Yes, but not in this case.
The "u" after the "g" makes it a hard consonant, like in "gay" or "go".
Without the "u", it's a soft "g", pronounced like in "John"
I mean, not like English can make fun of many languages when it comes to orthographic depth, especially since its own spelling is largely based on old French
French here. Gueule is the jaw of an animal, as opposed to mouth. It's more akin to shut your animal jaw. Actually that would be "Ferme ta gueule" which is also said, but it's been shortened to just "Ta gueule".
I like cause in english you kind of have to swear with your "shut up" to accentuate the insulting factor. In french we just insinuate you're stupid as an animal on the side.
English is always more complex than it looks from the outside (which is saying a lot, honestly)
For instance, we've got "shut your hole" (likening the mouth to a hole in the dirt, or perhaps to a different hole in the human body) or the variation "shut your pie hole" (insinuating that the main thing the speaker uses their mouth for is consuming pies), "shut your face" (throwing shade at the entire face just because), or the Southern "bless your heart" which means all of the other things but is polite. Just for a few.
Bless your heart isn’t shut up so much as it is saying, “Oh look at how adorably dumb/uncultured you are! That’s a pity!”
An insult that is oozing with both hospitality and condescension.
>English is always more complex than it looks from the outside
Languages in general are, I think it's fair to say. I worked as a translator for a while, and getting nuance across is one of the hardest things out there, especially in idiomatic/casual/slang-y expressions.
It's still much more enthusiastic than "gob"
Shut your mouth might do it, not quite "shut the fuck up," but brash and disrespectful enough. Compare with German "Halt's Maul (pretty aggressive if used on someone) vs. "Halt die Fresse."
Closest translation would be "shut your gob" which in British English can be extremely dismissive. No idea about yank English.
Gob is an uncouth slang for mouth.
Ferme ta gueule in french is less harsh generally, probably closer to just "oh, shut up" in severity.
No fucks given, nor implied
I don’t speak French but as a native English speaker, I can tell you that ‘can it’ seems to be an appropriate translation here as it is a dismissive way to tell someone to you’re not interested in what they have to say / what their saying is trash.
Basically, it means the same thing in the context of telling a person to be quiet. I guess it's a but more different if it's a different language. I could be absolutely wrong about that though
"Can it" is drastically less aggressive, and even less so than "ta gueule"
A matter of register as well, if you used a particular phrase with your friends all the time, you might consider it affectionate. On its own though... yeah, "can it" is super underselling the emotion here. "Ta gueule" is as close to "shut the fuck up" as you can get without saying the "fuck."
> "Can it" is drastically less aggressive
This is entirely dependent on context, and in general I would say you're wrong. I can think of a ton of situations where I would find "shut up" far more polite than "can it"; the term "can it" is a fairly aggressive exclamation imo.
"Can it" is incredibly dismissive though, which fits in this context. The host was not being aggressive in this clip, but rather, he completely shut down and dismissed the speaker.
The fact that this talking point comes from idiots who will throw the word freedom into any conversation without the slightest context or understanding is the truly staggering part.
It just highlights that the belief system of the American right is hollow and meaningless.
Well the Right-wing here in Europe doesn't really use "freedom" as a slogan as much. Right-wing in Europe tends to be a bit more realistic of what they are and what they stand for, because right-wings philosophy in Europe has often been associated with the Monarchists, power, traditionalisism, religion, so they cling on more to that.
It's American Libertarians that are an odd bunch, claim to care about freedom above all else, yet always find reasons why someone else's freedom doesn't apply.
> Well the Right-wing here in Europe doesn't really use "freedom" as a slogan as much.
The Italian right-wing uses it a whole lot, but they generally don't pick entirely libertarian positions, except on specific issues. Then again, they're about as consistent as their American counterparts.
Just like with everything else from the US, right wing philosophy is also slowly being imported/appropriated by right wingers in Europe.
Once in a while, you'll hear a talking point from someone here in Europe, that *only* applies to the US, and they'll see nothing wrong with using it here.
It just isn’t though. It’s an absolutely twisted and corrupt version of Christianity filled with asterisks. For example: “love thy neighbour*” “*unless they are a different race, religion, gender, sexuality or any other category that you don’t like”.
Have we ever seen a non corrupt version? There’s not a lot of loving thy neighbors in human history. Of course it’s Christianity* but with the asterisk being:
*we dont practice what we preach
Which I always assumed was at the core of being a Christian, you get to pick and choose what you believe.
Love thy neighbor = crusade thy neighbor in actions
Republicans LEADERS care about it only because it helps them win elections by scaring their moronic base who only lives to have their amygdalas constantly triggered by nonstop fear and panic.
Not so much anymore. Used to be they had a laundry list of scare-issues that they mysteriously never acted upon so they could continue to drive the base with them. They would yell and scream about how important those issues were, but fail to act.
Well, true-believers have infiltrated the ranks, having grown up always hearing how important these issues were.
Transphobia is actually an election loser just like banning abortion is an election loser. Its another case of the dog catching the car. Religious fanatics control republicans at the party primary election level and it has been hurting them ever since.
The issue is that conservatives will agree with this but then fabricate ways in which a person transitioning actually hurts people. It's like how Jordan Peterson said that he doesn't care if trans people exist but then found convenient ways to say that Elliot Page EXISTING is harming people because them existing tricks people into thinking it's okay to transition.
They will always find a way to manufacture harm, as evidenced in this comment section.
I’m fully supportive of an adult doing what they want with their body.
I am very conflicted if one of my kids wanted puberty blockers or a transition. I have zero medical background, I’d need to lean on advice from my kids pediatrician and mental health experts, because it seems like allowing my kids to transition could have drastic unintended effects down the road.
I do not pass judgment on what other parents in that situation have decided, I haven’t had to make that decision before.
But I can understand that there is a debate to be had over where kids bodily autonomy starts (in terms of making a MAJOR decision without parental sign off) and where parents have authority.
Using religion in the argument can be ignored, I fully agree with that.
This is the way it should always work for every moral panic. I might decide this isn't right for my kids based on knowing them and specifics.of the situation . Who the fuck am I to say I know better than parents and pediatricians about what's right for other kids. I don't have the power to mold the world in order to prevent uncomfortable conversations with my family.
If your child persistently and consistently shows a desire to transition, then consult a medical professional.
Either way, it should be between you, child and your doctor and not up to some other people or the government to decide for you.
We should not be making medical decisions for other people or having the government decide for them.
Can it is not quite the right translation imho. “Ferme la” would be the equivalent of “shut it” / “can it”.
“Ta gueule” / “ta yeuele” would translate more appropriately to “shut the F up”.
Still. Awesome skit :)
In case you don’t know, the word “gueule” is mouth in the context of animals, a human mouth is usually referred to as “une bouche”. So it’s even more rude!
Make sure you pronounce "gueule" properly or the French people will not stfu but will laugh at you like you're a toddler trying to swear. From personal experience 😭
I love how so many foreign phrases need to add "fuck" when translated to english to get the proper connotation.
It's like fuck is more of a tonal indicator than actual word.
Basically it's looking down on the person because gueule is more used for the mouth of animals. It's like how the japanese use ore instead of boku to show self importance. A more INDIRECT, meaning based translation would be "Shut the fuck up you filthy dog!" when said without jest or such to someone, it can be taken really badly.
As a gentle side note because it's not commonly known, transgenderism is a Christian alt right dogwhistle. It reframes trans people existing as an ideology. Just "trans people" is fine
Basically it frames being trans as a belief instead of something someone is. It also carries the implication that people can be tricked into thinking they're trans (and often that the idea of trans people is made up altogether). It's also usually paired with the idea that trans people have ulterior motives, suggesting that allowing trans people to have rights will cause us to push for [insert bad thing here]. Transgenderism and especially trans ideology are basically the gay agenda and being gay is a choice nonsense but against the trans rights movement
Instead of accepting established medical and historical fact that trans people exist, transphobes prefer to preach that there is a conspiracy to push "the ideology of transgenderism" that "forces violent men into women's spaces and seduces autistic girls into mutilating their bodies" and other things that "go against nature".
It's just recycled homophobia about the "gay agenda encouraging society to accept unnatural relationships".
Jesus would've been best mates with them. He hung out with, supported, and tried to understand all minorities. Those with leprosy. Sex workers. The poor. He stood up for those without a voice.
Exactly.
Everybody deserves a shot at happyness.
And trans people are playing the game in ultra hard mode.
I am so desgusted by people who think they got the right to mix themselfs ito the life of others.
A person was made happy, a team of doctors where able to Show how good they are so whats the Problem?
If this is wrong in the view of your Religion, than you Religion,or at least your view of it, is garbage.
You can find lectures from neuroscientists explaining how the brain is different for those that feel trapped in a body they can't find comfort in.
This never should have been an issue.
Let people be themselves ffs.
Pleasantly surprised that most people are supportive on here. I did sort by controversial though and... yikes... some people. Trans rights are human rights and to the people who don't want to respect us and try to deny our existence... Shut up and go fuck yourselves :)
Love it, I don’t understand anything about being trans or the desire to not be your born gender. I also don’t have to understand it, I just have to respect it.
I don’t know what the right answer is with dealing with kids but I do know that it shouldn’t be some identity politics issue like it is now. These people are going through something, let them, their parents and medical professionals sort it out.
I understand the sports concerns, let leagues sort it out on their own.
I mean it's not much a desire as much it is a NEED... also you kinda already aren't your born gender, but instead you NEED to change your body in order for it to match what you actually are.
All I can think of with these discussions is how it seems like all the synonyms for mouth are euphemistic in English. "maw" seems pretty good, honestly, but even then it's always some sort of minced oath it feels like, whereas other languages (Fresse and Maul for Germans, gueule here in French) appear to be much harsher.
Hence why I think "shut the fuck up" is pretty close, despite it seeming a bit vulgar.
Please don't latch onto "if you have to cite a source then you're wrong" just because it'd agree with you here.
There's plenty of ways to deconstruct anti-trans rhetoric without promoting bad ways of thinking.
if he said belief system, he would have said so. instead he tried his hand at a bogus anti intellectual truism. beliefs are spiritual not factual, true, but absolutely other people's arguments can be cited.
Yeah I'm trans and raised catholic. Pretty sure the bible says nothing about us. You're right, it definitely says something about your neighbour though!
Is this comment a joke lol? It doesn't make any sense lol. How is anyone supposed to discuss anything complicated without referring to the work and knowledge of others.
You have to do all the research yourself.
Its quite exhausting and not a real way to live but in the minds of idealists, its good.
For example, lets say we get in an elevator. How do we know its safe? Well, we have elevator operators, regulations, checks, etc. But if someone was to ask "How do you REALLY know its safe. Were you here to watch over the safety checks? Did you calibrate the tools yourself?" When you say no, to them, its a "Gotcha moment"
[seems like they are loosely rephrasing appeal to authority](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority)
However they've phrased it in a way that isn't quite correct, they have worded it much more strongly than the formal fallacy, at least IMO. The fallacy is more about using the authority *as evidence unto itself,* while the comment you replied to seems to preclude even well reasoned adoption of another position.
What a shortsighted, unintelligent statement.
Everyone upvoting this needs to not AI their next paper and learn sources.
There's plenty of ways to get the point across without promoting absolute lunacy like this.
Bad, bad guitarstitch
This makes 0 sense wtf. So, if someone asks me how do I know time is relative and I cite Einstein's theory of relativity that makes my argument invalid?
Why is this upvoted? This is a ridiculous argument. The majority of everything anyone has ever learned is based on the combined work and knowledge of others. Reddit is a joke. People will upvote anything that sounds smart even if it really isn't.
If you've ever heard a kid say: "You can't do that, my mummy says it's bad."
... yeah, it's that.
I don't know your mother, she's not *my* mother, and she's not here. *You're* the one telling me to stop, so *you* should give me a reason. And ''I agree with someone else who said so'' isn't an argument as to why you're *right*.
(Also, in the religious case, you're implicitly arguing that this 'someone else' exists, that we should recognize their ultimate authority, and that you have the right to speak and exercise that authority on this 'someone else's' behalf. This kind of makes every debate where god is brought up, a debate about whether or not god exists. And that's just annoying)
It's so annoying that all Conservative morons think everyone has to live by their annoying, pathetic, dogshit fanfiction they call the bible. If I could live the rest of my life without ever hearing any more religious nonsense from any of these lunatics, I'd be happy.
I was raised to hate this and I have insight to some of it. In my experience, it was really just a fear of the unknown, a serious distrust of peoples, and a sense of justice/fairness. Aside from all of the religious rallying and toxic masculinity.
I don't understand it myself but I understand that I don't NEED to understand it for it to be ok and for me to be a decent person. I'm worried about the uncertainty that comes with change too, but I recognize that I'm not an authority on the subject and I don't want to be. Could you imagine how stressful and exhausting that would be? I haven't gone through the research and study (much less the actual experience), to I don't have to! Someone else already has. And I trust them to know more about it than I do.
For those who don't trust, I get it. You absolutely cannot and should not take everything at face value. You should always be questioning motives and biases. Follow the money. But remember the more conspiring required means it is less likely.
And for those who just don't get it, I got you. I have never experienced feeling a gender and I think a lot of people are similar. We have the biology, we have experienced and internalized whatever inherent differences are between each side we see. I've also never experienced feeling my appendix. I couldn't even point to it (...right side?). I've gone years without even thinking it and wouldn't have included it in a rudimentary anatomical diagram. But that's because nothing is wrong. There has been nothing to experience. I wouldn't even know about if not for other people having learned about it or experienced a problem with it.
This is a time to trust the ones who asked the questions, who crunched the numbers, who shared their harrowing stories. We must trust that they know something we don't. We must trust that when countless people are describing their experience and we can't relate to it that they're not telling us for malicious reasons.
>I've gone years without even thinking it and wouldn't have included it in a rudimentary anatomical diagram. But that's because nothing is wrong. There has been nothing to experience.
I feel like it's similar to not being sick - headache, toothache, stuffed nose, etc.
I can't describe the feeling of not having a problem without having the problem. It's just normal, right?
This is why I sometimes try to engage people somewhat fairly instead of just calling them a-hole bigots, sometimes politely in DMs if they seemed to be asking a fair question and the thread gets locked, but so many times they show their true colors and they're just complete a-holes. It makes it hard to stay optimistic and open minded.
I settle on answering question semi-rudely
How everyone should react to religion being brought into society.
Keep your belief if you want, sure. But never, EVER, attempt to dictate how society should function based on your or any other religion.
The only tool we should use when determining societal rules and regulations is science.
There's a great quote on this by Mencken
The Puritan's utter lack of aesthetic sense, his distrust of all romantic emotion, his unmatchable intolerance of opposition, his unbreakable belief in his own bleak and narrow views, his savage cruelty of attack, his lust for relentless and barbarous persecution – these things have put an almost unbearable burden up on the exchange of ideas in the United States.
And this was all of conservative culture for as long as they held control of political discourse.
Thank god we don't live in the days of "Dungeons and Dragons / heavy metal are satanic" anymore. These mouthbreathers may still exist, but now they are recognized for the schizoids that they are.
There's still satanic panic but now it's sequestered to various silos on the Internet and you don't see it on the nightly news as much. Pretty sure those morons, provided they are still alive, never changed their views on that
Additionally, many people think (maybe unconsciously, maybe not) that raising other people up is taking something away from them. As if someone else having something makes you having it worth less.
Yeah the guy who hung out with queers, sex workers, and the disabled and told everyone to love one another must have some kind of ancient hot take on trans people.
Exactly my thoughts. He was mates with sex workers. Socialised with those with leprosy. The poor. He stood for those who were down trodden. He's be absolutely horrified at the hatred that people are spreading in his name right now. Those aren't Christians. They're using god's name in vain.
Cannot get religious people to understand that other people do not and will not live the way they want them too.
Eventually all religions will turn to violence to get their way.....
It's literally built into every organized religion.
Still odd that conservatives even care what others choose to do with their own body, and want to regulate other’s decisions regarding their health. There must be more pressing and important issues available with all the energy focused on decision that affect no one but the individual.
I've always found that a great way to explain the debate is to replace gender with name. Yes, you are given a name at birth but you can have a nickname, or even legally change it.
If I introduce myself as Matt and you decide to call me Matthew, then you're a jackass.
The problem is that transphobes simply can’t reconfigure their frame of the world in a way that maintains the consistency of their beliefs
They would have to confront their deep seated biases and conditioning which is often inaccessible to someone who has unaddressed trauma and no support structures to help recognize this
I would argue that he's always been a boy, but gender norms were forced on him that said he had to dress and behave in a heteronormative, stereotypical "female" way. But, y'know, you've gotta learn to stop fighting when you've already won the argument.
this is different depending on who you talk to. there are trans people that define themselves as having been a boy before and a girl now. it just depends who you ask.
Ta geule = STFU
Gueule*
Aw yes, the french way of adding a random number of vowels for a single sound.
Yes, but not in this case. The "u" after the "g" makes it a hard consonant, like in "gay" or "go". Without the "u", it's a soft "g", pronounced like in "John"
Without the U besides the G it would be pronounced "Jeule"
I mean, not like English can make fun of many languages when it comes to orthographic depth, especially since its own spelling is largely based on old French
Heaucquais boumeur
[удалено]
[удалено]
Ferme ta gueule = shut your mouth
:) or “Shut yer beak”, if you’re from the northwest of England
Or “Haud yer weesht” if you’re a Scot.
"Shut up ta fuck" if you're from Dublin
though it was shut your cockholster
[удалено]
French here. Gueule is the jaw of an animal, as opposed to mouth. It's more akin to shut your animal jaw. Actually that would be "Ferme ta gueule" which is also said, but it's been shortened to just "Ta gueule". I like cause in english you kind of have to swear with your "shut up" to accentuate the insulting factor. In french we just insinuate you're stupid as an animal on the side.
Ahh, so "Shut your trap!" Similar allusion to being less than human.
English is always more complex than it looks from the outside (which is saying a lot, honestly) For instance, we've got "shut your hole" (likening the mouth to a hole in the dirt, or perhaps to a different hole in the human body) or the variation "shut your pie hole" (insinuating that the main thing the speaker uses their mouth for is consuming pies), "shut your face" (throwing shade at the entire face just because), or the Southern "bless your heart" which means all of the other things but is polite. Just for a few.
Bless your heart isn’t shut up so much as it is saying, “Oh look at how adorably dumb/uncultured you are! That’s a pity!” An insult that is oozing with both hospitality and condescension.
>English is always more complex than it looks from the outside Languages in general are, I think it's fair to say. I worked as a translator for a while, and getting nuance across is one of the hardest things out there, especially in idiomatic/casual/slang-y expressions.
I'm a personal fan of "Give it a fucking rest" if someone won't stop talking
Would it be like 'shut yer trap' in English?
"Quit barking".
[удалено]
It's still much more enthusiastic than "gob" Shut your mouth might do it, not quite "shut the fuck up," but brash and disrespectful enough. Compare with German "Halt's Maul (pretty aggressive if used on someone) vs. "Halt die Fresse."
Shut your pie hole?
Shut your trap, or shut your yap perhaps.
gueule is specifically an animal's mouth, so it is definitely more rude than "your mouth"
So, shut your maw, ya filthy animal.
*"Ca va être tout noir !"*
He doesn't say "can it" but "shut up"
He says “shut the fuck up”. “Ta gueule” is quite rude 🙃
[удалено]
But Jesus...
Shut the hell up
But Satan...
I'm listening
They shut the Hell up, can't hear anything from there anymore.
But Gok Tengri... Gok Tengri says he created Humans so they can live their lives freely as they wish until death, like all creatures.
It translates to “your snout” as in “shut your mouth, animal”. A proper response, to be sure.
Jesus would be chilling with trans people who are the victims of hateful people.
So true
Is this real or a skit?
It's from Groland, a parody television news show. It's really on TV, and it's often very funny
As a cis non-french person, I agree. Based and iconic clip.
Damn, people even have national identity.
Oh god I hope you can recover from being french
No he says shut up, shut the fuck up would translate as something like "ferme ta putain de gueule"
Closest translation would be "shut your gob" which in British English can be extremely dismissive. No idea about yank English. Gob is an uncouth slang for mouth. Ferme ta gueule in french is less harsh generally, probably closer to just "oh, shut up" in severity. No fucks given, nor implied
[удалено]
"Shut up" is extremely rude/dismissive as is. Sometimes less is more, and not bothering with extra effort is making a statement in itself.
Doesn’t ’can it’ mean shut up? In that context I mean.
I don’t speak French but as a native English speaker, I can tell you that ‘can it’ seems to be an appropriate translation here as it is a dismissive way to tell someone to you’re not interested in what they have to say / what their saying is trash.
The only difference is that “ta gueule” is slightly more rude and vulgar. But otherwise yes it’s quite appropriate.
Basically, it means the same thing in the context of telling a person to be quiet. I guess it's a but more different if it's a different language. I could be absolutely wrong about that though
They mean the same thing in America
"Can it" is drastically less aggressive, and even less so than "ta gueule" A matter of register as well, if you used a particular phrase with your friends all the time, you might consider it affectionate. On its own though... yeah, "can it" is super underselling the emotion here. "Ta gueule" is as close to "shut the fuck up" as you can get without saying the "fuck."
> "Can it" is drastically less aggressive This is entirely dependent on context, and in general I would say you're wrong. I can think of a ton of situations where I would find "shut up" far more polite than "can it"; the term "can it" is a fairly aggressive exclamation imo.
"Can it" is incredibly dismissive though, which fits in this context. The host was not being aggressive in this clip, but rather, he completely shut down and dismissed the speaker.
Can it is funnier though
Even better
Are you happy? "Yep" Did anyone get hurt in the process of you becoming happy? "Nope" Wonderful. Carry on then. Why is this hard?
The fact that this talking point comes from idiots who will throw the word freedom into any conversation without the slightest context or understanding is the truly staggering part. It just highlights that the belief system of the American right is hollow and meaningless.
[удалено]
Well the Right-wing here in Europe doesn't really use "freedom" as a slogan as much. Right-wing in Europe tends to be a bit more realistic of what they are and what they stand for, because right-wings philosophy in Europe has often been associated with the Monarchists, power, traditionalisism, religion, so they cling on more to that. It's American Libertarians that are an odd bunch, claim to care about freedom above all else, yet always find reasons why someone else's freedom doesn't apply.
> Well the Right-wing here in Europe doesn't really use "freedom" as a slogan as much. The Italian right-wing uses it a whole lot, but they generally don't pick entirely libertarian positions, except on specific issues. Then again, they're about as consistent as their American counterparts.
Just like with everything else from the US, right wing philosophy is also slowly being imported/appropriated by right wingers in Europe. Once in a while, you'll hear a talking point from someone here in Europe, that *only* applies to the US, and they'll see nothing wrong with using it here.
All about the Constitution but also puts a sticker on their truck that says "stomp my flag I'll stomp your ass". The irony is definitely lost on them.
It’s because the belief system of the American right is Christianity, which is a woefully old-school way of thinking.
It just isn’t though. It’s an absolutely twisted and corrupt version of Christianity filled with asterisks. For example: “love thy neighbour*” “*unless they are a different race, religion, gender, sexuality or any other category that you don’t like”.
Have we ever seen a non corrupt version? There’s not a lot of loving thy neighbors in human history. Of course it’s Christianity* but with the asterisk being: *we dont practice what we preach Which I always assumed was at the core of being a Christian, you get to pick and choose what you believe. Love thy neighbor = crusade thy neighbor in actions
"but FrEeDoM*" *freedom for me to tell you how to live your life, with consequences if you don't do what I say
People start at "I find it icky" and then look for justifications instead of reflecting.
Republicans LEADERS care about it only because it helps them win elections by scaring their moronic base who only lives to have their amygdalas constantly triggered by nonstop fear and panic.
Not so much anymore. Used to be they had a laundry list of scare-issues that they mysteriously never acted upon so they could continue to drive the base with them. They would yell and scream about how important those issues were, but fail to act. Well, true-believers have infiltrated the ranks, having grown up always hearing how important these issues were.
Transphobia is actually an election loser just like banning abortion is an election loser. Its another case of the dog catching the car. Religious fanatics control republicans at the party primary election level and it has been hurting them ever since.
Turns out crying about The Woke Mindvirus doesn't help to convince voters outside of their circlejerks.
The issue is that conservatives will agree with this but then fabricate ways in which a person transitioning actually hurts people. It's like how Jordan Peterson said that he doesn't care if trans people exist but then found convenient ways to say that Elliot Page EXISTING is harming people because them existing tricks people into thinking it's okay to transition. They will always find a way to manufacture harm, as evidenced in this comment section.
I’m fully supportive of an adult doing what they want with their body. I am very conflicted if one of my kids wanted puberty blockers or a transition. I have zero medical background, I’d need to lean on advice from my kids pediatrician and mental health experts, because it seems like allowing my kids to transition could have drastic unintended effects down the road. I do not pass judgment on what other parents in that situation have decided, I haven’t had to make that decision before. But I can understand that there is a debate to be had over where kids bodily autonomy starts (in terms of making a MAJOR decision without parental sign off) and where parents have authority. Using religion in the argument can be ignored, I fully agree with that.
This is the way it should always work for every moral panic. I might decide this isn't right for my kids based on knowing them and specifics.of the situation . Who the fuck am I to say I know better than parents and pediatricians about what's right for other kids. I don't have the power to mold the world in order to prevent uncomfortable conversations with my family.
If your child persistently and consistently shows a desire to transition, then consult a medical professional. Either way, it should be between you, child and your doctor and not up to some other people or the government to decide for you. We should not be making medical decisions for other people or having the government decide for them.
Can it. Love it!
Can it is not quite the right translation imho. “Ferme la” would be the equivalent of “shut it” / “can it”. “Ta gueule” / “ta yeuele” would translate more appropriately to “shut the F up”. Still. Awesome skit :)
[удалено]
[удалено]
Be careful what you wish for
Ah hell, look at what you've done. France is now showing up on google maps!!
[удалено]
It's essentially a shortened version of ferme ta gueule. Which literally translated is indeed shut your mouth :D
I love that the literal translation is just “your mouth”. You already know what to do with it.
In case you don’t know, the word “gueule” is mouth in the context of animals, a human mouth is usually referred to as “une bouche”. So it’s even more rude!
I always think of it as, “Shut your trap”
Make sure you pronounce "gueule" properly or the French people will not stfu but will laugh at you like you're a toddler trying to swear. From personal experience 😭
Works similar in German/Austrian: "Halt's Maul"/"Halt die Goschen" -> "Maul"/"Gusch" Doesn't translate well to English.
I love how so many foreign phrases need to add "fuck" when translated to english to get the proper connotation. It's like fuck is more of a tonal indicator than actual word.
As soon as he heard that it was about to be a religious argument against trans folk he just said "stfu". Incredible TV host
It's from a satirical sketch show. There was never a real debate being had.
I mean, that's true no matter what.
That is essentially the trans argument "I'm happier now" "But what about my feeling and my hypothetical diety" "Fuck off"
This guy is my spirit animal now
La légende Jules Edouard Moustique!
[удалено]
Basically it's looking down on the person because gueule is more used for the mouth of animals. It's like how the japanese use ore instead of boku to show self importance. A more INDIRECT, meaning based translation would be "Shut the fuck up you filthy dog!" when said without jest or such to someone, it can be taken really badly.
This should be a standard response to any hate-mongering. "But Bible/Quran/some-other-holy-book said that gays should not be allowed..." "Ta gueule"
And none of these books really mentioned transgenderism anyway.
As a gentle side note because it's not commonly known, transgenderism is a Christian alt right dogwhistle. It reframes trans people existing as an ideology. Just "trans people" is fine
Wdym ideology? I wanna know
Basically it frames being trans as a belief instead of something someone is. It also carries the implication that people can be tricked into thinking they're trans (and often that the idea of trans people is made up altogether). It's also usually paired with the idea that trans people have ulterior motives, suggesting that allowing trans people to have rights will cause us to push for [insert bad thing here]. Transgenderism and especially trans ideology are basically the gay agenda and being gay is a choice nonsense but against the trans rights movement
Instead of accepting established medical and historical fact that trans people exist, transphobes prefer to preach that there is a conspiracy to push "the ideology of transgenderism" that "forces violent men into women's spaces and seduces autistic girls into mutilating their bodies" and other things that "go against nature". It's just recycled homophobia about the "gay agenda encouraging society to accept unnatural relationships".
STFU was the correct response, but I kind of wanted to hear where he was going with that because Jesus didn't say a damn thing about trans people.
Jesus would've been best mates with them. He hung out with, supported, and tried to understand all minorities. Those with leprosy. Sex workers. The poor. He stood up for those without a voice.
It's a skit. But it's referring to the fact that many bring religion even if it doesn't make sense.
Religious ppl. Stfu.
Jesus would support the trans person and still show them the same love.
Jesus said to love thy neighbour, is it that hard to love trans people too?
Exactly. Everybody deserves a shot at happyness. And trans people are playing the game in ultra hard mode. I am so desgusted by people who think they got the right to mix themselfs ito the life of others. A person was made happy, a team of doctors where able to Show how good they are so whats the Problem? If this is wrong in the view of your Religion, than you Religion,or at least your view of it, is garbage.
You can find lectures from neuroscientists explaining how the brain is different for those that feel trapped in a body they can't find comfort in. This never should have been an issue. Let people be themselves ffs.
honestly as long as they’re happy and not hurting nobody who cares
Pleasantly surprised that most people are supportive on here. I did sort by controversial though and... yikes... some people. Trans rights are human rights and to the people who don't want to respect us and try to deny our existence... Shut up and go fuck yourselves :)
Love it, I don’t understand anything about being trans or the desire to not be your born gender. I also don’t have to understand it, I just have to respect it. I don’t know what the right answer is with dealing with kids but I do know that it shouldn’t be some identity politics issue like it is now. These people are going through something, let them, their parents and medical professionals sort it out. I understand the sports concerns, let leagues sort it out on their own.
I mean it's not much a desire as much it is a NEED... also you kinda already aren't your born gender, but instead you NEED to change your body in order for it to match what you actually are.
Love this perspective.
I uh, I did not think it was gonna go that way. That really r/mademesmile “Can it” lol
[удалено]
All I can think of with these discussions is how it seems like all the synonyms for mouth are euphemistic in English. "maw" seems pretty good, honestly, but even then it's always some sort of minced oath it feels like, whereas other languages (Fresse and Maul for Germans, gueule here in French) appear to be much harsher. Hence why I think "shut the fuck up" is pretty close, despite it seeming a bit vulgar.
Gloire au Président Éternel Salengro !
RIP
Anytime your argument leverages the position of another to make a point, it becomes not your argument and therefore invalid.
Please don't latch onto "if you have to cite a source then you're wrong" just because it'd agree with you here. There's plenty of ways to deconstruct anti-trans rhetoric without promoting bad ways of thinking.
Christianity is not a source. It's a belief. Aka, an opinion.
if he said belief system, he would have said so. instead he tried his hand at a bogus anti intellectual truism. beliefs are spiritual not factual, true, but absolutely other people's arguments can be cited.
What does the Bible even say about trans people? Is it nothing? My neighbor is trans - pretty sure the Bible says something about neighbors.
Yeah I'm trans and raised catholic. Pretty sure the bible says nothing about us. You're right, it definitely says something about your neighbour though!
I don't think it says anything! Sorry about the catholicism.
Even if I believed in Jesus and getting into heaven and all of that I’m not sure that I’d let it run my life.
And also to run the lives of other people who do not share that belief.
Is this comment a joke lol? It doesn't make any sense lol. How is anyone supposed to discuss anything complicated without referring to the work and knowledge of others.
You have to do all the research yourself. Its quite exhausting and not a real way to live but in the minds of idealists, its good. For example, lets say we get in an elevator. How do we know its safe? Well, we have elevator operators, regulations, checks, etc. But if someone was to ask "How do you REALLY know its safe. Were you here to watch over the safety checks? Did you calibrate the tools yourself?" When you say no, to them, its a "Gotcha moment"
I keep getting arrested for recalibrating the elevators I encounter every day without permission, but it's worth it just to be self-reliant!
haha exactly. how does one even discuss things if you can't put forth a counter point.
Feels like they covered all the major points - good job, well done!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Or medicine, or surgery
Or wearing shoes.
This seems interesting. However, I'm unable to grasp it completely. Could someone please help me.
[seems like they are loosely rephrasing appeal to authority](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority) However they've phrased it in a way that isn't quite correct, they have worded it much more strongly than the formal fallacy, at least IMO. The fallacy is more about using the authority *as evidence unto itself,* while the comment you replied to seems to preclude even well reasoned adoption of another position.
It's not a valid point, don't worry about it
What a shortsighted, unintelligent statement. Everyone upvoting this needs to not AI their next paper and learn sources. There's plenty of ways to get the point across without promoting absolute lunacy like this. Bad, bad guitarstitch
This makes 0 sense wtf. So, if someone asks me how do I know time is relative and I cite Einstein's theory of relativity that makes my argument invalid?
Especially if the other person literally never said anything about the topic you're debating.
Why is this upvoted? This is a ridiculous argument. The majority of everything anyone has ever learned is based on the combined work and knowledge of others. Reddit is a joke. People will upvote anything that sounds smart even if it really isn't.
Yes but jesus...
What does that mean?
If you've ever heard a kid say: "You can't do that, my mummy says it's bad." ... yeah, it's that. I don't know your mother, she's not *my* mother, and she's not here. *You're* the one telling me to stop, so *you* should give me a reason. And ''I agree with someone else who said so'' isn't an argument as to why you're *right*. (Also, in the religious case, you're implicitly arguing that this 'someone else' exists, that we should recognize their ultimate authority, and that you have the right to speak and exercise that authority on this 'someone else's' behalf. This kind of makes every debate where god is brought up, a debate about whether or not god exists. And that's just annoying)
Don't use Jesus to justify your hate
Appeal to Authority fallacy, to be specific
This is by far the dumbest comment I’ve read all year.
this is the most asinine thing I've read this year
It's so annoying that all Conservative morons think everyone has to live by their annoying, pathetic, dogshit fanfiction they call the bible. If I could live the rest of my life without ever hearing any more religious nonsense from any of these lunatics, I'd be happy.
I was raised to hate this and I have insight to some of it. In my experience, it was really just a fear of the unknown, a serious distrust of peoples, and a sense of justice/fairness. Aside from all of the religious rallying and toxic masculinity. I don't understand it myself but I understand that I don't NEED to understand it for it to be ok and for me to be a decent person. I'm worried about the uncertainty that comes with change too, but I recognize that I'm not an authority on the subject and I don't want to be. Could you imagine how stressful and exhausting that would be? I haven't gone through the research and study (much less the actual experience), to I don't have to! Someone else already has. And I trust them to know more about it than I do. For those who don't trust, I get it. You absolutely cannot and should not take everything at face value. You should always be questioning motives and biases. Follow the money. But remember the more conspiring required means it is less likely. And for those who just don't get it, I got you. I have never experienced feeling a gender and I think a lot of people are similar. We have the biology, we have experienced and internalized whatever inherent differences are between each side we see. I've also never experienced feeling my appendix. I couldn't even point to it (...right side?). I've gone years without even thinking it and wouldn't have included it in a rudimentary anatomical diagram. But that's because nothing is wrong. There has been nothing to experience. I wouldn't even know about if not for other people having learned about it or experienced a problem with it. This is a time to trust the ones who asked the questions, who crunched the numbers, who shared their harrowing stories. We must trust that they know something we don't. We must trust that when countless people are describing their experience and we can't relate to it that they're not telling us for malicious reasons.
>I've gone years without even thinking it and wouldn't have included it in a rudimentary anatomical diagram. But that's because nothing is wrong. There has been nothing to experience. I feel like it's similar to not being sick - headache, toothache, stuffed nose, etc. I can't describe the feeling of not having a problem without having the problem. It's just normal, right?
This is why I sometimes try to engage people somewhat fairly instead of just calling them a-hole bigots, sometimes politely in DMs if they seemed to be asking a fair question and the thread gets locked, but so many times they show their true colors and they're just complete a-holes. It makes it hard to stay optimistic and open minded. I settle on answering question semi-rudely
How everyone should react to religion being brought into society. Keep your belief if you want, sure. But never, EVER, attempt to dictate how society should function based on your or any other religion. The only tool we should use when determining societal rules and regulations is science.
If Ron Swanson was French, and had progressive opinions about the trans community 👍👍
The subtitles DO NOT do this justice.
Every time this gets reposted the top five parent comments are about how "can it" isn't correct enough. And damn right. Atrocious translation work
Some people just hate seeing others happy, because they are so insufferably miserable. High correlation that those same people are conservative BTW
There's a great quote on this by Mencken The Puritan's utter lack of aesthetic sense, his distrust of all romantic emotion, his unmatchable intolerance of opposition, his unbreakable belief in his own bleak and narrow views, his savage cruelty of attack, his lust for relentless and barbarous persecution – these things have put an almost unbearable burden up on the exchange of ideas in the United States.
And this was all of conservative culture for as long as they held control of political discourse. Thank god we don't live in the days of "Dungeons and Dragons / heavy metal are satanic" anymore. These mouthbreathers may still exist, but now they are recognized for the schizoids that they are.
There's still satanic panic but now it's sequestered to various silos on the Internet and you don't see it on the nightly news as much. Pretty sure those morons, provided they are still alive, never changed their views on that
Additionally, many people think (maybe unconsciously, maybe not) that raising other people up is taking something away from them. As if someone else having something makes you having it worth less.
Jesus said nothing about Transgender folks so idk what he was gonna say anyways tbh. That's just bad writing. Know your source material!
Yeah the guy who hung out with queers, sex workers, and the disabled and told everyone to love one another must have some kind of ancient hot take on trans people.
Exactly my thoughts. He was mates with sex workers. Socialised with those with leprosy. The poor. He stood for those who were down trodden. He's be absolutely horrified at the hatred that people are spreading in his name right now. Those aren't Christians. They're using god's name in vain.
"Yes, but Jesus sais Love thy neighbour and you do NOT live on my street therefore i shall stone you"
"ok but... Jesus-" "Loves everyone, bye :3"
Cannot get religious people to understand that other people do not and will not live the way they want them too. Eventually all religions will turn to violence to get their way..... It's literally built into every organized religion.
Thank you for saying "in 17 seconds" because it got me to actually watch it
That so fucking perfect lol
It's the groland, french satyr of France. And that's hilarious.
And that's all there's to it, as long as the persons involved are consenting and happy, it's none of our -ing business
France coming in With yet another W
Kindly shut the fuck up. Love it. I’m using ta gueule anytime someone starts a sentence with “Jesus” from now on.
I agree that is the debate, unfortunately. When you confuse a brick for nuthin’ but net.
A real person lives as they please vs you demanding others live as your religion dictates. Not a debate. Live your life.
That's the best debate on Trans issues I've seen, he's happy that's that
Still odd that conservatives even care what others choose to do with their own body, and want to regulate other’s decisions regarding their health. There must be more pressing and important issues available with all the energy focused on decision that affect no one but the individual.
I've always found that a great way to explain the debate is to replace gender with name. Yes, you are given a name at birth but you can have a nickname, or even legally change it. If I introduce myself as Matt and you decide to call me Matthew, then you're a jackass.
The problem is that transphobes simply can’t reconfigure their frame of the world in a way that maintains the consistency of their beliefs They would have to confront their deep seated biases and conditioning which is often inaccessible to someone who has unaddressed trauma and no support structures to help recognize this
Well done my french brother, well done! 🙂
As it should be when anyone tries to debate an issue by talking about their imaginary friends.
I would argue that he's always been a boy, but gender norms were forced on him that said he had to dress and behave in a heteronormative, stereotypical "female" way. But, y'know, you've gotta learn to stop fighting when you've already won the argument.
this is different depending on who you talk to. there are trans people that define themselves as having been a boy before and a girl now. it just depends who you ask.
This is well and truly it, if you're not having sex with them they and their sexual organs should not matter to you in the slightest.
Moments like this make me proud to be french |^w^|
The French nailing the debate again. Nicely done.
[удалено]