• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

UK - Train firm apologise for "ladies and gentlemen" announcement

cullennz

Banned
cullennz
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
21,318
Location
NZ
Sometimes I wish I was some trendy other gender, rather than boring old "a dude".

They seem to have little to nothing actually important to get worried about.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14947...ses-non-binary-ladies-gentlemen-announcement/

Train firm apologises to ‘non-binary’ passenger for conductor’s ‘ladies and gentlemen’ announcement

A TRAIN company has apologised for not being inclusive after a conductor welcomed passengers on board with “Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls”.

The London North Eastern Railway issued a grovelling apology after passenger Laurence Coles complained.

Coles tweeted: “‘Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls…’ so as a non-binary person this announcement doesn’t actually apply to me so I won’t listen”.

Laurence’s friend Charlotte Monroe, 28, also contacted the company, saying: “I was sat with Laurence when this tweet was sent. Both of us are non-binary, and we were both alarmed and uncomfortable by the lack of inclusion.”

LNER responded saying: “I'm really sorry to see this, Laurence, our Train Managers should not be using language like this, and I thank you for bringing it to my attention.

“Please could you let me know which service you are on and I will ensure they remain as inclusive as we strive to be at LNER.

“We've been working very hard with educating our people on why gender specific pronouns are not suitable in instances like these, and we're sorry to see this has not been applied here.

“It is entirely valid for someone who does not identify with the terms used to feel excluded and as a business we do not accept that anyone should feel excluded.”....
Click to expand...
 
cullennz said:
Sometimes I wish I was some trendy other gender, rather than boring old "a dude".



They seem to have little to nothing actually important to get worried about.



https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14947...ses-non-binary-ladies-gentlemen-announcement/
Click to expand...

In this post you:

Express lamemt over a perceived loss of status.

Minimize the experiences others have that you do not.

Complained about something that probably causes you not one iota of harm (so we know you have nothing important in your life to worry about).
 
I will continue to minimize the importance of people who say "I'm neither a lady nor a gentleman, and I demand restitution."

Nonbinary is just not that special. Nor does it have any real significance, except when castigating people for not considering it significant.
 
It certainly confirms for me that people who call themselves "non-binary" are actually insecure histrionic narcissists who demand to be acknowledged. Very tiresome, and best ignored.
 
It's the same as transgenderism.

Either you're staking out a nonconformist position on social constructs of gender. Which means sweet eff all to anyone else.

Or you're claiming that your biological sex is different from what it actually is. Which is madness. And also means sweet eff all to anyone else. Because they can see what your sex is.
 
theprestige said:
I will continue to minimize the importance of people who say "I'm neither a lady nor a gentleman, and I demand restitution."
Click to expand...

Simple recognition (or, more accurately, not being excluded) in something like a train announcement is hardly "restitution", it's just a simple awareness of reality.

Non-binary people exist. That fact is generally understood now, and its recognition makes strictly-binary greetings at the beginning of public announcements - something that has literally always been completely unnecessary purple fluff anyway - even more factually redundant than before. Such greetings can and should be excised to reflect reality and absolutely nothing would be lost from the change.
 
theprestige said:
I question the premise that nonbinary people exist in a way that requires changing language to accommodate them.
Click to expand...

In 1787, many American Congressmen questioned the premise that black slaves were "people" for governmental purposes. They eventually decided that it would be okay to consider them three-fifths of a person.
 
Ron Obvious said:
Do they? Multiple personality disorder was believed and officially sanctioned for many years too, as were repressed memories. I believe both have now fallen out of favour in mainstream psychiatry. This seems like more of the same.
Click to expand...


There are people who are physically non-binary.
 
Checkmite said:
In 1787, many American Congressmen questioned the premise that black slaves were "people" for governmental purposes. They eventually decided that it would be okay to consider them three-fifths of a person.
Click to expand...

For purposes of representation, yes, as a compromise with the slave states who wanted them to be counted as fully human. Nobody believed they were 3/5ths of a person in reality.
 
Ron Obvious said:
Do they? Multiple personality disorder was believed and officially sanctioned for many years too, as were repressed memories. I believe both have now fallen out of favour in mainstream psychiatry. This seems like more of the same.
Click to expand...

However, non-binary is a gender identity, not a proposed disorder whose existence or non-existence is a matter of debate within the field of psychiatry.
 
Ron Obvious said:
For purposes of representation, yes, as a compromise with the slave states who wanted them to be counted as fully human.
Click to expand...

Well no; it was conditional. The slave states wanted them to be counted as persons for purposes of allocating the number of a state's representatives; but they insisted they not count as people at all for the purposes of allocating a state's tax burden.

And you are wrong. Pro-slavery white people did very much actually believe that slaves were not people.
 
Last edited:
All this anguish over seeing others included while maintaining such incredulity at those being discluded having anything to get upset about...

Oh, it's a ********.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
All this anguish over seeing others included while maintaining such incredulity at those being discluded having anything to get upset about...

Oh, it's a ********.
Click to expand...

Oh, I assure you there's no anguish on my part about this whatsoever. Merely a raised eyebrow at the gullibility of the average person these days who appears to be so terrified at being called a bigot that they're willing to suspend all reason.
 
Last edited:
Checkmite said:
Well no; it was conditional. The slave states wanted them to be counted as persons for purposes of allocating the number of a state's representatives; but they insisted they not count as people at all for the purposes of allocating a state's tax burden.

And you are wrong. Pro-slavery white people did very much actually believe that slaves were not people.
Click to expand...

You snipped my second sentence which said: "nobody believed they were actually 3/5ths of a person".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom