The Sunday Roast

Who did the readers give a good old Kiwi roasting this week? 

It seems that the Human Rights Commission has gone off half-cocked and made a bit of a balls-up. It seems that they really do not understand their own name. The clue is right there Human Rights Commission.

The definition above is from the Cambridge Dictionary. (Please ignore the obligatory planet doom example.)

A human is a man, woman or child (who will, no doubt grow into either a woman or a man.

There, that wasn’t so hard was it?

But the Human + Transgender + Takatapui + Genderfluid + Non-binary + Agender + Don’t know + Prefer not to say + Self Describe Rights Commission thought otherwise. (Oh, the poor telephonist.)

Laidback Sally was confused about the fluid state:

I looked up genderfluid as I had not heard that before, complete scam…

“A person who is genderfluid prefers to remain flexible about their gender identity rather than committing to a single gender. They may fluctuate between genders or express multiple genders at the same time.”

KGB summed the definition succinctly:

Put simply…a nutter.

This devolved into a humorous sidetrack about the willie count. We won’t go there again!

Tim was aggrieved that he and his type have again been marginalised:

I’m really upset. I identify as an “Apache Attack Helicopter” and thats not an option. Should I email them ?
I’m so sick to death of people ignoring my type.

But Rightsideofthebed offered words of comfort to the distraught Tim:

When you fully transition one day – then you’ll show them 🙂

shoehorn took things to their logical conclusion and ended up with nothing:

If you can choose whatever….then really there is only one gender….

Nothing..

What is the point of having the others.
You could be male but identify as a female or actually a trans or genderfluid or a male…what ever you tick…your real gender could be anything.(male or female…who knows)

What choice do I have on my passport.

sonovaMin pointed out that the H(etc)RC were getting a bit ahead of themselves:

The Human Rights nutters are well out of line here. They are attempting to legitimise some genders that are not yet recognised under law.

Arthur cautioned: nothing to see here, move along, it is all perfectly normal when the inmates are running the asylum:

Govt. Depts under Labour/Greens always descend into nonsensical, navel gazing swamps of self indulgent twaddle. E.g. under Commissar Clark’s coalition one large Govt. Dept.that shall remain nameless but may have had ‘Foreign’ in its name regularly had 5-10 staff emptying rubbish bins in the car park spending the entire day sifting through garbage identifying items that could have possibly been recycled. To say that this was a scandalous waste of taxpayer money is an understatement. Today this same organisation (possibly a misuse of organise) now indulges in spending millions on upper high paid staff fluffing around with values committees, gender and diversity workshops and rainbow meetings instead of core business.
If a serious organisation like this can go off the common sense rails then more fluffy ones like Human Rights and Women’s Affairs must be like modern versions of Monty Python sketches but more bizarre. Yes, the National party, ACT and the New Conservatives should be all over this like a rash but seemingly they too are gender-fluid and lack balls.

38%
×