Discussion in 'United States' started by Steve N, Oct 23, 2018.
And yet the spectrum is real - go figure.
There are 3 points on the "spectrum" - male, female, and mentally ill.
Of course it does.
Not unlike the chaos that happened when the slaves in the US were being freed.
But I doubt the country will break into civil war over transgenders. In several years, the RW will lost out and then yet another minority will become a whole person in the eyes of the majority.
Mens room, Ladies room, Indeterminates room?
Who has claimed they are not a person? I associate with other humans, and most my closest friends are those who I find the least disagreement with, LGBTQ, black, white, Asian, Hispanic, Religious, non-religious, Left wing, Right wing, rich, poor, middle class, etc. only comes into play as a result of politics and politicians/others who use such differences as a primary means of dividing us into useful voting blocs for their own benefit.
Yet, here we have a thread whining about trans.
People see them as a person, but not as the person who the trans are. They want them to be the person they want them to be, not who the trans themselves are. They think they now best how each of them should feel, think, and act.
That's all we need to do, see others as simply a person. How a person feels, thinks and acts, as long as it doesn't impose upon other persons is of no consequence, but it doesn't change their chromosomes. If someone thinks they are Napoleon or Cleopatra reincarnated, I could care less as long as they don't require me believe it to be a fact. I have no problem eliminating gender specific words when communicating with a man or a woman who thinks, feels, or acts the opposite.
Sure hope so. We are a society who lives in a world of fact, not imagination and make believe.
If one person gets to discard facts in favor of imagination, then everyone should get the same option or we are talking obvious discrimination. So either stick to facts, or give every human the option to discard fact and make society indulge their imagination on any matter of their choosing.
Better off just keeping society rooted in facts, or the whole thing falls apart.
I don't think so, but we can agree to disagree.
Some good points, but as to the bolded part, the anti-trans bigotry I see all the time is almost unbelievable.
And utterly shameful.
^ Thread win.
Then we are in agreement. Nothing left to debate.
LOL. Tell that to all the religious folks who believe on mostly blind faith. You know, make believe.
Nice to see we agree on something, but there never was anything to debate, people will simply be what they are, like it or not.
Speaking words of wisdom, let me be.
Of course not. I'm a straight female, but there's no way on this earth (or any others) that I'd touch a Trans man. To me they are just very masculine lesbians playing dress ups .. which oddly makes them even LESS attractive than an ordinary lesbian. I totally get why a gay man wouldn't want to touch a Trans man, IOW. And I also get why many straight men sooner die than 'do it' with a Trans woman. Trans people don't belong in the SGL world (straight/gay/lesbian .. it's my new code for normal people!), sexually or romantically.
there is nothing complicated about noughts and ones.
seeing complexity where there is none is a vanity.
You have too little insight, and too few 'extrapolative' powers, DA.
Our identity is a social negotiation. It is always a mixture of self-identity (name, gender, etc) and how we are perceived by others. The only part we have ANY control over, and ANY right to change .. is our self-identity. More importantly, those who believe they're entitled to demand that others see them as they see themselves, are narcissists.
It has NOTHING to do with 'knowing best how everyone else should think or feel'. It's the exact opposite in fact. The world in general does not give a damn what you think or feel. The world will see you how it will. If you (GY) think that others are actually concerning themselves with such things about you, in all your interactions, then you are indeed a narcissist.
Everyone IS entitled to discard facts in favor of their imagination, if they want. But imagine a person who might think/want to be identified as a Duck, who went around quacking like a Duck, who encountered hungry others willing to accept him/her to be a Duck. That would be a time he/she might hope that others apply fact rather than fiction in how he/she is treated.
I don't see how the word could possibly be defined out of existence, making this a non-issue.
The only problem I have with transgenders is when transgender women compete athletically and dominate. Change my mind on that if you can.
When white Rachael Dolezal wanted to be black, the blacks said no, she could not be black.
What in the world could have been their reasoning in not letting her be black
At no point in the law, should the words "male", "female", "man", or "woman" ever be needed. So its rather an exercise in futility
The word 'Person(s)' should suffice.
Separate names with a comma.