|
On August 02 2013 03:08 crazyweasel wrote:
"if at that point (having sex) you still don't know he's a trap"
Speaking of being an asshole, this language would be considered rude.
|
On August 02 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:10 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 02:29 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:26 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:24 Klondikebar wrote:
Your first assumption is wrong. Assuming nobody asks and nobody discloses, the trans person sleeps with 9 strangers and all 9 of them are fine. Because these things never, ever come out and it's fine to rape people as long as they don't know about it. Learn to ethics better. You're really playing fast and loose with the term rape. I guess your standard for informed consent is much higher than mine...particularly for a one night stand. Withholding information that has no practical consequences for the other person doesn't negate informed consent. If the other person can continue living their lives with no immediate or long term impact based on the information provided, they can provide informed consent. We'll never agree because we have different standards of informed consent for a one night stand. It has consequences - in form of serious trauma. Stop ignoring that. Your stupid logic justifies rape. lol serious trauma. No. There's no trauma that results from having sex with a trans person no matter how averse to them you are. Especially if you didn't no they were trans. It might make you uncomfortable. It might even make you disgusted. But you will not be permanently emotionally scarred. And we've pretty clearly moved on from the rape thing. No, my logic doesn't justify rape. At worst it justifies being kinda an asshole.
Following your twisted logic, there is no trauma for a woman who's been raped by means of a rape pill, she doesn't even have any memory of the whole thing. You clearly have no idea of morality.
|
On August 02 2013 03:14 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:10 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:08 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:05 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:00 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:57 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:55 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:50 Mercy13 wrote:On August 02 2013 02:41 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:37 Iyerbeth wrote:
Not making a statement either way, but just curious about KwarK's response to this if possible. Is it morally wrong to not tell someone when you're going in to a one night stand where both sides are essentially consenting to sex without knowledge of their partner? If it were a true lottery without any information then they'd be accepting the odds through consenting to it. But one night stands aren't that, in one night stands you still lead a partner to believe things about you through your appearance etc. If one of their beliefs, in this case that you are cis, is not the case and would be a dealbreaker for them then you are morally wrong not to tell them. Do you think it would also be morally wrong to disclose to a potential sexual partner during a one night stand that you are actually poor, when you lead them to believe that you were rich by say, wearing expensive clothes and buying fancy drinks? Should you just assume that they only want to sleep with you because you are looking and acting like a rich person? Genuinely curious, I don't see the distinction. Sure, I'm not a fan of deceiving people into consenting to sex in contexts outside trans issues either. If you believe it is likely that a person is only having sex with you due to their belief that they'll get money from it and you have no money for them then you ought to tell them rather than just fuck them and go "no harm done, no consequences". It's not up to you to judge their criteria or make the decision for them, if you believe they are lacking the information they would need to make the decision they want then you ought to give them that. But that doesn't make you a rapist. The rapist point was in response to you arguing that only physical consequences matter and that you can do whatever you want with a person sexually as long as they don't know. That even if they would never consent to sex with a trans woman and you knew that it didn't matter that you knew that their consent was not informed consent and that they didn't actually want to have sex with you because "fuck that guy". As long as they weren't physically damaged by your withholding then no harm done, whatever their feelings of violation etc might be. What you said in that particular post was really rapey and rode roughshod over the principles of consent. No. Rape can cause emotional damage as well. And I said several times if you knew they would never consent to sex with a trans person the trans person should back off. You're straw manning me here. We were talking about situations in which we weren't sure if the person would care or not. If you have no idea if the person cares or not, I don't think it's very pertinent information. Knowing that a large portion of the population do care and then willfully choosing to remain ignorant in the case of this individual is a shitty excuse. You don't get to know that the question is pertinent, then not ask it, then go "well I didn't know the answer". That's bullshit. I mean, you can bring up gay rights in conversation or even make up a story about how one of your "friends" is trans to gauge a reaction. If they react negatively, back off. If they don't react negatively cool, no reason to disclose because the question probably isn't pertinent. Or you can just go "I'm trans rather than cis, is that an issue for you?". Sure, cis people don't need to do that, that's majority privilege. But equally people with perfect sight don't get those awesome pet dogs. That's life.
I think we've been over how coming out as trans has some nasty consequences that trans people are extremely justified in wanting to avoid. If you just want them to stay home and only have sex with people they meet on trans friendly dating sites just admit it.
|
United States41976 Posts
On August 02 2013 03:15 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:08 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:06 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2013 03:02 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:58 Shiragaku wrote:On August 02 2013 02:56 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2013 02:51 Shiragaku wrote:
Okay, one of the things I despise the most and am pretty well known for is anti-fascism. Most people are familiar with me know that I dislike fascism. So one day, I go to the bar and take a nice man/woman home with me and after sex, I learn that the person is a fascist even though the person knows that I despise fascism.
These days, at least in the US, fascism is pretty dead and almost no one wants to associate themselves with the ideology. However, I cannot apply my own personal disgust to the law and accuse the person of rape. It would be ridiculous and incredibly childish to do so.
So as a conclusion, whilst it can be very disgusting to certain people that they had sex with a trans person, to compare it to rape which is a very huge crime is ridiculous. I think the main point people are objecting to is Klondikebar's indifference to the feelings of the other party. The attitude seems to be "fuck you, I get laid if I want and if you don't like sleeping with me, your a bigot. I'm not going to tell you that I am transgender, because I want sex and if you didn't want to have sex with me, the the emotions of bigots don't matter." Oh, in that case, he lacks empathy for the other party a.k.a being an ass. We should be arguing about that, not about rape. Also I only used the word "bigot" because all of us started using the word transphobe. I think more as shorthand to describe someone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people rather than any sort of actual label. I'm not interested in actually deciding whether someone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people is a bigot in this discussion. And yeah, the emotional states of a stranger aren't a huge concern for me after a one night stand. I like to make sure they have fun cause...being good at sex is as much fun as having good sex, but I generally make it pretty clear that I'm hooking up to get my rocks off and that's it. If you want me to worry about your emotions we need to go on a date first. So your an ass hole, basiclly? You don't give a shit if someone gets hurt by your actions as long as you get what you want and they find out when you aren't around them? If I tell someone "I'm here to get my rocks off" and they're like "ok." And then after the fact they turn around and they're like "why don't you care about me more?!" seems like their problem. I made it very clear I wasn't there for a tea party. If they wanted more they probably should have passed on me. I pass on people when I'm looking for more and they can't give it to me. Doesn't make me an asshole, it just means I define what I expect to get out of a relationship or one night stand and I look for people who can give that to me. I expect everyone else to do the same. This isn't happening in a vacuum. Even while you do it you're still presenting yourself as a cis female. Is that any different than presenting yourself as affluent or, hell, prettier than you actually are by wearing nice clothes, hanging out in a dark bar, and buying expensive drinks? We all present ourselves as slightly different than we actually are when we try to get laid. Doesn't make it rape when the person then consents to have sex with us.
When that thing that you think is just slightly different is a dealbreaker for the other party and you know it is a dealbreaker then yes, we're getting into rape territory. Their consent is not informed consent and you are actively denying them the information that they would need in order to make the decision that produces their desired outcome because you think you know better and think their criteria are bad.
It's rapey.
|
On August 02 2013 03:16 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:10 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 02:29 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:26 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:24 Klondikebar wrote:
Your first assumption is wrong. Assuming nobody asks and nobody discloses, the trans person sleeps with 9 strangers and all 9 of them are fine. Because these things never, ever come out and it's fine to rape people as long as they don't know about it. Learn to ethics better. You're really playing fast and loose with the term rape. I guess your standard for informed consent is much higher than mine...particularly for a one night stand. Withholding information that has no practical consequences for the other person doesn't negate informed consent. If the other person can continue living their lives with no immediate or long term impact based on the information provided, they can provide informed consent. We'll never agree because we have different standards of informed consent for a one night stand. It has consequences - in form of serious trauma. Stop ignoring that. Your stupid logic justifies rape. lol serious trauma. No. There's no trauma that results from having sex with a trans person no matter how averse to them you are. Especially if you didn't no they were trans. It might make you uncomfortable. It might even make you disgusted. But you will not be permanently emotionally scarred. And we've pretty clearly moved on from the rape thing. No, my logic doesn't justify rape. At worst it justifies being kinda an asshole. Following your twisted logic, there is no trauma for a woman who's been raped by means of a rape pill, she doesn't even have any memory of the whole thing. You clearly have no idea of morality.
Are you fucking dense?! Of course there's trauma there! She didn't give ANY consent. It's not just that trivial information was withheld from her, the ability to say yes or no AT ALL was withheld. Fuck off I'm not talking to you anymore.
|
On August 02 2013 03:08 crazyweasel wrote:
as much as is don't like to agree with kwark, he's right on this one. althought its not probable to happen if you're not socially apt (meaning that you can't detect or differentiate, female behavior/personality and male behavior/personality that are much much different when it comes to "mating" or sexualy oriented convy). I work in a restaurant next to a trans bar, and its obvious unless they get shittons of plastic chirurgies.
question for kwark :
if at that point (having sex) you still don't know he's a trap then the blame is kind of on you for not detecting something strange?
how do you determine if the transgender guy/female intentionally omitted to tell you and that he didn't assume you knew at that point (let's say you have long enough chat equivalent to one it takes to bring a girl home)?
Please, use proper pronoun and don't misgender. Trap is also a very offensive term.
|
United States41976 Posts
On August 02 2013 03:16 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:14 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:10 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:08 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:05 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:00 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:57 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:55 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:50 Mercy13 wrote:On August 02 2013 02:41 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
If it were a true lottery without any information then they'd be accepting the odds through consenting to it. But one night stands aren't that, in one night stands you still lead a partner to believe things about you through your appearance etc. If one of their beliefs, in this case that you are cis, is not the case and would be a dealbreaker for them then you are morally wrong not to tell them. Do you think it would also be morally wrong to disclose to a potential sexual partner during a one night stand that you are actually poor, when you lead them to believe that you were rich by say, wearing expensive clothes and buying fancy drinks? Should you just assume that they only want to sleep with you because you are looking and acting like a rich person? Genuinely curious, I don't see the distinction. Sure, I'm not a fan of deceiving people into consenting to sex in contexts outside trans issues either. If you believe it is likely that a person is only having sex with you due to their belief that they'll get money from it and you have no money for them then you ought to tell them rather than just fuck them and go "no harm done, no consequences". It's not up to you to judge their criteria or make the decision for them, if you believe they are lacking the information they would need to make the decision they want then you ought to give them that. But that doesn't make you a rapist. The rapist point was in response to you arguing that only physical consequences matter and that you can do whatever you want with a person sexually as long as they don't know. That even if they would never consent to sex with a trans woman and you knew that it didn't matter that you knew that their consent was not informed consent and that they didn't actually want to have sex with you because "fuck that guy". As long as they weren't physically damaged by your withholding then no harm done, whatever their feelings of violation etc might be. What you said in that particular post was really rapey and rode roughshod over the principles of consent. No. Rape can cause emotional damage as well. And I said several times if you knew they would never consent to sex with a trans person the trans person should back off. You're straw manning me here. We were talking about situations in which we weren't sure if the person would care or not. If you have no idea if the person cares or not, I don't think it's very pertinent information. Knowing that a large portion of the population do care and then willfully choosing to remain ignorant in the case of this individual is a shitty excuse. You don't get to know that the question is pertinent, then not ask it, then go "well I didn't know the answer". That's bullshit. I mean, you can bring up gay rights in conversation or even make up a story about how one of your "friends" is trans to gauge a reaction. If they react negatively, back off. If they don't react negatively cool, no reason to disclose because the question probably isn't pertinent. Or you can just go "I'm trans rather than cis, is that an issue for you?". Sure, cis people don't need to do that, that's majority privilege. But equally people with perfect sight don't get those awesome pet dogs. That's life. I think we've been over how coming out as trans has some nasty consequences that trans people are extremely justified in wanting to avoid. If you just want them to stay home and only have sex with people they meet on trans friendly dating sites just admit it.
This the the two wrongs make a right argument.
|
United States41976 Posts
On August 02 2013 03:17 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:16 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:10 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 02:29 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:26 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:24 Klondikebar wrote:
Your first assumption is wrong. Assuming nobody asks and nobody discloses, the trans person sleeps with 9 strangers and all 9 of them are fine. Because these things never, ever come out and it's fine to rape people as long as they don't know about it. Learn to ethics better. You're really playing fast and loose with the term rape. I guess your standard for informed consent is much higher than mine...particularly for a one night stand. Withholding information that has no practical consequences for the other person doesn't negate informed consent. If the other person can continue living their lives with no immediate or long term impact based on the information provided, they can provide informed consent. We'll never agree because we have different standards of informed consent for a one night stand. It has consequences - in form of serious trauma. Stop ignoring that. Your stupid logic justifies rape. lol serious trauma. No. There's no trauma that results from having sex with a trans person no matter how averse to them you are. Especially if you didn't no they were trans. It might make you uncomfortable. It might even make you disgusted. But you will not be permanently emotionally scarred. And we've pretty clearly moved on from the rape thing. No, my logic doesn't justify rape. At worst it justifies being kinda an asshole. Following your twisted logic, there is no trauma for a woman who's been raped by means of a rape pill, she doesn't even have any memory of the whole thing. You clearly have no idea of morality. Are you fucking dense?! Of course there's trauma there! She didn't give ANY consent. It's not just that trivial information was withheld from her, the ability to say yes or no AT ALL was withheld. Fuck off I'm not talking to you anymore.
Trivial information.
You're just not getting this. I keep saying it and you keep not getting this. Whether or not the information is trivial is not up to you to decide. It's that simple. This is why I keep saying what you're saying is rapey. You are saying "I don't like your criteria so I'm going to withhold the information you need to make the judgement you want."
|
On August 02 2013 03:17 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:15 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:08 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:06 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2013 03:02 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:58 Shiragaku wrote:On August 02 2013 02:56 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2013 02:51 Shiragaku wrote:
Okay, one of the things I despise the most and am pretty well known for is anti-fascism. Most people are familiar with me know that I dislike fascism. So one day, I go to the bar and take a nice man/woman home with me and after sex, I learn that the person is a fascist even though the person knows that I despise fascism.
These days, at least in the US, fascism is pretty dead and almost no one wants to associate themselves with the ideology. However, I cannot apply my own personal disgust to the law and accuse the person of rape. It would be ridiculous and incredibly childish to do so.
So as a conclusion, whilst it can be very disgusting to certain people that they had sex with a trans person, to compare it to rape which is a very huge crime is ridiculous. I think the main point people are objecting to is Klondikebar's indifference to the feelings of the other party. The attitude seems to be "fuck you, I get laid if I want and if you don't like sleeping with me, your a bigot. I'm not going to tell you that I am transgender, because I want sex and if you didn't want to have sex with me, the the emotions of bigots don't matter." Oh, in that case, he lacks empathy for the other party a.k.a being an ass. We should be arguing about that, not about rape. Also I only used the word "bigot" because all of us started using the word transphobe. I think more as shorthand to describe someone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people rather than any sort of actual label. I'm not interested in actually deciding whether someone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people is a bigot in this discussion. And yeah, the emotional states of a stranger aren't a huge concern for me after a one night stand. I like to make sure they have fun cause...being good at sex is as much fun as having good sex, but I generally make it pretty clear that I'm hooking up to get my rocks off and that's it. If you want me to worry about your emotions we need to go on a date first. So your an ass hole, basiclly? You don't give a shit if someone gets hurt by your actions as long as you get what you want and they find out when you aren't around them? If I tell someone "I'm here to get my rocks off" and they're like "ok." And then after the fact they turn around and they're like "why don't you care about me more?!" seems like their problem. I made it very clear I wasn't there for a tea party. If they wanted more they probably should have passed on me. I pass on people when I'm looking for more and they can't give it to me. Doesn't make me an asshole, it just means I define what I expect to get out of a relationship or one night stand and I look for people who can give that to me. I expect everyone else to do the same. This isn't happening in a vacuum. Even while you do it you're still presenting yourself as a cis female. Is that any different than presenting yourself as affluent or, hell, prettier than you actually are by wearing nice clothes, hanging out in a dark bar, and buying expensive drinks? We all present ourselves as slightly different than we actually are when we try to get laid. Doesn't make it rape when the person then consents to have sex with us. When that thing that you think is just slightly different is a dealbreaker for the other party and you know it is a dealbreaker then yes, we're getting into rape territory. Their consent is not informed consent and you are actively denying them the information that they would need in order to make the decision that produces their desired outcome because you think you know better and think their criteria are bad. It's rapey.
Again, yes, if you know it's a dealbreaker it's rapey. Quit acting like that's what I'm talking about.
Even if it's "likely" a dealbreaker that doesn't change much. If it's likely enough that they have to ask the question with every single man they sleep with, then in practice you're asking them to just assume it's a dealbreaker with everyone. At some point they have to be allowed to assume "it's probably not a dealbreaker with this guy" and be allowed to withhold the information. Because if they have to disclose every single time because of the assumption that it's "likely" a deal breaker...we're just dealing with the first stupid scenario. In which case they just shouldn't have sex.
At some point they have to be allowed to assume "it's probably not a dealbreaker with this guy" and be allowed to withhold the information.
|
On August 02 2013 03:17 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:16 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:10 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 02:29 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:26 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:24 Klondikebar wrote:
Your first assumption is wrong. Assuming nobody asks and nobody discloses, the trans person sleeps with 9 strangers and all 9 of them are fine. Because these things never, ever come out and it's fine to rape people as long as they don't know about it. Learn to ethics better. You're really playing fast and loose with the term rape. I guess your standard for informed consent is much higher than mine...particularly for a one night stand. Withholding information that has no practical consequences for the other person doesn't negate informed consent. If the other person can continue living their lives with no immediate or long term impact based on the information provided, they can provide informed consent. We'll never agree because we have different standards of informed consent for a one night stand. It has consequences - in form of serious trauma. Stop ignoring that. Your stupid logic justifies rape. lol serious trauma. No. There's no trauma that results from having sex with a trans person no matter how averse to them you are. Especially if you didn't no they were trans. It might make you uncomfortable. It might even make you disgusted. But you will not be permanently emotionally scarred. And we've pretty clearly moved on from the rape thing. No, my logic doesn't justify rape. At worst it justifies being kinda an asshole. Following your twisted logic, there is no trauma for a woman who's been raped by means of a rape pill, she doesn't even have any memory of the whole thing. You clearly have no idea of morality. Are you fucking dense?! Of course there's trauma there! She didn't give ANY consent. It's not just that trivial information was withheld from her, the ability to say yes or no AT ALL was withheld. Fuck off I'm not talking to you anymore.
Well, she clearly was in a bar, looking for a one night stand. She was looking for some casual sex, and got some. She has no recollection of the whole thing, so no harm done, according to your reasoning...
You are fucking dense if you think someone's sexual partner being a transsexual is trivial for most people, despite so many people telling you otherwise. That person ALSO did not give ANY consent to have sex with a transsexual, but you decided to trick them into having sex with you regardless, i.e. raped them.
|
On August 02 2013 03:20 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:17 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:16 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:10 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 02:29 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:26 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:24 Klondikebar wrote:
Your first assumption is wrong. Assuming nobody asks and nobody discloses, the trans person sleeps with 9 strangers and all 9 of them are fine. Because these things never, ever come out and it's fine to rape people as long as they don't know about it. Learn to ethics better. You're really playing fast and loose with the term rape. I guess your standard for informed consent is much higher than mine...particularly for a one night stand. Withholding information that has no practical consequences for the other person doesn't negate informed consent. If the other person can continue living their lives with no immediate or long term impact based on the information provided, they can provide informed consent. We'll never agree because we have different standards of informed consent for a one night stand. It has consequences - in form of serious trauma. Stop ignoring that. Your stupid logic justifies rape. lol serious trauma. No. There's no trauma that results from having sex with a trans person no matter how averse to them you are. Especially if you didn't no they were trans. It might make you uncomfortable. It might even make you disgusted. But you will not be permanently emotionally scarred. And we've pretty clearly moved on from the rape thing. No, my logic doesn't justify rape. At worst it justifies being kinda an asshole. Following your twisted logic, there is no trauma for a woman who's been raped by means of a rape pill, she doesn't even have any memory of the whole thing. You clearly have no idea of morality. Are you fucking dense?! Of course there's trauma there! She didn't give ANY consent. It's not just that trivial information was withheld from her, the ability to say yes or no AT ALL was withheld. Fuck off I'm not talking to you anymore. Trivial information. You're just not getting this. I keep saying it and you keep not getting this. Whether or not the information is trivial is not up to you to decide. It's that simple. This is why I keep saying what you're saying is rapey. You are saying "I don't like your criteria so I'm going to withhold the information you need to make the judgement you want."
And what you keep failing to understand is that I'm not just inventing this criteria. It's trivial in terms of consequences. I'm more than willing to admit that it's non-trivial information for some people. But in that case it's their job to find out about it. If that means asking every woman they sleep with based on the tiny probability that they might be trans...that's their cross to bear.
|
United States41976 Posts
On August 02 2013 03:21 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:17 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:15 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:08 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:06 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2013 03:02 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:58 Shiragaku wrote:On August 02 2013 02:56 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2013 02:51 Shiragaku wrote:
Okay, one of the things I despise the most and am pretty well known for is anti-fascism. Most people are familiar with me know that I dislike fascism. So one day, I go to the bar and take a nice man/woman home with me and after sex, I learn that the person is a fascist even though the person knows that I despise fascism.
These days, at least in the US, fascism is pretty dead and almost no one wants to associate themselves with the ideology. However, I cannot apply my own personal disgust to the law and accuse the person of rape. It would be ridiculous and incredibly childish to do so.
So as a conclusion, whilst it can be very disgusting to certain people that they had sex with a trans person, to compare it to rape which is a very huge crime is ridiculous. I think the main point people are objecting to is Klondikebar's indifference to the feelings of the other party. The attitude seems to be "fuck you, I get laid if I want and if you don't like sleeping with me, your a bigot. I'm not going to tell you that I am transgender, because I want sex and if you didn't want to have sex with me, the the emotions of bigots don't matter." Oh, in that case, he lacks empathy for the other party a.k.a being an ass. We should be arguing about that, not about rape. Also I only used the word "bigot" because all of us started using the word transphobe. I think more as shorthand to describe someone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people rather than any sort of actual label. I'm not interested in actually deciding whether someone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people is a bigot in this discussion. And yeah, the emotional states of a stranger aren't a huge concern for me after a one night stand. I like to make sure they have fun cause...being good at sex is as much fun as having good sex, but I generally make it pretty clear that I'm hooking up to get my rocks off and that's it. If you want me to worry about your emotions we need to go on a date first. So your an ass hole, basiclly? You don't give a shit if someone gets hurt by your actions as long as you get what you want and they find out when you aren't around them? If I tell someone "I'm here to get my rocks off" and they're like "ok." And then after the fact they turn around and they're like "why don't you care about me more?!" seems like their problem. I made it very clear I wasn't there for a tea party. If they wanted more they probably should have passed on me. I pass on people when I'm looking for more and they can't give it to me. Doesn't make me an asshole, it just means I define what I expect to get out of a relationship or one night stand and I look for people who can give that to me. I expect everyone else to do the same. This isn't happening in a vacuum. Even while you do it you're still presenting yourself as a cis female. Is that any different than presenting yourself as affluent or, hell, prettier than you actually are by wearing nice clothes, hanging out in a dark bar, and buying expensive drinks? We all present ourselves as slightly different than we actually are when we try to get laid. Doesn't make it rape when the person then consents to have sex with us. When that thing that you think is just slightly different is a dealbreaker for the other party and you know it is a dealbreaker then yes, we're getting into rape territory. Their consent is not informed consent and you are actively denying them the information that they would need in order to make the decision that produces their desired outcome because you think you know better and think their criteria are bad. It's rapey. Again, yes, if you know it's a dealbreaker it's rapey. Quit acting like that's what I'm talking about. Even if it's "likely" a dealbreaker that doesn't change much. If it's likely enough that they have to ask the question with every single man they sleep with, then in practice you're asking them to just assume it's a dealbreaker with everyone. At some point they have to be allowed to assume "it's probably not a dealbreaker with this guy" and be allowed to withhold the information. Because if they have to disclose every single time because of the assumption that it's "likely" a deal breaker...we're just dealing with the first stupid scenario. In which case they just shouldn't have sex. At some point they have to be allowed to assume "it's probably not a dealbreaker with this guy" and be allowed to withhold the information.
And if you're in a LGBT bar then you can assume. Or if you met them at a pro trans event you can assume. But if you met them as a complete stranger and 30% (hypothetical example) of complete strangers view it as a dealbreaker then you ought to disclose.
|
On August 02 2013 02:44 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 02:39 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2013 02:36 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:33 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:29 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:26 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:24 Klondikebar wrote:
Your first assumption is wrong. Assuming nobody asks and nobody discloses, the trans person sleeps with 9 strangers and all 9 of them are fine. Because these things never, ever come out and it's fine to rape people as long as they don't know about it. Learn to ethics better. You're really playing fast and loose with the term rape. I guess your standard for informed consent is much higher than mine...particularly for a one night stand. Withholding information that has no practical consequences for the other person doesn't negate informed consent. If the other person can continue living their lives with no immediate or long term impact based on the information provided, they can provide informed consent. We'll never agree because we have different standards of informed consent for a one night stand. This is a completely different argument to your "it's totally reasonable for transphobes to ask every time despite the numbers" one which I hope you're finally ready to drop after I conclusively showed it to be statistically absurd a few posts ago. You don't get to decide which information is important to them within a reasonable standard. If you have no reason to believe that they are transphobic then you have no obligation to disclose, any more than you would have to disclose if you had your appendix removed. But given a reasonably high instance of people who do have a problem with it, and there is, there is absolutely an obligation to disclose. If consent hinges upon something which matters a lot to them and you know that they would not consent if they knew what you knew then you are morally obliged to tell them, you do not get to decide that their conditions for having sex are silly and that you know better so you're just going to go ahead and take advantage of their ignorance to fuck them anyway. I'm not arbitrarily deciding what information is important. I'm using the pretty objective measure of whether or not there are consequences of said information. If there are no consequences, it is not important. So the transgender person shouldnt' feel bad about neglecting to tell them and the other party is a bigot if they get upset that they were not informed? Because you can't assume there are no consequences, because the world doesn't work that way. I'm not "assuming there are no consequences." Your emotional state after the fact is not a consequence in the sense that I'm talking about them. I'm talking about practical, demonstrable things that affect how you are able to live your life. Like HIV or pissing off a spurned wife who then burns your house down. Having sex with a trans woman doesn't create any consequences like that. And emotional states aren't a terribly good metric. We withhold a lot of information based on the fact that it might create a negative emotional state. And quite frankly I don't give a shit anymore if the other party is a bigot. If they don't wanna have sex with a trans person I really don't care what we call them, I just think that avoidance is on them.
In other words, raping a woman does not cause any consequences as long as you're gentle about it and don't physically harm her. You really do have rapist mentality.
|
On August 02 2013 03:11 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:08 ComaDose wrote:On August 02 2013 02:51 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:50 ComaDose wrote:On August 02 2013 02:48 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:48 ComaDose wrote:On August 02 2013 02:46 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:45 ComaDose wrote:
so im hoping that it becomes reasonable to assume the person you're talking to is not a transphobe soon.
then its cool not to disclose by everyone definition. Works for me. For the time being though, I wouldn't reject a trans woman for being trans if she disclosed but I would reject one for being an asshole if she did not and I later found out. so is not disclosing being an asshole only untill it is reasonable to assume the person you are talking to is not a transphobe? yes do we all hope that happens one day? Ideally, but I'd like to be with someone who if she thinks X could conceivably impact my decision to consent will let me know because consent is super important to her. It's a principle which goes far beyond trans issues. be with someone like relationship? or like one night stand? "conceivably" seems a little loose. are we still using "reasonable to assume"? its unfortunate that one is labeled asshole by someone striving for a society where what they did is socially acceptable. Since you have now told me that you would not reject a trans woman for being trans and i conclusively know that it is not a deal breaker for you, would i still be obligated to tell you i was a trans person if i was and we were going to have sex? I don't one night stand really. I am still using conceivably to mean reasonable to assume. No, if we're having sex and you know that it's definitely not an issue for me because you follow my tl posts or whatever then you're not obligated to tell me because you don't need to find out my feelings on the matter and be considerate of them because you know my feelings on the matter. But if you did not know then I would want you to be considerate.
neat.
yeah i was oriented toward the extreme and seemingly most common case of taking someone home from the bar.
what kind of affirmative action could be taken to avoid this dangerous uncomfortable and awkward side effect of protecting the very necessary right to make an informed consent as it is applied to people that hold views which negatively impact others and ultimately serve to keep us further from the global equal rights ideal?
might as well ask people to question their fathers ideals >.< damn morally sanctioned majority prejudice
|
On August 02 2013 03:23 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:20 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:17 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:16 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:10 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 02:29 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:26 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:24 Klondikebar wrote:
Your first assumption is wrong. Assuming nobody asks and nobody discloses, the trans person sleeps with 9 strangers and all 9 of them are fine. Because these things never, ever come out and it's fine to rape people as long as they don't know about it. Learn to ethics better. You're really playing fast and loose with the term rape. I guess your standard for informed consent is much higher than mine...particularly for a one night stand. Withholding information that has no practical consequences for the other person doesn't negate informed consent. If the other person can continue living their lives with no immediate or long term impact based on the information provided, they can provide informed consent. We'll never agree because we have different standards of informed consent for a one night stand. It has consequences - in form of serious trauma. Stop ignoring that. Your stupid logic justifies rape. lol serious trauma. No. There's no trauma that results from having sex with a trans person no matter how averse to them you are. Especially if you didn't no they were trans. It might make you uncomfortable. It might even make you disgusted. But you will not be permanently emotionally scarred. And we've pretty clearly moved on from the rape thing. No, my logic doesn't justify rape. At worst it justifies being kinda an asshole. Following your twisted logic, there is no trauma for a woman who's been raped by means of a rape pill, she doesn't even have any memory of the whole thing. You clearly have no idea of morality. Are you fucking dense?! Of course there's trauma there! She didn't give ANY consent. It's not just that trivial information was withheld from her, the ability to say yes or no AT ALL was withheld. Fuck off I'm not talking to you anymore. Trivial information. You're just not getting this. I keep saying it and you keep not getting this. Whether or not the information is trivial is not up to you to decide. It's that simple. This is why I keep saying what you're saying is rapey. You are saying "I don't like your criteria so I'm going to withhold the information you need to make the judgement you want." And what you keep failing to understand is that I'm not just inventing this criteria. It's trivial in terms of consequences. I'm more than willing to admit that it's non-trivial information for some people. But in that case it's their job to find out about it. If that means asking every woman they sleep with based on the tiny probability that they might be trans...that's their cross to bear.
You don't get to decide what is important for other people, that is the problem with this discussion. Just like when someone finds out they have slept with someone who was married and is upset about it. They weren't harmed directly, but they were lied to.
|
On August 02 2013 03:23 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:21 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:17 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:15 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:08 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:06 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2013 03:02 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:58 Shiragaku wrote:On August 02 2013 02:56 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
I think the main point people are objecting to is Klondikebar's indifference to the feelings of the other party. The attitude seems to be "fuck you, I get laid if I want and if you don't like sleeping with me, your a bigot. I'm not going to tell you that I am transgender, because I want sex and if you didn't want to have sex with me, the the emotions of bigots don't matter." Oh, in that case, he lacks empathy for the other party a.k.a being an ass. We should be arguing about that, not about rape. Also I only used the word "bigot" because all of us started using the word transphobe. I think more as shorthand to describe someone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people rather than any sort of actual label. I'm not interested in actually deciding whether someone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people is a bigot in this discussion. And yeah, the emotional states of a stranger aren't a huge concern for me after a one night stand. I like to make sure they have fun cause...being good at sex is as much fun as having good sex, but I generally make it pretty clear that I'm hooking up to get my rocks off and that's it. If you want me to worry about your emotions we need to go on a date first. So your an ass hole, basiclly? You don't give a shit if someone gets hurt by your actions as long as you get what you want and they find out when you aren't around them? If I tell someone "I'm here to get my rocks off" and they're like "ok." And then after the fact they turn around and they're like "why don't you care about me more?!" seems like their problem. I made it very clear I wasn't there for a tea party. If they wanted more they probably should have passed on me. I pass on people when I'm looking for more and they can't give it to me. Doesn't make me an asshole, it just means I define what I expect to get out of a relationship or one night stand and I look for people who can give that to me. I expect everyone else to do the same. This isn't happening in a vacuum. Even while you do it you're still presenting yourself as a cis female. Is that any different than presenting yourself as affluent or, hell, prettier than you actually are by wearing nice clothes, hanging out in a dark bar, and buying expensive drinks? We all present ourselves as slightly different than we actually are when we try to get laid. Doesn't make it rape when the person then consents to have sex with us. When that thing that you think is just slightly different is a dealbreaker for the other party and you know it is a dealbreaker then yes, we're getting into rape territory. Their consent is not informed consent and you are actively denying them the information that they would need in order to make the decision that produces their desired outcome because you think you know better and think their criteria are bad. It's rapey. Again, yes, if you know it's a dealbreaker it's rapey. Quit acting like that's what I'm talking about. Even if it's "likely" a dealbreaker that doesn't change much. If it's likely enough that they have to ask the question with every single man they sleep with, then in practice you're asking them to just assume it's a dealbreaker with everyone. At some point they have to be allowed to assume "it's probably not a dealbreaker with this guy" and be allowed to withhold the information. Because if they have to disclose every single time because of the assumption that it's "likely" a deal breaker...we're just dealing with the first stupid scenario. In which case they just shouldn't have sex. At some point they have to be allowed to assume "it's probably not a dealbreaker with this guy" and be allowed to withhold the information. And if you're in a LGBT bar then you can assume. Or if you met them at a pro trans event you can assume. But if you met them as a complete stranger and 30% (hypothetical example) of complete strangers view it as a dealbreaker then you ought to disclose.
If you met a complete stranger and you just wanted to have sex with her and that's what you got...then no I don't think she needs to run down a checklist of what are even your likely hangups. Complete stranger...one time thing...there's a shitton she's not gonna know about you. I mean, would you be expected to disclose if you had a smaller than average penis. That's a dealbreaker for a lot of women.
|
On August 02 2013 03:26 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:23 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:20 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:17 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:16 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:10 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 02:29 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:26 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:24 Klondikebar wrote:
Your first assumption is wrong. Assuming nobody asks and nobody discloses, the trans person sleeps with 9 strangers and all 9 of them are fine. Because these things never, ever come out and it's fine to rape people as long as they don't know about it. Learn to ethics better. You're really playing fast and loose with the term rape. I guess your standard for informed consent is much higher than mine...particularly for a one night stand. Withholding information that has no practical consequences for the other person doesn't negate informed consent. If the other person can continue living their lives with no immediate or long term impact based on the information provided, they can provide informed consent. We'll never agree because we have different standards of informed consent for a one night stand. It has consequences - in form of serious trauma. Stop ignoring that. Your stupid logic justifies rape. lol serious trauma. No. There's no trauma that results from having sex with a trans person no matter how averse to them you are. Especially if you didn't no they were trans. It might make you uncomfortable. It might even make you disgusted. But you will not be permanently emotionally scarred. And we've pretty clearly moved on from the rape thing. No, my logic doesn't justify rape. At worst it justifies being kinda an asshole. Following your twisted logic, there is no trauma for a woman who's been raped by means of a rape pill, she doesn't even have any memory of the whole thing. You clearly have no idea of morality. Are you fucking dense?! Of course there's trauma there! She didn't give ANY consent. It's not just that trivial information was withheld from her, the ability to say yes or no AT ALL was withheld. Fuck off I'm not talking to you anymore. Trivial information. You're just not getting this. I keep saying it and you keep not getting this. Whether or not the information is trivial is not up to you to decide. It's that simple. This is why I keep saying what you're saying is rapey. You are saying "I don't like your criteria so I'm going to withhold the information you need to make the judgement you want." And what you keep failing to understand is that I'm not just inventing this criteria. It's trivial in terms of consequences. I'm more than willing to admit that it's non-trivial information for some people. But in that case it's their job to find out about it. If that means asking every woman they sleep with based on the tiny probability that they might be trans...that's their cross to bear. You don't get to decide what is important for other people, that is the problem with this discussion. Just like when someone finds out they have slept with someone who was married and is upset about it. They weren't harmed directly, but they were lied to.
They were not raped either.
I'm not deciding what's important for people. God Plansix now you're just being dense. I completely admitted in the very post you quoted that that information might be important to some people. But now knowing it doesn't mean they were raped.
|
United States41976 Posts
On August 02 2013 03:23 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:20 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:17 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:16 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 03:13 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:10 maybenexttime wrote:On August 02 2013 02:29 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:26 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:24 Klondikebar wrote:
Your first assumption is wrong. Assuming nobody asks and nobody discloses, the trans person sleeps with 9 strangers and all 9 of them are fine. Because these things never, ever come out and it's fine to rape people as long as they don't know about it. Learn to ethics better. You're really playing fast and loose with the term rape. I guess your standard for informed consent is much higher than mine...particularly for a one night stand. Withholding information that has no practical consequences for the other person doesn't negate informed consent. If the other person can continue living their lives with no immediate or long term impact based on the information provided, they can provide informed consent. We'll never agree because we have different standards of informed consent for a one night stand. It has consequences - in form of serious trauma. Stop ignoring that. Your stupid logic justifies rape. lol serious trauma. No. There's no trauma that results from having sex with a trans person no matter how averse to them you are. Especially if you didn't no they were trans. It might make you uncomfortable. It might even make you disgusted. But you will not be permanently emotionally scarred. And we've pretty clearly moved on from the rape thing. No, my logic doesn't justify rape. At worst it justifies being kinda an asshole. Following your twisted logic, there is no trauma for a woman who's been raped by means of a rape pill, she doesn't even have any memory of the whole thing. You clearly have no idea of morality. Are you fucking dense?! Of course there's trauma there! She didn't give ANY consent. It's not just that trivial information was withheld from her, the ability to say yes or no AT ALL was withheld. Fuck off I'm not talking to you anymore. Trivial information. You're just not getting this. I keep saying it and you keep not getting this. Whether or not the information is trivial is not up to you to decide. It's that simple. This is why I keep saying what you're saying is rapey. You are saying "I don't like your criteria so I'm going to withhold the information you need to make the judgement you want." And what you keep failing to understand is that I'm not just inventing this criteria. It's trivial in terms of consequences. I'm more than willing to admit that it's non-trivial information for some people. But in that case it's their job to find out about it. If that means asking every woman they sleep with based on the tiny probability that they might be trans...that's their cross to bear.
And we're back to the statistics. If we assume that 1 in 10,000 are trans, 1 in 3 are transphobic and each person has 9 partners then we had a 33% success rate through disclosure and a 0.03% success rate with asking first. We did this already.
On a related note, trans issues in popular culture often focus around the homophobic bullying of the victim whose partner failed to disclose. Suggesting that it doesn't go beyond the individual and their issues is nonsense, you're exposing them to a huge amount of bullying, abuse and even physical violence.
|
On August 02 2013 03:27 Klondikebar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:23 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:21 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:17 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:15 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:08 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 03:06 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2013 03:02 Klondikebar wrote:On August 02 2013 02:58 Shiragaku wrote:
[quote]
Oh, in that case, he lacks empathy for the other party a.k.a being an ass. We should be arguing about that, not about rape. Also I only used the word "bigot" because all of us started using the word transphobe. I think more as shorthand to describe someone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people rather than any sort of actual label. I'm not interested in actually deciding whether someone who doesn't want to have sex with trans people is a bigot in this discussion. And yeah, the emotional states of a stranger aren't a huge concern for me after a one night stand. I like to make sure they have fun cause...being good at sex is as much fun as having good sex, but I generally make it pretty clear that I'm hooking up to get my rocks off and that's it. If you want me to worry about your emotions we need to go on a date first. So your an ass hole, basiclly? You don't give a shit if someone gets hurt by your actions as long as you get what you want and they find out when you aren't around them? If I tell someone "I'm here to get my rocks off" and they're like "ok." And then after the fact they turn around and they're like "why don't you care about me more?!" seems like their problem. I made it very clear I wasn't there for a tea party. If they wanted more they probably should have passed on me. I pass on people when I'm looking for more and they can't give it to me. Doesn't make me an asshole, it just means I define what I expect to get out of a relationship or one night stand and I look for people who can give that to me. I expect everyone else to do the same. This isn't happening in a vacuum. Even while you do it you're still presenting yourself as a cis female. Is that any different than presenting yourself as affluent or, hell, prettier than you actually are by wearing nice clothes, hanging out in a dark bar, and buying expensive drinks? We all present ourselves as slightly different than we actually are when we try to get laid. Doesn't make it rape when the person then consents to have sex with us. When that thing that you think is just slightly different is a dealbreaker for the other party and you know it is a dealbreaker then yes, we're getting into rape territory. Their consent is not informed consent and you are actively denying them the information that they would need in order to make the decision that produces their desired outcome because you think you know better and think their criteria are bad. It's rapey. Again, yes, if you know it's a dealbreaker it's rapey. Quit acting like that's what I'm talking about. Even if it's "likely" a dealbreaker that doesn't change much. If it's likely enough that they have to ask the question with every single man they sleep with, then in practice you're asking them to just assume it's a dealbreaker with everyone. At some point they have to be allowed to assume "it's probably not a dealbreaker with this guy" and be allowed to withhold the information. Because if they have to disclose every single time because of the assumption that it's "likely" a deal breaker...we're just dealing with the first stupid scenario. In which case they just shouldn't have sex. At some point they have to be allowed to assume "it's probably not a dealbreaker with this guy" and be allowed to withhold the information. And if you're in a LGBT bar then you can assume. Or if you met them at a pro trans event you can assume. But if you met them as a complete stranger and 30% (hypothetical example) of complete strangers view it as a dealbreaker then you ought to disclose. If you met a complete stranger and you just wanted to have sex with her and that's what you got...then no I don't think she needs to run down a checklist of what are even your likely hangups. Complete stranger...one time thing...there's a shitton she's not gonna know about you. I mean, would you be expected to disclose if you had a smaller than average penis. That's a dealbreaker for a lot of women.
Well, penis size is an unavoidable piece of information in pursuit of a one night stand, so that's a bit different.
|
United States41976 Posts
On August 02 2013 03:25 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 03:11 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 03:08 ComaDose wrote:On August 02 2013 02:51 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:50 ComaDose wrote:On August 02 2013 02:48 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:48 ComaDose wrote:On August 02 2013 02:46 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2013 02:45 ComaDose wrote:
so im hoping that it becomes reasonable to assume the person you're talking to is not a transphobe soon.
then its cool not to disclose by everyone definition. Works for me. For the time being though, I wouldn't reject a trans woman for being trans if she disclosed but I would reject one for being an asshole if she did not and I later found out. so is not disclosing being an asshole only untill it is reasonable to assume the person you are talking to is not a transphobe? yes do we all hope that happens one day? Ideally, but I'd like to be with someone who if she thinks X could conceivably impact my decision to consent will let me know because consent is super important to her. It's a principle which goes far beyond trans issues. be with someone like relationship? or like one night stand? "conceivably" seems a little loose. are we still using "reasonable to assume"? its unfortunate that one is labeled asshole by someone striving for a society where what they did is socially acceptable. Since you have now told me that you would not reject a trans woman for being trans and i conclusively know that it is not a deal breaker for you, would i still be obligated to tell you i was a trans person if i was and we were going to have sex? I don't one night stand really. I am still using conceivably to mean reasonable to assume. No, if we're having sex and you know that it's definitely not an issue for me because you follow my tl posts or whatever then you're not obligated to tell me because you don't need to find out my feelings on the matter and be considerate of them because you know my feelings on the matter. But if you did not know then I would want you to be considerate. neat. yeah i was oriented toward the extreme and seemingly most common case of taking someone home from the bar. what kind of affirmative action could be taken to avoid this dangerous uncomfortable and awkward side effect of protecting the very necessary right to make an informed consent as it is applied to people that hold views which negatively impact others and ultimately serve to keep us further from the global equal rights ideal? might as well ask people to question their fathers ideals >.< damn morally sanctioned majority prejudice
Education and an end to "trap" jokes and "trap victim" ridicule in popular culture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
