|
On July 31 2013 06:52 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:51 maybenexttime wrote: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:
[quote]
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:
[quote]
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.
Well, you're putting words into my mouth, twisting what I'm saying out of context, making patronizing and "witty" remarks regarding my posts and calling me an asshole. You clearly are one, haha, moreso than me, apparently.
|
On July 31 2013 07:10 IamPryda wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:02 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:00 IamPryda wrote:On July 31 2013 06:46 Plansix wrote: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 How are other people right being infringe ? What is so wrong with a trans girl going in a washroom with stall to pee ? The females in the lockerroom complained they didn't feel comfartable getting changed in front a boy. You wouldn't force that same boy who identifies as a female to get dressed in boys locker room or does it not work both ways?
Yea, in case of locker room, its best to avoid them if you're pre transistion. Both of them.
|
On July 31 2013 07:10 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:07 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 07:03 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 07:00 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:57 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:56 theodorus12 wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Please just stop, it makes no sense at all. So would it also be lying to call a fat person that identifies as skinny, fat? You please just stop, it makes no sense at all. They ARE a woman. they ARE fat. why are you talking about whats between their legs to choose their pronoun? Because a women is generally defined as a female human, so I really don't see the need to call a born male with a penis, a women. You do realise that female human isn't actually a definition of woman right? They are synonyms. Terms that mean the same. I would call a trans woman a female human. Because the terms are equivalent.
A woman /ˈwʊmən/, pl: women /ˈwɪmɨn/ is a female human.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women
Of course you could go and find some meta gender new sciences definition, but the one posted by me is the one that the majority uses.
|
On July 31 2013 07:10 babylon wrote:
Internet 101: don't attempt to educate those who do not display the willingness to be open-minded enough to learn.
Internet 101: don't attempt to persuade those who do not display the willingness to be persuaded that your beliefs are better than theirs.
Fixed.
|
On July 31 2013 07:07 theodorus12 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:03 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 07:00 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:57 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:56 theodorus12 wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Please just stop, it makes no sense at all. So would it also be lying to call a fat person that identifies as skinny, fat? You please just stop, it makes no sense at all. They ARE a woman. they ARE fat. why are you talking about whats between their legs to choose their pronoun? Because a women is generally defined as a female human, so I really don't see the need to call a born male with a penis, a women. Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:04 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:03 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 Plansix 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:
[quote]
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. You are free to believe whatever you want, still doesn't make it right. Maybe we live in different places, but people here generally don't consider being honest as being a jerk. You're not honest, you're just transphobic and unwilling to learn. I'm not transphobic at all, I support them to have equal rights like everyone else rtc. But it's also my right to call them what they actually are and not what they want to be.
"I am not racist, I support them to have equal rights like everyone else. But it's also my right to call nigger if I want"
Best way to spot transphobia: switch gender with race.
|
On July 31 2013 07:14 theodorus12 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:10 Crushinator wrote:On July 31 2013 07:07 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 07:03 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 07:00 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:57 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:56 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:53 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:51 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:47 ComaDose wrote:
[quote]
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. Please just stop, it makes no sense at all. So would it also be lying to call a fat person that identifies as skinny, fat? You please just stop, it makes no sense at all. They ARE a woman. they ARE fat. why are you talking about whats between their legs to choose their pronoun? Because a women is generally defined as a female human, so I really don't see the need to call a born male with a penis, a women. You do realise that female human isn't actually a definition of woman right? They are synonyms. Terms that mean the same. I would call a trans woman a female human. Because the terms are equivalent. A woman /ˈwʊmən/, pl: women /ˈwɪmɨn/ is a female human. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WomenOf course you could go and find some meta gender new sciences definition, but the one posted by me is the one that the majority uses.
I don't even know what to say to this. This is pointless. I hope you get banned soon.
|
On July 31 2013 07:15 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:07 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 07:03 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 07:00 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:57 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:56 theodorus12 wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Please just stop, it makes no sense at all. So would it also be lying to call a fat person that identifies as skinny, fat? You please just stop, it makes no sense at all. They ARE a woman. they ARE fat. why are you talking about whats between their legs to choose their pronoun? Because a women is generally defined as a female human, so I really don't see the need to call a born male with a penis, a women. On July 31 2013 07:04 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:03 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 Plansix 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:
[quote]
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. You are free to believe whatever you want, still doesn't make it right. Maybe we live in different places, but people here generally don't consider being honest as being a jerk. You're not honest, you're just transphobic and unwilling to learn. I'm not transphobic at all, I support them to have equal rights like everyone else rtc. But it's also my right to call them what they actually are and not what they want to be. "I am not racist, I support them to have equal rights like everyone else. But it's also my right to call nigger if I want" Best way to spot transphobia: switch gender with race.
That's actually a very small minded way.
Nigger is a derogatory term, while man is not. If I were asked whether a black person is black or white, I would say black.
If I am asked wheter a born male with a penis is a man, even tho he sees himself as a women, I would answer men.
On July 31 2013 07:17 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:14 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 07:10 Crushinator wrote:On July 31 2013 07:07 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 07:03 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 07:00 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:57 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:56 theodorus12 wrote:On July 31 2013 06:53 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:51 theodorus12 wrote:
[quote]
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. Please just stop, it makes no sense at all. So would it also be lying to call a fat person that identifies as skinny, fat? You please just stop, it makes no sense at all. They ARE a woman. they ARE fat. why are you talking about whats between their legs to choose their pronoun? Because a women is generally defined as a female human, so I really don't see the need to call a born male with a penis, a women. You do realise that female human isn't actually a definition of woman right? They are synonyms. Terms that mean the same. I would call a trans woman a female human. Because the terms are equivalent. A woman /ˈwʊmən/, pl: women /ˈwɪmɨn/ is a female human. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WomenOf course you could go and find some meta gender new sciences definition, but the one posted by me is the one that the majority uses. I don't even know what to say to this. This is pointless. I hope you get banned soon.
"You don't agree with me and posted a credible source please get banned".
Cute
|
On July 31 2013 07:03 babylon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:53 Reason 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:On July 31 2013 05:41 Reason wrote:[quote] 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:
[quote]
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? Conflating sexual attraction with other factors. You would be sexually attracted to both women if they are both identical (except one is trans and the other isn't, even if you can't tell), but given more information, you'd prefer to be with the cis woman for whatever reason (i.e. lack of trust, desire for children, desire for no baggage, etc.). I admittedly do not know how your brain works re: sexual attraction, but my understanding is that for most people it works on a physical level, which may/may not be augmented based on other factors (e.g. emotional, intellectual, etc.). But if you don't know the difference, then the trans factor honestly wouldn't come into play. I don't mean to dictate any of this to you -- I don't believe in telling people, oh, they should be attracted to X or Y, there are plenty of reasons why someone would not want to be with a trans person -- just trying to explain a bit.
I'm not conflating anything.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_attraction
Sexual attraction is attraction on the basis of sexual desire or the quality of arousing such interest. Sexual attractiveness or sex appeal refers to an individual's ability to attract the sexual or erotic interest of another person, and is a factor in sexual selection or mate choice. The attraction can be to the physical or other qualities or traits of a person, or to such qualities in the context in which they appear. The attraction may be to a person's looks or movements or to their voice or smell, besides other factors. The attraction may be enhanced by a person's adornments, clothing, perfume, hair length and style, and anything else which can attract the sexual interest of another person. It can also be influenced by individual genetic, psychological, or cultural factors, or to other, more amorphous qualities of the person. Sexual attraction is also a response to another person that depends on a combination of the person possessing the traits and also on the criteria of the person who is attracted.
|
On July 31 2013 07:15 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:10 babylon wrote:
Internet 101: don't attempt to educate those who do not display the willingness to be open-minded enough to learn. Internet 101: don't attempt to persuade those who do not display the willingness to be persuaded that your beliefs are better than theirs. Fixed.
Eh, I've had some pretty fruitful discussions with people I disagree with. You just both need to put in the effort to remain civil and intelligent.
|
On July 31 2013 07:19 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:03 babylon wrote:On July 31 2013 06:53 Reason 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? 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? Conflating sexual attraction with other factors. You would be sexually attracted to both women if they are both identical (except one is trans and the other isn't, even if you can't tell), but given more information, you'd prefer to be with the cis woman for whatever reason (i.e. lack of trust, desire for children, desire for no baggage, etc.). I admittedly do not know how your brain works re: sexual attraction, but my understanding is that for most people it works on a physical level, which may/may not be augmented based on other factors (e.g. emotional, intellectual, etc.). But if you don't know the difference, then the trans factor honestly wouldn't come into play. I don't mean to dictate any of this to you -- I don't believe in telling people, oh, they should be attracted to X or Y, there are plenty of reasons why someone would not want to be with a trans person -- just trying to explain a bit. I'm not conflating anything. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_attractionSexual attraction is attraction on the basis of sexual desire or the quality of arousing such interest. Sexual attractiveness or sex appeal refers to an individual's ability to attract the sexual or erotic interest of another person, and is a factor in sexual selection or mate choice. The attraction can be to the physical or other qualities or traits of a person, or to such qualities in the context in which they appear. The attraction may be to a person's looks or movements or to their voice or smell, besides other factors. The attraction may be enhanced by a person's adornments, clothing, perfume, hair length and style, and anything else which can attract the sexual interest of another person . It can also be influenced by individual genetic, psychological, or cultural factors, or to other, more amorphous qualities of the person. Sexual attraction is also a response to another person that depends on a combination of the person possessing the traits and also on the criteria of the person who is attracted.
I'm asking you, not Wikipedia. Sexual attraction is different for different people. When you see a 10/10 (on your scale, whatever that is), would you sleep with her?
EDIT: I should rephrase that to "would you feel the desire to sleep with her?" Attraction is not action.
|
On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote: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:
[quote]
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:
[quote]
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?
Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment.
There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you.
|
On July 31 2013 07:18 theodorus12 wrote:
"You don't agree with me and posted a credible source please get banned".
Cute
From your source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women#Biology_and_gender
Biological factors are not sufficient determinants of which gender a person identifies with. Intersex individuals, who have mixed physical and/or genetic features, may use other criteria in making a clear determination. According to a study done at Brown University, 1.7 percent births are of intersex babies. At that rate, if 300,000 babies were born, 5,100 would have varying degrees of intersexual development. However, at birth, these babies were assigned a gender based on their genitalia. In some cases even if a child had XX chromosomes, if they were born with a penis, they were raised as a male.[20] There are also transgender or transsexual women, who were born or physically assigned as male at birth, but identify as women; there are varying social, legal and individual definitions with regard to these issues. (See trans woman.)
Maybe you should read them first.
|
On July 31 2013 07:26 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:18 theodorus12 wrote:
"You don't agree with me and posted a credible source please get banned".
Cute From your source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women#Biology_and_genderBiological factors are not sufficient determinants of which gender a person identifies with. Intersex individuals, who have mixed physical and/or genetic features, may use other criteria in making a clear determination. According to a study done at Brown University, 1.7 percent births are of intersex babies. At that rate, if 300,000 babies were born, 5,100 would have varying degrees of intersexual development. However, at birth, these babies were assigned a gender based on their genitalia. In some cases even if a child had XX chromosomes, if they were born with a penis, they were raised as a male.[20] There are also transgender or transsexual women, who were born or physically assigned as male at birth, but identify as women; there are varying social, legal and individual definitions with regard to these issues. (See trans woman.) Maybe you should read them first.
I read that, however I don't care what they "identify with" but with what they actually are.
|
On July 31 2013 07:00 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:53 Reason 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:On July 31 2013 05:41 Reason wrote:[quote] 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:
[quote]
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? Except that you can never identify the difference. It doesn't exist in any practical way. If you could never identify the political parties of your hookups then yeah, your political preferences in women would be pretty damn stupid too. It's difficult for me to understand because you're essentially claiming that you don't want to have sex with a trans person while having absolutely no way of identifying a trans person. If you can't even tell them apart from someone who was born a woman, then what's guiding that preference? The only possibility is transphobia since there's no actual difference between the women.
What's so hard to understand? I may not want to have sex/be in a relationship with a former prostitute despite having absolutely no way of identifying the fact that she used to be one. That's perfectly reasonable. Even though she is not one, I may find it disturbing that she used to. Why can't the same apply to transsexual people?
Also, I don't think anybody who doesn't accept the terminology used by certain ideologists will care that you label him/her as transphobic. It's a made up term, used to demean people who disagree with your ideology.
|
On July 31 2013 07:24 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote: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:
[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 ? 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? Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment. There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you.
So you're an expert on trans issue ?
There is a BIG difference between being transgender and being disillusioned into thinking your Elvis/Nappeleon/whatever.
Trans people are FULLY aware of what they look like physically. This is gender dysphoria, which is characterized by depression, pain, low self esteem. If not treated, this can lead to suicide.
As far as I know, delusionnal people don't have Elvis or Nappoleon dysphoria.
|
On July 31 2013 07:31 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote: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:
[quote]
So you really think, I should call someone a women, only because he feels like one but still has a penis?
[quote]
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? Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment. There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you. So you're an expert on trans issue ? There is a BIG difference between being transgender and being disillusioned into thinking your Elvis/Nappeleon/whatever. Trans people are FULLY aware of what they look like physically. This is gender dysphoria, which is characterized by depression, pain, low self esteem. If not treated, this can lead to suicide. As far as I know, delusionnal people don't have Elvis or Nappoleon dysphoria.
No, I'm not an expert (neither are you, from what I can tell), but I'm knowledgable enough to know that there's a glaring difference between being actually transsexual (which has to do with brain structure) and having a mental illness that makes you identify as the opposite sex.
|
On July 31 2013 07:24 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote: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:
[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 ? 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? Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment. There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you.
I think it is possible that people with other issues may get confused and think that gender issues are at the root of their mental issues, while they are not. I believe this isn't unheard of. Is this what you mean? Cos you put it very strangely.
|
On July 31 2013 07:23 babylon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:19 Reason wrote:On July 31 2013 07:03 babylon wrote:On July 31 2013 06:53 Reason 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? 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? Conflating sexual attraction with other factors. You would be sexually attracted to both women if they are both identical (except one is trans and the other isn't, even if you can't tell), but given more information, you'd prefer to be with the cis woman for whatever reason (i.e. lack of trust, desire for children, desire for no baggage, etc.). I admittedly do not know how your brain works re: sexual attraction, but my understanding is that for most people it works on a physical level, which may/may not be augmented based on other factors (e.g. emotional, intellectual, etc.). But if you don't know the difference, then the trans factor honestly wouldn't come into play. I don't mean to dictate any of this to you -- I don't believe in telling people, oh, they should be attracted to X or Y, there are plenty of reasons why someone would not want to be with a trans person -- just trying to explain a bit. I'm not conflating anything. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_attractionSexual attraction is attraction on the basis of sexual desire or the quality of arousing such interest. Sexual attractiveness or sex appeal refers to an individual's ability to attract the sexual or erotic interest of another person, and is a factor in sexual selection or mate choice. The attraction can be to the physical or other qualities or traits of a person, or to such qualities in the context in which they appear. The attraction may be to a person's looks or movements or to their voice or smell, besides other factors. The attraction may be enhanced by a person's adornments, clothing, perfume, hair length and style, and anything else which can attract the sexual interest of another person . It can also be influenced by individual genetic, psychological, or cultural factors, or to other, more amorphous qualities of the person. Sexual attraction is also a response to another person that depends on a combination of the person possessing the traits and also on the criteria of the person who is attracted. I'm asking you, not Wikipedia. Sexual attraction is different for different people. When you see a 10/10 (on your scale, whatever that is), would you sleep with her? EDIT: I should rephrase that to "would you feel the desire to sleep with her?" Attraction is not action.
You accused me of conflating sexual attraction with other factors and instead of just replying "you're wrong" I decided to quote wikipedia to back up my assertion that you're wrong. If you disagree with my interpretation of that passage or my own understanding of sexual attraction then please, explain, but there's no need to act like a smartass. Physical attraction is *part* of sexual attraction.
Although I've made this abundantly clear but haven't stated it directly allow me to do so now; if I see a person who is a 10/10 on my scale and isn't identifiable as a trans person then yes obviously I would feel a desire to sleep with her, just like I would feel a desire to sleep with an attractive five dollar hooker with aids before finding out some more information about her.
Yes I would be equally attracted physically to a trans woman and a non trans woman if they looked identical but that goes without saying.
When I find out that the person is trans I might even still have sex with this person, I don't know as I've never been faced with this situation and I'm certainly not repulsed by trans people nor am I a transphobe, I simply have the preference that they not be trans. Faced with the choice, I'd prefer not trans to trans.
On July 31 2013 07:00 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 06:53 Reason 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:On July 31 2013 05:41 Reason wrote:[quote] 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:
[quote]
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? Except that you can never identify the difference. It doesn't exist in any practical way. If you could never identify the political parties of your hookups then yeah, your political preferences in women would be pretty damn stupid too. It's difficult for me to understand because you're essentially claiming that you don't want to have sex with a trans person while having absolutely no way of identifying a trans person. If you can't even tell them apart from someone who was born a woman, then what's guiding that preference? The only possibility is transphobia since there's no actual difference between the women.
Okay, if you are presented with two identical women but one of them has had sex with 1 person in her life and the other has had sex with 1000 people, which would you prefer?
There is no right or wrong answer here. Some people may be embarrassed about penis size and not want to have sex with someone who will very likely have had sex with numerous people with a larger penis. Some people are attracted to the idea of an inexperienced woman and some are attracted to the idea of an experienced woman. There are numerous factors that could affect someone's preference in this matter. Some people might not give a fuck.
I'm one of those people who just simply doesn't like the idea of other guys touching a girl that I'm with, past or present. It might not be rational but it's true. I slept with a girl once and I found out she had had way more partners than me and it instantly turned me off. I'm not insecure at all about penis size or sexual performance or anything like that, just the idea of all these other men having sex with her repulsed me. This isn't something I could tell at a glance but I sure as hell have a preference and it doesn't make me a sexophobe or whatever you want to call it any more than not wanting to sleep with a trans person makes me a transphobe.
Like I said, you don't have to understand it and you don't have to rationalise it, you just have to accept it. I'm telling you that I have this preference and it's not something you should really be questioning me about in such an impudent fashion while telling me that I don't understand things, that I'm confused, that I have ill-conceived notions and that I'm a fucking transphobe.
Not understanding me does not justify you talking down to me or insulting me.
|
On July 31 2013 07:35 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:31 Shodaa wrote:On July 31 2013 07:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote: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:[quote] 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? Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment. There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you. So you're an expert on trans issue ? There is a BIG difference between being transgender and being disillusioned into thinking your Elvis/Nappeleon/whatever. Trans people are FULLY aware of what they look like physically. This is gender dysphoria, which is characterized by depression, pain, low self esteem. If not treated, this can lead to suicide. As far as I know, delusionnal people don't have Elvis or Nappoleon dysphoria. No, I'm not an expert (neither are you, from what I can tell), but I'm knowledgable enough to know that there's a glaring difference between being actually transsexual (which has to do with brain structure) and having a mental illness that makes you identify as the opposite sex.
by mental illness, doesnt that mean they need treatment? gay people or transgenders dont need treatment as far as i know, unless from prejudice they face for being gay, but being gay itself is not an mental illness because it does not require psychiatric intervention, unless of course by people that thinks being gay is wrong...but i dont see a wrong as long as they dont do any harm or cant function properly like rainman, which they dont afaik.
|
On July 31 2013 07:37 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 07:24 maybenexttime wrote:On July 31 2013 06:59 ComaDose wrote:On July 31 2013 06:58 maybenexttime wrote: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:
[quote]
So you really think, I should call someone a women, only because he feels like one but still has a penis?
[quote]
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? Yes, they're clearly not transsexual if it's "merely" a mental issue. They're troubled individuals that need help and sympathy, but they're not transsexual, and sex-change surgery is not a valid treatment for them. The same way someone who thinks he's Napoleon is not one, and a plastic surgery that would make him resemble Napoleon more is not a valid treatment. There's a colossal difference between your brain structure making you think of yourself as a certain gender/sex, and a mental illness making doing the same to you. I think it is possible that people with other issues may get confused and think that gender issues are at the root of their mental issues, while they are not. I believe this isn't unheard of. Is this what you mean? Cos you put it very strangely.
Any gender identity issue that doesn't have a root in the brain structure not matching the genitals/appearence has a root in the psyche, i.e. is a mental issue. At least I can't see any other etiology/explanation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
