Comments by "Philip Rayment" (@PJRayment) on "Gender activists' ‘absurdity’ is hindering their own pursuits" video.

@red rose "Only on Sky news. The rest of society moved on years ago." No, the rest of society pushed the boundaries, and now pretends that this nonsense is not an issue. Sorry, it remains an issue as long as it's pushed.
2
@turnerfamilyinozi "What about a woman that can't breast feed or get pregnant? Is a woman who goes through menopause no longer a woman?" Are you critiquing the wording of her definition (which might be fair enough) or trying to prove her basic contention as being wrong (which would be ridiculous)?
2
@turnerfamilyinozi "Woke means being against discrimination." That's not all it means. But also, it means being against other people disagreeing with one's own views, but you're free to discriminate against them, because what they want is, to your mind, not worthy of being protected.
2
@turnerfamilyinozi "So what is your definition of a woman or a man?" A man is the one kind of creature created by God in His image (i.e. the man-kind). A woman is an adult female (hu)man (Genesis 1:27: "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them."
2
@turnerfamilyinozi "Even if you were talking about sexes you would be still incorrect." What other sexes are there? Male and Female are all there are.
2
"Why the hell is a NZ Premier being asked what makes a woman." Perhaps to see if he's sane? "A Prime Minister runs a country, he does not involve himself in sexual role definitions." And that country has a Ministry for Women. How can you have an ministry for an undefined group? "Conservatives have nothing left except games with sex roles and woke rubbish." Calling out the irrational left is a serious and important task. It's not a game. "I want a PM to run the economy, defence, health,..." Does that include understanding the differences between men's health and women's health? How can do you that if you don't understand the difference? "...not have to answer the nonsense of conservatives." You have that back to front. The nonsense is in claiming that a man can become a woman. And that's mainly the left doing that.
2
@turnerfamilyinozi "How many psychologists agree with him?" Probably a lot more than are prepared to admit publicly, given the censorship on this issue. How many psychologists disagree with him, even if they don't publicly admit it? Can you answer that?
2
@turnerfamilyinozi "How would classify a person who has XXY chromosomes" As having that particular copying error in their genes. And as male.
1
@red rose "Nazis are not known for their intellect, much less their scholarship." And left-wingers are not known for their civil debates, often resorting to name-calling and vilification.
1
The funny thing about the left is that they can imagine things that aren't the case just in order to vilify.
1
@turnerfamilyinozi "Please provide evidence for your claim." I already cited an authoritative reference.
1
@turnerfamilyinozi "If you did I missed it." So you missed my reference to Genesis 1:27?
1
@turnerfamilyinozi "Which version of Genesis are you referring to?" Are you asking about which English translation? Any. But for whatever it matters, I quoted from the ESV UK translation.
1
@turnerfamilyinozi "No I am talking about the two different versions of Genesis in any bible you care to mention." I'm very familiar with Bibles, and there is only one version in every single Bible I've ever looked at.
1
@turnerfamilyinozi "There are two creation stories in Genesis." That's not what you said. And no, there are not two stories. The one story starts off with an overview of what happened on each day of creation week. Then it continues by focusing in with more detail of what happened on day 6. It's all one story, not two. "In one, man is created before other animals. In the other, man is God's final creation." In first part of the one account, thing are given in order. In the second part, the order is not the main issue. The AV translates the start of Genesis 2:19 as "And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; ..." However the Hebrew can be understood as speaking in the context of Genesis 1 and therefore be read as in the NIV, "Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. ..." (my bolding in both cases). It's a bit like if you meet me at the railway station when my train arrives, and as I get off the train I say to you "I haven't ridden the train today". That seems like a blatantly false statement given that I've just alighted from the train. But if, earlier in the day, I'd told you "Today I'm going to be riding on a new train on a test run", you would realise that my reference to "the train" was not to the one I'd just alighted from, but the one I had earlier mentioned. Seemingly-straightforward statements can mean something quite different depending on the context. So as far as the two "stories" in Genesis are concerned, you first have to assume that they are different stories in order to read them as being contradictory. Essentially, a circular argument.
1
"Talking about transgender issues and having not one authority on the subject on the panel." You don't need to be an authority to know what a woman is. "Classic Sky." Classic baseless sniping. Here's one authority on the subject. Christopher Dummitt is an academic with a PhD in gender history, and has published on that topic, with his work being cited by others. But he wrote "Everyone was (and is) making it up. That’s how the gender-studies field works."
1
@rightherethereeverywhere "he's an historian" How much history is there for gender views? And the supposed history of people having a variety of genders is used to help justify the nonsense. He is familiar with and is/was involved with the gender studies field. That would suggest that he knows what he's talking about.
1
@HelloWorld-ns7gt "There is a history of it..." I don't doubt that. History finishes yesterday. "...the first trans operation was over a hundred years ago." Which is relatively recent. However, the NIH says that "The first sex-change operation in a transsexual patient, i.e. the construction of a penis (so-called phalloplasty), took place in the Netherlands in Arnhem in 1959-1960."
1