|
On August 03 2013 04:32 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:29 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 03:11 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:05 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:59 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 02:49 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:45 fugs wrote:
[quote]
You misunderstand my argument. I'm implying privilege to information. You are not privileged to my medical history as it is personal and unless I tell you it is none of your business regardless of the situation. I am pointing out male entitlement and how it's affecting a woman's right to privacy.
The information may be relevant to you, but you are not privileged to it. I am when you're asking me to consent to sex with you based upon flawed information. This is no different to having an STD in that regard. Not that I am saying that trans women are diseased, merely that society already has decided that things that can affect the partner should be disclosed before they consent to sex. And if you think that it can't have any impact then you are simply wrong. You might thing it shouldn't have, or that in a fair world it would not have, but you can't think that it will not have any impact. A person with aids needs to tell their partner about their STD because it could kill their partner. That is not the same as a medical issue that is not only not contagious, but in no way physically detrimental to their partner. I apologize but my personal medical information won't be brought into the open by popular opinion. I'm not a monster, and transsexuality is not contagious. The only people privvy to my medical history are my doctors. You've been implying the entire time that the man is trapped in a situation where they become the victim when that's not the case because it's the girl that's being forced to give away information that is her business and hers alone. Firstly and most importantly because we keep restating this and people keep not getting it. You do not get to decide what is detrimental to other people regarding their choice to consent to sex. They get to. Not you. Even if you think you know better. They get to decide. Not you. You can think "well it won't hurt them" as much as you like but if they don't want it, that's what counts. And that's before we look at the fact that a person could quite easily be left with all sorts of issues. A transphobe who views you as a man and himself as straight could be left traumatized, someone with transphobic/homophobic friends could be bullied and physically harassed for years as a result of your decision to deny them the right to informed consent. This involves them. You are not being forced to disclose anything right up until the point at which the information directly affects anyone else. Don't pretend this is about forcibly outing you, it's not, it's about protecting other people. If it was about forcibly outing you then we wouldn't need to involve consent. I don't mean to imply that their right to consent is based on my beliefs, but this false sense of obligation stems completely from negative opinion. Why is protecting people from negative opinion a double edged sword for me? Why do I have to babysit their transphobia while at the same time be berated by it? Because where their belief comes from doesn't matter when it comes down to whether or not they have a right to informed consent. You can think they're a complete fucking retard but you still don't get to knowingly deny them information which would impact their decision to consent to sex. I'm sorry, it sucks that the world isn't fair to you guys but that does not change this principle. Why's this principle more important, because it's popular? Why do I need to adhere to their transphobia, why must I always fucking make sure that they are more comfortable than I am? Why can't I just be a woman and have it be left at that? To be blunt: Because you're not a woman, at least not in the eyes of most people. Even if you want to be one, and look like one, the fact that both those were not always true, makes accepting you as a real woman difficult for many. You're an artificial woman, an imposter, only existing the way you do now because of surgery and/or medication to change you into who you are now. Had those not existed, you would not be able to consider yourself a woman now. It's really no different from thinking a woman is "fake" or "plastic" if she has plastic surgeries to make herself look different. Well, actually it is different, because you're prosecuted far worse than they are, since many people view the way you are as a form of deception, and against nature tbh. Whether or not it is morally wrong to not tell them you are trans is up for grabs though. It's not like you have aids or some sort of disease that could impact them later. If they were always ignorant of who you were before, they would never be negatively affected by it. It's like saying you have to formally announce your race beforehand, just to make sure the other party is cool with it. Now if they ask (for whatever reason), you should obviously tell them. Personally, I'd probably refuse to sleep with a transwoman if I knew about it ahead of time. I wouldn't like attack them or anything, but I'd certainly be against it. If I found out after the matter that I had slept with a transwoman, I'd probably feel betrayed, tricked, and the likes, but I can't imagine I'd be scarred or seek revenge. It's really not that big of a deal if you think about it physically, but emotionally it's muddled. Which is probably where most of the difference in opinion stems from. You look like a woman (I imagine), and you think of yourself as a woman. Emotionally, you believe yourself to really be a woman. Others however, upon hearing you originally weren't a woman, would think you still identify as a man, think as a man, etc. They'd be physically sleeping with a woman, but one with the mentality of a man. Imagine an average guy who magically transforms into a girl one day, and that's how people would view you. Looks like a woman, thinks like a man, and is unnatural. Not that you actually have the mentality of a man. Hopefully you see my point and don't think this is just a big insult post to you. It's harsh, but most people don't exactly have a fond opinion of transgender people, as I'm sure you're already aware. wow not a real woman huh? It doesn't matter how much pain I went through it's never enough. I'll always be a man. Not a real woman Not a real woman Not a real woman Not a real woman Fine, I get it, whatever. And no matter how much you disagree with him, you don't get to disregard his consent. To some people your trans status will always be a dealbreaker, sorry.
Yeah thanks, I get it. You don't have to pretend to be 'sorry'. Might as well stop lying to myself, freaky inverted penis monster probably fits better after all.
|
United States42579 Posts
On August 03 2013 04:37 RaspberrySC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:29 Darkwhite wrote:On August 03 2013 04:24 jinorazi wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:14 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:12 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:01 jinorazi wrote:On August 03 2013 03:57 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
Would it be too far for me to suggest that this tangent about the immediate issues surrounding "disclosure" is indicative of a culture that tells trans people "we think you're weird and scary so you have to be x for us"?
Saying "You are worth as much as other people" really is just idealized lip service when the actions of society say that trans people are not (this is why civil liberties movements and social justice are things).
It doesn't matter what individuals may think or say because those are ineffective. What matters is what is actually put into practice and what is put into practice in US culture is that trans women are considered less than human and it is acceptable to target them for prejudice, bigotry, hatred, and even violence.
You say trans people are worth just as much as anyone else? I say prove it. you can ask the same question about the blacks 50 years ago. its a slow process and its unfair, there is no denying that. but you cant also dismiss how a person is shaped by culture without choice. vast majority of the population are "irrational" and unfortunately thats how the real world is. Without being snarky, I will say that I find your response along with the bolded statement fairly ironic. You should make sure you are aware if someone is using their first language beore making snippy comments. I said it was ironic. You can call it snippy if you like, but is it far-fetched for me to assume that during jinorazi's education in the English language that they were taught or learned that this was an acceptable way to use it? I'm not faulting them. It's ironic. i understand its politically incorrect but at the same time i mean no harm and i tend to use it like that on normal basis and i hear like that on normal basis. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20111129131952AAdjCdZThe bar for finding something offensive is particularly low in here. That's dishonest representation. "Black" as an adjective *is* acceptable. "Black" as a noun is not. "African American" is acceptable because it acknowledges the humanity of the subject in the phrase. "Blacks" denies the humanity. Please stop purposely twisting and obscuring details.
Bullshit. Not all blacks are African Americans. Blacks and whites are perfectly acceptable words to group people by skin colour and when you say African Americans all you're really doing is saying "those Americans who are black".
|
United States42579 Posts
On August 03 2013 04:38 fugs wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:32 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 04:29 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 03:11 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:05 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:59 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 02:49 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
I am when you're asking me to consent to sex with you based upon flawed information. This is no different to having an STD in that regard. Not that I am saying that trans women are diseased, merely that society already has decided that things that can affect the partner should be disclosed before they consent to sex. And if you think that it can't have any impact then you are simply wrong. You might thing it shouldn't have, or that in a fair world it would not have, but you can't think that it will not have any impact. A person with aids needs to tell their partner about their STD because it could kill their partner. That is not the same as a medical issue that is not only not contagious, but in no way physically detrimental to their partner. I apologize but my personal medical information won't be brought into the open by popular opinion. I'm not a monster, and transsexuality is not contagious. The only people privvy to my medical history are my doctors. You've been implying the entire time that the man is trapped in a situation where they become the victim when that's not the case because it's the girl that's being forced to give away information that is her business and hers alone. Firstly and most importantly because we keep restating this and people keep not getting it. You do not get to decide what is detrimental to other people regarding their choice to consent to sex. They get to. Not you. Even if you think you know better. They get to decide. Not you. You can think "well it won't hurt them" as much as you like but if they don't want it, that's what counts. And that's before we look at the fact that a person could quite easily be left with all sorts of issues. A transphobe who views you as a man and himself as straight could be left traumatized, someone with transphobic/homophobic friends could be bullied and physically harassed for years as a result of your decision to deny them the right to informed consent. This involves them. You are not being forced to disclose anything right up until the point at which the information directly affects anyone else. Don't pretend this is about forcibly outing you, it's not, it's about protecting other people. If it was about forcibly outing you then we wouldn't need to involve consent. I don't mean to imply that their right to consent is based on my beliefs, but this false sense of obligation stems completely from negative opinion. Why is protecting people from negative opinion a double edged sword for me? Why do I have to babysit their transphobia while at the same time be berated by it? Because where their belief comes from doesn't matter when it comes down to whether or not they have a right to informed consent. You can think they're a complete fucking retard but you still don't get to knowingly deny them information which would impact their decision to consent to sex. I'm sorry, it sucks that the world isn't fair to you guys but that does not change this principle. Why's this principle more important, because it's popular? Why do I need to adhere to their transphobia, why must I always fucking make sure that they are more comfortable than I am? Why can't I just be a woman and have it be left at that? To be blunt: Because you're not a woman, at least not in the eyes of most people. Even if you want to be one, and look like one, the fact that both those were not always true, makes accepting you as a real woman difficult for many. You're an artificial woman, an imposter, only existing the way you do now because of surgery and/or medication to change you into who you are now. Had those not existed, you would not be able to consider yourself a woman now. It's really no different from thinking a woman is "fake" or "plastic" if she has plastic surgeries to make herself look different. Well, actually it is different, because you're prosecuted far worse than they are, since many people view the way you are as a form of deception, and against nature tbh. Whether or not it is morally wrong to not tell them you are trans is up for grabs though. It's not like you have aids or some sort of disease that could impact them later. If they were always ignorant of who you were before, they would never be negatively affected by it. It's like saying you have to formally announce your race beforehand, just to make sure the other party is cool with it. Now if they ask (for whatever reason), you should obviously tell them. Personally, I'd probably refuse to sleep with a transwoman if I knew about it ahead of time. I wouldn't like attack them or anything, but I'd certainly be against it. If I found out after the matter that I had slept with a transwoman, I'd probably feel betrayed, tricked, and the likes, but I can't imagine I'd be scarred or seek revenge. It's really not that big of a deal if you think about it physically, but emotionally it's muddled. Which is probably where most of the difference in opinion stems from. You look like a woman (I imagine), and you think of yourself as a woman. Emotionally, you believe yourself to really be a woman. Others however, upon hearing you originally weren't a woman, would think you still identify as a man, think as a man, etc. They'd be physically sleeping with a woman, but one with the mentality of a man. Imagine an average guy who magically transforms into a girl one day, and that's how people would view you. Looks like a woman, thinks like a man, and is unnatural. Not that you actually have the mentality of a man. Hopefully you see my point and don't think this is just a big insult post to you. It's harsh, but most people don't exactly have a fond opinion of transgender people, as I'm sure you're already aware. wow not a real woman huh? It doesn't matter how much pain I went through it's never enough. I'll always be a man. Not a real woman Not a real woman Not a real woman Not a real woman Fine, I get it, whatever. And no matter how much you disagree with him, you don't get to disregard his consent. To some people your trans status will always be a dealbreaker, sorry. Yeah thanks, I get it. You don't have to pretend to be 'sorry'. Might as well stop lying to myself, freaky inverted penis monster probably fits better after all.
I am sorry. I wish you had been born cis, that'd make your life much, much easier. I just don't hold to "my life is hard so I get to disregard consent because it's really inconvenient to me because I lost the birth lottery". You're not a monster and I would see absolutely no problem with having sex with a trans person because I don't especially care about that distinction. But if they had reason to believe I did then I would expect them to disclose.
|
On August 03 2013 04:37 killa_robot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:32 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 03:11 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:05 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:59 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 02:49 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:45 fugs wrote:
[quote]
You misunderstand my argument. I'm implying privilege to information. You are not privileged to my medical history as it is personal and unless I tell you it is none of your business regardless of the situation. I am pointing out male entitlement and how it's affecting a woman's right to privacy.
The information may be relevant to you, but you are not privileged to it. I am when you're asking me to consent to sex with you based upon flawed information. This is no different to having an STD in that regard. Not that I am saying that trans women are diseased, merely that society already has decided that things that can affect the partner should be disclosed before they consent to sex. And if you think that it can't have any impact then you are simply wrong. You might thing it shouldn't have, or that in a fair world it would not have, but you can't think that it will not have any impact. A person with aids needs to tell their partner about their STD because it could kill their partner. That is not the same as a medical issue that is not only not contagious, but in no way physically detrimental to their partner. I apologize but my personal medical information won't be brought into the open by popular opinion. I'm not a monster, and transsexuality is not contagious. The only people privvy to my medical history are my doctors. You've been implying the entire time that the man is trapped in a situation where they become the victim when that's not the case because it's the girl that's being forced to give away information that is her business and hers alone. Firstly and most importantly because we keep restating this and people keep not getting it. You do not get to decide what is detrimental to other people regarding their choice to consent to sex. They get to. Not you. Even if you think you know better. They get to decide. Not you. You can think "well it won't hurt them" as much as you like but if they don't want it, that's what counts. And that's before we look at the fact that a person could quite easily be left with all sorts of issues. A transphobe who views you as a man and himself as straight could be left traumatized, someone with transphobic/homophobic friends could be bullied and physically harassed for years as a result of your decision to deny them the right to informed consent. This involves them. You are not being forced to disclose anything right up until the point at which the information directly affects anyone else. Don't pretend this is about forcibly outing you, it's not, it's about protecting other people. If it was about forcibly outing you then we wouldn't need to involve consent. I don't mean to imply that their right to consent is based on my beliefs, but this false sense of obligation stems completely from negative opinion. Why is protecting people from negative opinion a double edged sword for me? Why do I have to babysit their transphobia while at the same time be berated by it? Because where their belief comes from doesn't matter when it comes down to whether or not they have a right to informed consent. You can think they're a complete fucking retard but you still don't get to knowingly deny them information which would impact their decision to consent to sex. I'm sorry, it sucks that the world isn't fair to you guys but that does not change this principle. Why's this principle more important, because it's popular? Why do I need to adhere to their transphobia, why must I always fucking make sure that they are more comfortable than I am? Why can't I just be a woman and have it be left at that? To be blunt: Because you're not a woman, at least not in the eyes of most people. Even if you want to be one, and look like one, the fact that both those were not always true, makes accepting you as a real woman difficult for many. You're an artificial woman, an imposter, only existing the way you do now because of surgery and/or medication to change you into who you are now. Had those not existed, you would not be able to consider yourself a woman now. It's really no different from thinking a woman is "fake" or "plastic" if she has plastic surgeries to make herself look different. Well, actually it is different, because you're prosecuted far worse than they are, since many people view the way you are as a form of deception, and against nature tbh. Whether or not it is morally wrong to not tell them you are trans is up for grabs though. It's not like you have aids or some sort of disease that could impact them later. If they were always ignorant of who you were before, they would never be negatively affected by it. It's like saying you have to formally announce your race beforehand, just to make sure the other party is cool with it. Now if they ask (for whatever reason), you should obviously tell them. Personally, I'd probably refuse to sleep with a transwoman if I knew about it ahead of time. I wouldn't like attack them or anything, but I'd certainly be against it. If I found out after the matter that I had slept with a transwoman, I'd probably feel betrayed, tricked, and the likes, but I can't imagine I'd be scarred or seek revenge. It's really not that big of a deal if you think about it physically, but emotionally it's muddled. Which is probably where most of the difference in opinion stems from. You look like a woman (I imagine), and you think of yourself as a woman. Emotionally, you believe yourself to really be a woman. Others however, upon hearing you originally weren't a woman, would think you still identify as a man, think as a man, etc. They'd be physically sleeping with a woman, but one with the mentality of a man. Imagine an average guy who magically transforms into a girl one day, and that's how people would view you. Looks like a woman, thinks like a man, and is unnatural. Not that you actually have the mentality of a man. Hopefully you see my point and don't think this is just a big insult post to you. It's harsh, but most people don't exactly have a fond opinion of transgender people, as I'm sure you're already aware. That was really unnecessary. I do not believe most people are that transphobic, and I do think most people are receptive to learn about our condition, our experience and how to respect us. Just because you dislike or disagree with my opinion doesn't mean it was unnecessary. Learning about transgender people and respecting them is a lot different from having intimate relations with them, which is what my post was about. I'd be fine with having a transgender friend, as it wouldn't affect my opinion of them as a human being, but I would still be against sleeping with them.
The comment you made is one of those that could put a less emotionally stable person in a near suicidal state. I'm not even joking.
|
On August 03 2013 04:37 killa_robot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:32 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 03:11 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:05 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:59 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 02:49 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:45 fugs wrote:
[quote]
You misunderstand my argument. I'm implying privilege to information. You are not privileged to my medical history as it is personal and unless I tell you it is none of your business regardless of the situation. I am pointing out male entitlement and how it's affecting a woman's right to privacy.
The information may be relevant to you, but you are not privileged to it. I am when you're asking me to consent to sex with you based upon flawed information. This is no different to having an STD in that regard. Not that I am saying that trans women are diseased, merely that society already has decided that things that can affect the partner should be disclosed before they consent to sex. And if you think that it can't have any impact then you are simply wrong. You might thing it shouldn't have, or that in a fair world it would not have, but you can't think that it will not have any impact. A person with aids needs to tell their partner about their STD because it could kill their partner. That is not the same as a medical issue that is not only not contagious, but in no way physically detrimental to their partner. I apologize but my personal medical information won't be brought into the open by popular opinion. I'm not a monster, and transsexuality is not contagious. The only people privvy to my medical history are my doctors. You've been implying the entire time that the man is trapped in a situation where they become the victim when that's not the case because it's the girl that's being forced to give away information that is her business and hers alone. Firstly and most importantly because we keep restating this and people keep not getting it. You do not get to decide what is detrimental to other people regarding their choice to consent to sex. They get to. Not you. Even if you think you know better. They get to decide. Not you. You can think "well it won't hurt them" as much as you like but if they don't want it, that's what counts. And that's before we look at the fact that a person could quite easily be left with all sorts of issues. A transphobe who views you as a man and himself as straight could be left traumatized, someone with transphobic/homophobic friends could be bullied and physically harassed for years as a result of your decision to deny them the right to informed consent. This involves them. You are not being forced to disclose anything right up until the point at which the information directly affects anyone else. Don't pretend this is about forcibly outing you, it's not, it's about protecting other people. If it was about forcibly outing you then we wouldn't need to involve consent. I don't mean to imply that their right to consent is based on my beliefs, but this false sense of obligation stems completely from negative opinion. Why is protecting people from negative opinion a double edged sword for me? Why do I have to babysit their transphobia while at the same time be berated by it? Because where their belief comes from doesn't matter when it comes down to whether or not they have a right to informed consent. You can think they're a complete fucking retard but you still don't get to knowingly deny them information which would impact their decision to consent to sex. I'm sorry, it sucks that the world isn't fair to you guys but that does not change this principle. Why's this principle more important, because it's popular? Why do I need to adhere to their transphobia, why must I always fucking make sure that they are more comfortable than I am? Why can't I just be a woman and have it be left at that? To be blunt: Because you're not a woman, at least not in the eyes of most people. Even if you want to be one, and look like one, the fact that both those were not always true, makes accepting you as a real woman difficult for many. You're an artificial woman, an imposter, only existing the way you do now because of surgery and/or medication to change you into who you are now. Had those not existed, you would not be able to consider yourself a woman now. It's really no different from thinking a woman is "fake" or "plastic" if she has plastic surgeries to make herself look different. Well, actually it is different, because you're prosecuted far worse than they are, since many people view the way you are as a form of deception, and against nature tbh. Whether or not it is morally wrong to not tell them you are trans is up for grabs though. It's not like you have aids or some sort of disease that could impact them later. If they were always ignorant of who you were before, they would never be negatively affected by it. It's like saying you have to formally announce your race beforehand, just to make sure the other party is cool with it. Now if they ask (for whatever reason), you should obviously tell them. Personally, I'd probably refuse to sleep with a transwoman if I knew about it ahead of time. I wouldn't like attack them or anything, but I'd certainly be against it. If I found out after the matter that I had slept with a transwoman, I'd probably feel betrayed, tricked, and the likes, but I can't imagine I'd be scarred or seek revenge. It's really not that big of a deal if you think about it physically, but emotionally it's muddled. Which is probably where most of the difference in opinion stems from. You look like a woman (I imagine), and you think of yourself as a woman. Emotionally, you believe yourself to really be a woman. Others however, upon hearing you originally weren't a woman, would think you still identify as a man, think as a man, etc. They'd be physically sleeping with a woman, but one with the mentality of a man. Imagine an average guy who magically transforms into a girl one day, and that's how people would view you. Looks like a woman, thinks like a man, and is unnatural. Not that you actually have the mentality of a man. Hopefully you see my point and don't think this is just a big insult post to you. It's harsh, but most people don't exactly have a fond opinion of transgender people, as I'm sure you're already aware. That was really unnecessary. I do not believe most people are that transphobic, and I do think most people are receptive to learn about our condition, our experience and how to respect us. Just because you dislike or disagree with my opinion doesn't mean it was unnecessary. Learning about transgender people and respecting them is a lot different from having intimate relations with them, which is what my post was about. I'd be fine with having a transgender friend, as it wouldn't affect my opinion of them as a human being (well it would, but it wouldn't be incredibly negative), but I would still be against sleeping with them. Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:34 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 03:11 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:05 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:59 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 02:49 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:45 fugs wrote:
[quote]
You misunderstand my argument. I'm implying privilege to information. You are not privileged to my medical history as it is personal and unless I tell you it is none of your business regardless of the situation. I am pointing out male entitlement and how it's affecting a woman's right to privacy.
The information may be relevant to you, but you are not privileged to it. I am when you're asking me to consent to sex with you based upon flawed information. This is no different to having an STD in that regard. Not that I am saying that trans women are diseased, merely that society already has decided that things that can affect the partner should be disclosed before they consent to sex. And if you think that it can't have any impact then you are simply wrong. You might thing it shouldn't have, or that in a fair world it would not have, but you can't think that it will not have any impact. A person with aids needs to tell their partner about their STD because it could kill their partner. That is not the same as a medical issue that is not only not contagious, but in no way physically detrimental to their partner. I apologize but my personal medical information won't be brought into the open by popular opinion. I'm not a monster, and transsexuality is not contagious. The only people privvy to my medical history are my doctors. You've been implying the entire time that the man is trapped in a situation where they become the victim when that's not the case because it's the girl that's being forced to give away information that is her business and hers alone. Firstly and most importantly because we keep restating this and people keep not getting it. You do not get to decide what is detrimental to other people regarding their choice to consent to sex. They get to. Not you. Even if you think you know better. They get to decide. Not you. You can think "well it won't hurt them" as much as you like but if they don't want it, that's what counts. And that's before we look at the fact that a person could quite easily be left with all sorts of issues. A transphobe who views you as a man and himself as straight could be left traumatized, someone with transphobic/homophobic friends could be bullied and physically harassed for years as a result of your decision to deny them the right to informed consent. This involves them. You are not being forced to disclose anything right up until the point at which the information directly affects anyone else. Don't pretend this is about forcibly outing you, it's not, it's about protecting other people. If it was about forcibly outing you then we wouldn't need to involve consent. I don't mean to imply that their right to consent is based on my beliefs, but this false sense of obligation stems completely from negative opinion. Why is protecting people from negative opinion a double edged sword for me? Why do I have to babysit their transphobia while at the same time be berated by it? Because where their belief comes from doesn't matter when it comes down to whether or not they have a right to informed consent. You can think they're a complete fucking retard but you still don't get to knowingly deny them information which would impact their decision to consent to sex. I'm sorry, it sucks that the world isn't fair to you guys but that does not change this principle. Why's this principle more important, because it's popular? Why do I need to adhere to their transphobia, why must I always fucking make sure that they are more comfortable than I am? Why can't I just be a woman and have it be left at that? To be blunt: Because you're not a woman, at least not in the eyes of most people. Even if you want to be one, and look like one, the fact that both those were not always true, makes accepting you as a real woman difficult for many. You're an artificial woman, an imposter, only existing the way you do now because of surgery and/or medication to change you into who you are now. Had those not existed, you would not be able to consider yourself a woman now. It's really no different from thinking a woman is "fake" or "plastic" if she has plastic surgeries to make herself look different. Well, actually it is different, because you're prosecuted far worse than they are, since many people view the way you are as a form of deception, and against nature tbh. Whether or not it is morally wrong to not tell them you are trans is up for grabs though. It's not like you have aids or some sort of disease that could impact them later. If they were always ignorant of who you were before, they would never be negatively affected by it. It's like saying you have to formally announce your race beforehand, just to make sure the other party is cool with it. Now if they ask (for whatever reason), you should obviously tell them. Personally, I'd probably refuse to sleep with a transwoman if I knew about it ahead of time. I wouldn't like attack them or anything, but I'd certainly be against it. If I found out after the matter that I had slept with a transwoman, I'd probably feel betrayed, tricked, and the likes, but I can't imagine I'd be scarred or seek revenge. It's really not that big of a deal if you think about it physically, but emotionally it's muddled. Which is probably where most of the difference in opinion stems from. You look like a woman (I imagine), and you think of yourself as a woman. Emotionally, you believe yourself to really be a woman. Others however, upon hearing you originally weren't a woman, would think you still identify as a man, think as a man, etc. They'd be physically sleeping with a woman, but one with the mentality of a man. Imagine an average guy who magically transforms into a girl one day, and that's how people would view you. Looks like a woman, thinks like a man, and is unnatural. Not that you actually have the mentality of a man. Hopefully you see my point and don't think this is just a big insult post to you. It's harsh, but most people don't exactly have a fond opinion of transgender people, as I'm sure you're already aware. A lot of people might say your being honest. I am not one of them, I think your just doing it to be an ass. Bambie taught us all something long ago about this subject. If you don't have something nice to say, shut it. It was a less you clearly missed out on. Meh, you're wrong, but it's not as though I can convince you of this.
It was over the top and mean. The entire section about "artificial woman, an imposter" was just mean for the sake of it. Unless you think they are not aware, which then I would question how much you thought about that. You could have cut that thing in half and gotten your point across.
|
On August 03 2013 04:40 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:37 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 04:32 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 03:11 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:05 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:59 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 02:49 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
I am when you're asking me to consent to sex with you based upon flawed information. This is no different to having an STD in that regard. Not that I am saying that trans women are diseased, merely that society already has decided that things that can affect the partner should be disclosed before they consent to sex. And if you think that it can't have any impact then you are simply wrong. You might thing it shouldn't have, or that in a fair world it would not have, but you can't think that it will not have any impact. A person with aids needs to tell their partner about their STD because it could kill their partner. That is not the same as a medical issue that is not only not contagious, but in no way physically detrimental to their partner. I apologize but my personal medical information won't be brought into the open by popular opinion. I'm not a monster, and transsexuality is not contagious. The only people privvy to my medical history are my doctors. You've been implying the entire time that the man is trapped in a situation where they become the victim when that's not the case because it's the girl that's being forced to give away information that is her business and hers alone. Firstly and most importantly because we keep restating this and people keep not getting it. You do not get to decide what is detrimental to other people regarding their choice to consent to sex. They get to. Not you. Even if you think you know better. They get to decide. Not you. You can think "well it won't hurt them" as much as you like but if they don't want it, that's what counts. And that's before we look at the fact that a person could quite easily be left with all sorts of issues. A transphobe who views you as a man and himself as straight could be left traumatized, someone with transphobic/homophobic friends could be bullied and physically harassed for years as a result of your decision to deny them the right to informed consent. This involves them. You are not being forced to disclose anything right up until the point at which the information directly affects anyone else. Don't pretend this is about forcibly outing you, it's not, it's about protecting other people. If it was about forcibly outing you then we wouldn't need to involve consent. I don't mean to imply that their right to consent is based on my beliefs, but this false sense of obligation stems completely from negative opinion. Why is protecting people from negative opinion a double edged sword for me? Why do I have to babysit their transphobia while at the same time be berated by it? Because where their belief comes from doesn't matter when it comes down to whether or not they have a right to informed consent. You can think they're a complete fucking retard but you still don't get to knowingly deny them information which would impact their decision to consent to sex. I'm sorry, it sucks that the world isn't fair to you guys but that does not change this principle. Why's this principle more important, because it's popular? Why do I need to adhere to their transphobia, why must I always fucking make sure that they are more comfortable than I am? Why can't I just be a woman and have it be left at that? To be blunt: Because you're not a woman, at least not in the eyes of most people. Even if you want to be one, and look like one, the fact that both those were not always true, makes accepting you as a real woman difficult for many. You're an artificial woman, an imposter, only existing the way you do now because of surgery and/or medication to change you into who you are now. Had those not existed, you would not be able to consider yourself a woman now. It's really no different from thinking a woman is "fake" or "plastic" if she has plastic surgeries to make herself look different. Well, actually it is different, because you're prosecuted far worse than they are, since many people view the way you are as a form of deception, and against nature tbh. Whether or not it is morally wrong to not tell them you are trans is up for grabs though. It's not like you have aids or some sort of disease that could impact them later. If they were always ignorant of who you were before, they would never be negatively affected by it. It's like saying you have to formally announce your race beforehand, just to make sure the other party is cool with it. Now if they ask (for whatever reason), you should obviously tell them. Personally, I'd probably refuse to sleep with a transwoman if I knew about it ahead of time. I wouldn't like attack them or anything, but I'd certainly be against it. If I found out after the matter that I had slept with a transwoman, I'd probably feel betrayed, tricked, and the likes, but I can't imagine I'd be scarred or seek revenge. It's really not that big of a deal if you think about it physically, but emotionally it's muddled. Which is probably where most of the difference in opinion stems from. You look like a woman (I imagine), and you think of yourself as a woman. Emotionally, you believe yourself to really be a woman. Others however, upon hearing you originally weren't a woman, would think you still identify as a man, think as a man, etc. They'd be physically sleeping with a woman, but one with the mentality of a man. Imagine an average guy who magically transforms into a girl one day, and that's how people would view you. Looks like a woman, thinks like a man, and is unnatural. Not that you actually have the mentality of a man. Hopefully you see my point and don't think this is just a big insult post to you. It's harsh, but most people don't exactly have a fond opinion of transgender people, as I'm sure you're already aware. That was really unnecessary. I do not believe most people are that transphobic, and I do think most people are receptive to learn about our condition, our experience and how to respect us. Just because you dislike or disagree with my opinion doesn't mean it was unnecessary. Learning about transgender people and respecting them is a lot different from having intimate relations with them, which is what my post was about. I'd be fine with having a transgender friend, as it wouldn't affect my opinion of them as a human being, but I would still be against sleeping with them. The comment you made is one of those that could put a less emotionally stable person in a near suicidal state. I'm not even joking.
just knowing there are people like him in society isnt doing anything good for my psyche
|
United States42579 Posts
On August 03 2013 04:40 Shodaa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:37 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 04:32 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 03:11 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:05 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:59 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 02:49 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
I am when you're asking me to consent to sex with you based upon flawed information. This is no different to having an STD in that regard. Not that I am saying that trans women are diseased, merely that society already has decided that things that can affect the partner should be disclosed before they consent to sex. And if you think that it can't have any impact then you are simply wrong. You might thing it shouldn't have, or that in a fair world it would not have, but you can't think that it will not have any impact. A person with aids needs to tell their partner about their STD because it could kill their partner. That is not the same as a medical issue that is not only not contagious, but in no way physically detrimental to their partner. I apologize but my personal medical information won't be brought into the open by popular opinion. I'm not a monster, and transsexuality is not contagious. The only people privvy to my medical history are my doctors. You've been implying the entire time that the man is trapped in a situation where they become the victim when that's not the case because it's the girl that's being forced to give away information that is her business and hers alone. Firstly and most importantly because we keep restating this and people keep not getting it. You do not get to decide what is detrimental to other people regarding their choice to consent to sex. They get to. Not you. Even if you think you know better. They get to decide. Not you. You can think "well it won't hurt them" as much as you like but if they don't want it, that's what counts. And that's before we look at the fact that a person could quite easily be left with all sorts of issues. A transphobe who views you as a man and himself as straight could be left traumatized, someone with transphobic/homophobic friends could be bullied and physically harassed for years as a result of your decision to deny them the right to informed consent. This involves them. You are not being forced to disclose anything right up until the point at which the information directly affects anyone else. Don't pretend this is about forcibly outing you, it's not, it's about protecting other people. If it was about forcibly outing you then we wouldn't need to involve consent. I don't mean to imply that their right to consent is based on my beliefs, but this false sense of obligation stems completely from negative opinion. Why is protecting people from negative opinion a double edged sword for me? Why do I have to babysit their transphobia while at the same time be berated by it? Because where their belief comes from doesn't matter when it comes down to whether or not they have a right to informed consent. You can think they're a complete fucking retard but you still don't get to knowingly deny them information which would impact their decision to consent to sex. I'm sorry, it sucks that the world isn't fair to you guys but that does not change this principle. Why's this principle more important, because it's popular? Why do I need to adhere to their transphobia, why must I always fucking make sure that they are more comfortable than I am? Why can't I just be a woman and have it be left at that? To be blunt: Because you're not a woman, at least not in the eyes of most people. Even if you want to be one, and look like one, the fact that both those were not always true, makes accepting you as a real woman difficult for many. You're an artificial woman, an imposter, only existing the way you do now because of surgery and/or medication to change you into who you are now. Had those not existed, you would not be able to consider yourself a woman now. It's really no different from thinking a woman is "fake" or "plastic" if she has plastic surgeries to make herself look different. Well, actually it is different, because you're prosecuted far worse than they are, since many people view the way you are as a form of deception, and against nature tbh. Whether or not it is morally wrong to not tell them you are trans is up for grabs though. It's not like you have aids or some sort of disease that could impact them later. If they were always ignorant of who you were before, they would never be negatively affected by it. It's like saying you have to formally announce your race beforehand, just to make sure the other party is cool with it. Now if they ask (for whatever reason), you should obviously tell them. Personally, I'd probably refuse to sleep with a transwoman if I knew about it ahead of time. I wouldn't like attack them or anything, but I'd certainly be against it. If I found out after the matter that I had slept with a transwoman, I'd probably feel betrayed, tricked, and the likes, but I can't imagine I'd be scarred or seek revenge. It's really not that big of a deal if you think about it physically, but emotionally it's muddled. Which is probably where most of the difference in opinion stems from. You look like a woman (I imagine), and you think of yourself as a woman. Emotionally, you believe yourself to really be a woman. Others however, upon hearing you originally weren't a woman, would think you still identify as a man, think as a man, etc. They'd be physically sleeping with a woman, but one with the mentality of a man. Imagine an average guy who magically transforms into a girl one day, and that's how people would view you. Looks like a woman, thinks like a man, and is unnatural. Not that you actually have the mentality of a man. Hopefully you see my point and don't think this is just a big insult post to you. It's harsh, but most people don't exactly have a fond opinion of transgender people, as I'm sure you're already aware. That was really unnecessary. I do not believe most people are that transphobic, and I do think most people are receptive to learn about our condition, our experience and how to respect us. Just because you dislike or disagree with my opinion doesn't mean it was unnecessary. Learning about transgender people and respecting them is a lot different from having intimate relations with them, which is what my post was about. I'd be fine with having a transgender friend, as it wouldn't affect my opinion of them as a human being, but I would still be against sleeping with them. The comment you made is one of those that could put a less emotionally stable person in a near suicidal state. I'm not even joking.
He said that all the surgery in the world won't make enough of a difference for some people. That is true. For some people trans people will forever be different to cis people and will be irrevocably associated with their birth gender. I don't believe he said it to be mean or to induce suicide, he said it because it is relevant to this issue. As ever trans people have my sympathy.
|
On August 03 2013 04:38 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:37 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:29 Darkwhite wrote:On August 03 2013 04:24 jinorazi wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:14 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:12 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:01 jinorazi wrote:On August 03 2013 03:57 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
Would it be too far for me to suggest that this tangent about the immediate issues surrounding "disclosure" is indicative of a culture that tells trans people "we think you're weird and scary so you have to be x for us"?
Saying "You are worth as much as other people" really is just idealized lip service when the actions of society say that trans people are not (this is why civil liberties movements and social justice are things).
It doesn't matter what individuals may think or say because those are ineffective. What matters is what is actually put into practice and what is put into practice in US culture is that trans women are considered less than human and it is acceptable to target them for prejudice, bigotry, hatred, and even violence.
You say trans people are worth just as much as anyone else? I say prove it. you can ask the same question about the blacks 50 years ago. its a slow process and its unfair, there is no denying that. but you cant also dismiss how a person is shaped by culture without choice. vast majority of the population are "irrational" and unfortunately thats how the real world is. Without being snarky, I will say that I find your response along with the bolded statement fairly ironic. You should make sure you are aware if someone is using their first language beore making snippy comments. I said it was ironic. You can call it snippy if you like, but is it far-fetched for me to assume that during jinorazi's education in the English language that they were taught or learned that this was an acceptable way to use it? I'm not faulting them. It's ironic. i understand its politically incorrect but at the same time i mean no harm and i tend to use it like that on normal basis and i hear like that on normal basis. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20111129131952AAdjCdZThe bar for finding something offensive is particularly low in here. That's dishonest representation. "Black" as an adjective *is* acceptable. "Black" as a noun is not. "African American" is acceptable because it acknowledges the humanity of the subject in the phrase. "Blacks" denies the humanity. Please stop purposely twisting and obscuring details. Bullshit. Not all blacks are African Americans. Blacks and whites are perfectly acceptable words to group people by skin colour and when you say African Americans all you're really doing is saying "those Americans who are black".
Bullshit. You're missing the point. "Whites" is just as unacceptable as "Blacks" or "Reds" or "Yellows". The point is that nouning the describing adjective of a group of people is a subversive dehumanization.
|
I appreciate it's the Internet and I can't prove otherwise, but if there were some way I could prove intention I would bet everything I own on his intention being meant to be hurtful.
|
On August 03 2013 04:42 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:40 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 04:37 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 04:32 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 03:11 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:05 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 02:59 fugs wrote:
[quote]
A person with aids needs to tell their partner about their STD because it could kill their partner. That is not the same as a medical issue that is not only not contagious, but in no way physically detrimental to their partner. I apologize but my personal medical information won't be brought into the open by popular opinion. I'm not a monster, and transsexuality is not contagious.
The only people privvy to my medical history are my doctors. You've been implying the entire time that the man is trapped in a situation where they become the victim when that's not the case because it's the girl that's being forced to give away information that is her business and hers alone. Firstly and most importantly because we keep restating this and people keep not getting it. You do not get to decide what is detrimental to other people regarding their choice to consent to sex. They get to. Not you. Even if you think you know better. They get to decide. Not you. You can think "well it won't hurt them" as much as you like but if they don't want it, that's what counts. And that's before we look at the fact that a person could quite easily be left with all sorts of issues. A transphobe who views you as a man and himself as straight could be left traumatized, someone with transphobic/homophobic friends could be bullied and physically harassed for years as a result of your decision to deny them the right to informed consent. This involves them. You are not being forced to disclose anything right up until the point at which the information directly affects anyone else. Don't pretend this is about forcibly outing you, it's not, it's about protecting other people. If it was about forcibly outing you then we wouldn't need to involve consent. I don't mean to imply that their right to consent is based on my beliefs, but this false sense of obligation stems completely from negative opinion. Why is protecting people from negative opinion a double edged sword for me? Why do I have to babysit their transphobia while at the same time be berated by it? Because where their belief comes from doesn't matter when it comes down to whether or not they have a right to informed consent. You can think they're a complete fucking retard but you still don't get to knowingly deny them information which would impact their decision to consent to sex. I'm sorry, it sucks that the world isn't fair to you guys but that does not change this principle. Why's this principle more important, because it's popular? Why do I need to adhere to their transphobia, why must I always fucking make sure that they are more comfortable than I am? Why can't I just be a woman and have it be left at that? To be blunt: Because you're not a woman, at least not in the eyes of most people. Even if you want to be one, and look like one, the fact that both those were not always true, makes accepting you as a real woman difficult for many. You're an artificial woman, an imposter, only existing the way you do now because of surgery and/or medication to change you into who you are now. Had those not existed, you would not be able to consider yourself a woman now. It's really no different from thinking a woman is "fake" or "plastic" if she has plastic surgeries to make herself look different. Well, actually it is different, because you're prosecuted far worse than they are, since many people view the way you are as a form of deception, and against nature tbh. Whether or not it is morally wrong to not tell them you are trans is up for grabs though. It's not like you have aids or some sort of disease that could impact them later. If they were always ignorant of who you were before, they would never be negatively affected by it. It's like saying you have to formally announce your race beforehand, just to make sure the other party is cool with it. Now if they ask (for whatever reason), you should obviously tell them. Personally, I'd probably refuse to sleep with a transwoman if I knew about it ahead of time. I wouldn't like attack them or anything, but I'd certainly be against it. If I found out after the matter that I had slept with a transwoman, I'd probably feel betrayed, tricked, and the likes, but I can't imagine I'd be scarred or seek revenge. It's really not that big of a deal if you think about it physically, but emotionally it's muddled. Which is probably where most of the difference in opinion stems from. You look like a woman (I imagine), and you think of yourself as a woman. Emotionally, you believe yourself to really be a woman. Others however, upon hearing you originally weren't a woman, would think you still identify as a man, think as a man, etc. They'd be physically sleeping with a woman, but one with the mentality of a man. Imagine an average guy who magically transforms into a girl one day, and that's how people would view you. Looks like a woman, thinks like a man, and is unnatural. Not that you actually have the mentality of a man. Hopefully you see my point and don't think this is just a big insult post to you. It's harsh, but most people don't exactly have a fond opinion of transgender people, as I'm sure you're already aware. That was really unnecessary. I do not believe most people are that transphobic, and I do think most people are receptive to learn about our condition, our experience and how to respect us. Just because you dislike or disagree with my opinion doesn't mean it was unnecessary. Learning about transgender people and respecting them is a lot different from having intimate relations with them, which is what my post was about. I'd be fine with having a transgender friend, as it wouldn't affect my opinion of them as a human being, but I would still be against sleeping with them. The comment you made is one of those that could put a less emotionally stable person in a near suicidal state. I'm not even joking. He said that all the surgery in the world won't make enough of a difference for some people. That is true. For some people trans people will forever be different to cis people and will be irrevocably associated with their birth gender. I don't believe he said it to be mean or to induce suicide, he said it because it is relevant to this issue. As ever trans people have my sympathy.
I'm sorry Kwark, did you miss the first paragraph or the second?
|
On August 03 2013 04:29 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:20 ComaDose wrote:On August 03 2013 04:17 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:09 shinosai wrote:On August 03 2013 04:07 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:01 shinosai wrote:On August 03 2013 03:53 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 03:49 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 03:47 Snusmumriken wrote:
Look, can we all at least agree that if you actually KNOW a person doesnt want to sleep with you if they knew something about you, no matter what it is, then you should tell them before having sex with them, otherwise youre doing something immoral. Does everyone agree with this? Yes, if you can confirm they do not care about sleeping with someone who is transgender without informing them you are transgender(ie, they were in a past relationship or simple expressed indifference), then there is no problem and no requirement to inform them. Right, the other way around would be to learn what the person think about transgender, like with starting a casual conversation with them without implying anything about yourself to stay safe. Similar to how you can "test the water" before coming out to someone close. Look, I agree, I would totally test the waters to make sure someone is not transphobic before sleeping with them. I actually am of the opinion that honesty is the best policy. I just think there's a weird double standard here where trans women are required to do way more disclosure than you are. Maybe not most, but a lot of people (a significant 'statistic' as Kwark might call it) don't want to sleep with transphobic or racist individuals. I think that if trans women are morally obligated to "test" the waters, then you are as well. There are a lot of weird double standards in the bed room when it comes to one night stands. Males are generally have to be more careful about consent, as any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid, even if they are not. The bedroom is not a fair place. I think it's kind of off topic, but really important to note that most accusations of rape are not taken seriously (or seriously enough). Hence why the vast, vast majority of rapists are never prosecuted. That being said, if you acknowledge there's a double standard, then do you agree that you are morally obligated to inform partners of your phobias? There is a Lacross team from Duke that wishes that was always the case with false rape reports. And yes, we are obligated to inform people of any hang ups you might have. Or at least things they would object to. I mean, if someone won't sleep with gun owners, they should likely let people know(weirdest, non-racial phobia I could think of) what? he said the vast majority of real rapists are never prosecuted and you said one time there was a false rape report that went through? EDIT: wait before that you said as any accusations of rape made (by?) a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid what fucking planet are you living on buddy? But we are discussing false reports of rape and the double standard on men when it comes to that subject. I never discussed or even brought up the topic of real rapists, only when men are falsely accused of raping a woman. They are two very seperate subjects.
well you said:
"any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously"
and im asking you where you are from because i don't know of any place thats like this on earth
|
United States42579 Posts
On August 03 2013 04:43 RaspberrySC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:38 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 04:37 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:29 Darkwhite wrote:On August 03 2013 04:24 jinorazi wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:14 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:12 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:01 jinorazi wrote:On August 03 2013 03:57 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
Would it be too far for me to suggest that this tangent about the immediate issues surrounding "disclosure" is indicative of a culture that tells trans people "we think you're weird and scary so you have to be x for us"?
Saying "You are worth as much as other people" really is just idealized lip service when the actions of society say that trans people are not (this is why civil liberties movements and social justice are things).
It doesn't matter what individuals may think or say because those are ineffective. What matters is what is actually put into practice and what is put into practice in US culture is that trans women are considered less than human and it is acceptable to target them for prejudice, bigotry, hatred, and even violence.
You say trans people are worth just as much as anyone else? I say prove it. you can ask the same question about the blacks 50 years ago. its a slow process and its unfair, there is no denying that. but you cant also dismiss how a person is shaped by culture without choice. vast majority of the population are "irrational" and unfortunately thats how the real world is. Without being snarky, I will say that I find your response along with the bolded statement fairly ironic. You should make sure you are aware if someone is using their first language beore making snippy comments. I said it was ironic. You can call it snippy if you like, but is it far-fetched for me to assume that during jinorazi's education in the English language that they were taught or learned that this was an acceptable way to use it? I'm not faulting them. It's ironic. i understand its politically incorrect but at the same time i mean no harm and i tend to use it like that on normal basis and i hear like that on normal basis. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20111129131952AAdjCdZThe bar for finding something offensive is particularly low in here. That's dishonest representation. "Black" as an adjective *is* acceptable. "Black" as a noun is not. "African American" is acceptable because it acknowledges the humanity of the subject in the phrase. "Blacks" denies the humanity. Please stop purposely twisting and obscuring details. Bullshit. Not all blacks are African Americans. Blacks and whites are perfectly acceptable words to group people by skin colour and when you say African Americans all you're really doing is saying "those Americans who are black". Bullshit. You're missing the point. "Whites" is just as unacceptable as "Blacks" or "Reds" or "Yellows". The point is that nouning the describing adjective of a group of people is a subversive dehumanization.
Not in the least bit true. Otherwise I wouldn't use whites and blacks while being white.
|
On August 03 2013 04:36 Asarha wrote:
I'll try to give Raspberry an example. Sorry for my english, I enjoy reading this board, but never really try to discuss, 'cause I don't think my english's good enough, but i feel I need to explain why you have to say to people you're transgender if you want to have sex with them.
I agree that the example of people having aids was totaly awful. Despite whatever people are thinking, this is not a disease. But here's my example: libertinism.
See, I am someone who can be with a woman, and have sex with an other woman. For me, sex is just sex. It doesn't mean I'm in love. It doesn't mean I want to build something with the person wich is in my bed.
But If I'm going to have sex with someone, I had to tell her this. Not 'cause It's wrong. Not 'cause I'm ashamed, but just 'cause this could hurt her.
I'm not ashamed of being libertin, neither should you of being a trans. And even if we both can say "I don't care about what you think about my way of life", I feel like we can't act like it doesn't matter when it come to sex. We have to understand that there are some "stereotype", some "default settings" and if we don't fit in, we have to tell it to other people.
For example, when someone's my girlfriends, she need to know that it doesn't mean I won't have sex with another woman. That doesn't even mean I won't be with an other woman, as a couple. This is not what "society" teach us. It's not wrong. It's just an other way. (thx Darkest days)
Same things for transgender. It's not wrong. It's just an other way. But you have to tell your partner about it, 'cause it's not what they expect to.
Sex is something awesome. Love's awesome too. Don't mess with other people feeling, even if you think this shouldn't matters.
I understand what you are saying. The moral dilemma here is just how much do we insist (or enforce) that people be responsible for someone else's feelings based on uncommunicated expectations and to what end?
|
United States42579 Posts
On August 03 2013 04:44 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:42 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 04:40 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 04:37 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 04:32 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 03:11 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:05 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Firstly and most importantly because we keep restating this and people keep not getting it. You do not get to decide what is detrimental to other people regarding their choice to consent to sex. They get to. Not you. Even if you think you know better. They get to decide. Not you. You can think "well it won't hurt them" as much as you like but if they don't want it, that's what counts.
And that's before we look at the fact that a person could quite easily be left with all sorts of issues. A transphobe who views you as a man and himself as straight could be left traumatized, someone with transphobic/homophobic friends could be bullied and physically harassed for years as a result of your decision to deny them the right to informed consent. This involves them.
You are not being forced to disclose anything right up until the point at which the information directly affects anyone else. Don't pretend this is about forcibly outing you, it's not, it's about protecting other people. If it was about forcibly outing you then we wouldn't need to involve consent. I don't mean to imply that their right to consent is based on my beliefs, but this false sense of obligation stems completely from negative opinion. Why is protecting people from negative opinion a double edged sword for me? Why do I have to babysit their transphobia while at the same time be berated by it? Because where their belief comes from doesn't matter when it comes down to whether or not they have a right to informed consent. You can think they're a complete fucking retard but you still don't get to knowingly deny them information which would impact their decision to consent to sex. I'm sorry, it sucks that the world isn't fair to you guys but that does not change this principle. Why's this principle more important, because it's popular? Why do I need to adhere to their transphobia, why must I always fucking make sure that they are more comfortable than I am? Why can't I just be a woman and have it be left at that? To be blunt: Because you're not a woman, at least not in the eyes of most people. Even if you want to be one, and look like one, the fact that both those were not always true, makes accepting you as a real woman difficult for many. You're an artificial woman, an imposter, only existing the way you do now because of surgery and/or medication to change you into who you are now. Had those not existed, you would not be able to consider yourself a woman now. It's really no different from thinking a woman is "fake" or "plastic" if she has plastic surgeries to make herself look different. Well, actually it is different, because you're prosecuted far worse than they are, since many people view the way you are as a form of deception, and against nature tbh. Whether or not it is morally wrong to not tell them you are trans is up for grabs though. It's not like you have aids or some sort of disease that could impact them later. If they were always ignorant of who you were before, they would never be negatively affected by it. It's like saying you have to formally announce your race beforehand, just to make sure the other party is cool with it. Now if they ask (for whatever reason), you should obviously tell them. Personally, I'd probably refuse to sleep with a transwoman if I knew about it ahead of time. I wouldn't like attack them or anything, but I'd certainly be against it. If I found out after the matter that I had slept with a transwoman, I'd probably feel betrayed, tricked, and the likes, but I can't imagine I'd be scarred or seek revenge. It's really not that big of a deal if you think about it physically, but emotionally it's muddled. Which is probably where most of the difference in opinion stems from. You look like a woman (I imagine), and you think of yourself as a woman. Emotionally, you believe yourself to really be a woman. Others however, upon hearing you originally weren't a woman, would think you still identify as a man, think as a man, etc. They'd be physically sleeping with a woman, but one with the mentality of a man. Imagine an average guy who magically transforms into a girl one day, and that's how people would view you. Looks like a woman, thinks like a man, and is unnatural. Not that you actually have the mentality of a man. Hopefully you see my point and don't think this is just a big insult post to you. It's harsh, but most people don't exactly have a fond opinion of transgender people, as I'm sure you're already aware. That was really unnecessary. I do not believe most people are that transphobic, and I do think most people are receptive to learn about our condition, our experience and how to respect us. Just because you dislike or disagree with my opinion doesn't mean it was unnecessary. Learning about transgender people and respecting them is a lot different from having intimate relations with them, which is what my post was about. I'd be fine with having a transgender friend, as it wouldn't affect my opinion of them as a human being, but I would still be against sleeping with them. The comment you made is one of those that could put a less emotionally stable person in a near suicidal state. I'm not even joking. He said that all the surgery in the world won't make enough of a difference for some people. That is true. For some people trans people will forever be different to cis people and will be irrevocably associated with their birth gender. I don't believe he said it to be mean or to induce suicide, he said it because it is relevant to this issue. As ever trans people have my sympathy. I'm sorry Kwark, did you miss the first paragraph or the second?
Did you miss "at least not in the eyes of most people". He was putting forth a viewpoint which people genuinely hold and is relevant.
|
On August 03 2013 04:28 RaspberrySC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:22 Darkwhite wrote:On August 03 2013 04:18 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:09 Darkwhite wrote:On August 03 2013 03:57 RaspberrySC2 wrote:
Would it be too far for me to suggest that this tangent about the immediate issues surrounding "disclosure" is indicative of a culture that tells trans people "we think you're weird and scary so you have to be x for us"?
Saying "You are worth as much as other people" really is just idealized lip service when the actions of society say that trans people are not (this is why civil liberties movements and social justice are things).
It doesn't matter what individuals may think or say because those are ineffective. What matters is what is actually put into practice and what is put into practice in US culture is that trans women are considered less than human and it is acceptable to target them for prejudice, bigotry, hatred, and even violence.
You say trans people are worth just as much as anyone else? I say prove it. Blind people can't read the shit we write or watch the movies we make. Ugly people have a harder time getting laid. Stupid people get less prestigious jobs. Nobody thinks everybody is worth literally the same. Transsexuals seem to be, generally and overall, less desirable as sexual partners - this is something which might be true, statistically, which I haven't done any actual research on. Everybody isn't equal, in the literal sense. The principle of equality means that everybody, regardless of disabilities or appearance or preference, have the same basic rights. It means you have to respect their right to make their own decisions and treat them fairly, i.e. only by relevant characteristics, in the workplace and that the law have to consider them equals. It does not mean you have an obligation to take an equal sexual interest in everybody or have your circle of friends be representative of the population as a whole. We're not talking about just sex at this point, but I will say that many men find me sexually attractive because they let me know that they do. I am in no way trying to inflate my ego when I say that I can literally have sex with a different man every single day of the year if I wanted to because there really is that much of a line. Being sexually desirable does not mean that I am equal in society. The bolded part of your statement is inherently false in US society because trans people do *not* have equal rights and protections. Do you mean that the law makes special exceptions to not provide transsexuals the same rights are non-transsexuals? I am not disagreeing at this point, just wondering what you are thinking about. I'm thinking about this: http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_research/ntdsThere are tons of other articles, stories, and reports about trans individuals in relation to things like how they are treated in the prison system or the age-old bathroom question can result in a trans person being found guilty of criminal trespassing.
Using the correct bathroom is both about others being comfortable with being there with you, and you being comfortable with being around them. This bathroom-problem has no obvious solution, short of single unit bathrooms.
Literally every group which anybody has any sort of stupid reason to dislike faces some form of discrimination - gym rats, for being roid raging, vain morons, nerds for being awkward, homosexuals for being deviant, blacks for being a minority, women for being women I guess. Transsexuals might be getting even more of this than other groups, but this is the much more general problem of any population containing its decent share of assholes.
|
On August 03 2013 04:44 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:29 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:20 ComaDose wrote:On August 03 2013 04:17 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:09 shinosai wrote:On August 03 2013 04:07 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:01 shinosai wrote:On August 03 2013 03:53 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 03:49 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 03:47 Snusmumriken wrote:
Look, can we all at least agree that if you actually KNOW a person doesnt want to sleep with you if they knew something about you, no matter what it is, then you should tell them before having sex with them, otherwise youre doing something immoral. Does everyone agree with this? Yes, if you can confirm they do not care about sleeping with someone who is transgender without informing them you are transgender(ie, they were in a past relationship or simple expressed indifference), then there is no problem and no requirement to inform them. Right, the other way around would be to learn what the person think about transgender, like with starting a casual conversation with them without implying anything about yourself to stay safe. Similar to how you can "test the water" before coming out to someone close. Look, I agree, I would totally test the waters to make sure someone is not transphobic before sleeping with them. I actually am of the opinion that honesty is the best policy. I just think there's a weird double standard here where trans women are required to do way more disclosure than you are. Maybe not most, but a lot of people (a significant 'statistic' as Kwark might call it) don't want to sleep with transphobic or racist individuals. I think that if trans women are morally obligated to "test" the waters, then you are as well. There are a lot of weird double standards in the bed room when it comes to one night stands. Males are generally have to be more careful about consent, as any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid, even if they are not. The bedroom is not a fair place. I think it's kind of off topic, but really important to note that most accusations of rape are not taken seriously (or seriously enough). Hence why the vast, vast majority of rapists are never prosecuted. That being said, if you acknowledge there's a double standard, then do you agree that you are morally obligated to inform partners of your phobias? There is a Lacross team from Duke that wishes that was always the case with false rape reports. And yes, we are obligated to inform people of any hang ups you might have. Or at least things they would object to. I mean, if someone won't sleep with gun owners, they should likely let people know(weirdest, non-racial phobia I could think of) what? he said the vast majority of real rapists are never prosecuted and you said one time there was a false rape report that went through? EDIT: wait before that you said as any accusations of rape made (by?) a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid what fucking planet are you living on buddy? But we are discussing false reports of rape and the double standard on men when it comes to that subject. I never discussed or even brought up the topic of real rapists, only when men are falsely accused of raping a woman. They are two very seperate subjects. well you said: "any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously" and im asking you where you are from because i don't know of any place thats like this on earth
The exact quote is:
"Males are generally have to be more careful about consent, as any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid, even if they are not."
Did you miss the "even if they are not" part?
|
United States42579 Posts
On August 03 2013 04:47 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:44 ComaDose wrote:On August 03 2013 04:29 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:20 ComaDose wrote:On August 03 2013 04:17 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:09 shinosai wrote:On August 03 2013 04:07 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:01 shinosai wrote:On August 03 2013 03:53 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 03:49 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Yes, if you can confirm they do not care about sleeping with someone who is transgender without informing them you are transgender(ie, they were in a past relationship or simple expressed indifference), then there is no problem and no requirement to inform them. Right, the other way around would be to learn what the person think about transgender, like with starting a casual conversation with them without implying anything about yourself to stay safe. Similar to how you can "test the water" before coming out to someone close. Look, I agree, I would totally test the waters to make sure someone is not transphobic before sleeping with them. I actually am of the opinion that honesty is the best policy. I just think there's a weird double standard here where trans women are required to do way more disclosure than you are. Maybe not most, but a lot of people (a significant 'statistic' as Kwark might call it) don't want to sleep with transphobic or racist individuals. I think that if trans women are morally obligated to "test" the waters, then you are as well. There are a lot of weird double standards in the bed room when it comes to one night stands. Males are generally have to be more careful about consent, as any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid, even if they are not. The bedroom is not a fair place. I think it's kind of off topic, but really important to note that most accusations of rape are not taken seriously (or seriously enough). Hence why the vast, vast majority of rapists are never prosecuted. That being said, if you acknowledge there's a double standard, then do you agree that you are morally obligated to inform partners of your phobias? There is a Lacross team from Duke that wishes that was always the case with false rape reports. And yes, we are obligated to inform people of any hang ups you might have. Or at least things they would object to. I mean, if someone won't sleep with gun owners, they should likely let people know(weirdest, non-racial phobia I could think of) what? he said the vast majority of real rapists are never prosecuted and you said one time there was a false rape report that went through? EDIT: wait before that you said as any accusations of rape made (by?) a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid what fucking planet are you living on buddy? But we are discussing false reports of rape and the double standard on men when it comes to that subject. I never discussed or even brought up the topic of real rapists, only when men are falsely accused of raping a woman. They are two very seperate subjects. well you said: "any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously" and im asking you where you are from because i don't know of any place thats like this on earth The exact quote is: "Males are generally have to be more careful about consent, as any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid, even if they are not." Did you miss the "even if they are not" part?
A lot of rape accusations are discounted due to institutional sexism.
|
On August 03 2013 04:47 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:44 ComaDose wrote:On August 03 2013 04:29 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:20 ComaDose wrote:On August 03 2013 04:17 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:09 shinosai wrote:On August 03 2013 04:07 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:01 shinosai wrote:On August 03 2013 03:53 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 03:49 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Yes, if you can confirm they do not care about sleeping with someone who is transgender without informing them you are transgender(ie, they were in a past relationship or simple expressed indifference), then there is no problem and no requirement to inform them. Right, the other way around would be to learn what the person think about transgender, like with starting a casual conversation with them without implying anything about yourself to stay safe. Similar to how you can "test the water" before coming out to someone close. Look, I agree, I would totally test the waters to make sure someone is not transphobic before sleeping with them. I actually am of the opinion that honesty is the best policy. I just think there's a weird double standard here where trans women are required to do way more disclosure than you are. Maybe not most, but a lot of people (a significant 'statistic' as Kwark might call it) don't want to sleep with transphobic or racist individuals. I think that if trans women are morally obligated to "test" the waters, then you are as well. There are a lot of weird double standards in the bed room when it comes to one night stands. Males are generally have to be more careful about consent, as any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid, even if they are not. The bedroom is not a fair place. I think it's kind of off topic, but really important to note that most accusations of rape are not taken seriously (or seriously enough). Hence why the vast, vast majority of rapists are never prosecuted. That being said, if you acknowledge there's a double standard, then do you agree that you are morally obligated to inform partners of your phobias? There is a Lacross team from Duke that wishes that was always the case with false rape reports. And yes, we are obligated to inform people of any hang ups you might have. Or at least things they would object to. I mean, if someone won't sleep with gun owners, they should likely let people know(weirdest, non-racial phobia I could think of) what? he said the vast majority of real rapists are never prosecuted and you said one time there was a false rape report that went through? EDIT: wait before that you said as any accusations of rape made (by?) a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid what fucking planet are you living on buddy? But we are discussing false reports of rape and the double standard on men when it comes to that subject. I never discussed or even brought up the topic of real rapists, only when men are falsely accused of raping a woman. They are two very seperate subjects. well you said: "any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously" and im asking you where you are from because i don't know of any place thats like this on earth The exact quote is: "Males are generally have to be more careful about consent, as any accusations of rape made a woman will be taken very seriously and assumed to be valid, even if they are not." Did you miss the "even if they are not" part?
no. did you miss my question?
|
On August 03 2013 04:45 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:43 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:38 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 04:37 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:29 Darkwhite wrote:On August 03 2013 04:24 jinorazi wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:14 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:12 RaspberrySC2 wrote:On August 03 2013 04:01 jinorazi wrote:
[quote]
you can ask the same question about the blacks 50 years ago. its a slow process and its unfair, there is no denying that. but you cant also dismiss how a person is shaped by culture without choice. vast majority of the population are "irrational" and unfortunately thats how the real world is. Without being snarky, I will say that I find your response along with the bolded statement fairly ironic. You should make sure you are aware if someone is using their first language beore making snippy comments. I said it was ironic. You can call it snippy if you like, but is it far-fetched for me to assume that during jinorazi's education in the English language that they were taught or learned that this was an acceptable way to use it? I'm not faulting them. It's ironic. i understand its politically incorrect but at the same time i mean no harm and i tend to use it like that on normal basis and i hear like that on normal basis. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20111129131952AAdjCdZThe bar for finding something offensive is particularly low in here. That's dishonest representation. "Black" as an adjective *is* acceptable. "Black" as a noun is not. "African American" is acceptable because it acknowledges the humanity of the subject in the phrase. "Blacks" denies the humanity. Please stop purposely twisting and obscuring details. Bullshit. Not all blacks are African Americans. Blacks and whites are perfectly acceptable words to group people by skin colour and when you say African Americans all you're really doing is saying "those Americans who are black". Bullshit. You're missing the point. "Whites" is just as unacceptable as "Blacks" or "Reds" or "Yellows". The point is that nouning the describing adjective of a group of people is a subversive dehumanization. Not in the least bit true. Otherwise I wouldn't use whites and blacks while being white.
Actually, it is true. At this point though, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
|
On August 03 2013 04:46 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:44 Plansix wrote:On August 03 2013 04:42 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 04:40 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 04:37 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 04:32 Shodaa wrote:On August 03 2013 04:22 killa_robot wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 fugs wrote:On August 03 2013 03:12 KwarK wrote:On August 03 2013 03:11 fugs wrote:
[quote]
I don't mean to imply that their right to consent is based on my beliefs, but this false sense of obligation stems completely from negative opinion. Why is protecting people from negative opinion a double edged sword for me? Why do I have to babysit their transphobia while at the same time be berated by it? Because where their belief comes from doesn't matter when it comes down to whether or not they have a right to informed consent. You can think they're a complete fucking retard but you still don't get to knowingly deny them information which would impact their decision to consent to sex. I'm sorry, it sucks that the world isn't fair to you guys but that does not change this principle. Why's this principle more important, because it's popular? Why do I need to adhere to their transphobia, why must I always fucking make sure that they are more comfortable than I am? Why can't I just be a woman and have it be left at that? To be blunt: Because you're not a woman, at least not in the eyes of most people. Even if you want to be one, and look like one, the fact that both those were not always true, makes accepting you as a real woman difficult for many. You're an artificial woman, an imposter, only existing the way you do now because of surgery and/or medication to change you into who you are now. Had those not existed, you would not be able to consider yourself a woman now. It's really no different from thinking a woman is "fake" or "plastic" if she has plastic surgeries to make herself look different. Well, actually it is different, because you're prosecuted far worse than they are, since many people view the way you are as a form of deception, and against nature tbh. Whether or not it is morally wrong to not tell them you are trans is up for grabs though. It's not like you have aids or some sort of disease that could impact them later. If they were always ignorant of who you were before, they would never be negatively affected by it. It's like saying you have to formally announce your race beforehand, just to make sure the other party is cool with it. Now if they ask (for whatever reason), you should obviously tell them. Personally, I'd probably refuse to sleep with a transwoman if I knew about it ahead of time. I wouldn't like attack them or anything, but I'd certainly be against it. If I found out after the matter that I had slept with a transwoman, I'd probably feel betrayed, tricked, and the likes, but I can't imagine I'd be scarred or seek revenge. It's really not that big of a deal if you think about it physically, but emotionally it's muddled. Which is probably where most of the difference in opinion stems from. You look like a woman (I imagine), and you think of yourself as a woman. Emotionally, you believe yourself to really be a woman. Others however, upon hearing you originally weren't a woman, would think you still identify as a man, think as a man, etc. They'd be physically sleeping with a woman, but one with the mentality of a man. Imagine an average guy who magically transforms into a girl one day, and that's how people would view you. Looks like a woman, thinks like a man, and is unnatural. Not that you actually have the mentality of a man. Hopefully you see my point and don't think this is just a big insult post to you. It's harsh, but most people don't exactly have a fond opinion of transgender people, as I'm sure you're already aware. That was really unnecessary. I do not believe most people are that transphobic, and I do think most people are receptive to learn about our condition, our experience and how to respect us. Just because you dislike or disagree with my opinion doesn't mean it was unnecessary. Learning about transgender people and respecting them is a lot different from having intimate relations with them, which is what my post was about. I'd be fine with having a transgender friend, as it wouldn't affect my opinion of them as a human being, but I would still be against sleeping with them. The comment you made is one of those that could put a less emotionally stable person in a near suicidal state. I'm not even joking. He said that all the surgery in the world won't make enough of a difference for some people. That is true. For some people trans people will forever be different to cis people and will be irrevocably associated with their birth gender. I don't believe he said it to be mean or to induce suicide, he said it because it is relevant to this issue. As ever trans people have my sympathy. I'm sorry Kwark, did you miss the first paragraph or the second? Did you miss "at least not in the eyes of most people". He was putting forth a viewpoint which people genuinely hold and is relevant.
I could put any number of hurtful things in behind of that statement about amost any race and that doesn't make it ok, even if the general public believed them to be true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
