• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 04:35
CEST 10:35
KST 17:35
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
RSL Season 1 - Final Week6[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0
Community News
Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed17Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission extension3Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation17$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced7
StarCraft 2
General
Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread Who will win EWC 2025? The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo)
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Flash Announces (and Retracts) Hiatus From ASL BW General Discussion Soulkey Muta Micro Map? [ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues CSL Xiamen International Invitational 2025 ACS Season 2 Qualifier Cosmonarchy Pro Showmatches
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile Nintendo Switch Thread CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project The PlayStation 5
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Summer Games Done Quick 2025!
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 605 users

LGBT Rights and Gender Equality Thread - Page 131

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 129 130 131 132 133 149 Next
RaspberrySC2
Profile Joined November 2011
United States168 Posts
August 07 2013 22:45 GMT
#2601
On August 08 2013 07:42 farvacola wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:40 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:36 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:11 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:01 KwarK wrote:
I'm making assumptions based upon your reply. I explained how the behaviour was predatory and you then replied
I'll be doing what is conducive to my happiness, too. <3


The exact same "fuck them, I got mine, who cares if they didn't want it" mentality as the rest of the predators. So yes, I assume you're a predator because you have presented yourself as one. You don't get to then cry "you don't know me!", I know you from your posting, if a mistake was made then it was by you.

Unfortunately there is no surgery to make people pass as a decent human being. Instead you need lessons like "don't fuck people who don't wanna fuck" drilled into you by experience. This is what I'm trying to do to you.


Now you're suggesting an even more general concept of me not being a decent human being.

I'm sorry that your interpretation of reality isn't quite secure enough that you need to shore it up with ever-more grandiose negative labels.

My stance is that I refuse to be responsible for someone else's unrealities. Prejudice and bigotry are learned behaviors. Oddly enough, the common consensus is that prejudiced and bigoted person's feelings "should" (that magic word) be respected. Are prejudiced and bigoted people more qualifying as "decent human beings" than I am now?

The reality in the discussed topic is that someone enjoys a very real experience with someone else. However, the unreality of their learned prejudices and fears has so much more importance placed upon it that it can override and negate that enjoyment.

I am a predator because I prefer reality over imagination.

Cool. I can live with that.

See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.

Stop painting me as someone afraid of sex with a trans person. I am not.

The numbers are a fact. It'd be easier for you if they weren't, but they are, and you know they are and it makes your behaviour inexcusable. There is a colossal imbalance in the information between the parties. Your partner knows that he shares criteria with, for the purpose of argument, 50% of people. You know you have a condition which affects roughly 0.01% of people. This means you are going into this with a 50% chance of violating someone if you do nothing whereas they are going into this with a 0.01% chance of being violated. If you know these numbers (hypothetical, just for the example) and you go "fuck it, that's their problem if they didn't want to have sex with a trans person", you're a predator. You know there is a reasonable chance that your partner does not want this but because you do want it you simply choose not to address that.

This isn't a "I shouldn't have to" or a "it's not fair" or anything else. Whining about how you shouldn't have to doesn't chance shit, you're not trying to tick boxes, you're trying to protect the individuals involved from something they do not want. This is a moral obligation.

Do you understand that sex with someone who doesn't want sex with you (but doesn't know) is a bad thing? Can you at least get that?


You're taking this too personally. I've never said that you, personally, are afraid to have sex with a trans person. If this was personal, I know *I* wouldn't want to have sex with you even if you for some reason wanted to have it with me.

I get it if they clarify first. If they already have their mouth on my genitals or their penis in me, I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they want it.

This is the definition of slut shaming.....particularly sinc you keep referencing clubs and places where alcohol and drugs are common.


I would contend that me being called a "predator" and a "rapist" is more slut-shaming than me enjoying being a slut with someone else being a slut.
Ever since I was a child I have had this instinctive urge for expansion and growth. To me, the function and duty of a quality human being is the sincere and honest development of one's potential. - Bruce Lee
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42607 Posts
August 07 2013 22:46 GMT
#2602
On August 08 2013 07:43 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:41 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:37 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:11 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:01 KwarK wrote:
I'm making assumptions based upon your reply. I explained how the behaviour was predatory and you then replied
[quote]

The exact same "fuck them, I got mine, who cares if they didn't want it" mentality as the rest of the predators. So yes, I assume you're a predator because you have presented yourself as one. You don't get to then cry "you don't know me!", I know you from your posting, if a mistake was made then it was by you.

Unfortunately there is no surgery to make people pass as a decent human being. Instead you need lessons like "don't fuck people who don't wanna fuck" drilled into you by experience. This is what I'm trying to do to you.


Now you're suggesting an even more general concept of me not being a decent human being.

I'm sorry that your interpretation of reality isn't quite secure enough that you need to shore it up with ever-more grandiose negative labels.

My stance is that I refuse to be responsible for someone else's unrealities. Prejudice and bigotry are learned behaviors. Oddly enough, the common consensus is that prejudiced and bigoted person's feelings "should" (that magic word) be respected. Are prejudiced and bigoted people more qualifying as "decent human beings" than I am now?

The reality in the discussed topic is that someone enjoys a very real experience with someone else. However, the unreality of their learned prejudices and fears has so much more importance placed upon it that it can override and negate that enjoyment.

I am a predator because I prefer reality over imagination.

Cool. I can live with that.

See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.


Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...


I fail to see the relation. "I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups" does not apply to rape by impersonation...


It's pretty simple. How could you potentially know that they would not consent to have sex with you, had they known that you were not the person you seemed to be? It's only a reasonable assumption, right?


Uhh... what? That's not what rape by impersonation is. What exactly do you mean "not the person you seemed to be"? How is the trans-person not the person they seemed to be? I don't understand. Please explain.

To people who want sex with cis people a trans person is impersonating a cis person. And it doesn't matter that the trans person is just a person because you don't get to decide someone else's criteria for consent for them. If they don't want to have sex with a trans person and you're a trans person then feel free to explain to them that they're dumb for making the distinction but do not not disclose.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
August 07 2013 22:46 GMT
#2603
On August 08 2013 07:45 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:42 farvacola wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:40 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:36 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:11 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:01 KwarK wrote:
I'm making assumptions based upon your reply. I explained how the behaviour was predatory and you then replied
[quote]

The exact same "fuck them, I got mine, who cares if they didn't want it" mentality as the rest of the predators. So yes, I assume you're a predator because you have presented yourself as one. You don't get to then cry "you don't know me!", I know you from your posting, if a mistake was made then it was by you.

Unfortunately there is no surgery to make people pass as a decent human being. Instead you need lessons like "don't fuck people who don't wanna fuck" drilled into you by experience. This is what I'm trying to do to you.


Now you're suggesting an even more general concept of me not being a decent human being.

I'm sorry that your interpretation of reality isn't quite secure enough that you need to shore it up with ever-more grandiose negative labels.

My stance is that I refuse to be responsible for someone else's unrealities. Prejudice and bigotry are learned behaviors. Oddly enough, the common consensus is that prejudiced and bigoted person's feelings "should" (that magic word) be respected. Are prejudiced and bigoted people more qualifying as "decent human beings" than I am now?

The reality in the discussed topic is that someone enjoys a very real experience with someone else. However, the unreality of their learned prejudices and fears has so much more importance placed upon it that it can override and negate that enjoyment.

I am a predator because I prefer reality over imagination.

Cool. I can live with that.

See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.

Stop painting me as someone afraid of sex with a trans person. I am not.

The numbers are a fact. It'd be easier for you if they weren't, but they are, and you know they are and it makes your behaviour inexcusable. There is a colossal imbalance in the information between the parties. Your partner knows that he shares criteria with, for the purpose of argument, 50% of people. You know you have a condition which affects roughly 0.01% of people. This means you are going into this with a 50% chance of violating someone if you do nothing whereas they are going into this with a 0.01% chance of being violated. If you know these numbers (hypothetical, just for the example) and you go "fuck it, that's their problem if they didn't want to have sex with a trans person", you're a predator. You know there is a reasonable chance that your partner does not want this but because you do want it you simply choose not to address that.

This isn't a "I shouldn't have to" or a "it's not fair" or anything else. Whining about how you shouldn't have to doesn't chance shit, you're not trying to tick boxes, you're trying to protect the individuals involved from something they do not want. This is a moral obligation.

Do you understand that sex with someone who doesn't want sex with you (but doesn't know) is a bad thing? Can you at least get that?


You're taking this too personally. I've never said that you, personally, are afraid to have sex with a trans person. If this was personal, I know *I* wouldn't want to have sex with you even if you for some reason wanted to have it with me.

I get it if they clarify first. If they already have their mouth on my genitals or their penis in me, I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they want it.

This is the definition of slut shaming.....particularly sinc you keep referencing clubs and places where alcohol and drugs are common.


I would contend that me being called a "predator" and a "rapist" is more slut-shaming than me enjoying being a slut with someone else being a slut.


What? That makes no sense, and you know it makes no sense. Please make sense.
RaspberrySC2
Profile Joined November 2011
United States168 Posts
August 07 2013 22:46 GMT
#2604
On August 08 2013 07:45 maybenexttime wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:41 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:38 Plansix wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:36 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 Plansix wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:31 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:24 Plansix wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:22 ComaDose wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
[quote]

Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.

thats a little far.... maybe if they asked if you were a trans person and you lied about it.

The scenario implies that the trans person is aware that the person does not want to sleep with someone who is transgendered.


That's the scenario? That's not where I'm working from.

Its not like it matters to you. You don't care if they would have a problem with you being transgender or not. Your just like the guy who can't wait for another night for his date to be sober or doesn't inform the girl that he isn't a member of the band.


I do care, but my assumption is that they don't.

Stop asking me to assume that each of my partners actually hates me deep down and I'll take this conversation more seriously... maybe.

But what if you got the impression they would be uncomfortable. What do you do then?


Then I don't have sex with them. I don't ignore cues. I actually do listen to the things people say.


And we're supposed to believe you, when you've claimed several times that you don't actually give a crap about their consent criteria and would have sex with them regardless?


I give a crap if they communicate it. I never said otherwise. Twisting and misrepresenting my posts isn't fun.
Ever since I was a child I have had this instinctive urge for expansion and growth. To me, the function and duty of a quality human being is the sincere and honest development of one's potential. - Bruce Lee
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42607 Posts
August 07 2013 22:47 GMT
#2605
On August 08 2013 07:45 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:42 farvacola wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:40 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:36 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:11 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:01 KwarK wrote:
I'm making assumptions based upon your reply. I explained how the behaviour was predatory and you then replied
[quote]

The exact same "fuck them, I got mine, who cares if they didn't want it" mentality as the rest of the predators. So yes, I assume you're a predator because you have presented yourself as one. You don't get to then cry "you don't know me!", I know you from your posting, if a mistake was made then it was by you.

Unfortunately there is no surgery to make people pass as a decent human being. Instead you need lessons like "don't fuck people who don't wanna fuck" drilled into you by experience. This is what I'm trying to do to you.


Now you're suggesting an even more general concept of me not being a decent human being.

I'm sorry that your interpretation of reality isn't quite secure enough that you need to shore it up with ever-more grandiose negative labels.

My stance is that I refuse to be responsible for someone else's unrealities. Prejudice and bigotry are learned behaviors. Oddly enough, the common consensus is that prejudiced and bigoted person's feelings "should" (that magic word) be respected. Are prejudiced and bigoted people more qualifying as "decent human beings" than I am now?

The reality in the discussed topic is that someone enjoys a very real experience with someone else. However, the unreality of their learned prejudices and fears has so much more importance placed upon it that it can override and negate that enjoyment.

I am a predator because I prefer reality over imagination.

Cool. I can live with that.

See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.

Stop painting me as someone afraid of sex with a trans person. I am not.

The numbers are a fact. It'd be easier for you if they weren't, but they are, and you know they are and it makes your behaviour inexcusable. There is a colossal imbalance in the information between the parties. Your partner knows that he shares criteria with, for the purpose of argument, 50% of people. You know you have a condition which affects roughly 0.01% of people. This means you are going into this with a 50% chance of violating someone if you do nothing whereas they are going into this with a 0.01% chance of being violated. If you know these numbers (hypothetical, just for the example) and you go "fuck it, that's their problem if they didn't want to have sex with a trans person", you're a predator. You know there is a reasonable chance that your partner does not want this but because you do want it you simply choose not to address that.

This isn't a "I shouldn't have to" or a "it's not fair" or anything else. Whining about how you shouldn't have to doesn't chance shit, you're not trying to tick boxes, you're trying to protect the individuals involved from something they do not want. This is a moral obligation.

Do you understand that sex with someone who doesn't want sex with you (but doesn't know) is a bad thing? Can you at least get that?


You're taking this too personally. I've never said that you, personally, are afraid to have sex with a trans person. If this was personal, I know *I* wouldn't want to have sex with you even if you for some reason wanted to have it with me.

I get it if they clarify first. If they already have their mouth on my genitals or their penis in me, I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they want it.

This is the definition of slut shaming.....particularly sinc you keep referencing clubs and places where alcohol and drugs are common.


I would contend that me being called a "predator" and a "rapist" is more slut-shaming than me enjoying being a slut with someone else being a slut.

I'm a very sex positive feminist and have absolutely no issue with sluts. I love sluts, sluttiness and all things positive and sexual. You, however, are a predator. Not because I think your behaviour is slutty but because of your cavalier attitude to whether or not they want to have sex with you.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
August 07 2013 22:47 GMT
#2606
On August 08 2013 07:45 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:42 farvacola wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:40 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:36 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:11 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:01 KwarK wrote:
I'm making assumptions based upon your reply. I explained how the behaviour was predatory and you then replied
[quote]

The exact same "fuck them, I got mine, who cares if they didn't want it" mentality as the rest of the predators. So yes, I assume you're a predator because you have presented yourself as one. You don't get to then cry "you don't know me!", I know you from your posting, if a mistake was made then it was by you.

Unfortunately there is no surgery to make people pass as a decent human being. Instead you need lessons like "don't fuck people who don't wanna fuck" drilled into you by experience. This is what I'm trying to do to you.


Now you're suggesting an even more general concept of me not being a decent human being.

I'm sorry that your interpretation of reality isn't quite secure enough that you need to shore it up with ever-more grandiose negative labels.

My stance is that I refuse to be responsible for someone else's unrealities. Prejudice and bigotry are learned behaviors. Oddly enough, the common consensus is that prejudiced and bigoted person's feelings "should" (that magic word) be respected. Are prejudiced and bigoted people more qualifying as "decent human beings" than I am now?

The reality in the discussed topic is that someone enjoys a very real experience with someone else. However, the unreality of their learned prejudices and fears has so much more importance placed upon it that it can override and negate that enjoyment.

I am a predator because I prefer reality over imagination.

Cool. I can live with that.

See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.

Stop painting me as someone afraid of sex with a trans person. I am not.

The numbers are a fact. It'd be easier for you if they weren't, but they are, and you know they are and it makes your behaviour inexcusable. There is a colossal imbalance in the information between the parties. Your partner knows that he shares criteria with, for the purpose of argument, 50% of people. You know you have a condition which affects roughly 0.01% of people. This means you are going into this with a 50% chance of violating someone if you do nothing whereas they are going into this with a 0.01% chance of being violated. If you know these numbers (hypothetical, just for the example) and you go "fuck it, that's their problem if they didn't want to have sex with a trans person", you're a predator. You know there is a reasonable chance that your partner does not want this but because you do want it you simply choose not to address that.

This isn't a "I shouldn't have to" or a "it's not fair" or anything else. Whining about how you shouldn't have to doesn't chance shit, you're not trying to tick boxes, you're trying to protect the individuals involved from something they do not want. This is a moral obligation.

Do you understand that sex with someone who doesn't want sex with you (but doesn't know) is a bad thing? Can you at least get that?


You're taking this too personally. I've never said that you, personally, are afraid to have sex with a trans person. If this was personal, I know *I* wouldn't want to have sex with you even if you for some reason wanted to have it with me.

I get it if they clarify first. If they already have their mouth on my genitals or their penis in me, I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they want it.

This is the definition of slut shaming.....particularly sinc you keep referencing clubs and places where alcohol and drugs are common.


I would contend that me being called a "predator" and a "rapist" is more slut-shaming than me enjoying being a slut with someone else being a slut.

Well we aren't really shaming you. We just think your a bad person who doesn't care if they hurt someone as long as you get what you want. And you have stated it several times too.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
August 07 2013 22:47 GMT
#2607
On August 08 2013 07:46 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:43 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:41 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:37 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:11 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
[quote]

Now you're suggesting an even more general concept of me not being a decent human being.

I'm sorry that your interpretation of reality isn't quite secure enough that you need to shore it up with ever-more grandiose negative labels.

My stance is that I refuse to be responsible for someone else's unrealities. Prejudice and bigotry are learned behaviors. Oddly enough, the common consensus is that prejudiced and bigoted person's feelings "should" (that magic word) be respected. Are prejudiced and bigoted people more qualifying as "decent human beings" than I am now?

The reality in the discussed topic is that someone enjoys a very real experience with someone else. However, the unreality of their learned prejudices and fears has so much more importance placed upon it that it can override and negate that enjoyment.

I am a predator because I prefer reality over imagination.

Cool. I can live with that.

See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.


Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...


I fail to see the relation. "I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups" does not apply to rape by impersonation...


It's pretty simple. How could you potentially know that they would not consent to have sex with you, had they known that you were not the person you seemed to be? It's only a reasonable assumption, right?


Uhh... what? That's not what rape by impersonation is. What exactly do you mean "not the person you seemed to be"? How is the trans-person not the person they seemed to be? I don't understand. Please explain.

To people who want sex with cis people a trans person is impersonating a cis person. And it doesn't matter that the trans person is just a person because you don't get to decide someone else's criteria for consent for them. If they don't want to have sex with a trans person and you're a trans person then feel free to explain to them that they're dumb for making the distinction but do not not disclose.


How are they impersonating a cis person?
RaspberrySC2
Profile Joined November 2011
United States168 Posts
August 07 2013 22:48 GMT
#2608
On August 08 2013 07:46 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:45 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:42 farvacola wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:40 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:36 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:11 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
[quote]

Now you're suggesting an even more general concept of me not being a decent human being.

I'm sorry that your interpretation of reality isn't quite secure enough that you need to shore it up with ever-more grandiose negative labels.

My stance is that I refuse to be responsible for someone else's unrealities. Prejudice and bigotry are learned behaviors. Oddly enough, the common consensus is that prejudiced and bigoted person's feelings "should" (that magic word) be respected. Are prejudiced and bigoted people more qualifying as "decent human beings" than I am now?

The reality in the discussed topic is that someone enjoys a very real experience with someone else. However, the unreality of their learned prejudices and fears has so much more importance placed upon it that it can override and negate that enjoyment.

I am a predator because I prefer reality over imagination.

Cool. I can live with that.

See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.

Stop painting me as someone afraid of sex with a trans person. I am not.

The numbers are a fact. It'd be easier for you if they weren't, but they are, and you know they are and it makes your behaviour inexcusable. There is a colossal imbalance in the information between the parties. Your partner knows that he shares criteria with, for the purpose of argument, 50% of people. You know you have a condition which affects roughly 0.01% of people. This means you are going into this with a 50% chance of violating someone if you do nothing whereas they are going into this with a 0.01% chance of being violated. If you know these numbers (hypothetical, just for the example) and you go "fuck it, that's their problem if they didn't want to have sex with a trans person", you're a predator. You know there is a reasonable chance that your partner does not want this but because you do want it you simply choose not to address that.

This isn't a "I shouldn't have to" or a "it's not fair" or anything else. Whining about how you shouldn't have to doesn't chance shit, you're not trying to tick boxes, you're trying to protect the individuals involved from something they do not want. This is a moral obligation.

Do you understand that sex with someone who doesn't want sex with you (but doesn't know) is a bad thing? Can you at least get that?


You're taking this too personally. I've never said that you, personally, are afraid to have sex with a trans person. If this was personal, I know *I* wouldn't want to have sex with you even if you for some reason wanted to have it with me.

I get it if they clarify first. If they already have their mouth on my genitals or their penis in me, I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they want it.

This is the definition of slut shaming.....particularly sinc you keep referencing clubs and places where alcohol and drugs are common.


I would contend that me being called a "predator" and a "rapist" is more slut-shaming than me enjoying being a slut with someone else being a slut.


What? That makes no sense, and you know it makes no sense. Please make sense.


It makes sense because all I do is enjoy my sexuality by the same standards and practices reasonably assumable as everyone else, but I'm in the wrong for doing so.
Ever since I was a child I have had this instinctive urge for expansion and growth. To me, the function and duty of a quality human being is the sincere and honest development of one's potential. - Bruce Lee
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42607 Posts
August 07 2013 22:48 GMT
#2609
On August 08 2013 07:46 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:45 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:41 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:38 Plansix wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:36 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 Plansix wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:31 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:24 Plansix wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:22 ComaDose wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.

thats a little far.... maybe if they asked if you were a trans person and you lied about it.

The scenario implies that the trans person is aware that the person does not want to sleep with someone who is transgendered.


That's the scenario? That's not where I'm working from.

Its not like it matters to you. You don't care if they would have a problem with you being transgender or not. Your just like the guy who can't wait for another night for his date to be sober or doesn't inform the girl that he isn't a member of the band.


I do care, but my assumption is that they don't.

Stop asking me to assume that each of my partners actually hates me deep down and I'll take this conversation more seriously... maybe.

But what if you got the impression they would be uncomfortable. What do you do then?


Then I don't have sex with them. I don't ignore cues. I actually do listen to the things people say.


And we're supposed to believe you, when you've claimed several times that you don't actually give a crap about their consent criteria and would have sex with them regardless?


I give a crap if they communicate it. I never said otherwise. Twisting and misrepresenting my posts isn't fun.

A large number of people do care about it. Saying "well statistically there was a good chance he did but he didn't actually explicitly state it" is exactly the kind of ticking the boxes and giving no fucks about actual consent attitude that makes you a predator. It's not about getting away with it, it's about making sure the person you're fucking wants to fuck.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
maybenexttime
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Poland5546 Posts
August 07 2013 22:49 GMT
#2610
On August 08 2013 07:43 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:41 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:37 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:11 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:01 KwarK wrote:
I'm making assumptions based upon your reply. I explained how the behaviour was predatory and you then replied
[quote]

The exact same "fuck them, I got mine, who cares if they didn't want it" mentality as the rest of the predators. So yes, I assume you're a predator because you have presented yourself as one. You don't get to then cry "you don't know me!", I know you from your posting, if a mistake was made then it was by you.

Unfortunately there is no surgery to make people pass as a decent human being. Instead you need lessons like "don't fuck people who don't wanna fuck" drilled into you by experience. This is what I'm trying to do to you.


Now you're suggesting an even more general concept of me not being a decent human being.

I'm sorry that your interpretation of reality isn't quite secure enough that you need to shore it up with ever-more grandiose negative labels.

My stance is that I refuse to be responsible for someone else's unrealities. Prejudice and bigotry are learned behaviors. Oddly enough, the common consensus is that prejudiced and bigoted person's feelings "should" (that magic word) be respected. Are prejudiced and bigoted people more qualifying as "decent human beings" than I am now?

The reality in the discussed topic is that someone enjoys a very real experience with someone else. However, the unreality of their learned prejudices and fears has so much more importance placed upon it that it can override and negate that enjoyment.

I am a predator because I prefer reality over imagination.

Cool. I can live with that.

See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.


Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...


I fail to see the relation. "I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups" does not apply to rape by impersonation...


It's pretty simple. How could you potentially know that they would not consent to have sex with you, had they known that you were not the person you seemed to be? It's only a reasonable assumption, right?


Uhh... what? That's not what rape by impersonation is. What exactly do you mean "not the person you seemed to be"? How is the trans-person not the person they seemed to be? I don't understand. Please explain.


You may as well read the last 20 or so pages where all of this was discussed. Several good analogies were made, too.

If you take advantage of the fact that someone thinks you're a cis woman and would not have sex with a trans woman, then, in principle, it's not far from rape by impersonation.
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
August 07 2013 22:49 GMT
#2611
On August 08 2013 07:48 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:46 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:45 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:42 farvacola wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:40 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:36 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.

Stop painting me as someone afraid of sex with a trans person. I am not.

The numbers are a fact. It'd be easier for you if they weren't, but they are, and you know they are and it makes your behaviour inexcusable. There is a colossal imbalance in the information between the parties. Your partner knows that he shares criteria with, for the purpose of argument, 50% of people. You know you have a condition which affects roughly 0.01% of people. This means you are going into this with a 50% chance of violating someone if you do nothing whereas they are going into this with a 0.01% chance of being violated. If you know these numbers (hypothetical, just for the example) and you go "fuck it, that's their problem if they didn't want to have sex with a trans person", you're a predator. You know there is a reasonable chance that your partner does not want this but because you do want it you simply choose not to address that.

This isn't a "I shouldn't have to" or a "it's not fair" or anything else. Whining about how you shouldn't have to doesn't chance shit, you're not trying to tick boxes, you're trying to protect the individuals involved from something they do not want. This is a moral obligation.

Do you understand that sex with someone who doesn't want sex with you (but doesn't know) is a bad thing? Can you at least get that?


You're taking this too personally. I've never said that you, personally, are afraid to have sex with a trans person. If this was personal, I know *I* wouldn't want to have sex with you even if you for some reason wanted to have it with me.

I get it if they clarify first. If they already have their mouth on my genitals or their penis in me, I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they want it.

This is the definition of slut shaming.....particularly sinc you keep referencing clubs and places where alcohol and drugs are common.


I would contend that me being called a "predator" and a "rapist" is more slut-shaming than me enjoying being a slut with someone else being a slut.


What? That makes no sense, and you know it makes no sense. Please make sense.


It makes sense because all I do is enjoy my sexuality by the same standards and practices reasonably assumable as everyone else, but I'm in the wrong for doing so.


They're calling you a predator. Not a slut. The distinction is so wide that I don't even know how they could be confused with each other.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42607 Posts
August 07 2013 22:49 GMT
#2612
On August 08 2013 07:47 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:46 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:43 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:41 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:37 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.


Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...


I fail to see the relation. "I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups" does not apply to rape by impersonation...


It's pretty simple. How could you potentially know that they would not consent to have sex with you, had they known that you were not the person you seemed to be? It's only a reasonable assumption, right?


Uhh... what? That's not what rape by impersonation is. What exactly do you mean "not the person you seemed to be"? How is the trans-person not the person they seemed to be? I don't understand. Please explain.

To people who want sex with cis people a trans person is impersonating a cis person. And it doesn't matter that the trans person is just a person because you don't get to decide someone else's criteria for consent for them. If they don't want to have sex with a trans person and you're a trans person then feel free to explain to them that they're dumb for making the distinction but do not not disclose.


How are they impersonating a cis person?

Because 99.99% of people are cis. People are not seen as possibly trans, probably cis. They're just seen as cis.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42607 Posts
August 07 2013 22:53 GMT
#2613
On August 08 2013 07:48 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:46 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:45 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:42 farvacola wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:40 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:36 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.

Stop painting me as someone afraid of sex with a trans person. I am not.

The numbers are a fact. It'd be easier for you if they weren't, but they are, and you know they are and it makes your behaviour inexcusable. There is a colossal imbalance in the information between the parties. Your partner knows that he shares criteria with, for the purpose of argument, 50% of people. You know you have a condition which affects roughly 0.01% of people. This means you are going into this with a 50% chance of violating someone if you do nothing whereas they are going into this with a 0.01% chance of being violated. If you know these numbers (hypothetical, just for the example) and you go "fuck it, that's their problem if they didn't want to have sex with a trans person", you're a predator. You know there is a reasonable chance that your partner does not want this but because you do want it you simply choose not to address that.

This isn't a "I shouldn't have to" or a "it's not fair" or anything else. Whining about how you shouldn't have to doesn't chance shit, you're not trying to tick boxes, you're trying to protect the individuals involved from something they do not want. This is a moral obligation.

Do you understand that sex with someone who doesn't want sex with you (but doesn't know) is a bad thing? Can you at least get that?


You're taking this too personally. I've never said that you, personally, are afraid to have sex with a trans person. If this was personal, I know *I* wouldn't want to have sex with you even if you for some reason wanted to have it with me.

I get it if they clarify first. If they already have their mouth on my genitals or their penis in me, I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they want it.

This is the definition of slut shaming.....particularly sinc you keep referencing clubs and places where alcohol and drugs are common.


I would contend that me being called a "predator" and a "rapist" is more slut-shaming than me enjoying being a slut with someone else being a slut.


What? That makes no sense, and you know it makes no sense. Please make sense.


It makes sense because all I do is enjoy my sexuality by the same standards and practices reasonably assumable as everyone else, but I'm in the wrong for doing so.

No. The standard I hold you to is universal. It's a standard I have built from fetish scenes in which predators are pretty common and do an awful lot of very rapey stuff. If you suspect the other person doesn't want you to do X then you check. If they're really headspaced and you have reason to doubt their answer then you ignore their yes and stop the scene anyway. You protect your partner.

You are in the wrong for doing it because you are acting like being trans isn't a big deal when to a lot of people it is. Those people still have rights. You can want to be cis all you want but you are not and never will be and for those people, that is an issue. You are in the wrong for having a predatory approach to those people. You lost the birth lottery, you were born trans and that sucks for you but that does not give you the right to go "if I wasn't trans this behaviour would be fine therefore it's fine". Those people have rights and you need to understand that and respect them.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
ComaDose
Profile Blog Joined December 2009
Canada10357 Posts
August 07 2013 22:54 GMT
#2614
On August 08 2013 07:37 maybenexttime wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:36 ComaDose wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:11 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:01 KwarK wrote:
I'm making assumptions based upon your reply. I explained how the behaviour was predatory and you then replied
I'll be doing what is conducive to my happiness, too. <3


The exact same "fuck them, I got mine, who cares if they didn't want it" mentality as the rest of the predators. So yes, I assume you're a predator because you have presented yourself as one. You don't get to then cry "you don't know me!", I know you from your posting, if a mistake was made then it was by you.

Unfortunately there is no surgery to make people pass as a decent human being. Instead you need lessons like "don't fuck people who don't wanna fuck" drilled into you by experience. This is what I'm trying to do to you.


Now you're suggesting an even more general concept of me not being a decent human being.

I'm sorry that your interpretation of reality isn't quite secure enough that you need to shore it up with ever-more grandiose negative labels.

My stance is that I refuse to be responsible for someone else's unrealities. Prejudice and bigotry are learned behaviors. Oddly enough, the common consensus is that prejudiced and bigoted person's feelings "should" (that magic word) be respected. Are prejudiced and bigoted people more qualifying as "decent human beings" than I am now?

The reality in the discussed topic is that someone enjoys a very real experience with someone else. However, the unreality of their learned prejudices and fears has so much more importance placed upon it that it can override and negate that enjoyment.

I am a predator because I prefer reality over imagination.

Cool. I can live with that.

See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.


Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...

well no. in that situation they are strangers


Or, in other words, not disclosing information upon which the consent hinges...

i dont think you can just equate rape by impersonation with not disclosing information upon which the consent may or may not hinge (even if it is reasonable to assume that it does) because one of them has intentional misleading.

also i wasn't saying that they were right i was just saying that you were wrong.
BW pros training sc2 is like kiss making a dub step album.
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
August 07 2013 22:55 GMT
#2615
On August 08 2013 07:49 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:47 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:46 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:43 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:41 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:37 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
[quote]

Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.


Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...


I fail to see the relation. "I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups" does not apply to rape by impersonation...


It's pretty simple. How could you potentially know that they would not consent to have sex with you, had they known that you were not the person you seemed to be? It's only a reasonable assumption, right?


Uhh... what? That's not what rape by impersonation is. What exactly do you mean "not the person you seemed to be"? How is the trans-person not the person they seemed to be? I don't understand. Please explain.

To people who want sex with cis people a trans person is impersonating a cis person. And it doesn't matter that the trans person is just a person because you don't get to decide someone else's criteria for consent for them. If they don't want to have sex with a trans person and you're a trans person then feel free to explain to them that they're dumb for making the distinction but do not not disclose.


How are they impersonating a cis person?

Because 99.99% of people are cis. People are not seen as possibly trans, probably cis. They're just seen as cis.


But they aren't impersonating someone different than themselves. It's obviously not the same thing.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42607 Posts
August 07 2013 22:57 GMT
#2616
On August 08 2013 07:55 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:49 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:47 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:46 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:43 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:41 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:37 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.


Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...


I fail to see the relation. "I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups" does not apply to rape by impersonation...


It's pretty simple. How could you potentially know that they would not consent to have sex with you, had they known that you were not the person you seemed to be? It's only a reasonable assumption, right?


Uhh... what? That's not what rape by impersonation is. What exactly do you mean "not the person you seemed to be"? How is the trans-person not the person they seemed to be? I don't understand. Please explain.

To people who want sex with cis people a trans person is impersonating a cis person. And it doesn't matter that the trans person is just a person because you don't get to decide someone else's criteria for consent for them. If they don't want to have sex with a trans person and you're a trans person then feel free to explain to them that they're dumb for making the distinction but do not not disclose.


How are they impersonating a cis person?

Because 99.99% of people are cis. People are not seen as possibly trans, probably cis. They're just seen as cis.


But they aren't impersonating someone different than themselves. It's obviously not the same thing.

Yes, and yet the other person assumes they are cis because 99.99% of people are cis. The other person got it wrong, they made an incorrect assumption and they don't know it. The trans person knows though, they know that the other person is assuming they're something they're not, and they choose to not disclose. It's impersonation.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-08-07 23:03:18
August 07 2013 23:01 GMT
#2617
On August 08 2013 07:57 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:55 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:49 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:47 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:46 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:43 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:41 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:37 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
[quote]

No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.


Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...


I fail to see the relation. "I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups" does not apply to rape by impersonation...


It's pretty simple. How could you potentially know that they would not consent to have sex with you, had they known that you were not the person you seemed to be? It's only a reasonable assumption, right?


Uhh... what? That's not what rape by impersonation is. What exactly do you mean "not the person you seemed to be"? How is the trans-person not the person they seemed to be? I don't understand. Please explain.

To people who want sex with cis people a trans person is impersonating a cis person. And it doesn't matter that the trans person is just a person because you don't get to decide someone else's criteria for consent for them. If they don't want to have sex with a trans person and you're a trans person then feel free to explain to them that they're dumb for making the distinction but do not not disclose.


How are they impersonating a cis person?

Because 99.99% of people are cis. People are not seen as possibly trans, probably cis. They're just seen as cis.


But they aren't impersonating someone different than themselves. It's obviously not the same thing.

Yes, and yet the other person assumes they are cis because 99.99% of people are cis. The other person got it wrong, they made an incorrect assumption and they don't know it. The trans person knows though, they know that the other person is assuming they're something they're not, and they choose to not disclose. It's impersonation.


But it's not like the person is different before and after you tell them. It's still the same person.

It's not like "Hi I'm George, let's have sex. *ugly bump* I'm actually FRED! Bwahaha!" That's impersonation. You're pretending to be another person.

It's more like "Hi I'm George, let's have sex. *ugly bump* I used to be GEORGIA! Still George, though."
maybenexttime
Profile Blog Joined November 2006
Poland5546 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-08-07 23:04:04
August 07 2013 23:02 GMT
#2618
On August 08 2013 07:54 ComaDose wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:37 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:36 ComaDose wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:29 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:19 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:17 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:14 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:11 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:01 KwarK wrote:
I'm making assumptions based upon your reply. I explained how the behaviour was predatory and you then replied
[quote]

The exact same "fuck them, I got mine, who cares if they didn't want it" mentality as the rest of the predators. So yes, I assume you're a predator because you have presented yourself as one. You don't get to then cry "you don't know me!", I know you from your posting, if a mistake was made then it was by you.

Unfortunately there is no surgery to make people pass as a decent human being. Instead you need lessons like "don't fuck people who don't wanna fuck" drilled into you by experience. This is what I'm trying to do to you.


Now you're suggesting an even more general concept of me not being a decent human being.

I'm sorry that your interpretation of reality isn't quite secure enough that you need to shore it up with ever-more grandiose negative labels.

My stance is that I refuse to be responsible for someone else's unrealities. Prejudice and bigotry are learned behaviors. Oddly enough, the common consensus is that prejudiced and bigoted person's feelings "should" (that magic word) be respected. Are prejudiced and bigoted people more qualifying as "decent human beings" than I am now?

The reality in the discussed topic is that someone enjoys a very real experience with someone else. However, the unreality of their learned prejudices and fears has so much more importance placed upon it that it can override and negate that enjoyment.

I am a predator because I prefer reality over imagination.

Cool. I can live with that.

See, this is it. This is why you're a predator. It's not that you don't know other people can have preferences which impact their consent with you, you simply think you know better, you just don't care.

It doesn't matter whether they're afraid that you're a man any more than it would matter if they were afraid you were a bear, if someone doesn't want to have sex with you then you don't get to make their decision for them. It's that fucking simple. You're a predator.


Bolded for emphasis. Who better knows ourselves than ourselves? Your reality is not mine. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter what you know. If someone doesn't want to have sex with you because they think you're a bear, even though it's a ridiculous assumption, you don't get to simply force yourself on them because you know you're not. How are you not getting this? You keep repeating "I know their criteria for consent better than they do", it's no different from "she said "no" but I knew she wanted it". Literally no different.


No, I don't know their criteria for consent because they haven't told me.

I will state, however, that if they are groping me and grinding their penis into my ass, it is not my responsibility to be the one who comes out of the moment to clarify that they know what they are doing.

I can't stress this enough: I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups.

The numbers can be invoked all you want. It's fundamentally dishonest and unequal to place the responsibility of determining a person's understanding and interpretation of reality on me especially when the determination of what is relevant and irrelevant is arbitrarily determined by each individual. If there is honest equality, each individual is responsible for declaring their own hangups.

"Reasonable assumption" has the same fallacies of "common sense."

My interest is reality. Your's is protecting your imagination.


Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...

well no. in that situation they are strangers


Or, in other words, not disclosing information upon which the consent hinges...

i dont think you can just equate rape by impersonation with not disclosing information upon which the consent may or may not hinge (even if it is reasonable to assume that it does) because one of them has intentional misleading.

also i wasn't saying that they were right i was just saying that you were wrong.


I am not equating them. That's why I said the same line of defense can be used for both. I did not say they are the same. But they are similar. One could argue that transsexual women doing everything to make themselves as indistinguishable from cis women is misleading. If the transsexual person is aware of the fact that many/most people would not want to have sex with them and does not disclose that piece of information, then that could be considered intentional misleading.

Anyway, the rape by impersonation also relies of assumptions. It's not clear whether they wouldn't have had sex with you, had they known. It's only assumed to be true. Maybe they were just attracted to you? After all, they consented, right?


On August 08 2013 08:01 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:57 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:55 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:49 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:47 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:46 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:43 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:41 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:37 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
[quote]

Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...


I fail to see the relation. "I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups" does not apply to rape by impersonation...


It's pretty simple. How could you potentially know that they would not consent to have sex with you, had they known that you were not the person you seemed to be? It's only a reasonable assumption, right?


Uhh... what? That's not what rape by impersonation is. What exactly do you mean "not the person you seemed to be"? How is the trans-person not the person they seemed to be? I don't understand. Please explain.

To people who want sex with cis people a trans person is impersonating a cis person. And it doesn't matter that the trans person is just a person because you don't get to decide someone else's criteria for consent for them. If they don't want to have sex with a trans person and you're a trans person then feel free to explain to them that they're dumb for making the distinction but do not not disclose.


How are they impersonating a cis person?

Because 99.99% of people are cis. People are not seen as possibly trans, probably cis. They're just seen as cis.


But they aren't impersonating someone different than themselves. It's obviously not the same thing.

Yes, and yet the other person assumes they are cis because 99.99% of people are cis. The other person got it wrong, they made an incorrect assumption and they don't know it. The trans person knows though, they know that the other person is assuming they're something they're not, and they choose to not disclose. It's impersonation.


But it's not like the person is different before and after you tell them. It's still the same person.

It's not like "Hi I'm George, let's have sex. *ugly bump* I'm actually FRED! Bwahaha!" That's impersonation. You're pretending to be another person.

It's more like "Hi I'm George, let's have sex. *ugly bump* I used to be GEORGIA!"


Hence "analogy". They are not exactly the same. The principle is very similar, however, if not the same.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42607 Posts
August 07 2013 23:04 GMT
#2619
On August 08 2013 08:01 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 07:57 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:55 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:49 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:47 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:46 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:43 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:41 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:37 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:
[quote]

Same reasoning can be applied to defend rape by impersonation...


I fail to see the relation. "I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups" does not apply to rape by impersonation...


It's pretty simple. How could you potentially know that they would not consent to have sex with you, had they known that you were not the person you seemed to be? It's only a reasonable assumption, right?


Uhh... what? That's not what rape by impersonation is. What exactly do you mean "not the person you seemed to be"? How is the trans-person not the person they seemed to be? I don't understand. Please explain.

To people who want sex with cis people a trans person is impersonating a cis person. And it doesn't matter that the trans person is just a person because you don't get to decide someone else's criteria for consent for them. If they don't want to have sex with a trans person and you're a trans person then feel free to explain to them that they're dumb for making the distinction but do not not disclose.


How are they impersonating a cis person?

Because 99.99% of people are cis. People are not seen as possibly trans, probably cis. They're just seen as cis.


But they aren't impersonating someone different than themselves. It's obviously not the same thing.

Yes, and yet the other person assumes they are cis because 99.99% of people are cis. The other person got it wrong, they made an incorrect assumption and they don't know it. The trans person knows though, they know that the other person is assuming they're something they're not, and they choose to not disclose. It's impersonation.


But it's not like the person is different before and after you tell them. It's still the same person.

It's not like "Hi I'm George, let's have sex. *ugly bump* I'm actually FRED! Bwahaha!" That's impersonation. You're pretending to be another person.

It's more like "Hi I'm George, let's have sex. *ugly bump* I used to be Georgia, by the way."

Again, the person assuming George was always George is getting it wrong, they are making a false assumption which is in no way the fault of the trans person.
However the trans person is aware this is happening (assuming they didn't meet in a trans bar) and then actively chooses not to correct them. At this point it's impersonation. The same way that if the twin was walking down the street and his brother's wife approached him he might not explicitly claim to be his brother but he knows that she's assuming he is.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
DoubleReed
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States4130 Posts
August 07 2013 23:05 GMT
#2620
On August 08 2013 08:04 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 08 2013 08:01 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:57 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:55 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:49 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:47 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:46 KwarK wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:43 DoubleReed wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:41 maybenexttime wrote:
On August 08 2013 07:37 DoubleReed wrote:
[quote]

I fail to see the relation. "I am not responsible for knowing someone else's hangups" does not apply to rape by impersonation...


It's pretty simple. How could you potentially know that they would not consent to have sex with you, had they known that you were not the person you seemed to be? It's only a reasonable assumption, right?


Uhh... what? That's not what rape by impersonation is. What exactly do you mean "not the person you seemed to be"? How is the trans-person not the person they seemed to be? I don't understand. Please explain.

To people who want sex with cis people a trans person is impersonating a cis person. And it doesn't matter that the trans person is just a person because you don't get to decide someone else's criteria for consent for them. If they don't want to have sex with a trans person and you're a trans person then feel free to explain to them that they're dumb for making the distinction but do not not disclose.


How are they impersonating a cis person?

Because 99.99% of people are cis. People are not seen as possibly trans, probably cis. They're just seen as cis.


But they aren't impersonating someone different than themselves. It's obviously not the same thing.

Yes, and yet the other person assumes they are cis because 99.99% of people are cis. The other person got it wrong, they made an incorrect assumption and they don't know it. The trans person knows though, they know that the other person is assuming they're something they're not, and they choose to not disclose. It's impersonation.


But it's not like the person is different before and after you tell them. It's still the same person.

It's not like "Hi I'm George, let's have sex. *ugly bump* I'm actually FRED! Bwahaha!" That's impersonation. You're pretending to be another person.

It's more like "Hi I'm George, let's have sex. *ugly bump* I used to be Georgia, by the way."

Again, the person assuming George was always George is getting it wrong, they are making a false assumption which is in no way the fault of the trans person.
However the trans person is aware this is happening (assuming they didn't meet in a trans bar) and then actively chooses not to correct them. At this point it's impersonation. The same way that if the twin was walking down the street and his brother's wife approached him he might not explicitly claim to be his brother but he knows that she's assuming he is.


Fred and George are twins from Harry Potter. That's exactly the distinction I was making.
Prev 1 129 130 131 132 133 149 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 1h 25m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nina 261
trigger 43
StarCraft: Brood War
BeSt 1722
Soma 286
Barracks 195
Larva 191
Backho 160
Dewaltoss 145
sorry 41
ajuk12(nOOB) 30
Sharp 21
Britney 0
Dota 2
ODPixel692
XcaliburYe593
League of Legends
JimRising 653
Super Smash Bros
Westballz33
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor155
Other Games
Fuzer 162
SortOf100
Happy40
Trikslyr23
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick2772
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 13 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH310
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota2189
League of Legends
• Stunt1188
Upcoming Events
CranKy Ducklings
1h 25m
Epic.LAN
3h 25m
CSO Contender
8h 25m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
1d 1h
Online Event
1d 7h
Esports World Cup
3 days
ByuN vs Astrea
Lambo vs HeRoMaRinE
Clem vs TBD
Solar vs Zoun
SHIN vs Reynor
Maru vs TriGGeR
herO vs Lancer
Cure vs ShoWTimE
Esports World Cup
4 days
Esports World Cup
5 days
Esports World Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational: ShowMatche
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

BSL 2v2 Season 3
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
CSL Xiamen Invitational
2025 ACS Season 2
Championship of Russia 2025
Underdog Cup #2
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.