Would You Date Caitlyn Jenner?

Sure it is. It shows that the people considering that person to be a "woman" are not telling the whole truth.

 

The same left-wing forces that caused you to smilingly accept Caitlyn Jenner as a woman and advocate for her type over the internet is responsible for the things you routinely complain about. Apparently the leftwing feast where you gorged yourself was served up buffet style where you got to pick and choose. But, of course, that's been my problem with libertarians to begin with.

 

Please provide a citation to my "smiling acceptance of Caitlyn Jenner as a woman" and "advocating for her type." I've done neither. Nor has anything cause me to "accept" anything as you errantly claim. I simply don't care - that you can not accept that is not my problem.

As for the rest of your post, I'll leave you with this: Those who will trade freedom for comfort deserve neither. Freedom is messy. It can be downright ugly. It means that you may have to tolerate some behavior that you don't like... and conversely others have to tolerate you. And me. But considering the alternative, I'll take it. If you think it is the proper role of government in a nation of free men to regulate such things as interpersonal relationships among consenting adult citizens and gender identification, then you have lost the right to complain when that same government tells you what kind of lightbulbs you can buy, how many bullets you can put in your gun (like they just did right here in Los Angeles), how many ounces of soda you can buy, and how many gallons of gas you can put in your SUV. A man much smarter than me once said "careful what you wish for... you just might get it."

 

You don't think he's wrecked enough ?

 

MOD EDIT - Rule 3

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people" - John Adams. And he wasn't the only one. The early framers of the Constitution and civil society were advocates for a moral people and a moral society. It wasn't about appealing to sexual fetishists. That was never their intention for the country. Obviously times have changed and progressed, and the Constitution is being used as a weapon against the very society it was originally intended to support.

 

Hey conservatives, if you're straight and male, and you wouldn't instantly shtup Barbara Bush if she threw yourself at you, obviously you're a hypocrite and also gay.

 

I'll accept that it's possible to not find Caitlyn Jenner attractive even if you fully believed her to be a woman. The question evolved to whether progressives would be willing to date a transgendered woman, in general. Would you?

 

Problem with that is it's a "never say never" question. I may not think any transgender people I've met were my type, or attractive. But maybe one day I'll meet one.

We keep telling you it's a silly question for reasons like that. You may need to accept that it's a silly question.

 

Why is it a silly question? You just answered it. What's silly is that it took you this long to arrive at an answer. You *may* date a transgender if you find one that you're attracted to. Fair enough.

 

I didn't take long at all; I answered the question way earlier in this thread. It's still a silly question, because it's looking for a simple answer to a complex question. The only legitimate answer is "it depends".

 

You answered "I don't know" earlier.

 

It's the same answer.

 

Wow. Now you even presume to think for me?

Pure BS. I've done no such thing. Citation now or retract this outright lie. I will not permit you to intentionally misrepresent me or my positions.

That I don't give a rip if Bruce Jenner chops his ying yang off and wears a dress? What's the rebuttal? Government should put him/her/it in jail?

Hiding behind the Constitution? If by that you mean expecting my government to perform its solemn duties to its citizens, then yes, I'll proudly "hide behind the Constitution." Regardless of your opinion and what you think the Constitution was made for, it was made for one thing, and one thing only: To defend the natural liberties of consenting adult citizens in this nation of free men.

A statesman's opinion is not the law.

I get that you don't like freedom. I do. And as I said, freedom can be a messy business. Those of you who spend so much of your waking hours so totally engrossed in what your neighbors are up to frankly fascinate me. Why do you care? I think you're really missing out on all the wonderful things life has to offer because you get so exasperated when you discover that not everyone is exactly like you. I have news for you: They're not. And thank goodness, what a boring world it would be... Just my subjective opinion. YMMV.

 

`
No.
`

 

You already asked me that question in a different thread. I said I don't know. I've never known any transgendered people, male or female. But I can say that if it was a person with whom I shared an emotional and physical connection like the one I have with my wife, the answer would probably be yes. It really depends on the person, and that's the most honest answer any person is truthfully capable of giving unless you're talking about an actual specific person that's known to whomever you're asking. While many folks here might know who Caitlyn Jenner is, I doubt any of us actually know him on a personal level even remotely close to what you would need to decide whether he's someone you would be or are attracted to.

 

But why do liberals have to be willing to date them for their feelings about their identity to be valid? It doesn't really require anybody's validation. I've seen manly women who were born as women and I wouldn't date them. Doesn't prove anything except that it might be hard for them to get dates.

 

I'd force myself if it helped get my views across.

 

Without a doubt. The road to hell is paved with good intentions

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/423479-needed-gay-civil-disobedience.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/414389-marriage-victory-today-those-who-love-liberty.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/373066-proposed-rule-same-sex-marriage-threads.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/current-events/308995-30-second-guide-how-same-sex-marriage-effects-you.html

More like we don't need the Government to validate his lifestyle. Should he be able to use the woman's room? What about those people who just feel they are born in the wrong body. You want a guy who feels like a girl in the lady's room with your daughter? How far does your acceptance of this go?

It was made by people who by and large believed it was the society's duty to practice morality. Libertarians justify degeneracy in society by pointing to the Constitution. That's what I meant.

So the opinion of the Founding Fathers and the people who crafted the Constitution is irrelevant to what the Constitution says? That says a lot about your ideology.

Yes, we'd have such a dull existence without sexual deviants chopping off their penises, calling themselves women, and marrying other dudes. Good point. Clearly this is the zenith of what the framers of the Constitution had in mind for society.

 

^_- I thought that much in the OP was obvious. Considering straight liberals and conservatives, liberals tend to believe that Jenner is now a woman - conservatives tend to say Jenner still is a man. There is a fair amount of differentiation within each group, with a not-tiny minority of each side disagreeing with their own side, but there is a pretty clear established dichotomy: liberals say Jenner is a woman now, conservatives don't.

The question is, for straight liberals saying Jenner is now a woman, would you have any qualms about dating her? My assumptions is that, rhetorical bs and evasion aside, most would say no. I don't think there's anything wrong with a homosexual man saying "I'm not interested in dating women", just as I don't think there's anything wrong with straight progressive males saying, "I'm not interested in dating a transgender woman", which is what I read the OP as asking them.

 

Why not just say, Jenner's a woman but I'm not personally attracted to her?

 

I don't think they would be against it per-se.

 

Nice try but none of those posts constitute "defending homosexuals and other alternative orientations" as you continue to falsely assert. As I said, I have no pony in that race. Second, no defense is required: there are homosexuals. They exist.

If you think government should exist to "validate lifestyles" then you are no different than Barack Obama or Barney Frank. Free men don't need governments to validate or invalidate anything - they need it to simply defend their precious freedom by carefully balancing competing interests through the lens of jurisprudence. It must do so, necessarily, dispassionately, objectively, and without regard to popular opinions or notions of propriety. Anything less and we lose the right to call ourselves free men.

There is a reason Lady Justice wears the blindfold.

Then leave it up to society. Government's job is to defend liberty. If you want government to influence society, you are known as a social engineer. Social engineering is at the heart of liberalism though certainly not its only refuge and the liberals do not own the monopoly on using the organs of government to design a society that pleases them. Again, I caution you statists and social engineers: Careful what you wish for. And don't you dare complain when you get it.

I don't think you'll find the word degeneracy in the Constitution. One man's degeneracy is another's normacy. And that is the whole point - you are free to use your constitutionally-guaranteed liberties to bloviate to the heavens about whatever and ever you wish. You are entitled to use that freedom to do everything in your power to try to persuade me to your opinion or belief. And no matter how great we may disagree on that matter, a libertarian will fight with every fiber of his being to preserve and protect your right to proclaim your beliefs and to try to persuade your fellow citizens. Lesser men will try to have you silenced; social engineers will try to have you silenced. But the moment you think it is right or just to use government as a tool to force your fellow citizens to fall in line with your thinking, you have already killed that very freedom you have cavalierly taken for granted. Careful what you wish for. Again, Lady Justice is wears that blindfold for a very important reason - so she not be swayed by the emotional appeals, the scratching of beards, and the gnashing of teeth from those of you who wish to use our government to do harm to our precious liberty for nothing more than your own comfort. And we've already covered what happens to people who trade their liberty for comfort - they are eventually left with neither, deservedly so.

That's not what I said. I said "a statesman's opinion is not law." Please stop misrepresenting my argument. And not for my sake - it betrays the weakness of yours and I think you are better than that.

I'm sorry you have such a hard time understanding that not everyone is exactly like you. I'm still so fascinated by how totally consumed you are by this topic. Bill and Steve down the street will probably have anal sex tonight. And Lucy and Stephanie will lick each other to ecstasy. I hope to talk my wife into a BJ this weekend. Guess what? The sun will stay in the sky, a dollar will still buy a newspaper, and most of us on Monday will all have jobs to go back to. Yet Obama still wants to steal my 401K. Now there's something to get bent up over.

 

Because the question the OP was getting at isn't if you find Jenner attractive. Again, I thought that much was pretty clear.

 

It's not.

I agree that Jenner might have limited options for a partner, but I don't believe every man who is happy to treat her as a woman, needs to be attracted to her to do so.