You're all Transgender hens until Proven Otherwise!!

Kev_2012

Meesared wrote: »

I'll just leave this here

And I'll leave this here http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/open-minded

Note the key word, Consider

Millicent

awec wrote: »

If he doesn't like sport, so be it. Certainly no less of a son.

It won't be a case of "ah you don't like football? Here's a baby and a pram." If it turns out he is into girly things then fine, but to actually promote those things to him would be wrong.

The ridiculous parts are where people try to argue that men and women are really the same. They are not. They are inherently different. They are into different things. This is reality. No matter how much people try to deny it, it will remain reality. The attempts to blur the lines between men and women is nothing other than modern day political correctness gone into overdrive.

It won't be long before the words "boy" and "girl" are taboo, because I'd be offending someone and discriminating against them if I called them a boy but they considered themselves a girl, even though they look like a guy. It is getting way, way OTT.

Tell me, since you know both genders so well, what should I be into? I'm a woman. Please tell me what interests I likely have that are different to yours because of my gender? Because effectively that's what arguments like yours boil down to--you knowing more what people want better than they know themselves.

Also, as regards to your son, no one will be forcing him to play with a pram but if he asked for one would you buy it for him?

Meesared

Kev_2012 wrote: »

And I'll leave this here http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/open-minded

Note the key word, Consider

That is my point you aren't even considering it, you are outright shooting all our points down, saying "being transgender is wrong" etc etc.

Mardy Bum

awec wrote: »

No, they are not. A man is a man and a woman is a woman. That is that.

Some men want to be women, some women want to be men. Fair enough, no dispute there. That's up to them, but they were men before and women after (or vice versa).

You mean male before and female after if you are talking about changing sex. That person pre-op may have been a woman in gender terms.

Millicent

Donnielighto wrote: »

I know, i just referring to averages across the respective populations.

Anyway Im out have a paer to write and study to do..... fml

Good luck with the paper.

Kev_2012

Meesared wrote: »

That is my point you aren't even considering it, you are outright shooting all our points down, saying "being transgender is wrong" etc etc.

Am, no, I have considered it, I know what it is and why it's been done, and I still reject it.

Meesared

Kev_2012 wrote: »

And watch the "likes" fly in! I used that word because it's first one that came to mind! What is the PC terminology so if you want me to use that?

Oh look at the poor bigot getting picked on.
*gets out the worlds smallest violin to play the worlds saddest song*

suicide_circus

Links234 wrote: »

I've always noticed how people who are generally against transgender people love to throw around the word "mutilate"

It has nothing to do with being "against" transgender people, but i can hardly blame you if ou have a persecution complex. So called gender reassignment surgery is little more than mutilation of a persons genitles so that they look different. Now if that helps somebody deal with life and feel happier inside then that is wonderful, the same with any cosmetic surgery but it is just that, cosmetic.

awec

Millicent wrote: »

Tell me, since you know both genders so well, what should I be into? I'm a woman. Please tell me what interests I likely have that are different to yours because of my gender? Because effectively that's what arguments like yours boil down to--you knowing more what people want better than they know themselves.

Also, as regards to your son, no one will be forcing him to play with a pram but if he asked for one would you buy it for him?

If he asked for a pram I'd buy it. Sure. Doesn't mean I'm going to promote to him the idea of playing with prams. I'm not going to use my child as some sort of tool for me to make a PC point with.

"Oh look at me, I have a young boy and I introduced him to playing with dolls". Why would I do that?

I am not saying what you should be into. I am saying men like different things to women. This is fact. There are exceptions to this but they are exactly that, exceptions. This should not be pushed as if it's the norm. It's not and again, that's fact. And before you say it, I am not saying you are abnormal, I meant "the norm" in the context of the vast vast vast majority of boys are into boys things. And the same for girls. And otherwise you are going against the grain.

Boys are into different things than girls. Why is there such a campaign to deny this?

strobe

Mardy Bum wrote: »

The most widespread and significant form of sexuality in Ancient Greece was pederasty. Do you think that had something to do with the social view of it or where they all paedos?
First bit was a typo in that I meant to say within patriarchal societies gender consists of two opposite or complementary modes of being human, one more valued than the other. In order for man to continue to dominate woman heterosexuality is vital.

Whoa, so much wrong in such a short paragraph. Firstly the most common form of sexuality in Ancient Greece was certainly was not pederasty, it was heterosexuality by a long long long way. Secondly, pederasty isn't synonymous with paedophilia, it means a sexual relationship between an adolescent (someone between puberty and adulthood) and an adult i.e non-paedophilic(sc). Thirdly the fact that pederasty being socially acceptable means it was more common says nothing whatsoever about the reasons heterosexuality is widely practiced.


Your associating of heterosexuality with patriarchal oppression is even more absurd and your apparent desire to 'explain away' the wide practice of heterosexuality as some kind of imposed
social construct put in place by evil men that want to subjugate women is really really weird and worrying.

No offense, but you appear to have some serious issues man. Really...

Kev_2012

Meesared wrote: »

Oh look at the poor bigot getting picked on.
*gets out the worlds smallest violin to play the worlds saddest song*

If you wanna have a discussion then lets have one, but if you wanna act the bollocks, then go away.

Meesared

Kev_2012 wrote: »

If you wanna have a discussion then lets have one, but if you wanna act the bollocks, then go away.

I can act the bollocks when people are not willing to even remotely see my side of the debate, we are still people, and i am not "wrong"

drunkmonkey

Millicent wrote: »

I thought you were going to respond to my post today? It wouldn't be that you're just ignoring people for the sake of not having to discuss your opinions with other posters, would it?

No not dodging you, will you sum up the question again and i'll be straight back to you.

My Opinion though if it helps, Straight, Gay, Bi, Curious, Not sure, Drag, Cross Dressing, Torture, Rape fetish, Baby clothes fetish, Branding, Geisha Feet, whatever all fine by me as long as no one gets hurt that doesn't want to be. No problems go enjoy yourself.

Then we have modern science which takes things to another level. This is where I start to disagree on how much we should help or encourage people. Boards should not be used as a medium to encourage severe body mutilation but it is being and people who don't think it should be are being felt to feel like there the ones with the problem when it's not really true.

awec

Mardy Bum wrote: »

You mean male before and female after if you are talking about changing sex. That person pre-op may have been a woman in gender terms.

No, I mean men before and women after. I mean male before and female after. I mean boy before and girl after. Whatever you want to try and label it as, they changed.

I have no issue with people doing this. I have no issue with transgender people. People have the right to do what they want without prejudice. But let's get real here.

suicide_circus

Meesared wrote: »

I can act the bollocks when people are not willing to even remotely see my side of the debate, we are still people, and i am not "wrong"

no one said you arent people, get over yourself

Links234

Kev_2012 wrote: »

So why physically become a woman to have relations with a woman?

I'm sorry now but this makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. Apologies, I'm sure you are a lovely person and all but I just don't agree with it.

Because that's the way things are, this is something you're born with.
Look for example, transsexual gene link identified

there's nothing to agree or disagree with, that's just natural human diversity right there. does that make sense?


...would it really fry your noodle if I told you that my girlfriend and I are both trans?

sbsquarepants

Mardy Bum wrote: »

The most widespread and significant form of sexuality in Ancient Greece was pederasty. Do you think that had something to do with the social view of it or where they all paedos?
First bit was a typo in that I meant to say within patriarchal societies gender consists of two opposite or complementary modes of being human, one more valued than the other. In order for man to continue to dominate woman heterosexuality is vital.

How does that fit with your chinese village? Or ancient greece? In order for men to dominate women, surely all it requires is enough men who want to dominate women. Whether those men then give each other a celebratory reach around is entirely a seperate matter!

Surely sexuality is just down to inherant likes and dislikes. I've never been the type to follow the crowd, or to try to fit in, in fact i've possible been a bit the opposite. Yet i'm strictly heterosexual - not cos i could give a fúck about what anyone thinks, but purely because i am attracted to women and not to men. Men just don't float my boat. It wasn't forced on me and i couldn't change it even if i wanted to - i'm just made that way.

As for the pederasty, take a look at the internet - it's awash porn (allegedly:D) featuring young girls, supposedly they're 18 plus but who could really know. It's probably the same on gay sites, i don't know. It's not so different from ancient greece. Human nature, is human nature.

Links234 wrote: »

yes, there are lesbian/gay/bi trans people out there

I happen to be one!

why? 'cos a person's gender identity is separate to their sexuality


and you know, say what you will about being transgender, it's the single greatest asshole filter in the world

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPRpGnHYTSw

Is that you in the video?

bodice ripper

I would have to agree with Jill Valentine on this - it is very telling that the main focus for concern is centered around little boys.

When I was little, I was very active, academic and competitive. Everyone told me I was such a tomboy. They cut my hair short, I never had a dress. I was only given toys that had educational or constructive qualities. I was told outright that I was "too smart" to want dolls. I was encouraged to compete with the boys in whatever I was doing, as generally the competition with other girls was pretty weak (which to be fair did seem to be true...).

As I grew up I came to look down my nose at overt displays of girlyness. I had no female friends outside those from school. I wore baggy jeans and t-shirts and did nothing with my hair. Everyone told me I was gay. I took it that they were right.

I was unbelievably unhappy, and it seemed the clear answer was that I had serious self-esteem issues stemming from societal pressures surrounding gender roles and sexuality.

I was in my late twenties before I realised that I was uncomfortable in my own skin not because society didn't accept me, but because it wasn't who I was AT ALL. I desperately needed to be girly, and I am not even a little bit gay. it is taking years to deal with the fall out from that.


TL;DR
All kids are potentially susceptible to damage from enforcing gender roles of various sorts, not just kids who may be trans. I don't think making them all gender neutral until they can make their own choice would be for the greater good.

awec

Mardy Bum wrote: »

The most widespread and significant form of sexuality in Ancient Greece was pederasty. Do you think that had something to do with the social view of it or where they all paedos?
First bit was a typo in that I meant to say within patriarchal societies gender consists of two opposite or complementary modes of being human, one more valued than the other. In order for man to continue to dominate woman heterosexuality is vital.

In order for human beings to continue to inhabit this planet heterosexuality is vital.

Sperm plus sperm, or egg plus egg, does not a baby make.

Your attempts to suggest heterosexuality is nothing other than something enforced by social prejudice is wide of the mark. You seem to be promoting the notion that people are only heterosexual because they think that's what society demands. Wrong.

Meesared

suicide_circus wrote: »

no one said you arent people, get over yourself

People saying we are "wrong" implies it, don't take me out of context

Links234

suicide_circus wrote: »

It has nothing to do with being "against" transgender people, but i can hardly blame you if ou have a persecution complex. So called gender reassignment surgery is little more than mutilation of a persons genitles so that they look different. Now if that helps somebody deal with life and feel happier inside then that is wonderful, the same with any cosmetic surgery but it is just that, cosmetic.

it's a much too common misconception that male-to-female genital reassignment surgery is getting their genitals "cut-off", when in actual fact it's a far more complex procedure that reconstructs analogous tissue, eg the tip of the penis becomes the clitoris etc. and calling it "cosmetic" is just silly.

and yes, "mutilation" is an entirely negative word and extremely loaded in this context, the use of it is inherently a value judgement. so yes, it sounds very 'against' transgender people.

seamus

bodice ripper wrote: »

I would have to agree with Jill Valentine on this - it is very telling that the main focus for concern is centered around little boys.

Yep. There's far less of a social taboo around "tomboy" girls than there is about little boys who like pink things and push prams.

Straight men on the whole are lot more uncomfortable around gay men and homosexuality than straight women are around gay women. In my experience.

I'm not entirely sure why that is.

Links234

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Is that you in the video?

No, I'm much better looking

and besides, I wouldn't wear that polka-dot dress! :pac:

Mardy Bum

strobe wrote: »

Whoa, so much wrong in such a short paragraph. Firstly the most common form of sexuality in Ancient Greece was certainly was not pederasty, it was heterosexuality by a long long long way. Secondly, pederasty isn't synonymous with paedophilia, it means a sexual relationship between an adolescent (someone between puberty and adulthood) and an adult i.e non-paedophilic(sc). Thirdly the fact that pederasty being socially acceptable means it was more common says nothing whatsoever about the reasons heterosexuality is widely practiced.


Your associating of heterosexuality with patriarchal oppression is even more absurd and your apparent desire to 'explain away' the wide practice of heterosexuality as some kind of imposed
social construct put in place by evil men that want to subjugate women is really really weird and worrying.

No offense, but you appear to have some serious issues man. Really...

My link with pederasty is just raising the point that if something is socially acceptable more people will engage with it.
Heterosexuality is inextricably linked to patriarchy and it is linked with matriarchy. It is not a bad thing. I could give you the whole psychoanalytical reasoning but it would take much more than one post. No where did I insinuate anything about an evil man. These processes take place in the brain at an early age.
People try to explain this for a living day in day out its not weird its about trying to understand the world.

sbsquarepants

Links234 wrote: »

No, I'm much better looking

and besides, I wouldn't wear that polka-dot dress! :pac:

I thought she was fairly hot i have to say!;)

As an aside - i had an argument, well not quite but a difference of opinion with my missus a couple of years back. I said i would have no problem sleeping with a trans woman. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and all that! She says that's gay. I disagree, i consider myself entirely straight. I have no problem with people who are gay, but i in no way identify myself with them. What's your opinion?

Ps: I realise this sounds like the lamest come on of all time, but i am genuinely interested in your opinion!

Meesared

Links234 wrote: »

No, I'm much better looking

and besides, I wouldn't wear that polka-dot dress! :pac:

I agree

Babybuff

AH, the last bastion of the trogdolyte

Mardy Bum

awec wrote: »

In order for human beings to continue to inhabit this planet heterosexuality is vital.

Sperm plus sperm, or egg plus egg, does not a baby make.

Your attempts to suggest heterosexuality is nothing other than something enforced by social prejudice is wide of the mark. You seem to be promoting the notion that people are only heterosexual because they think that's what society demands. Wrong.

My posts are not fully explaining my argument because of their lenght and so it makes my argument reductive and easy to counter. Michel Foucault is one of the most influential men of the 20th Century he has a book called The History of Sexuality. If you want to see where my argument is coming from have a read of it.

pickarooney

I presume the 'hen' thing is simply introducing a third person singular neutral pronoun (in addition to 'han' and 'hon') to avoid having to say he/sh, (s)he, it, they or whatever convoluted way it's done now? We could all do with one of those, surely?

xsiborg

Babybuff wrote: »

AH, the last bastion of the trogdolyte

if it's that bad for you, you can always press "Ctrl" + "W".

nobody is forcing you to be in here.

awec

Mardy Bum wrote: »

My posts are not fully explaining my argument because of their lenght and so it makes my argument reductive and easy to counter. Michel Foucault is one of the most influential men of the 20th Century he has a book called The History of Sexuality. If you want to see where my argument is coming from have a read of it.

I don't need to see where your argument is coming from. Your argument is flawed before it even gets off the ground.

You are implying that heterosexuality is something that is considered the norm because that's what society thinks.

The scientific facts surrounding reproduction in humans blows this out of the water.

There is nothing wrong with homosexual people but let's not pretend that people are only heterosexual because of social pressures or because it "was just what people did for years".

drunkmonkey

Links234 wrote: »

...would it really fry your noodle if I told you that my girlfriend and I are both trans?

So she's a she pretending to be a man and your a man who thinks your a she. So your both boyfriend & girlfriend only the boyfriend which is your girlfriend is actually your boyfriend because your really a man. Or have you actually a girlfriend or is it a man who things he's a girl like yourself.

Have I that the right way round?

Nalz

7

Babybuff

xsiborg wrote: »

if it's that bad for you, you can always press "Ctrl" + "W".

nobody is forcing you to be in here.

no bother, just talk amongst yourselves there.

drunkmonkey

My brain is about to explode. I think i've got it.

Would I be right in thinking your both men who think you are women who are living life as if you were both lesbians?

Meesared

drunkmonkey wrote: »

So she's a she pretending to be a man and your a man who thinks your a she. So your both boyfriend & girlfriend only the boyfriend which is your girlfriend is actually your boyfriend because your really a man. Or have you actually a girlfriend or is it a man who things he's a girl like yourself.

Have I that the right way round?

that is horrendously offensive not just to Links but to every Trans person

Mardy Bum

awec wrote: »

I don't need to see where your argument is coming from. Your argument is flawed before it even gets off the ground.

You are implying that heterosexuality is something that is considered the norm because that's what society thinks.

The scientific facts surrounding reproduction in humans blows this out of the water.

There is nothing wrong with homosexual people but let's not pretend that people are only heterosexual because of social pressures or because it "was just what people did for years".

If you think yourself smarter than Foucault more power to you. I highly doubt it though.

Links234

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I thought she was fairly hot i have to say!;)

As an aside - i had an argument, well not quite but a difference of opinion with my missus a couple of years back. I said i would have no problem sleeping with a trans woman. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and all that! She says that's gay. I disagree, i consider myself entirely straight. I have no problem with people who are gay, but i in no way identify myself with them. What's your opinion?

Ps: I realise this sounds like the lamest come on of all time, but i am genuinely interested in your opinion!

oh she is, and I'm nowhere near that good-looking, I was just joking

I think my opinion is gonna be pretty obvious on this one, it's ridiculous to consider a guy who finds women attractive gay, doesn't matter if they're cisgender or transgender. but to go more indepth, a trans woman is a woman, her breasts are the same as a cisgender woman, how she smells, the texture of her skin, and so forth. that's because hormone treatment really changes the whole body in loads of ways. so you're still attracted to someone who is female.

and nope, not the lamest come on of all time, I've heard far worse from the denizens of After Hours. you wouldn't be the first or the last by a long, long shot.

drunkmonkey

Meesared wrote: »

that is horrendously offensive not just to Links but to every Trans person

Why? Is that not what it actually going on?

Rocket19

bodice ripper wrote: »

I would have to agree with Jill Valentine on this - it is very telling that the main focus for concern is centered around little boys.

When I was little, I was very active, academic and competitive. Everyone told me I was such a tomboy. They cut my hair short, I never had a dress. I was only given toys that had educational or constructive qualities. I was told outright that I was "too smart" to want dolls. I was encouraged to compete with the boys in whatever I was doing, as generally the competition with other girls was pretty weak (which to be fair did seem to be true...).

As I grew up I came to look down my nose at overt displays of girlyness. I had no female friends outside those from school. I wore baggy jeans and t-shirts and did nothing with my hair. Everyone told me I was gay. I took it that they were right.

I was unbelievably unhappy, and it seemed the clear answer was that I had serious self-esteem issues stemming from societal pressures surrounding gender roles and sexuality.

I was in my late twenties before I realised that I was uncomfortable in my own skin not because society didn't accept me, but because it wasn't who I was AT ALL. I desperately needed to be girly, and I am not even a little bit gay. it is taking years to deal with the fall out from that.


TL;DR
All kids are potentially susceptible to damage from enforcing gender roles of various sorts, not just kids who may be trans. I don't think making them all gender neutral until they can make their own choice would be for the greater good.

Yeah, but it doesn't sound like your parents raised you "gender neutral" though. It sounds to me they forced you into a "boy" stereotype, and actively discouraged anything commonly considered as "girly". That's not being general neutral!

Links234

drunkmonkey wrote: »

My brain is about to explode. I think i've got it.

Would I be right in thinking your both men who think you are women who are living life as if you were both lesbians?

we're both women who happen to be transgender, neither of us are men.

..

I hope I haven't broken drunkmonkey

Meesared

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Why? Is that not what it actually going on?

The rather snarky "pretending" you snuck in there is a disgraceful thing to say

awec

Mardy Bum wrote: »

If you think yourself smarter than Foucault more power to you. I highly doubt it though.

:pac::pac::pac:

Do you really think that people are just heterosexual because that's what society deems "normal"?

Seriously?

You are burying your head in the sand with regards to the facts.

drunkmonkey

Links234 wrote: »

so you're still attracted to someone who is female.

I'm a little lost here, Your a man that decided to become a woman but you like women but are in a relationship with another man who is also a woman. I'm not getting why you prefer men who are women more than women who are women, it's not making sense to me. I don't understand why you wouldn't just be with a woman. It's really confusing me.

Mardy Bum

awec wrote: »

:pac::pac::pac:

Do you really think that people are just heterosexual because that's what society deems "normal"?

Seriously?

No I don't think it is the only reason. However it is part of the reason why other forms of sexuality are and have been viewed as degenerate.

I have a background in psychoanalysis, I am not burying my head in the sand.

drunkmonkey

Links234 wrote: »

I hope I haven't broken drunkmonkey

I'm putting my hands to heaven asking my God what's going on at all:)

Donnielighto

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm a little lost here, Your a man that decided to become a woman but you like women but are in a relationship with another man who is also a woman. I'm not getting why you prefer men who are women more than women who are women, it's not making sense to me. I don't understand why you wouldn't just be with a woman. It's really confusing me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bMLrA_0O5I

drunkmonkey

Meesared wrote: »

The rather snarky "pretending" you snuck in there is a disgraceful thing to say

What are you on about?

awec

Mardy Bum wrote: »

No I don't think it is the only reason. However it is part of the reason why other forms of sexuality are and have been viewed as degenerate.

Now you are changing your argument. You're all over the place.

Heterosexuality is practiced by the vast, vast majority of people because heterosexuality is what you must engage in to reproduce. The vast majority of men are attracted to women. The vast majority of women are attracted to men.

This is not because society told them to be. It's because they are.

No matter how much you try to argue it isn't so, the reason the vast majority of people are heterosexual has NOTHING to do with the demands of society. It is who and what they are.

The prejudiced views of other sexualities are an entirely different subject.

smash

Mardy Bum wrote: »

No I don't think it is the only reason. However it is part of the reason why other forms of sexuality are and have been viewed as degenerate.

That's not exactly true. In Roman times everyone fúcked everyone. It's religious groups that make different forms of sexuality seem degenerate, not society. Even still, most of the time, opposites attract.