EPT It's interesting to find where the various lines are, or where other people conceive them to be.
if im signing up for a girl i met at the bar, birth gender is my least concern.
source: slut
LGBT Rights and Gender Equality Thread - Page 111
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
if im signing up for a girl i met at the bar, birth gender is my least concern. source: slut | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25771 Posts
 | ||
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
On August 03 2013 13:52 Wombat_NI wrote: I hope you're not falling into the risky area that will get comments 'when a guy does it he's a stud, when a girl does it she's a slut' remarks thrown at you man yo if i can u kno im playin da pwny | ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
On August 03 2013 11:32 Sokrates wrote: Maybe im drunk but i really think if someone is that sensitive about having sex and the other person somehow lied to you about certain things or didnt mention certain things at all (except STDs which whould threaten your health) then you have to DEAL WITH IT. Get over it. You are not a fucking child that didnt get the nice toy for behaving well. Man or women up, dont be fucking childish. If i read all this shit i really wonder how people get along in the real world. There is so much shit going wrong and some people complain about being "tricked" into sex. Shit you had sex with a trans person and you didnt know. OMFG IT WAS RAPE. Because you realized she wasnt what you expect. I have no sympathy for all this. Neither do i have sympathy for all that "oh you dont wanna have sex with a trans person you most be transphobic and therefore a bad person." Is this discussion about who has the most insulting slurs? People do what they do. We are all human. You are not the center of the universe. I wouldn't think it was rape but I'd be pretty pissed off. Everyone's sexual preference is their absolute right except for if that preference is kids and stuff like that. When it comes to some things yes a person is the center of their universe and telling them "you are not the center of the universe" is cheap and wrong. | ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
In most cases though, it'd definitely be a pretty huge lie of omission on the part of the trans that I think most people, including myself, would consider unethical. But rape? No. Not even really worthy of any legal repercussions tbh, but it's still wrong to keep that information from your partner. | ||
|
Mercy13
United States718 Posts
I have failed to disclose personal information, even though I believed that doing so would be likely to affect the willingness of several women to engage in sexual activity with me, and then I engaged in sexual activity with them. After some honest introspection, I now believe that this may have effected my judgement of Kwark's opinion (or Universal Moral Standard, as he likes to call it), and I think it's time to come clean. These women have included girlfriends, a couple people I never knew very well, and even a few friends. I did this because I like having sex as much as the next guy, and I knew that if I fully disclosed all relevant information I would have had a lot less of it. I know that it is not possible for me to atone for my actions, but as a sign that I would like to make amends and change my behavior in the future, I am going to share this personal information here: + Show Spoiler + I have spent dozens, perhaps HUNDREDS of hours looking at porn on the internet. I am confident that had I shared this information prior to each of my sexual encounters, many, perhaps even all of them, would not have occurred. In the future I will make sure to disclose this information to every woman prior to engaging in sexual activity with her. There will be a high price to pay in terms of lost tail, but I am willing to pay this price so that Kwark won't think I'm a rapist. | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
morals -> wrong or right fear is to physical what morals is to (the) mind (to psychological). i'd draw interesting parallels from that. like, the mind has instinctual responses to environmental stress. the psychological mirroring the mechanisms of the physical. | ||
KwarK
United States43021 Posts
On August 03 2013 16:28 Mercy13 wrote: I have a confession to make. There is a personal reason why I have been arguing so strenuously against KwarK's definition of rape. You see, I wanted it to be wrong, or maybe it would be better to say that I needed it to be wrong, because if his definition is correct then I am a rapist. I have failed to disclose personal information, even though I believed that doing so would be likely to affect the willingness of several women to engage in sexual activity with me, and then I engaged in sexual activity with them. After some honest introspection, I now believe that this may have effected my judgement of Kwark's opinion (or Universal Moral Standard, as he likes to call it), and I think it's time to come clean. These women have included girlfriends, a couple people I never knew very well, and even a few friends. I did this because I like having sex as much as the next guy, and I knew that if I fully disclosed all relevant information I would have had a lot less of it. I know that it is not possible for me to atone for my actions, but as a sign that I would like to make amends and change my behavior in the future, I am going to share this personal information here: + Show Spoiler + I have spent dozens, perhaps HUNDREDS of hours looking at porn on the internet. I am confident that had I shared this information prior to each of my sexual encounters, many, perhaps even all of them, would not have occurred. In the future I will make sure to disclose this information to every woman prior to engaging in sexual activity with her. There will be a high price to pay in terms of lost tail, but I am willing to pay this price so that Kwark won't think I'm a rapist. You're being silly. Looking at internet porn is the assumption rather than an exception which applies to 0.01% of the population. Your confession ought to be "I've somehow read a fairly basic argument explained a hundred times over and still don't get it, I probably can't be trusted with anything as complicated as consent". I mean jesus, you don't have to agree with me but can you just try to understand it. When your state is so unlikely they cannot reasonably assume it and your state being a dealbreaker is so likely you can reasonably expect it then disclose to avoid obtaining consent where it would not be obtained given equal information. In your example the state of "watches online porn" is not especially unlikely. | ||
|
Lynda
649 Posts
While I strongly disagree too with the notion of it being rapey / a redefinition of rape, and rather would just call it immoral / being an asshole, I can agree with KwarK that two wrongs don't make a right, not wanting to disclose due to personal safety does not give the moral card to someone to disregard others' consent criterias, because having one night stands isn't a 100% necessity for one's life. To the two trans women who posted that they're going to do it anyway, what did you expect, to be given a high five and to be given permission to continue doing it? Frankly, it surely isn't helping your cause to passionately post that just because people don't care about your safety then you can completely disregard what could potentially make someone very uncomfortable (hinging on the fact that they never find out and then they won't be), because two wrongs don't make a right. If you love one night stands so much that you think it's an indispensable part of your life and you are going to behave this way, we can't force you not to do it, but then don't passionately post about it while even having the attitude of being on a high horse and then bring up really flawed, sexist statements (even if in defense of rapist accusations that, like I said, I disagree with myself) like men can't be raped. I might also be negatively biased here though because being a lesbian I don't have this problem, I also don't care about one night stands at all, and it also angers me from the standpoint that people like myself, as well as straight/bisexual trans women who do disclose to their partners, will be lumped in together with straight/bi trans women who don't disclose, and can receive just as heavy of a physical assault from people / friends of people who had not been disclosed to prior but they found out (or from people who heard about that happening and got really angered), as they'll assume about us too that we're just "creepy sexually deviant freaks who trick straight men into having sex with them" as many people probably already think that's what transsexuality is all about (and when I tell them I'm a lesbian they can't comprehend it / don't believe me, as suddenly their entire notion of transsexuality would completely collapse). But if you're not going to disclose, then at least please don't be a vocal minority online who passionately keeps posting that you won't, while having the attitude that you do not care at all about anyone else's opinion on the matter, because you sure aren't even helping your cause, you are just angering people who would've supported you otherwise and reinforcing people's views that because two trans women posted that they don't disclose, they can automatically generalize that all trans women won't disclose. As for the extreme accusation of people being bigots/transphobes for not wanting to sleep with a trans woman, that's an extremely flawed stretch; even I myself felt very uncomfortable with the idea even long after I came out to myself, yet I'm a lesbian trans woman myself. So it can be all the more understood that people who are straight cis men could have a much harder time becoming comfortable, if ever. It's not their fault, we have less control over our inner sense of comfort or lack thereof than we'd think, especially when it's been so deeply ingrained due to decades of society brainwashing us into thinking that it's horribly wrong and disgusting. People can work on their internalized transphobia, but those who won't fully be able to get rid of that sense of discomfort regarding sleeping with a straight/bi trans woman are at no fault so long as they accept trans people as their identified gender in every other way. It's society's fault, so calling those people at all transphobic, especially when they are actually supportive, is not going to help anyone; if anything, it will just anger them. I really hope this thread can move on because it's been fucking horribly painful to read. | ||
|
Snusmumriken
Sweden1717 Posts
On August 03 2013 16:28 Mercy13 wrote: I have a confession to make. There is a personal reason why I have been arguing so strenuously against KwarK's definition of rape. You see, I wanted it to be wrong, or maybe it would be better to say that I needed it to be wrong, because if his definition is correct then I am a rapist. I have failed to disclose personal information, even though I believed that doing so would be likely to affect the willingness of several women to engage in sexual activity with me, and then I engaged in sexual activity with them. After some honest introspection, I now believe that this may have effected my judgement of Kwark's opinion (or Universal Moral Standard, as he likes to call it), and I think it's time to come clean. These women have included girlfriends, a couple people I never knew very well, and even a few friends. I did this because I like having sex as much as the next guy, and I knew that if I fully disclosed all relevant information I would have had a lot less of it. I know that it is not possible for me to atone for my actions, but as a sign that I would like to make amends and change my behavior in the future, I am going to share this personal information here: + Show Spoiler + I have spent dozens, perhaps HUNDREDS of hours looking at porn on the internet. I am confident that had I shared this information prior to each of my sexual encounters, many, perhaps even all of them, would not have occurred. In the future I will make sure to disclose this information to every woman prior to engaging in sexual activity with her. There will be a high price to pay in terms of lost tail, but I am willing to pay this price so that Kwark won't think I'm a rapist. Strawman. Having said that, its not cool to use words like you want to. Words dont mean what you want them to mean. Theres even a name for that, its called being a humpty dumpty. Its been used by both sides. Some call something rape when its not, some have called people ---phobic, bigoted or racist when theyre clearly not. Not cool. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5638 Posts
On August 03 2013 08:29 shinosai wrote: Again, I'm not trying to "punish" anyone by fucking them - I would never knowingly deceive someone. What I'm trying to say is that transphobes and racists are certainly aware of their situation in society, and people who dislike them are not statistical anomalies. No matter how many times the numbers and statistics argument is pulled, it works against you because (1) you don't actually know the statistics of how many people are transphobic (2) by comparison you don't know how many people are anti-transphobic and thus opposed to sleeping with THEM and (3) the risk is higher for the trans person. Therefore, while I might agree to having a responsibility to disclose if I know the other person has a problem, I will not under any circumstance agree that I have a responsibility to disclose when I have a lack of information if the transphobe does not have responsibility to disclose. (edited for clarity) Actually, I really doubt that the number of people who dislike (and assuming that does affect their sexual preference in terms of a hookup) "racists" and "transphobes" as defined by you or Zealos etc. are anything but minor. You are using those terms extremely loosly, and, like someone else said, the vast majority of people would not consider themselves as such and therefore not tell you, because, from their point of view, there's nothing to tell. That is like saying that the number of people who dislike (and it is a MAJOR deal breaker for them in terms of consenting to sex) people who "discriminate" against obese people and choose to have sex only with non-obese people is significant. And, following your logic, people who discriminate against obese people in terms of giving consent to sex are somehow "bigots" or "backwards savages" (or some special term invented to describe actual discrimination against obese people - bullying, not hiring them or such). | ||
|
i_bE_free
United States73 Posts
On August 03 2013 19:10 Lynda wrote: Wow, I can't believe people went on for 60 pages in a circle, beating a dead horse, posting very flawed analogies, while reaching both extreme wrong ends, of it being rapey / a redefinition of rape, and that people who at all are uncomfortable having sex with a trans woman are instantly transphobic/bigots and then their consent criterias doesn't matter. And what was achieved? After initially everyone being more or less able to agree that it's morally wrong, congratulations, you just spent a lot of your time arguing for 60 pages about something that apparently the two (I think there were two?) trans women who posted that they are going to do, are going to continue to do anyway without you being able to enforce it, while a lot of people pissed each other off and created a toxic environment. While I strongly disagree too with the notion of it being rapey / a redefinition of rape, and rather would just call it immoral / being an asshole, I can agree with KwarK that two wrongs don't make a right, not wanting to disclose due to personal safety does not give the moral card to someone to disregard others' consent criterias, because having one night stands isn't a 100% necessity for one's life. To the two trans women who posted that they're going to do it anyway, what did you expect, to be given a high five and to be given permission to continue doing it? Frankly, it surely isn't helping your cause to passionately post that just because people don't care about your safety then you can completely disregard what could potentially make someone very uncomfortable (hinging on the fact that they never find out and then they won't be), because two wrongs don't make a right. If you love one night stands so much that you think it's an indispensable part of your life and you are going to behave this way, we can't force you not to do it, but then don't passionately post about it while even having the attitude of being on a high horse and then bring up really flawed, sexist statements (even if in defense of rapist accusations that, like I said, I disagree with myself) like men can't be raped. I might also be negatively biased here though because being a lesbian I don't have this problem, I also don't care about one night stands at all, and it also angers me from the standpoint that people like myself, as well as straight/bisexual trans women who do disclose to their partners, will be lumped in together with straight/bi trans women who don't disclose, and can receive just as heavy of a physical assault from people / friends of people who had not been disclosed to prior but they found out (or from people who heard about that happening and got really angered), as they'll assume about us too that we're just "creepy sexually deviant freaks who trick straight men into having sex with them" as many people probably already think that's what transsexuality is all about (and when I tell them I'm a lesbian they can't comprehend it / don't believe me, as suddenly their entire notion of transsexuality would completely collapse). But if you're not going to disclose, then at least please don't be a vocal minority online who passionately keeps posting that you won't, while having the attitude that you do not care at all about anyone else's opinion on the matter, because you sure aren't even helping your cause, you are just angering people who would've supported you otherwise and reinforcing people's views that because two trans women posted that they don't disclose, they can automatically generalize that all trans women won't disclose. As for the extreme accusation of people being bigots/transphobes for not wanting to sleep with a trans woman, that's an extremely flawed stretch; even I myself felt very uncomfortable with the idea even long after I came out to myself, yet I'm a lesbian trans woman myself. So it can be all the more understood that people who are straight cis men could have a much harder time becoming comfortable, if ever. It's not their fault, we have less control over our inner sense of comfort or lack thereof than we'd think, especially when it's been so deeply ingrained due to decades of society brainwashing us into thinking that it's horribly wrong and disgusting. People can work on their internalized transphobia, but those who won't fully be able to get rid of that sense of discomfort regarding sleeping with a straight/bi trans woman are at no fault so long as they accept trans people as their identified gender in every other way. It's society's fault, so calling those people at all transphobic, especially when they are actually supportive, is not going to help anyone; if anything, it will just anger them. I really hope this thread can move on because it's been fucking horribly painful to read. at least the pope seems ok about gays | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5638 Posts
As in believes they should not have homosexual sex because it is a sin? His view on homosexuality and homosexuals is not any different from the official line of the Church. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
| ||
|
Iyerbeth
England2410 Posts
To explain what I mean, I didn't suddenly change who I was when I transitioned I merely stopped pretending to be someone else. I was a girl at age 5, I just hadn't told anyone and then when I did tell people I just sought medical help to correct some issues. As a person I was never less of a girl/woman than anyone else. Technically speaking, for me personally, I wasn't old enough to be considered a man at that point either, and my testosterone levels were half that of an unhealthy 80 year old (and hugely lower than expected for my age) so I literally have no idea what it means to be a man. I don't think those two things are what is meant, but I mention them only to highlight what's wrong with the thinking. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25771 Posts
I mean go read the thread on the Olympics/Russia issue and the appalling points being made there, and transgendered issues are more complex than the ones people over there stubbornly refuse to entertain. I hope we can see a more egalitarian world when I exit it than when I entered it, and it's been the general trend but I don't know how you bridge those kind of divides among people of a certain mentality. | ||
|
i_bE_free
United States73 Posts
On August 03 2013 18:38 KwarK wrote: You're being silly. Looking at internet porn is the assumption rather than an exception which applies to 0.01% of the population. Your confession ought to be "I've somehow read a fairly basic argument explained a hundred times over and still don't get it, I probably can't be trusted with anything as complicated as consent". I mean jesus, you don't have to agree with me but can you just try to understand it. When your state is so unlikely they cannot reasonably assume it and your state being a dealbreaker is so likely you can reasonably expect it then disclose to avoid obtaining consent where it would not be obtained given equal information. In your example the state of "watches online porn" is not especially unlikely. well theres that as well | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 03 2013 19:48 maybenexttime wrote: As in believes they should not have homosexual sex because it is a sin? His view on homosexuality and homosexuals is not any different from the official line of the Church. He specifically said "I will not judge them". In Pope speak, that's saying that he is ok with them. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On August 03 2013 21:07 Plansix wrote: He specifically said "I will not judge them". In Pope speak, that's saying that he is ok with them. As long as they don't have sex, at which point they're pure evil again, of course. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5638 Posts
On August 03 2013 21:07 Plansix wrote: He specifically said "I will not judge them". In Pope speak, that's saying that he is ok with them. You're manipulating what he said, like socially liberal media did. "If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?" He clearly implied that in order to search for God you need to try to abstain from sinful activity, as you cannot have good will and deliberately lead a sinful life. You can read more about it here: http://catholicism.about.com/b/2013/07/30/pope-francis-on-homosexuality-take-a-deep-breath.htm | ||
| ||
