|
On July 31 2013 06:44 IamPryda wrote:
I don't have a problem with calling a transgender what ever they want but what I would have a problem with is a teenage or younger transgender with a penis sharing a locker room with young girls and being told they have a right to be there and the privacy of everyone else means nothing
Yea, this usually never happens. It's mostly the other way around, trans person don't go there because they are scared of being harassed, insulted or worse.
|
On July 31 2013 06:45 theodorus12 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:36 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:32 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:28 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:21 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:13 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
I have a birth name and a nick name. I perfer the nick name, but it is not my legal, given name. People don't stand their and demand to call me by my birth name because its on my id card.
Its not a question of fact or forcing you to do something, it is just being polite and respectful. If someone asks you to refer to them as a woman or man, it is polite to do so. If you get that bent out of shape about it, I don't know what to tell you. Because I go by facts and not feelings. If someone is 200kg but feels skinny, I still wouldn't call him skinny. If someone dropped out of high school but wants to be called doctor I also wouldn't do that. So why exactly should I call a man, who still has a penis but feels like a women, a women? Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". So if i need to know if someone is overweight i can count on you to be accurate but if i want to know someones gender i can count on you being ignorant. No, you can count on me to use the actual meaning and not one that while heavily pushed by some people, is still wrong. On July 31 2013 06:28 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:21 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:13 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
I have a birth name and a nick name. I perfer the nick name, but it is not my legal, given name. People don't stand their and demand to call me by my birth name because its on my id card.
Its not a question of fact or forcing you to do something, it is just being polite and respectful. If someone asks you to refer to them as a woman or man, it is polite to do so. If you get that bent out of shape about it, I don't know what to tell you. Because I go by facts and not feelings. If someone is 200kg but feels skinny, I still wouldn't call him skinny. If someone dropped out of high school but wants to be called doctor I also wouldn't do that. So why exactly should I call a man, who still has a penis but feels like a women, a women? Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". And I don't mean it in an insulting way, but you're an ignorant asshole who doesn't have anything to contribute to this discussion. That's your opinion and I'm completely fine with it. Like I already said, I'm not the one going around telling people who they MUST see me and how not. On July 31 2013 06:30 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:21 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:13 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
I have a birth name and a nick name. I perfer the nick name, but it is not my legal, given name. People don't stand their and demand to call me by my birth name because its on my id card.
Its not a question of fact or forcing you to do something, it is just being polite and respectful. If someone asks you to refer to them as a woman or man, it is polite to do so. If you get that bent out of shape about it, I don't know what to tell you. Because I go by facts and not feelings. If someone is 200kg but feels skinny, I still wouldn't call him skinny. If someone dropped out of high school but wants to be called doctor I also wouldn't do that. So why exactly should I call a man, who still has a penis but feels like a women, a women? Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". But you wouldn't call them fat to their face, correct? Well this is the same thing. You KNOW they are a male, but that does not mean you NEED to use the word HE. You can say "she" and no one will be harmed. If you ask why, its for the same reason you don't call people fat to their face, because its inpolite. I would obviously call them fat if they asked me if they are fat or not..... I simply use the right word in the right context. There is no reason to say "lol you are fat", like there is no reason to say "lol you are a man". I will not go out of my way to insult anyone. But if the right context comes up, I will call them what they are... So basicly, you have no desire to hold down a job, like ever? Because this kind of honesty will get you fired for being an asshole. And god help you if you work with a person who is trans gender. I actually work part time for the same employer since my 2nd year in university. Maybe it's different where you live, but here honesty is actually something valued. Nah, I'm pretty sure you just don't act like this in public and only talk about this stuff on the internet. If faced with the prospect of being fired for calling someone by the gender you KNEW to be correct, you would just cave, call them what they wanted and keep your job. You are wrong. But still funny how this is what you have to resort to, it's a bit a funnier version of "lol you wouldn't say that to my face etc...."
you said you would call people who identified as women "he" in the work place to hold on to what you know as correct and true and that this is valued at your company. im pretty sure calling you out on it isn't resorting to something so much as pointing out that you're probably lying.
|
On July 31 2013 06:44 IamPryda wrote:
I don't have a problem with calling a transgender what ever they want but what I would have a problem with is a teenage or younger transgender with a penis sharing a locker room with young girls and being told they have a right to be there and the privacy of everyone else means nothing
I take it you're not a fan of unisex bathrooms...
|
On July 31 2013 06:45 mustache wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:42 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:39 Crushinator wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:37 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:25 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:18 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:08 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:04 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:00 maybenexttime wrote:
[quote]
Or you can simply choose not to accept the terminology the LGBT/feminist ideologists lobby for. Those definitions are not in any way objective, "gender studies" is not a scientific discipline, it's ideology being forced onto universities. So why don't you accept it anyway ? Is it so hard to not be an asshole and not insult trans people and gender variant people ? So calling people what they are and not what they feel like is being an asshole? Language evolves over time. Nowadays sex refers to biologically male or female and gender refers to gender identification. Since their gender identification is not dependent upon biological sex, telling someone they are not a particular gender when they identify with being that particular gender makes you an asshole, yes. On July 31 2013 06:09 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:06 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:03 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
Preference is an affinity for one characteristic over another. If the women are identical, they have no different characteristics. Making sense?
pref·er·ence /ˈpref(ə)rəns/ Noun A greater liking for one alternative over another or others. A thing preferred. I prefer the non trans woman to the alternative of the trans woman. Making fucking sense? Trans isn't a characteristic. It's not a thing. It just indicates a transition from one set of characteristics to another. It has absolutely no descriptive power about the current person standing in front of you. You seem to be struggling with basic definitions here. Struggling with basic definitions? This is becoming ridiculous. If presented with two options then I have an alternative. My hypothetical situation was two identical woman but 1. is trans 2. is not 1 /= 2 Therefore I have an alternative, therefore think about what you're saying to me before you say it. How do you not understand that is there is no "is trans." There's just: 1. is woman 2. is woman I think what you're trying to do here is imply that the trans woman will have some sort of emotional baggage or surgical scars and that is what you don't prefer...but those things aren't implied by the "trans" modifier. What you're actually saying is that you prefer someone who was a certain way in the past...even though their past has no consequences for who they are now (at least in the context of just banging them). You really don't understand how "this person changed" is not actually a characteristic of them but rather a description of how a old characteristic went away and new one came to be? I'm not going to be able to explain this any better. So if you're still confused, someone else is gonna have to take over. I think you just don't understand what trans actually means. I told you that if you presented me with two identical people except one of them is trans and the other isn't trans then I want the person who isn't trans. My sexual preferences are my own. You don't need to understand them, you don't need to rationalise them, all you need to do is respect them. But you have absolutely no way of knowing if one is trans. How can you act on a preference if you can't even identify it? Uhm, absolutely no way of knowing? what? You're implying that you can tell who is trans just by looking at them ? This is wrong. If you live a big city, you probably see a bunch of trans people everyday in public transit, and there's no way you'll be aware of who is trans unless you ask or they tells you. The example stated was almost identicall women, one trans one not. somehow making the assertion that you cant choose which one you prefer because you cant tell is rediculous because the example assumes one is trans and the other not.
It's not ridiculous. Simply stating a difference doesn't make it relevant to a choice. In order for it to actually be a choice you have to be able to identify the difference. We're saying this isn't even a choice to begin with because you can't identify the difference.
|
On July 31 2013 06:27 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:03 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:00 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:41 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 05:38 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 05:31 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 05:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:13 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 05:07 Reason wrote:
[quote]
You've actually undermined the point you're trying to communicate by saying this and I think you're being a little unreasonable about it too.
If someone who I view as fundamentally a man (regardless of his personal gender identification) gets an operation to remove his penis, he's still fundamentally a man as far as I'm concerned. I'm completely capable of understanding and respecting he might identify as a woman but that doesn't mean that I have to think of him as a woman myself or else I'm a total bastard. My personal relationship with gender roles and identities does not need to alter to accommodate other peoples beliefs, I just need to accept that some people view hold different beliefs and treat them accordingly.
If someone wants to view a trans person as a "woman with a penis" or a "man with no penis" they're perfectly entitled to do so if they respect that persons gender identity. If a woman with a large penis and adams apple came onto me and said "it's okay honey, I'm all woman" I'd be politely inclined to disagree and tell her I'm not interested and that's not disrespectful or bigoted or anything like that. If the same individual came onto me after they'd had their penis and adams apple removed and I don't give a fuck what else surgery they've had I'd react in the exact same way and that's entirely my choice and one I can make with a conscience clear of such negative terms. I'd refer to this individual as "she", however, if that's how they viewed themselves.
It's not weird at all that I don't want to have any contact with someone who's had a sex-change, what's weird is trying to pretend that it's not weird because they would be the first people to admit that it is. No it doesn't undermine my point. The person identifies as a woman. Having an operation to remove her penis doesn't change the way she identifies herself. Your flawed view has absolutely no bearing on them or their identity. Just because you're wrong about them doesn't mean they're suddenly different. How you react to them is your business and not relevant to the point your trying to make. I still think it's kinda weird that you'd be so hung up on a body that doesn't exist anymore but w/e (I think a lot of that comes from the fact that people don't realize how good the surgery and therapy is nowadays). Your reaction, opinion, understanding of the other person doesn't change who they are. And neither does surgery. If one considers oneself a woman but refuses to remove one's penis because one feels comfortable having one (or is simply undecided whether removing it is a good decision), then that person is clearly not a woman, and most likely has some serious mental issues. lol ? They are a lot of reason why a trans person wouldn't want that surgery. For one, it is fucking expensive, and unless that person has dysphoria regarding her or his genital, it won't help much with blending in with their gender because we don't look at genital to gender someone, we look at secondary sexual characteristic. There is also some risk, maintenance (dilating after surgery for a few hours each day). The result is not always perfect, and in the case of penis reconstruction, it's very limited. But really, don't talk about stuff like that if you have no idea what you're saying. So you really think, I should call someone a women, only because he feels like one but still has a penis? On July 31 2013 05:35 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 05:33 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 05:23 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 05:21 DinoMight wrote:
[quote]
"Man" and "Woman" are two terms created precisely to refer to people of different sexes. As in, that is why we invented these words.
If you're trying to explain a greater concept about how some males associate more with being females and vice versa, then you should say that. But as is, your post is stupid. "Penis" and "Vagina" are terms created to refer to people of different sexes. "Man" and "Woman" refer to different genders. What is the difference between your sex and your gender? Was not aware there was one. I thought the reason we have "male" and "female" was to distinguish between people who have penises and people who have vaginas. What's the purpose of having the terms man and woman when either can have either reproductive organ? What is then the basis for "man" or "woman?" I REALLY don't understand... so I'm asking for someone to englighten me, not comment on how poorly educated I am. Thanks. man and women are societal constructs about the different genders. male and female are sexes based on biology. You just defined that yourself? Because actually women is defined as a female human and men as a male human... No he didn't just define that himself. Do some reading before you start trying to tell people they are wrong when they're obviously more informed on the topic than you are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinctionSex is annotated as different from gender in the Oxford English Dictionary where it says sex "tends now to refer to biological differences, while . . . [gender] often refers to cultural or social ones.A working definition in use by the World Health Organization (WHO) for its work is that "'sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women" and that "'male' and 'female' are sex categories". Or you can simply choose not to accept the terminology the LGBT/feminist ideologists lobby for. Those definitions are not in any way objective, "gender studies" is not a scientific discipline, it's ideology being forced onto universities. "I can choose to ignore things I don't agree with and will call people what I want. If I want to call people men, even though they consider themselves a woman, I have that right. You can't make me do other wise" You are right sir, we can't stop you from being an asshole. If you want to be one, we have not ability to prevent you from doing it. However, we will call you an Asshole to our face, because its what you are. That's as if I called you a moron because you're, afaik, religious. But I don't consider people stupid simply because I disagree with their views. You can stoop that low for all I care, though. But its it what you are. Its fact. People asked you to call them a specific thing and you refuse to do so, knowing full well that they don't like it and its rude. That is what an ass hole is, someone who doesnt' care about other peoples feelings and does as they please. I am just calling you what you are.
Well, then you are being an asshole yourself. Welcome to the club. 
|
On July 31 2013 06:48 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:45 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 06:42 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:39 Crushinator wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:37 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:25 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:18 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:08 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:04 Shodaa wrote:
[quote]
So why don't you accept it anyway ? Is it so hard to not be an asshole and not insult trans people and gender variant people ? So calling people what they are and not what they feel like is being an asshole? Language evolves over time. Nowadays sex refers to biologically male or female and gender refers to gender identification. Since their gender identification is not dependent upon biological sex, telling someone they are not a particular gender when they identify with being that particular gender makes you an asshole, yes. On July 31 2013 06:09 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:06 Reason wrote:
[quote]
pref·er·ence
/ˈpref(ə)rəns/
Noun
A greater liking for one alternative over another or others.
A thing preferred.
I prefer the non trans woman to the alternative of the trans woman.
Making fucking sense? Trans isn't a characteristic. It's not a thing. It just indicates a transition from one set of characteristics to another. It has absolutely no descriptive power about the current person standing in front of you. You seem to be struggling with basic definitions here. Struggling with basic definitions? This is becoming ridiculous. If presented with two options then I have an alternative. My hypothetical situation was two identical woman but 1. is trans 2. is not 1 /= 2 Therefore I have an alternative, therefore think about what you're saying to me before you say it. How do you not understand that is there is no "is trans." There's just: 1. is woman 2. is woman I think what you're trying to do here is imply that the trans woman will have some sort of emotional baggage or surgical scars and that is what you don't prefer...but those things aren't implied by the "trans" modifier. What you're actually saying is that you prefer someone who was a certain way in the past...even though their past has no consequences for who they are now (at least in the context of just banging them). You really don't understand how "this person changed" is not actually a characteristic of them but rather a description of how a old characteristic went away and new one came to be? I'm not going to be able to explain this any better. So if you're still confused, someone else is gonna have to take over. I think you just don't understand what trans actually means. I told you that if you presented me with two identical people except one of them is trans and the other isn't trans then I want the person who isn't trans. My sexual preferences are my own. You don't need to understand them, you don't need to rationalise them, all you need to do is respect them. But you have absolutely no way of knowing if one is trans. How can you act on a preference if you can't even identify it? Uhm, absolutely no way of knowing? what? You're implying that you can tell who is trans just by looking at them ? This is wrong. If you live a big city, you probably see a bunch of trans people everyday in public transit, and there's no way you'll be aware of who is trans unless you ask or they tells you. The example stated was almost identicall women, one trans one not. somehow making the assertion that you cant choose which one you prefer because you cant tell is rediculous because the example assumes one is trans and the other not. It's not ridiculous. Simply stating a difference doesn't make it relevant to a choice. In order for it to actually be a choice you have to be able to identify the difference. We're saying this isn't even a choice to begin with because you can't identify the difference.
So this is just a very stupid hypothetical?
|
On July 31 2013 06:47 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:45 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:36 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:32 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:28 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:21 theodorus12 wrote:
[quote]
Because I go by facts and not feelings. If someone is 200kg but feels skinny, I still wouldn't call him skinny. If someone dropped out of high school but wants to be called doctor I also wouldn't do that. So why exactly should I call a man, who still has a penis but feels like a women, a women?
Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". So if i need to know if someone is overweight i can count on you to be accurate but if i want to know someones gender i can count on you being ignorant. No, you can count on me to use the actual meaning and not one that while heavily pushed by some people, is still wrong. On July 31 2013 06:28 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:21 theodorus12 wrote:
[quote]
Because I go by facts and not feelings. If someone is 200kg but feels skinny, I still wouldn't call him skinny. If someone dropped out of high school but wants to be called doctor I also wouldn't do that. So why exactly should I call a man, who still has a penis but feels like a women, a women?
Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". And I don't mean it in an insulting way, but you're an ignorant asshole who doesn't have anything to contribute to this discussion. That's your opinion and I'm completely fine with it. Like I already said, I'm not the one going around telling people who they MUST see me and how not. On July 31 2013 06:30 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:21 theodorus12 wrote:
[quote]
Because I go by facts and not feelings. If someone is 200kg but feels skinny, I still wouldn't call him skinny. If someone dropped out of high school but wants to be called doctor I also wouldn't do that. So why exactly should I call a man, who still has a penis but feels like a women, a women?
Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". But you wouldn't call them fat to their face, correct? Well this is the same thing. You KNOW they are a male, but that does not mean you NEED to use the word HE. You can say "she" and no one will be harmed. If you ask why, its for the same reason you don't call people fat to their face, because its inpolite. I would obviously call them fat if they asked me if they are fat or not..... I simply use the right word in the right context. There is no reason to say "lol you are fat", like there is no reason to say "lol you are a man". I will not go out of my way to insult anyone. But if the right context comes up, I will call them what they are... So basicly, you have no desire to hold down a job, like ever? Because this kind of honesty will get you fired for being an asshole. And god help you if you work with a person who is trans gender. I actually work part time for the same employer since my 2nd year in university. Maybe it's different where you live, but here honesty is actually something valued. Nah, I'm pretty sure you just don't act like this in public and only talk about this stuff on the internet. If faced with the prospect of being fired for calling someone by the gender you KNEW to be correct, you would just cave, call them what they wanted and keep your job. You are wrong. But still funny how this is what you have to resort to, it's a bit a funnier version of "lol you wouldn't say that to my face etc...." you said you would call people who identified as women "he" in the work place to hold on to what you know as correct and true and that this is valued at your company. im pretty sure calling you out on it isn't resorting to something so much as pointing out that you're probably lying.
And yes, that is what I would do, call them what they are. Because everything else is lying.
Calling me out on it is pointless since he can't prove it's not true, just like the " you woudn't say that to my face"...
|
On July 31 2013 06:45 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:17 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:16 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:51 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 05:47 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 05:39 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 05:36 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 05:13 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 05:07 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 04:46 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
Even outside of gender reassignment most of us owe the bodies we have to surgery in some form or another. Were you circumcised? Had your appendix removed? Your tonsils removed?
Operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person. You can scream difference all you want but finding meaningful differences will be a challenging task.
And it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore. The body they have now is their body. You're scared of a shadow.
You've actually undermined the point you're trying to communicate by saying this and I think you're being a little unreasonable about it too. If someone who I view as fundamentally a man (regardless of his personal gender identification) gets an operation to remove his penis, he's still fundamentally a man as far as I'm concerned. I'm completely capable of understanding and respecting he might identify as a woman but that doesn't mean that I have to think of him as a woman myself or else I'm a total bastard. My personal relationship with gender roles and identities does not need to alter to accommodate other peoples beliefs, I just need to accept that some people view hold different beliefs and treat them accordingly. If someone wants to view a trans person as a "woman with a penis" or a "man with no penis" they're perfectly entitled to do so if they respect that persons gender identity. If a woman with a large penis and adams apple came onto me and said "it's okay honey, I'm all woman" I'd be politely inclined to disagree and tell her I'm not interested and that's not disrespectful or bigoted or anything like that. If the same individual came onto me after they'd had their penis and adams apple removed and I don't give a fuck what else surgery they've had I'd react in the exact same way and that's entirely my choice and one I can make with a conscience clear of such negative terms. I'd refer to this individual as "she", however, if that's how they viewed themselves. It's not weird at all that I don't want to have any contact with someone who's had a sex-change, what's weird is trying to pretend that it's not weird because they would be the first people to admit that it is. No it doesn't undermine my point. The person identifies as a woman. Having an operation to remove her penis doesn't change the way she identifies herself. Your flawed view has absolutely no bearing on them or their identity. Just because you're wrong about them doesn't mean they're suddenly different. How you react to them is your business and not relevant to the point your trying to make. I still think it's kinda weird that you'd be so hung up on a body that doesn't exist anymore but w/e (I think a lot of that comes from the fact that people don't realize how good the surgery and therapy is nowadays). Your reaction, opinion, understanding of the other person doesn't change who they are. And neither does surgery. I'm referring to when you said "it's weird that you would be disturbed by their previous body because that body doesn't exist anymore." It definitely does undermine that point because saying "that body doesn't exist anymore" has less impact as a statement here after acknowledging "operating on a body doesn't fundamentally change a person" ... if you're disturbed by a man who identifies as a woman you're equally entitled to be disturbed by a man who identifies as a woman then undergoes surgery so saying it's "weird" to be disturbed by that is obviously flawed, not only by your own admission. I agree with the following and I haven't said anything to the contrary. "Your reaction, opinion, understanding of the other person doesn't change who they are. And neither does surgery." So it's not the surgery that bothers you...it's the fact that they're trans at all? Yes that is correct. If you presented me with two identical women that I'm attracted to physically but one is trans and the other isn't I'm going to want to want to become involved with only the non trans woman. This is not weird or wrong, my own sexual preferences are my own business and I'm fairly certain the majority of heterosexual males would feel exactly the same way. If you wish to construct a poll asking this question then be my guest. On July 31 2013 05:45 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 05:35 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 05:33 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 05:23 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 05:21 DinoMight wrote:
[quote]
"Man" and "Woman" are two terms created precisely to refer to people of different sexes. As in, that is why we invented these words.
If you're trying to explain a greater concept about how some males associate more with being females and vice versa, then you should say that. But as is, your post is stupid. "Penis" and "Vagina" are terms created to refer to people of different sexes. "Man" and "Woman" refer to different genders. What is the difference between your sex and your gender? Was not aware there was one. I thought the reason we have "male" and "female" was to distinguish between people who have penises and people who have vaginas. What's the purpose of having the terms man and woman when either can have either reproductive organ? What is then the basis for "man" or "woman?" I REALLY don't understand... so I'm asking for someone to englighten me, not comment on how poorly educated I am. Thanks. man and women are societal constructs about the different genders. male and female are sexes based on biology. I don't agree. Webster's dictionary defines "man" as: "an adult male human." Male is defined as: "an individual that produces small usually motile gametes (as spermatozoa or spermatozoids) which fertilize the eggs of a female" Maybe what you're trying to say is that some men associate more with the societal norms and expectations traditionally associated with women. But as it is you're making up definitions for words and confusing people (and making it extremely difficult to write about the transgender topic in terms of semantics, regardless of one's opinion). I think the word you are looking for here is "gender identity." Also, I demand an apology for calling me stupid and poorly educated, as clearly the dictionary is on my side! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinctionSex is annotated as different from gender in the Oxford English Dictionary where it says sex "tends now to refer to biological differences, while . . . [gender] often refers to cultural or social ones. A working definition in use by the World Health Organization (WHO) for its work is that "'sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women" and that "'male' and 'female' are sex categories". Get with the times. If the women are identical then you can't claim preference. Preference isn't academic. If you can't tell a difference between the two unless one tells you she's trans...then your preferences aren't a play, your ill conceived notions of what trans means are at play. Just because you can't tell the difference unless outright told about the fact doesn't mean it's not a justified reason to be disturbed by the fact once you learn about it. E.g. I would consider having sex with a prostitute, especially unprotected (if we were in a relationship and she hid that from me), disgusting. Why would you ever we worried about that? Why would anyone? Also, don't have sex with prostitutes. You seem to have trouble understanding abstract examples (or either are trying to be witty/funny). I explained to him/her how it's possible to be disturbed by partaking in something as intimate as sex with someone having a certain characteristic which is not immediately visible or even tangible. This is a perfectly sound analogy. In neither case can you know that fact. And if that person tells you about it post factum, e.g. once you've got into a relationship, then you have every right to be disturbed by that characteristic, even though you did not know about it while having sex. In other words, claiming that if you can't tell the difference, the difference is meaningless/is not there is flawed reasoning.
And I am telling you right now that if your dating someone and you get to the point of intimate and they haven't informed you that they are/were a man, thats a relationship issue. You have more to fear from sexually transmitted diseases.
Also, get better examples. Having unprotected sex with a prostitute is not a good example of anything except poor decision making.
|
On July 31 2013 06:51 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:27 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:03 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:00 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:41 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 05:38 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 05:31 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 05:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:13 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
No it doesn't undermine my point. The person identifies as a woman. Having an operation to remove her penis doesn't change the way she identifies herself. Your flawed view has absolutely no bearing on them or their identity. Just because you're wrong about them doesn't mean they're suddenly different.
How you react to them is your business and not relevant to the point your trying to make. I still think it's kinda weird that you'd be so hung up on a body that doesn't exist anymore but w/e (I think a lot of that comes from the fact that people don't realize how good the surgery and therapy is nowadays). Your reaction, opinion, understanding of the other person doesn't change who they are. And neither does surgery. If one considers oneself a woman but refuses to remove one's penis because one feels comfortable having one (or is simply undecided whether removing it is a good decision), then that person is clearly not a woman, and most likely has some serious mental issues. lol ? They are a lot of reason why a trans person wouldn't want that surgery. For one, it is fucking expensive, and unless that person has dysphoria regarding her or his genital, it won't help much with blending in with their gender because we don't look at genital to gender someone, we look at secondary sexual characteristic. There is also some risk, maintenance (dilating after surgery for a few hours each day). The result is not always perfect, and in the case of penis reconstruction, it's very limited. But really, don't talk about stuff like that if you have no idea what you're saying. So you really think, I should call someone a women, only because he feels like one but still has a penis? On July 31 2013 05:35 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 05:33 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 05:23 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
"Penis" and "Vagina" are terms created to refer to people of different sexes. "Man" and "Woman" refer to different genders. What is the difference between your sex and your gender? Was not aware there was one. I thought the reason we have "male" and "female" was to distinguish between people who have penises and people who have vaginas. What's the purpose of having the terms man and woman when either can have either reproductive organ? What is then the basis for "man" or "woman?" I REALLY don't understand... so I'm asking for someone to englighten me, not comment on how poorly educated I am. Thanks. man and women are societal constructs about the different genders. male and female are sexes based on biology. You just defined that yourself? Because actually women is defined as a female human and men as a male human... No he didn't just define that himself. Do some reading before you start trying to tell people they are wrong when they're obviously more informed on the topic than you are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinctionSex is annotated as different from gender in the Oxford English Dictionary where it says sex "tends now to refer to biological differences, while . . . [gender] often refers to cultural or social ones.A working definition in use by the World Health Organization (WHO) for its work is that "'sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women" and that "'male' and 'female' are sex categories". Or you can simply choose not to accept the terminology the LGBT/feminist ideologists lobby for. Those definitions are not in any way objective, "gender studies" is not a scientific discipline, it's ideology being forced onto universities. "I can choose to ignore things I don't agree with and will call people what I want. If I want to call people men, even though they consider themselves a woman, I have that right. You can't make me do other wise" You are right sir, we can't stop you from being an asshole. If you want to be one, we have not ability to prevent you from doing it. However, we will call you an Asshole to our face, because its what you are. That's as if I called you a moron because you're, afaik, religious. But I don't consider people stupid simply because I disagree with their views. You can stoop that low for all I care, though. But its it what you are. Its fact. People asked you to call them a specific thing and you refuse to do so, knowing full well that they don't like it and its rude. That is what an ass hole is, someone who doesnt' care about other peoples feelings and does as they please. I am just calling you what you are. Well, then you are being an asshole yourself. Welcome to the club.
Nope, I am polite, respectful person to those who respect me and others. I can't be lumped in with people like yourself.
|
On July 31 2013 06:51 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:48 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:45 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 06:42 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:39 Crushinator wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:37 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:25 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:18 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:08 theodorus12 wrote:
[quote]
So calling people what they are and not what they feel like is being an asshole? Language evolves over time. Nowadays sex refers to biologically male or female and gender refers to gender identification. Since their gender identification is not dependent upon biological sex, telling someone they are not a particular gender when they identify with being that particular gender makes you an asshole, yes. On July 31 2013 06:09 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
Trans isn't a characteristic. It's not a thing. It just indicates a transition from one set of characteristics to another. It has absolutely no descriptive power about the current person standing in front of you. You seem to be struggling with basic definitions here.
Struggling with basic definitions? This is becoming ridiculous. If presented with two options then I have an alternative. My hypothetical situation was two identical woman but 1. is trans 2. is not 1 /= 2 Therefore I have an alternative, therefore think about what you're saying to me before you say it. How do you not understand that is there is no "is trans." There's just: 1. is woman 2. is woman I think what you're trying to do here is imply that the trans woman will have some sort of emotional baggage or surgical scars and that is what you don't prefer...but those things aren't implied by the "trans" modifier. What you're actually saying is that you prefer someone who was a certain way in the past...even though their past has no consequences for who they are now (at least in the context of just banging them). You really don't understand how "this person changed" is not actually a characteristic of them but rather a description of how a old characteristic went away and new one came to be? I'm not going to be able to explain this any better. So if you're still confused, someone else is gonna have to take over. I think you just don't understand what trans actually means. I told you that if you presented me with two identical people except one of them is trans and the other isn't trans then I want the person who isn't trans. My sexual preferences are my own. You don't need to understand them, you don't need to rationalise them, all you need to do is respect them. But you have absolutely no way of knowing if one is trans. How can you act on a preference if you can't even identify it? Uhm, absolutely no way of knowing? what? You're implying that you can tell who is trans just by looking at them ? This is wrong. If you live a big city, you probably see a bunch of trans people everyday in public transit, and there's no way you'll be aware of who is trans unless you ask or they tells you. The example stated was almost identicall women, one trans one not. somehow making the assertion that you cant choose which one you prefer because you cant tell is rediculous because the example assumes one is trans and the other not. It's not ridiculous. Simply stating a difference doesn't make it relevant to a choice. In order for it to actually be a choice you have to be able to identify the difference. We're saying this isn't even a choice to begin with because you can't identify the difference. So this is just a very stupid hypothetical?
A very dumb one yes.
|
On July 31 2013 06:51 theodorus12 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:47 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:45 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:36 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:32 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:28 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". So if i need to know if someone is overweight i can count on you to be accurate but if i want to know someones gender i can count on you being ignorant. No, you can count on me to use the actual meaning and not one that while heavily pushed by some people, is still wrong. On July 31 2013 06:28 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". And I don't mean it in an insulting way, but you're an ignorant asshole who doesn't have anything to contribute to this discussion. That's your opinion and I'm completely fine with it. Like I already said, I'm not the one going around telling people who they MUST see me and how not. On July 31 2013 06:30 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". But you wouldn't call them fat to their face, correct? Well this is the same thing. You KNOW they are a male, but that does not mean you NEED to use the word HE. You can say "she" and no one will be harmed. If you ask why, its for the same reason you don't call people fat to their face, because its inpolite. I would obviously call them fat if they asked me if they are fat or not..... I simply use the right word in the right context. There is no reason to say "lol you are fat", like there is no reason to say "lol you are a man". I will not go out of my way to insult anyone. But if the right context comes up, I will call them what they are... So basicly, you have no desire to hold down a job, like ever? Because this kind of honesty will get you fired for being an asshole. And god help you if you work with a person who is trans gender. I actually work part time for the same employer since my 2nd year in university. Maybe it's different where you live, but here honesty is actually something valued. Nah, I'm pretty sure you just don't act like this in public and only talk about this stuff on the internet. If faced with the prospect of being fired for calling someone by the gender you KNEW to be correct, you would just cave, call them what they wanted and keep your job. You are wrong. But still funny how this is what you have to resort to, it's a bit a funnier version of "lol you wouldn't say that to my face etc...." you said you would call people who identified as women "he" in the work place to hold on to what you know as correct and true and that this is valued at your company. im pretty sure calling you out on it isn't resorting to something so much as pointing out that you're probably lying. And yes, that is what I would do, call them what they are. Because everything else is lying. Calling me out on it is pointless since he can't prove it's not true, just like the " you woudn't say that to my face"...
well he was just letting you know that this isn't appropriate anymore and you should catch up to modern humans
EDIT: or you will get fired! there is no way an employer values you making someone else uncomfortable by referring to them by the opposite gender they identify with.
also its not lying what you are doing is lying because gender and sex are different things.
|
On July 31 2013 06:38 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:37 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:25 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:18 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:08 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:04 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:00 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:41 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 05:38 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 05:31 Shodaa wrote:
[quote]
lol ? They are a lot of reason why a trans person wouldn't want that surgery. For one, it is fucking expensive, and unless that person has dysphoria regarding her or his genital, it won't help much with blending in with their gender because we don't look at genital to gender someone, we look at secondary sexual characteristic. There is also some risk, maintenance (dilating after surgery for a few hours each day). The result is not always perfect, and in the case of penis reconstruction, it's very limited.
But really, don't talk about stuff like that if you have no idea what you're saying. So you really think, I should call someone a women, only because he feels like one but still has a penis? On July 31 2013 05:35 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]
man and women are societal constructs about the different genders.
male and female are sexes based on biology. You just defined that yourself? Because actually women is defined as a female human and men as a male human... No he didn't just define that himself. Do some reading before you start trying to tell people they are wrong when they're obviously more informed on the topic than you are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinctionSex is annotated as different from gender in the Oxford English Dictionary where it says sex "tends now to refer to biological differences, while . . . [gender] often refers to cultural or social ones.A working definition in use by the World Health Organization (WHO) for its work is that "'sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women" and that "'male' and 'female' are sex categories". Or you can simply choose not to accept the terminology the LGBT/feminist ideologists lobby for. Those definitions are not in any way objective, "gender studies" is not a scientific discipline, it's ideology being forced onto universities. So why don't you accept it anyway ? Is it so hard to not be an asshole and not insult trans people and gender variant people ? So calling people what they are and not what they feel like is being an asshole? Language evolves over time. Nowadays sex refers to biologically male or female and gender refers to gender identification. Since their gender identification is not dependent upon biological sex, telling someone they are not a particular gender when they identify with being that particular gender makes you an asshole, yes. On July 31 2013 06:09 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:06 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:03 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:02 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 05:51 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 05:47 Reason wrote:[quote] Yes that is correct. If you presented me with two identical women that I'm attracted to physically but one is trans and the other isn't I'm going to want to want to become involved with only the non trans woman. This is not weird or wrong, my own sexual preferences are my own business and I'm fairly certain the majority of heterosexual males would feel exactly the same way. If you wish to construct a poll asking this question then be my guest. [quote] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinctionSex is annotated as different from gender in the Oxford English Dictionary where it says sex "tends now to refer to biological differences, while . . . [gender] often refers to cultural or social ones. A working definition in use by the World Health Organization (WHO) for its work is that "'sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women" and that "'male' and 'female' are sex categories". Get with the times. If the women are identical then you can't claim preference. Preference isn't academic. If you can't tell a difference between the two unless one tells you she's trans...then your preferences aren't a play, your ill conceived notions of what trans means are at play. Firstly, tell me what my notions of the meaning of trans are. Secondly, explain how they are ill conceived. Thirdly, explain how my sexual preferences are somehow independent from these notions. Alternatively you could just accept that my sexual preferences include a preference for non trans people whether that's distinguishable in your mind or not, it is in mine. Please manage to do this before you come ever closer to outright insulting me for my sexual preferences in a thread dedicated to the discussion of LGBT rights if you haven't already crossed that line. Preference isn't academic? Do you think I'm an animal? Preference is an affinity for one characteristic over another. If the women are identical, they have no different characteristics. Making sense? pref·er·ence /ˈpref(ə)rəns/ Noun A greater liking for one alternative over another or others. A thing preferred. I prefer the non trans woman to the alternative of the trans woman. Making fucking sense? Trans isn't a characteristic. It's not a thing. It just indicates a transition from one set of characteristics to another. It has absolutely no descriptive power about the current person standing in front of you. You seem to be struggling with basic definitions here. Struggling with basic definitions? This is becoming ridiculous. If presented with two options then I have an alternative. My hypothetical situation was two identical woman but 1. is trans 2. is not 1 /= 2 Therefore I have an alternative, therefore think about what you're saying to me before you say it. How do you not understand that is there is no "is trans." There's just: 1. is woman 2. is woman I think what you're trying to do here is imply that the trans woman will have some sort of emotional baggage or surgical scars and that is what you don't prefer...but those things aren't implied by the "trans" modifier. What you're actually saying is that you prefer someone who was a certain way in the past...even though their past has no consequences for who they are now (at least in the context of just banging them). You really don't understand how "this person changed" is not actually a characteristic of them but rather a description of how a old characteristic went away and new one came to be? I'm not going to be able to explain this any better. So if you're still confused, someone else is gonna have to take over. I think you just don't understand what trans actually means. I told you that if you presented me with two identical people except one of them is trans and the other isn't trans then I want the person who isn't trans. My sexual preferences are my own. You don't need to understand them, you don't need to rationalise them, all you need to do is respect them. But you have absolutely no way of knowing if one is trans. How can you act on a preference if you can't even identify it? I have trouble respecting this because you're claiming a difference that just really doesn't exist and basing it on "preference" when in reality your hormones have absolutely no way to distinguish between the two...especially if they look identical. It sounds like veiled transphobia. Particularly if you're only looking to bang one of these chicks.
Of course I can't act on a preference if I can't identify it, that doesn't mean that I don't have the preference.
If you are presented with two identical women but one supports the same political party as you and the other doesn't then perhaps you would prefer the one with the same views because you have something in common. Perhaps you would prefer the other one because opposites attract. Perhaps political orientation plays no part in your sexual preferences. That's your business.
You can't identify this difference at a glance but it exists and it's possible that you have a preference.
Is it so difficult for you to understand that I might have a preference if the person I'm about to have sex with is a trans person or not?
|
On July 31 2013 06:48 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:45 mustache wrote:On July 31 2013 06:42 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:39 Crushinator wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:37 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:25 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:18 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 06:08 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:04 Shodaa wrote:
[quote]
So why don't you accept it anyway ? Is it so hard to not be an asshole and not insult trans people and gender variant people ? So calling people what they are and not what they feel like is being an asshole? Language evolves over time. Nowadays sex refers to biologically male or female and gender refers to gender identification. Since their gender identification is not dependent upon biological sex, telling someone they are not a particular gender when they identify with being that particular gender makes you an asshole, yes. On July 31 2013 06:09 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:06 Reason wrote:
[quote]
pref·er·ence
/ˈpref(ə)rəns/
Noun
A greater liking for one alternative over another or others.
A thing preferred.
I prefer the non trans woman to the alternative of the trans woman.
Making fucking sense? Trans isn't a characteristic. It's not a thing. It just indicates a transition from one set of characteristics to another. It has absolutely no descriptive power about the current person standing in front of you. You seem to be struggling with basic definitions here. Struggling with basic definitions? This is becoming ridiculous. If presented with two options then I have an alternative. My hypothetical situation was two identical woman but 1. is trans 2. is not 1 /= 2 Therefore I have an alternative, therefore think about what you're saying to me before you say it. How do you not understand that is there is no "is trans." There's just: 1. is woman 2. is woman I think what you're trying to do here is imply that the trans woman will have some sort of emotional baggage or surgical scars and that is what you don't prefer...but those things aren't implied by the "trans" modifier. What you're actually saying is that you prefer someone who was a certain way in the past...even though their past has no consequences for who they are now (at least in the context of just banging them). You really don't understand how "this person changed" is not actually a characteristic of them but rather a description of how a old characteristic went away and new one came to be? I'm not going to be able to explain this any better. So if you're still confused, someone else is gonna have to take over. I think you just don't understand what trans actually means. I told you that if you presented me with two identical people except one of them is trans and the other isn't trans then I want the person who isn't trans. My sexual preferences are my own. You don't need to understand them, you don't need to rationalise them, all you need to do is respect them. But you have absolutely no way of knowing if one is trans. How can you act on a preference if you can't even identify it? Uhm, absolutely no way of knowing? what? You're implying that you can tell who is trans just by looking at them ? This is wrong. If you live a big city, you probably see a bunch of trans people everyday in public transit, and there's no way you'll be aware of who is trans unless you ask or they tells you. The example stated was almost identicall women, one trans one not. somehow making the assertion that you cant choose which one you prefer because you cant tell is rediculous because the example assumes one is trans and the other not. It's not ridiculous. Simply stating a difference doesn't make it relevant to a choice. In order for it to actually be a choice you have to be able to identify the difference. We're saying this isn't even a choice to begin with because you can't identify the difference.
two identical women, one is a murderer (insert whatever here) the other is not. which one would you prefer to be with? you cant tell which is which therefore it isnt relevant. you cant identify the difference.
|
On July 31 2013 06:53 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:51 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:47 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:45 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:36 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:32 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:28 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:
[quote]
I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he".
So if i need to know if someone is overweight i can count on you to be accurate but if i want to know someones gender i can count on you being ignorant. No, you can count on me to use the actual meaning and not one that while heavily pushed by some people, is still wrong. On July 31 2013 06:28 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:
[quote]
I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he".
And I don't mean it in an insulting way, but you're an ignorant asshole who doesn't have anything to contribute to this discussion. That's your opinion and I'm completely fine with it. Like I already said, I'm not the one going around telling people who they MUST see me and how not. On July 31 2013 06:30 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:
[quote]
I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he".
But you wouldn't call them fat to their face, correct? Well this is the same thing. You KNOW they are a male, but that does not mean you NEED to use the word HE. You can say "she" and no one will be harmed. If you ask why, its for the same reason you don't call people fat to their face, because its inpolite. I would obviously call them fat if they asked me if they are fat or not..... I simply use the right word in the right context. There is no reason to say "lol you are fat", like there is no reason to say "lol you are a man". I will not go out of my way to insult anyone. But if the right context comes up, I will call them what they are... So basicly, you have no desire to hold down a job, like ever? Because this kind of honesty will get you fired for being an asshole. And god help you if you work with a person who is trans gender. I actually work part time for the same employer since my 2nd year in university. Maybe it's different where you live, but here honesty is actually something valued. Nah, I'm pretty sure you just don't act like this in public and only talk about this stuff on the internet. If faced with the prospect of being fired for calling someone by the gender you KNEW to be correct, you would just cave, call them what they wanted and keep your job. You are wrong. But still funny how this is what you have to resort to, it's a bit a funnier version of "lol you wouldn't say that to my face etc...." you said you would call people who identified as women "he" in the work place to hold on to what you know as correct and true and that this is valued at your company. im pretty sure calling you out on it isn't resorting to something so much as pointing out that you're probably lying. And yes, that is what I would do, call them what they are. Because everything else is lying. Calling me out on it is pointless since he can't prove it's not true, just like the " you woudn't say that to my face"... well he was just letting you know that this isn't appropriate anymore and you should catch up to modern humans
So in your world, lying, just not to hurt the feelings of someone is appropriate?
Good to know that you are the authority on "modern humans".
|
On July 31 2013 06:56 theodorus12 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:53 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:51 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:47 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:45 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:36 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:32 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:28 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]
So if i need to know if someone is overweight i can count on you to be accurate but if i want to know someones gender i can count on you being ignorant. No, you can count on me to use the actual meaning and not one that while heavily pushed by some people, is still wrong. On July 31 2013 06:28 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
And I don't mean it in an insulting way, but you're an ignorant asshole who doesn't have anything to contribute to this discussion. That's your opinion and I'm completely fine with it. Like I already said, I'm not the one going around telling people who they MUST see me and how not. On July 31 2013 06:30 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
But you wouldn't call them fat to their face, correct? Well this is the same thing. You KNOW they are a male, but that does not mean you NEED to use the word HE. You can say "she" and no one will be harmed. If you ask why, its for the same reason you don't call people fat to their face, because its inpolite. I would obviously call them fat if they asked me if they are fat or not..... I simply use the right word in the right context. There is no reason to say "lol you are fat", like there is no reason to say "lol you are a man". I will not go out of my way to insult anyone. But if the right context comes up, I will call them what they are... So basicly, you have no desire to hold down a job, like ever? Because this kind of honesty will get you fired for being an asshole. And god help you if you work with a person who is trans gender. I actually work part time for the same employer since my 2nd year in university. Maybe it's different where you live, but here honesty is actually something valued. Nah, I'm pretty sure you just don't act like this in public and only talk about this stuff on the internet. If faced with the prospect of being fired for calling someone by the gender you KNEW to be correct, you would just cave, call them what they wanted and keep your job. You are wrong. But still funny how this is what you have to resort to, it's a bit a funnier version of "lol you wouldn't say that to my face etc...." you said you would call people who identified as women "he" in the work place to hold on to what you know as correct and true and that this is valued at your company. im pretty sure calling you out on it isn't resorting to something so much as pointing out that you're probably lying. And yes, that is what I would do, call them what they are. Because everything else is lying. Calling me out on it is pointless since he can't prove it's not true, just like the " you woudn't say that to my face"... well he was just letting you know that this isn't appropriate anymore and you should catch up to modern humans So in your world, lying, just not to hurt the feelings of someone is appropriate? Good to know that you are the authority on what defines a "modern human". :D
best strawman yet.
i think you would be lying by calling someone that identifies as a woman a he.
EDIT: pretty sure trans-phobia is a bit of a dated view too, im not the authority on it.
|
On July 31 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:38 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:04 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:00 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:41 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 05:38 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 05:31 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 05:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:13 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 05:07 Reason wrote:
[quote]
You've actually undermined the point you're trying to communicate by saying this and I think you're being a little unreasonable about it too.
If someone who I view as fundamentally a man (regardless of his personal gender identification) gets an operation to remove his penis, he's still fundamentally a man as far as I'm concerned. I'm completely capable of understanding and respecting he might identify as a woman but that doesn't mean that I have to think of him as a woman myself or else I'm a total bastard. My personal relationship with gender roles and identities does not need to alter to accommodate other peoples beliefs, I just need to accept that some people view hold different beliefs and treat them accordingly.
If someone wants to view a trans person as a "woman with a penis" or a "man with no penis" they're perfectly entitled to do so if they respect that persons gender identity. If a woman with a large penis and adams apple came onto me and said "it's okay honey, I'm all woman" I'd be politely inclined to disagree and tell her I'm not interested and that's not disrespectful or bigoted or anything like that. If the same individual came onto me after they'd had their penis and adams apple removed and I don't give a fuck what else surgery they've had I'd react in the exact same way and that's entirely my choice and one I can make with a conscience clear of such negative terms. I'd refer to this individual as "she", however, if that's how they viewed themselves.
It's not weird at all that I don't want to have any contact with someone who's had a sex-change, what's weird is trying to pretend that it's not weird because they would be the first people to admit that it is. No it doesn't undermine my point. The person identifies as a woman. Having an operation to remove her penis doesn't change the way she identifies herself. Your flawed view has absolutely no bearing on them or their identity. Just because you're wrong about them doesn't mean they're suddenly different. How you react to them is your business and not relevant to the point your trying to make. I still think it's kinda weird that you'd be so hung up on a body that doesn't exist anymore but w/e (I think a lot of that comes from the fact that people don't realize how good the surgery and therapy is nowadays). Your reaction, opinion, understanding of the other person doesn't change who they are. And neither does surgery. If one considers oneself a woman but refuses to remove one's penis because one feels comfortable having one (or is simply undecided whether removing it is a good decision), then that person is clearly not a woman, and most likely has some serious mental issues. lol ? They are a lot of reason why a trans person wouldn't want that surgery. For one, it is fucking expensive, and unless that person has dysphoria regarding her or his genital, it won't help much with blending in with their gender because we don't look at genital to gender someone, we look at secondary sexual characteristic. There is also some risk, maintenance (dilating after surgery for a few hours each day). The result is not always perfect, and in the case of penis reconstruction, it's very limited. But really, don't talk about stuff like that if you have no idea what you're saying. So you really think, I should call someone a women, only because he feels like one but still has a penis? On July 31 2013 05:35 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 05:33 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 05:23 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 05:21 DinoMight wrote:
[quote]
"Man" and "Woman" are two terms created precisely to refer to people of different sexes. As in, that is why we invented these words.
If you're trying to explain a greater concept about how some males associate more with being females and vice versa, then you should say that. But as is, your post is stupid. "Penis" and "Vagina" are terms created to refer to people of different sexes. "Man" and "Woman" refer to different genders. What is the difference between your sex and your gender? Was not aware there was one. I thought the reason we have "male" and "female" was to distinguish between people who have penises and people who have vaginas. What's the purpose of having the terms man and woman when either can have either reproductive organ? What is then the basis for "man" or "woman?" I REALLY don't understand... so I'm asking for someone to englighten me, not comment on how poorly educated I am. Thanks. man and women are societal constructs about the different genders. male and female are sexes based on biology. You just defined that yourself? Because actually women is defined as a female human and men as a male human... No he didn't just define that himself. Do some reading before you start trying to tell people they are wrong when they're obviously more informed on the topic than you are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinctionSex is annotated as different from gender in the Oxford English Dictionary where it says sex "tends now to refer to biological differences, while . . . [gender] often refers to cultural or social ones.A working definition in use by the World Health Organization (WHO) for its work is that "'sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women" and that "'male' and 'female' are sex categories". Or you can simply choose not to accept the terminology the LGBT/feminist ideologists lobby for. Those definitions are not in any way objective, "gender studies" is not a scientific discipline, it's ideology being forced onto universities. So why don't you accept it anyway ? Is it so hard to not be an asshole and not insult trans people and gender variant people ? How exactly am I being an asshole? Like I said, I would consider an actually transsexual person (because there are people with mental illnesses who consider themselves of the opposite sex; afaik, you can't get a sex-change surgery based solely on your will, you have to be diagnosed as transsexual by a doctor of medicine/psychiatrist) whatever sex/gender they consider themselves. I would, however, not refer to a man who dresses as a woman a "woman" simply because he so fancies. After a certain point doing whatever is possible in order not to potentially offend someone gets absurd. If you're white I'm not going to call you white simply because that's what you identify yourself as, even if you're Eminem. whoa.... "actually" transsexual person? instead of those fake trans persons? being transexual is a mental illness?.... whoa you're scaring me man. its like you're going backwards in time.
Can you actually read? Not everyone who considers himself/herself of the opposite sex does so because of a brain structure not matching his/her genitals. Sometimes it's a mental thing.
|
On July 31 2013 06:56 theodorus12 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:53 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:51 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:47 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:45 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:36 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:32 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:28 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]
So if i need to know if someone is overweight i can count on you to be accurate but if i want to know someones gender i can count on you being ignorant. No, you can count on me to use the actual meaning and not one that while heavily pushed by some people, is still wrong. On July 31 2013 06:28 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
And I don't mean it in an insulting way, but you're an ignorant asshole who doesn't have anything to contribute to this discussion. That's your opinion and I'm completely fine with it. Like I already said, I'm not the one going around telling people who they MUST see me and how not. On July 31 2013 06:30 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
But you wouldn't call them fat to their face, correct? Well this is the same thing. You KNOW they are a male, but that does not mean you NEED to use the word HE. You can say "she" and no one will be harmed. If you ask why, its for the same reason you don't call people fat to their face, because its inpolite. I would obviously call them fat if they asked me if they are fat or not..... I simply use the right word in the right context. There is no reason to say "lol you are fat", like there is no reason to say "lol you are a man". I will not go out of my way to insult anyone. But if the right context comes up, I will call them what they are... So basicly, you have no desire to hold down a job, like ever? Because this kind of honesty will get you fired for being an asshole. And god help you if you work with a person who is trans gender. I actually work part time for the same employer since my 2nd year in university. Maybe it's different where you live, but here honesty is actually something valued. Nah, I'm pretty sure you just don't act like this in public and only talk about this stuff on the internet. If faced with the prospect of being fired for calling someone by the gender you KNEW to be correct, you would just cave, call them what they wanted and keep your job. You are wrong. But still funny how this is what you have to resort to, it's a bit a funnier version of "lol you wouldn't say that to my face etc...." you said you would call people who identified as women "he" in the work place to hold on to what you know as correct and true and that this is valued at your company. im pretty sure calling you out on it isn't resorting to something so much as pointing out that you're probably lying. And yes, that is what I would do, call them what they are. Because everything else is lying. Calling me out on it is pointless since he can't prove it's not true, just like the " you woudn't say that to my face"... well he was just letting you know that this isn't appropriate anymore and you should catch up to modern humans So in your world, lying, just not to hurt the feelings of someone is appropriate? Good to know that you are the authority on what defines a "modern human". :D
Thing is you're the one lying.
I am transgender, I am a woman, I don't care if you're too delusional to not recognize it.
|
On July 31 2013 06:51 theodorus12 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:47 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:45 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:42 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:40 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:36 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:32 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:28 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". So if i need to know if someone is overweight i can count on you to be accurate but if i want to know someones gender i can count on you being ignorant. No, you can count on me to use the actual meaning and not one that while heavily pushed by some people, is still wrong. On July 31 2013 06:28 Klondikebar wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". And I don't mean it in an insulting way, but you're an ignorant asshole who doesn't have anything to contribute to this discussion. That's your opinion and I'm completely fine with it. Like I already said, I'm not the one going around telling people who they MUST see me and how not. On July 31 2013 06:30 Plansix wrote:On July 31 2013 06:26 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:24 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Because they asked you to? If a coworked asked you not to call them "fat", even though they were, woud you do it? This isn't a fact vs feelings thing. This is about being civil. I don't mean it in an insulting way, I wouldn't call anyone out for being fat. But if I were asked, "is your co worker fat?" I would say yes. The same way I would refer to a man with a penis as "he". But you wouldn't call them fat to their face, correct? Well this is the same thing. You KNOW they are a male, but that does not mean you NEED to use the word HE. You can say "she" and no one will be harmed. If you ask why, its for the same reason you don't call people fat to their face, because its inpolite. I would obviously call them fat if they asked me if they are fat or not..... I simply use the right word in the right context. There is no reason to say "lol you are fat", like there is no reason to say "lol you are a man". I will not go out of my way to insult anyone. But if the right context comes up, I will call them what they are... So basicly, you have no desire to hold down a job, like ever? Because this kind of honesty will get you fired for being an asshole. And god help you if you work with a person who is trans gender. I actually work part time for the same employer since my 2nd year in university. Maybe it's different where you live, but here honesty is actually something valued. Nah, I'm pretty sure you just don't act like this in public and only talk about this stuff on the internet. If faced with the prospect of being fired for calling someone by the gender you KNEW to be correct, you would just cave, call them what they wanted and keep your job. You are wrong. But still funny how this is what you have to resort to, it's a bit a funnier version of "lol you wouldn't say that to my face etc...." you said you would call people who identified as women "he" in the work place to hold on to what you know as correct and true and that this is valued at your company. im pretty sure calling you out on it isn't resorting to something so much as pointing out that you're probably lying. And yes, that is what I would do, call them what they are. Because everything else is lying. Calling me out on it is pointless since he can't prove it's not true, just like the " you woudn't say that to my face"...
And we are pointing out that we don't believe you and know you would want to keep your job, avoid getting beating up or having your girlfriend break up with you because your being a jerk. You can act like you would take the high road all you want on the internet, but I don't think you are going to back it up when it could have a negative effect on your life.
|
On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:40 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:38 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:04 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 06:00 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:41 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 05:38 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 05:31 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 05:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 05:13 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
No it doesn't undermine my point. The person identifies as a woman. Having an operation to remove her penis doesn't change the way she identifies herself. Your flawed view has absolutely no bearing on them or their identity. Just because you're wrong about them doesn't mean they're suddenly different.
How you react to them is your business and not relevant to the point your trying to make. I still think it's kinda weird that you'd be so hung up on a body that doesn't exist anymore but w/e (I think a lot of that comes from the fact that people don't realize how good the surgery and therapy is nowadays). Your reaction, opinion, understanding of the other person doesn't change who they are. And neither does surgery. If one considers oneself a woman but refuses to remove one's penis because one feels comfortable having one (or is simply undecided whether removing it is a good decision), then that person is clearly not a woman, and most likely has some serious mental issues. lol ? They are a lot of reason why a trans person wouldn't want that surgery. For one, it is fucking expensive, and unless that person has dysphoria regarding her or his genital, it won't help much with blending in with their gender because we don't look at genital to gender someone, we look at secondary sexual characteristic. There is also some risk, maintenance (dilating after surgery for a few hours each day). The result is not always perfect, and in the case of penis reconstruction, it's very limited. But really, don't talk about stuff like that if you have no idea what you're saying. So you really think, I should call someone a women, only because he feels like one but still has a penis? On July 31 2013 05:35 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 05:33 DinoMight wrote:On July 31 2013 05:23 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
"Penis" and "Vagina" are terms created to refer to people of different sexes. "Man" and "Woman" refer to different genders. What is the difference between your sex and your gender? Was not aware there was one. I thought the reason we have "male" and "female" was to distinguish between people who have penises and people who have vaginas. What's the purpose of having the terms man and woman when either can have either reproductive organ? What is then the basis for "man" or "woman?" I REALLY don't understand... so I'm asking for someone to englighten me, not comment on how poorly educated I am. Thanks. man and women are societal constructs about the different genders. male and female are sexes based on biology. You just defined that yourself? Because actually women is defined as a female human and men as a male human... No he didn't just define that himself. Do some reading before you start trying to tell people they are wrong when they're obviously more informed on the topic than you are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinctionSex is annotated as different from gender in the Oxford English Dictionary where it says sex "tends now to refer to biological differences, while . . . [gender] often refers to cultural or social ones.A working definition in use by the World Health Organization (WHO) for its work is that "'sex refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women" and that "'male' and 'female' are sex categories". Or you can simply choose not to accept the terminology the LGBT/feminist ideologists lobby for. Those definitions are not in any way objective, "gender studies" is not a scientific discipline, it's ideology being forced onto universities. So why don't you accept it anyway ? Is it so hard to not be an asshole and not insult trans people and gender variant people ? How exactly am I being an asshole? Like I said, I would consider an actually transsexual person (because there are people with mental illnesses who consider themselves of the opposite sex; afaik, you can't get a sex-change surgery based solely on your will, you have to be diagnosed as transsexual by a doctor of medicine/psychiatrist) whatever sex/gender they consider themselves. I would, however, not refer to a man who dresses as a woman a "woman" simply because he so fancies. After a certain point doing whatever is possible in order not to potentially offend someone gets absurd. If you're white I'm not going to call you white simply because that's what you identify yourself as, even if you're Eminem. whoa.... "actually" transsexual person? instead of those fake trans persons? being transexual is a mental illness?.... whoa you're scaring me man. its like you're going backwards in time. Can you actually read? Not everyone who considers himself/herself of the opposite sex does so because of a brain structure not matching his/her genitals. Sometimes it's a mental thing.
and your point is that this makes them a fake transexual person or did i missunderstand?
EDIT: or more directly you said that these are not "actual" transsexual persons?
|
On July 31 2013 06:46 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:44 IamPryda wrote:
I don't have a problem with calling a transgender what ever they want but what I would have a problem with is a teenage or younger transgender with a penis sharing a locker room with young girls and being told they have a right to be there and the privacy of everyone else means nothing In general this does not happen and people shouldn't be worried about it. You are more likely to have an issue with boys sneaking into to girls locker room to look at them in their underpants.
There was just a case where a 12 year old transgendered parents sued a school for making there child use a solo bathroom to change for gym class and use the bathroom instead of allowing her to use the girls room and won. I just think that while gay/transgender rights are important of shouldn't infringe on other peoples right to privacy and safety
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
