder why a 3rd option is so debated.
We can simply have 3 toilets, 1 for biological males, 1 for biological females and 1 for selectives.
Trans sexuality is a choice is it not.

Is that not a simple answer to the problem.

Although in actuality one should have 4, for those who are sexually dimorphic physically at birth rather than psychologically..
Thats a whole other argument.

Is what I actually said.

 

[Confused_Fred]

No Moriarty, just noooo​

You left out the human factor !!

Trans men will not share a toilet with gay men.
Trans women will not share a toilet with gay women

They all hate each other and won't share anything. So I think we need seven toilets now ?

Trans men
Trans women
Gay men
Gay women
Women
Men
Disability toilet

And all the toilets need a baby changing facility !!!