Be careful... This is a man....

Kooli

suicide_circus wrote: »

Call me backward, old fashioned, bigoted or ignorant if you will but if I was about to get jiggy with a girl and she said "by the way I used to have a cock but dont worry, it's inside out now" it would give me pause.

I have to admit I'd feel the same (i.e. if I started dating a man and he told me he used to be a woman), and I don't consider myself a bigot. So that's something to reflect on...

aujopimur

To get back on topic, she has a great ass.

pickarooney

Duckjob wrote: »

IMO she actually looks very well in side face profile, which is where the game is often given away by a manly jawline.

That always gives Gisele Bundchen away.

Annasopra

Kev_2012 wrote: »

Because it does have something to do with them? For example, I tolerate these things but don't agree, therefore, if I have kids, I'm going to tell them to be courteous to everyone but that being gay or transgender is wrong(remember, in my opinion ya?), and that it exists in this world, you can't do anything about it, so just get on with your own life and don't let these things affect you.

I don't care what people do as long as it doesn't affect my family, friends or myself.

I feel sorry for your family and friends and any potential children you have - I mean you might also have friend or family who are LGBT and scared to come out to you and scared of the reaction. I'm genuinely sad for them.

Dudess

Ah in fairness Kev, it's not "wrong" to be gay/transgender. It's not a choice for starters. You can use the "It's my opinion" get-out clause all you like but it's still wrong of you to make such a claim, and deserving of being challenged.

Plus, "PC brigade" weakens an argument. This isn't about political correctness, which is a system of walking on egg-shells around people for fear of even slightly offending them. This is about disputing a very dangerous message.

sbsquarepants

Kev_2012 wrote: »

But personally, I do not agree that homosexuality or people changing their gender is right, this is my personal opinion. I don't insult, abuse, discriminate against these people, I just don't agree with it.

I'm not quite sure i get your point. If you think something is wrong, how do you not discriminate against those who do it? Passing judgement is discrimination in and of itself, no?
I'm a live and let live type of man myself, whatever goes on between consenting adults is nobodies business but theirs. I quite honestly believe that the world would be a much better place if people just minded their own god damn business.
There is only one sexual deviance in this world and that is impossing yourself on another. If it's consensual it's absolutely fine no matter what "it" may be.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

mango salsa wrote: »

I feel sorry for your family and friends and any potential children you have

yeah, teaching his children to be courteous and nice to people

what an absolute ****

DubArk

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

yeah, teaching his children to be courteous and nice to people

what an absolute ****

No teaching his children to be Polite Bigots! The second part of your statement I agree 100%

Dudess

Kev_2012 wrote: »

So I raise them so that 1 is gay and another is transgender so just to please the PC brigade? Just because I would like to someday raise a traditional family, that automatically makes me a bigot? Get a grip.

And I'm not a racist in any way shape or form so why would I do that? Interracial marriage for me is a non issue, chalk and cheese tbh.

Lol, the first paragraph is hilarious.
Who the **** even implied a person had to raise a kid to be gay or transgender in order to show that they're not a bigot? And do you actually think a person's sexuality is the result of their upbringing?!

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Dudess wrote: »

Plus, "PC brigade" weakens an argument. This isn't about political correctness, which is a system of walking on egg-shells around people for fear of even slightly offending them. This is about disputing a very dangerous message.

the OP made a joke about the contestant being a man and everyone jumped on him calling him a bigot, .. this is *exactly* the PC brigade being the PC brigade. Unless you agree with their orthodoxy you are as bad as the worst of humanity, no shades of gray. Thinking a transgendered woman is a man is equivelent to kicking the **** out of somebody for being transgendered. not only that but they lay the blame for all this violence on his and others doorsteps too because they dare to have their own opinions which differ from current groupthink on the matter.

Dudess

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

yeah, teaching his children to be courteous and nice to people

what an absolute ****

You really do just argue any auld sh1t at all just for the sake of it - and to go against the grain.
"Fuk Israel" on one thread, "Fuk Palestinian terrorists" on another.

AgileMyth

Kev_2012 wrote: »

Because it does have something to do with them? For example, I tolerate these things but don't agree, therefore, if I have kids, I'm going to tell them to be courteous to everyone but that being gay or transgender is wrong(remember, in my opinion ya?), and that it exists in this world, you can't do anything about it, so just get on with your own life and don't let these things affect you.

I don't care what people do as long as it doesn't affect my family, friends or myself.

What happens if one of your kids is gay/trangender? And don't fool yourself into thinking that telling them its wrong will 'cure' them.

Fair play you've just brought up a kid to hate him/her self. Super parenting.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Dudess wrote: »

You really do just argue any auld sh1t at all just for the sake of it - and to go against the grain.
"Fuk Israel" on one thread, "Fuk Palestinian terrorists" on another.

i'm confused by what I should be doing.. flip a coin, pick a side and then defend them to the hilt....just because?

Annasopra

DubArk wrote: »

No teaching his children to be Polite Bigots! The second part of your statement I agree 100%

Or perhaps that they shouldn't accept themselves and should internalise the homophobia/transphobia they are being taught against themselves

Bobo78

Uterrly disgusting, no matter what he ll always be a man.
Yuk...

Dudess

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

the OP made a joke about the contestant being a man and everyone jumped on him calling him a bigot, .. this is *exactly* the PC brigade being the PC brigade. Unless you agree with their orthodoxy you are as bad as the worst of humanity, no shades of gray. Thinking a transgendered woman is a man is equivelent to kicking the **** out of somebody for being transgendered. not only that but they lay the blame for all this violence on his and others doorsteps too because they dare to have their own opinions which differ from current groupthink on the matter.

That's not what Kev was referring to. Kev was making out members of the PC brigade are people who feel a parent or parents should raise their kids as gay and transgendered, which is s phenomenon that... doesn't exist.

up for anything

matt-dublin wrote: »

Transgender Miss Universe contestant takes to the stage for bikini and evening gown rounds at pageant

I love the heading: Be careful... This is a man....


Like any chap on Boards is likely to get that close to such a gorgeous looking woman. :rolleyes::pac:

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Dudess wrote: »

That's not what Kev was referring to. Kev was making out members of the PC brigade are people who feel a parent or parents should raise their kids as gay and transgendered, which is s phenomenon that... doesn't exist.

the pc brigade is an all encompassing enemy

Dudess

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

i'm confused by what I should be doing.. flip a coin, pick a side and then defend them to the hilt....just because?

That's what you appear to do all right.

Rather than being consistent.

Yeah you're right, Kev would like to raise his kids to be courteous etc but that's obviously not what people had a problem with, they had a problem with him telling his kids that homosexuality is wrong. So you were just being obtuse in fairness.

eviltwin

He looks better than me and I'm a natural born woman

Fair play to him though, he is living the life he feels he should and I think that takes guts. Kudos to him.

Biggins

matt-dublin wrote: »

...If someone's taken offence to the title, get over it, it was meant in a light hearted way...

Yes, I'm sure the person involved would have laughed too - as will anyone else in the same situation.

...Not!

Its ok to joke about these people with a previous difficulty they had?
On a day after we get students reportedly expelled for hurtful postings and as such someone saying, being a plonker and posting material that could be taken as possibly inflammatory, that affect others, where do we stop now?

O' well its ok to joke about such stuff against some people and their once medical complaint, lets make them instead a butt of a joke and call them what they are not?

Excuse me, I find your humour lacking and in very poor taste.

The fact is that you posted "Be careful... This is a man...." - you were wrong in that statement and you were wrong to post it.
...Whats more, you were called out for it by many - and rightly so!

A lack of education has clearly left you unable to tell one sex from another.
A lack of education maybe has left you clearly unable to any decently towards those of a difficulty they might have had - and are trying to get over.

Your stupid, insulting, no humour post does nothing to help their situation, only hopes by accident or design to denigrate them.

If I was in the situation any person that you take humour out of, was in, I don't think I would be accepting your meek apology and "get over it!".

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Dudess wrote: »

That's what you appear to do all right.

Rather than being consistent.

Yeah you're right, Kev would like to raise his kids to be courteous etc but that's obviously not what people had a problem with, they had a problem with him telling his kids that homosexuality is wrong. So you were just being obtuse in fairness.

people are entitled to pass their own values on to their children, that includes christianity being a false religion, islam being a haven for terrorism ,homosexuality being morally wrong, capitalism being the most evil thing on the planet, whatever.. The important thing is to treat others with a bit of respect and not to be a dick.

pickarooney

KamiKazeKitten wrote: »

Paedophiles prey on children.

Kooli wrote: »

OK so with paedophilia, if the paedophile acts on their desires it is child abuse. This usually means irreparable damage to a child who has to engage in a non-consensual sexual act before they are emotionally or sexually mature.

With paedophilia, there is risk to others. HUGE risk to vulnerable children who must be protected by other adults.
With LGBT it's just about an individual doing what's right for them in their own personal life and with other consenting adults. It has no impact on anyone else. It is none of our business.

Surely you see that?

DubArk wrote: »

WOW! Now you’re putting Pedophiles into the same mix, more smoke and mirrors.

krudler wrote: »

Thats just fcuking idiotic.

Funny how people are only right-on up to a point. If someone happens to be born with genes* that make him/her attracted to their own sex or with the wrong sexual organs that's cool, and should be celebrated and anyone who disagrees is a bigot and an idiot but if a baby happens to be born with a gene that makes him/her attracted to young children he/she is inherently, intrinsically, irreparably evil and guilty of the worst crime before he/she draws his/her first breath.

Hardly seems fair.

This kind of trenchant, arbitrary, aggressive response is no better than the post being replied to. Refusing to entertain the question is the sign of a very poor debater.

*assuming, for the sake of argument, that a genetic theory of attraction applies across the board.

matt-dublin

Im sorry Biggins but i am actually very well educated Ill let you know.

Your stupic PC brigade atitude needs to get a grip.

The subject of the news article would be well aware what he/she was subjecting themselves to when they applied to the pagent. The fact that she's a transgender would always attract media attention and scrutiny and this has opened quite a good debate on how people feel on the subject.

get over yourself.

Biggins

matt-dublin wrote: »

Im sorry Biggins but ii am actually very well educated Ill let you know.

Your stupic PC brigade atitude needs to get a grip.

The subject of the new article would be well aware what he/she was subjecting themselves to when they applied to the pagent.

...So you though it would be ok to take to piss over such people with this problem?
Not only that - that others should be careful of them?

Your a lovely person indeed. Your a credit to society very much.

I have brother that has brain damage and epilepsy - would you like to take to piss out of that complaint too - or are you just saying that its ok to take the pee out of some people with serious problems but not others?

matt-dublin

where did i take the piss????

Dudess

It's a given that paedophile in this instance meant a person who actually acts on those urges.

Yeah SDCC, a person can't be stopped from passing on whatever views they want to their children (e.g. the Phelps family, a far-right skinhead, a loyalist fanatic, a provo, an islamic fundamentalist, a kkk member, a man-hater, a misogynist) but if they tell others this is what they're going to do, others have a right to challenge them.

Biggins

matt-dublin wrote: »

where did i take the piss????

The title is a BIG hint.

AEDIC

Biggins wrote: »

...So you though it would be ok to take to piss over such people with this problem?
Not only that - that others should be careful of them?

Your a lovely person indeed. Your a credit to society very much.

I have brother that has brain damage and epilepsy - would you like to take to piss out of that complaint too - or are you just saying that its ok to take the pee out of some people with serious problems but not others?

For someone who bangs on about others 'lack of education' thats an ironic post. :rolleyes:

Fenian Army

I dont think that some operations etc can change someone from being a man to a woman, I don't think that the person pictured is a "woman" in the truest sense of the word. I feel very sorry for transgender people, it can't be easy.

That said if it makes their lives even a little bit better to live as a woman, be treated as women, recognized by the state as such then I support transgender rights fully.

KamiKazeKitten

pickarooney wrote: »

Funny how people are only right-on up to a point. If someone happens to be born with genes* that make him/her attracted to their own sex or with the wrong sexual organs that's cool, and should be celebrated and anyone who disagrees is a bigot and an idiot but if a baby happens to be born with a gene that makes him/her attracted to young children he/she is inherently, intrinsically, irreparably evil and guilty of the worst crime before he/she draws his/her first breath.

Hardly seems fair.

This kind of trenchant, arbitrary, aggressive response is no better than the post being replied to. Refusing to entertain the question is the sign of a very poor debater.

*assuming, for the sake of argument, that a genetic theory of attraction applies across the board.

The question was answered - paedophilia, homosexuality and transgenderism can't be compared.

If someone is gay, they are interested in other, legally consenting adults.
If someone is trans, what they do to their body is their own business and does not harm anyone else.

Paedophilia is a different issue - children can't consent to sex acts. By its very nature if someone acts on their paedophilic urges they are scum, in my book.

I'm sure that there are people who are paedophilic for want of a better phrase but who don't act on their urges, I have a lot of respect for them and it must be difficult.

But the question itself was a ridiculous theory, that's why it got an aggressive response. Paedophilia is something you are born with but acted on will harm others, so no it is not acceptable.

DubArk

pickarooney wrote: »

Funny how people are only right-on up to a point. If someone happens to be born with genes* that make him/her attracted to their own sex or with the wrong sexual organs that's cool, and should be celebrated and anyone who disagrees is a bigot and an idiot but if a baby happens to be born with a gene that makes him/her attracted to young children he/she is inherently, intrinsically, irreparably evil and guilty of the worst crime before he/she draws his/her first breath.

Hardly seems fair.

This kind of trenchant, arbitrary, aggressive response is no better than the post being replied to. Refusing to entertain the question is the sign of a very poor debater.

*assuming, for the sake of argument, that a genetic theory of attraction applies across the board.

Consenting Adults.
That’s it. Not difficult.

pickarooney

Dudess wrote: »

It's a given that paedophile in this instance meant a person who actually acts on those urges.

No it isn't. The poster clearly made the point of the person being born with the orientation.

I'm pretty sure you yourself have made the same argument yourself more than once in the past, distinguishing between the crime of child abuse and the innate orientation. A commendable stand, I though, but now it looks like you're flip-flopping on this as that position doesn't suit the opinion flow of this thread. Which is a little ironic given you're accusing another poster of doing the same.

KamiKazeKitten wrote: »

The question was answered - paedophilia, homosexuality and transgenderism can't be compared.

If someone is gay, they are interested in other, legally consenting adults.
If someone is trans, what they do to their body is their own business and does not harm anyone else.

Paedophilia is a different issue - children can't consent to sex acts. By its very nature if someone acts on their paedophilic urges they are scum, in my book.

I'm sure that there are people who are paedophilic for want of a better phrase but who don't act on their urges, I have a lot of respect for them and it must be difficult.

But the question itself was a ridiculous theory, that's why it got an aggressive response. Paedophilia is something you are born with but acted on will harm others, so no it is not acceptable.

DubArk wrote: »

Consenting Adults.
That’s it. Not difficult.

Again, the context is a father telling his child that he/she is wrong for simply being born a certain way. Young children are not having gender reassignment surgery, having sex with members of their own gender or having sex with young children so the argument you're desperately trying to make in lieu of addressing the actual question and facing up to the obvious hypocrisy of your own view is completely moot.

matt-dublin

Biggins wrote: »

The title is a BIG hint.

its not a take the piss, if you didn't read the article you may think she was a natural woman.

If you were to start fapping to it and found out she was a man how would you feel about it?

for all you know i could be a devour christian and could take significant offence to this!

Biggins

AEDIC wrote: »

For someone who bangs on about others 'lack of education' thats an ironic post. :rolleyes:

Please do explain to this stupid person - instead of us just leaving us guessing.

The fact is the poster posted something that I'd say a few posters on boards.ie might know about and possibly suffer difficulties in.

They might have been fighting for their rights just to be seen as an equal in the eyes of the law, never mind as just an average human being on the street.

This stupidity of "Be careful... This is a man...." does nothing to help their situation - its just an ill made form of stupidity that put their situation backwards rather than helping society understand their very situation that for years has been (I assume) extremely hard for them.

...But hey... what does that matter, lets just take the piss out of them!
Rub their noses in it that they are not what they actually are!

Lets be careful of them, gosh - they must be dangerous or infectious...

Backward daftness to say the least.

KamiKazeKitten

matt-dublin wrote: »

for all you know i could be a devour christian and could take significant offence to this!

And so what if you do?

It's her life, leave her to live it.

Chuck Stone

Stupid sexy transgender.

Cork24

Feck me... :eek:

you have to say you would still give her one

Kev_2012

KamiKazeKitten wrote: »

You couldn't associate with them? Why not?
They're still your child after all, does them being transgender suddenly change all that?




Oh my.

Transgenders are not harming anyone by becoming a man/woman.
Gays are not harming anyone by having sex with their own sex.
Paedophiles prey on children.

That clear enough for you? I worry that you even have to ask.

I do despair sometimes.

I might change my mind as I get older and actually have kids, but I'm pretty sure that I would find it almost impossible to accept something like that.

Kooli wrote: »

OK so with paedophilia, if the paedophile acts on their desires it is child abuse. This usually means irreparable damage to a child who has to engage in a non-consensual sexual act before they are emotionally or sexually mature.

With someone who is gay or transgender....who gets hurt? Where is the abuse?

With paedophilia, there is risk to others. HUGE risk to vulnerable children who must be protected by other adults.
With LGBT it's just about an individual doing what's right for them in their own personal life and with other consenting adults. It has no impact on anyone else. It is none of our business.

Surely you see that?

This is not what I meant. My point is that they are all supposedly psychological conditions that people are born with.

I'm not an idiot, I know that it's between 2 consenting adults. But I do disagree that it doesn't affect others because I think it does. Why is there such glamorization of homosexuality and transgender in the media? Don't try and tell me that doesn't affect young impressionable people because it does. Not all the time, don't get me wrong, but it happens. Like ultra thing models being "rolemodels" and girls going away starving themselves.

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

We need a name for an equivalent law to Godwin's that states that all arguments about homosexuality or transgender will have some eejit comparing it to paedophilia.

Any ideas for a name?

Here less of the name calling ya?

DubArk wrote: »

WOW! Now you’re putting Pedophiles into the same mix, more smoke and mirrors. You’ll find that Consenting Adults are the key words here. I’m not going to insult myself or Gay and Transgender people by entertaining your openly bigoted stance. I hope you're just Trolling for your sake!!

Well if you read my post without the clouded view you have of what I'm trying to get across you might consider where I am coming from with my opinion.

Beruthiel wrote: »

Lets hope that one of your kids don't turn out to be gay or transgender then.
Also, teaching them bigotry is a sad reflection on you as a would be parent.

Yep, lets hope so.

Ok so, bigotry, a word used frequently these days against people with different opinions. I look at a lot of people here on boards.ie and in public that condemn and ridicule people with religious beliefs. I am in no way religious, but I don't ridicule people because of their beliefs. This seems to be ok, but disagreeing with LGBT issues is not. Double standard IMO.

mango salsa wrote: »

I feel sorry for your family and friends and any potential children you have - I mean you might also have friend or family who are LGBT and scared to come out to you and scared of the reaction. I'm genuinely sad for them.

Why? I don't have any gay friends or family(well I have one friend who is gay), and plus I said it would be difficult to accept a gay person, but transgender is a no go for me.

Dudess wrote: »

Ah in fairness Kev, it's not "wrong" to be gay/transgender. It's not a choice for starters. You can use the "It's my opinion" get-out clause all you like but it's still wrong of you to make such a claim, and deserving of being challenged.

Plus, "PC brigade" weakens an argument. This isn't about political correctness, which is a system of walking on egg-shells around people for fear of even slightly offending them. This is about disputing a very dangerous message.

Ok so, it's "different", is that word suitable? In fairness, it's not "wrong" of me to make such a claim either, and yes I welcome the challenge because it's a discussion. I'm not telling ye what to think, I'm giving my input on it.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I'm not quite sure i get your point. If you think something is wrong, how do you not discriminate against those who do it? Passing judgement is discrimination in and of itself, no?
I'm a live and let live type of man myself, whatever goes on between consenting adults is nobodies business but theirs. I quite honestly believe that the world would be a much better place if people just minded their own god damn business.
There is only one sexual deviance in this world and that is impossing yourself on another. If it's consensual it's absolutely fine no matter what "it" may be.

If somebody that is LGBT speaks to me, I won't say "f*ck off you fag" or anything like that, I will speak to them as any other person. But that doesn't mean I have to agree with their lifestyles. IF someone is in the pub the whole time, it's up to them, but I don't have to agree with it.

It's not a difficult concept really.

DubArk wrote: »

No teaching his children to be Polite Bigots! The second part of your statement I agree 100%

Yeah, I think I'll ignore you now. No need for that.

Dudess wrote: »

Lol, the first paragraph is hilarious.
Who the **** even implied a person had to raise a kid to be gay or transgender in order to show that they're not a bigot? And do you actually think a person's sexuality is the result of their upbringing?!

Nobody did, I'm making the point that people are accusing me of being a bigot because of what I think and I wanted to know what extremity do I have to go to show that I am not, and simply have an opinion.

And yes in *some* cases I think that the environment and what a child/teenager is subject to does have a direct impact on how they are as adults.

AgileMyth wrote: »

What happens if one of your kids is gay/trangender? And don't fool yourself into thinking that telling them its wrong will 'cure' them.

Fair play you've just brought up a kid to hate him/her self. Super parenting.

I wouldn't bring up kids to hate anything. I'd explain that boys like girls and vice versa. What's so wrong with explaining that to a child??

Dudess wrote: »

That's not what Kev was referring to. Kev was making out members of the PC brigade are people who feel a parent or parents should raise their kids as gay and transgendered, which is s phenomenon that... doesn't exist.

No, this is not what I meant. Read above.

up for anything wrote: »

I love the heading: Be careful... This is a man....


Like any chap on Boards is likely to get that close to such a gorgeous looking woman. :rolleyes::pac:

I'm sorry now if I offend the easily offended again, but AFAIAC, that is still a man.

I am not gay and never want to be involved with someone who was born male, so why should I accept somebody that was born male as a female? Is it not my right to know whether they are male/female? Instead of being hoodwinked into think they are female?

A surgically altered penis moulded into the shape of a vagina is STILL a penis at the end of the day. Dog sh!t moulded into the shape of a mars bar is still dog sh!t at the end of the day. Apologies for the crude analogy.

prinz

eviltwin wrote: »

He She looks better than me and I'm a natural born woman

Fair play to himher though, he she is living the life he she feels he she should and I think that takes guts. Kudos to him her.

FYP ya bigot. :pac: j/k I know you're not. It's a mixed up world we're living in.

Biggins

matt-dublin wrote: »

its not a take the piss, if you didn't read the article you may think she was a natural woman.

If you were to start fapping to it and found out she was a man how would you feel about it?

I might have further trust issues with the person - but that would be personal one on one thing.

I wouldn't go on line and warn the world that because of my new personal issues, those with this problem should be maybe treated like leaper's, that we should all be weary of them!

Wile E. Coyote

mango salsa wrote: »

Indeed only last week I met a trans guy in an all girls school in a town near where the OP lives.

You met a guy in a town near Uranus*?








*OP's current listed location.

KamiKazeKitten

pickarooney wrote: »

Again, the context is a father telling his child that he/she is wrong for simply being born a certain way. Young children are not having gender reassignment surgery, having sex with members of their own gender or having sex with young children so the argument you're desperately trying to make in lieu of addressing the actual question and facing up to the obvious hypocrisy of your own view is completely moot.

The actual post we replied to is here...

Kev_2012 wrote: »

Can I ask you a simple question? Do you think paedophilia is wrong? That is also legally a psychological condition that they can't help.

Obviously it is wrong, but I find it difficult to differentiate being gay or transgender with a paedophile if they are all supposed to be all psychological conditions that people are supposedly born with. That is just another reason why I don't agree with homosexuality or being transgender.

I'd like a proper discussion on this please, no smart answers or calling me a bigot.

He asked did people think paedophilia was wrong.

He then went on to say he couldn't differentiate between paedophilia, transgenderism or being gay because they were all conditions people are born with.

That's what people were responding to.

prinz

matt-dublin wrote: »

for all you know i could be a devour christian and could take significant offence to this!

Nyom nyom christian nyom, tasty.

DubArk

pickarooney wrote: »

No it isn't. The poster clearly made the point of the person being born with the orientation.

I'm pretty sure you yourself have made the same argument yourself more than once in the past, distinguishing between the crime of child abuse and the innate orientation. A commendable stand, I though, but now it looks like you're flip-flopping on this as that position doesn't suit the opinion flow of this thread. Which is a little ironic given you're accusing another poster of doing the same.





Again, the context is a father telling his child that he/she is wrong for simply being born a certain way. Young children are not having gender reassignment surgery, having sex with members of their own gender or having sex with young children so the argument you're desperately trying to make in lieu of addressing the actual question and facing up to the obvious hypocrisy of your own view is completely moot.

It would appear that you have completely missed the argument and have decided to go off on some sort of a self indulgent tangent, in order to not only confuse yourself about the text in the original thread but subsequent posts that led me and others to arrive at our various conclusions. You probably think that makes you sound really clever!?
It didn’t.

matt-dublin

Biggins wrote: »

I might have further trust issues with the person - but that would be personal one on one thing.

I wouldn't go on line and warn the world that because of my new personal issues, those with this problem should be maybe treated like leaper's, that we should all be weary of them!

just trust issues? you wouldnt be freaked out and annoyed by the fact that you just emptied your nutsack to a man who's had his p3nis surgically tucked in?

i've no personal issues with it, i thought it was an interesting article, i also thought it would stir an interesting debate on the topic, which it has.

Wile E. Coyote

I think some of you are way to sensitive about the title. What I took from it was that the OP was surprised that a person born a man could look so good as a woman.

DubArk

matt-dublin wrote: »

just trust issues? you wouldnt be freaked out and annoyed by the fact that you just emptied your nutsack to a man who's had his p3nis surgically tucked in?

i've no personal issues with it, i thought it was an interesting article, i also thought it would stir an interesting debate on the topic, which it has.

Ah it was all a clever ruse!!!!!
I don’t think you could of ever of thought that much!!
Pull the other one

KamiKazeKitten

Kev_2012 wrote: »

I might change my mind as I get older and actually have kids, but I'm pretty sure that I would find it almost impossible to accept something like that.

Doesn't answer the question though. Why not?

Kev_2012 wrote: »

I'm not an idiot, I know that it's between 2 consenting adults. But I do disagree that it doesn't affect others because I think it does. Why is there such glamorization of homosexuality and transgender in the media? Don't try and tell me that doesn't affect young impressionable people because it does. Not all the time, don't get me wrong, but it happens. Like ultra thing models being "rolemodels" and girls going away starving themselves.

Glamourisation in the media? Er, what?

Show me where the media are trying to turn us all gay please.

Kev_2012 wrote: »

If somebody that is LGBT speaks to me, I won't say "f*ck off you fag" or anything like that, I will speak to them as any other person. But that doesn't mean I have to agree with their lifestyles. IF someone is in the pub the whole time, it's up to them, but I don't have to agree with it.

Fair enough.

Kev_2012 wrote: »

I wouldn't bring up kids to hate anything. I'd explain that boys like girls and vice versa. What's so wrong with explaining that to a child??

Because it's not always true for all.

Kev_2012 wrote: »

I am not gay and never want to be involved with someone who was born male, so why should I accept somebody that was born male as a female? Is it not my right to know whether they are male/female? Instead of being hoodwinked into think they are female?

Strangely I agree with you here, although not the phrasing you're using....many people aren't comfortable with the idea of transgenders and I think it's only fair that they are told.

pickarooney

DubArk wrote: »

It would appear that you have completely missed the argument and have decided to go off on some sort of a self indulgent tangent, in order to not only confuse yourself about the text in the original thread but subsequent posts that led me and others to arrive at our various conclusions. You probably think that makes you sound really clever!?
It didn’t.

The only 'argument' you lot have made is that paedophilia can't be compared to anything because you simply don't want to respond to the question of whether someone can be born with something and sill be 'wrong'.