Peak Trans

Omackeral

paleoperson wrote: »

Yeah the thumbnail in that video is enough to make me not want to press play. That has to be one of the most punchable faces I've seen in a long long time.

sabat

Omackeral wrote: »

The T doesn't really fit in with the LGB. It's not a sexual orientation. I wonder is LGB vs T a trend? Is there a divide?

Haven't you heard? The TERFS are trying to get the L out of LGBT.

B.A._Baracus

If you are a man and say:

... You are a woman trapped in a man's body you are considered brave to come forward etc.
... But say you were reincarnated from a woman from the 18th century and watch as people say the opposite. Quite the opposite.

Omackeral

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

If you are a man and say:

... You are a woman trapped in a man's body you are considered brave to come forward etc.

If you are a white woman and say:

... You are a black woman trapped in a white woman's body you are considered to be a con artist or have mental illness. That's what a mod on here told me before elsewhere before banning me.

Sal Butamol

Omackeral wrote: »

Also, the brain named itself.

It was going for Brian but was dyslexic

Tin Foil Hat

Tis Yourself? wrote: »

A doctor was fired in the UK because he wouldn't renounce his belief that gender is determined at birth. The absoultue state of the UK...

If an adult wants surgery, fine, but why should anyone else be forced to accept your delusions?

Gender is determined the second either a male or female sperm wins the race to the egg.

Tis Yourself?

Shouldn't the 'B' be expelled from LGBT? Doesn't bisexual imply there are only two genders?

Sounds pretty hateful and problematic to me.

Sal Butamol

All this madness will end in tears

bodice ripper

Tis Yourself? wrote:

Shouldn't the 'B' be expelled from LGBT? Doesn't bisexual imply there are only two genders?

Tbh, the B is basically silent.

Yer Da sells Avon

Tis Yourself? wrote: »

A doctor was fired in the UK because he wouldn't renounce his belief that gender is determined at birth. The absoultue state of the UK...

If an adult wants surgery, fine, but why should anyone else be forced to accept your delusions?

If he's prepared to put his Christian beliefs before his patients' welfare, then he's not a good doctor and they're probably better off without him. I'd also argue that he's not a very good Christian either, because refusing to call someone what they want to be called seems very unkind.

Tis Yourself?

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

If he's prepared to put his Christian beliefs before his patients' welfare, then he's not a good doctor and they're probably better off without him. I'd also argue that he's not a very good Christian either, because refusing to call someone what they want to be called seems very unkind.

Ha no. He doesn't want to be forced to accept people's delusions. You know 2+2 does not = 5, right?

And what's his faith got to do with it? What if he was muslim? Or atheist? Would it be fair to fire him?

Yer Da sells Avon

Tis Yourself? wrote: »

Ha no. He doesn't want to be forced to accept people's delusions. You know 2+2 does not = 5, right?

And what's his faith got to do with it? What if he was muslim? Or atheist? Would it be fair to fire him?

His faith has everything to do with it, Rereginald. His opinion stems not from his medical training, but from his faith, and it is at variance with the general consensus within the medical community.

Cupatae

what i find wrong is the outrage, when some one takes the unpopular view on stuff like tans and LGBT, you cant speak out against any of it no matter how rational your argument might be, you ll be set apon and discredited by the masses of drones going along with the popular opinion without any real thought or opinion of there own sheerly on popularity alone lol you only have to look at the recent campaigns in Ireland as a fine example.

Tis Yourself?

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

His faith has everything to do with it, Rereginald. His opinion stems not from his medical training, but from his faith, and it is at variance with the general consensus within the medical community.

Yeah he must be punished for wrongthink. What is with you liberals and punishment? You've been it at since the days of Stalin.

You can't change your gender. You going to report me?

Yer Da sells Avon

Tis Yourself? wrote: »

Yeah he must be punished for wrngthink. What is with you liberals and punishment? You've been it at since the days of Stalin.

You can't change your gender. You going to report me?

Most doctors disagree with you.

Tis Yourself?

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Most doctors disagree with you.

Well of course because now you'll lose your job if you dare speak out!

This transgender nonsense will be considered barbaric in years to come. You know drilling holes in skull was once considered a way of treating mental illness too?

You can't change your gender. You are born a boy or a girl. That's it.

benjamin d

Cupatae wrote: »

what i find wrong is the outrage, when some one takes the unpopular view on stuff like tans and LGBT, you cant speak out against any of it...

Ah well sure we all hate the tans

Yer Da sells Avon

Tis Yourself? wrote: »

Well of course because now you'll lose your job if you dare speak out!

This transgender nonsense will be considered barbaric in years to come. You know drilling holes in skull was once considered a way treating mental illness too?

You can't change your gender. You are born a boy or a girl. That's it.

It's the transphobic bigots who'll be considered barbaric in years to come. Just live and let live.

Tis Yourself?

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

It's the transphobic bigots who'll be considered barbaric in years to come. Just live and let live.

Ha! live and let live he says, while calling for the punishment of those who dissent!

Can't change your gender, sorry.

Cupatae

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

It's the transphobic bigots who'll be considered barbaric in years to come. Just live and let live.

And anyone who doesnt whole heartedly agree or conform to trans people agendas or will falls under that catagory... if people dont want to recognize trans, they shouldnt be forced to by the bully tactics that are going on.

Yer Da sells Avon

Tis Yourself? wrote: »

Ha! live and let live he says, while calling for the punishment of those who dissent!

Can't change your gender, sorry.

I said nothing about punishment. If a doctor can't do their job properly, then surely they should be doing another job.

Tis Yourself?

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I said nothing about punishment. If a doctor can't do their job properly, then surely they should be doing another job.

Fired for not accepting 2+2=5? Funny, I think if the doctor was muslim you'd be on his side...

Btw, did I mention you can't change gender?

Yer Da sells Avon

Tis Yourself? wrote: »

Fired for not accepting 2+2=5? Funny, I think if the doctor was muslim you'd be on his side...

Btw, did I mention you can't change gender?

I wouldn't be on the side of a Muslim doctor whose religion prevented him from dealing with his patients properly either.

And yes, like a broken record, you did mention that you can't change gender. You can change your body though, if you don't identify with whichever gender you've been assigned. And it wouldn't hurt you (or others on this thread, because let's face it, you're not long for this forum) to tolerate that. That's all you're being asked, tbh, just to tolerate how other people live their lives.

Tis Yourself?

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I wouldn't be on the side of a Muslim doctor whose religion prevented him from dealing with his patients properly either.

And yes, like a broken record, you did mention that you can't change gender. You can change your body though, if you don't identify with whichever gender you've been assigned. And it wouldn't hurt you (or others on this thread, because let's face it, you're not long for this forum) to tolerate that. That's all you're being asked, tbh, just to tolerate how other people live their lives.

Yes adults can undergo crude surgery and take on an approximation of the opposite sex. It still doesn't mean that they are now a man or woman.

I tolerate them enough as it is. Why should I be punished for not accepting their delusions?

Omackeral

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

And yes, like a broken record, you did mention that you can't change gender. You can change your body though, if you don't identify with whichever gender you've been assigned. And it wouldn't hurt you (or others on this thread, because let's face it, you're not long for this forum) to tolerate that. That's all you're being asked, tbh, just to tolerate how other people live their lives.

I agree with your points here, generally. I agree to live and let live. I've no problem with using preferred pronouns, discounting xe/ze mumbo-jumbo. I must, however, challenge this notion of the ''gender you were assigned'' at birth. I wasn't assigned a male gender. I was just born male. I wasn't made on a production line and given a gender by someone. There's no assigning.

Yer Da sells Avon

Omackeral wrote: »

I must, however, challenge this notion of the ''gender you were assigned'' at birth. I wasn't assigned a male gender. I was just born male.

I might not have articulated it very well, but I just meant 'assigned', in that there is an (almost always completely fair and correct) assumption from birth (or halfway through the pregnancy or whatever...) that it is, and always will be, a boy or girl. I'm not implying that there's anything wrong with that, btw, or that the midwife/midhusband should say "congratulations, zhe's a baby, but let's keep zhem gender neutral until zhey can make up zheir own mind" instead.

The Bishop Basher

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

That's all you're being asked, tbh, just to tolerate how other people live their lives.

That’s not true though. We’re being asked to reconstruct many of our societal norms and in some cases our language to accommodate less the .5% of the population.

An example being use of the term, “assigned male at birth” while the other 99.5% of us just say she had a boy.

And yes I said “she” because despite the delusions of the trans community, only women can have babies.

Malayalam

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I wouldn't be on the side of a Muslim doctor whose religion prevented him from dealing with his patients properly either.

And yes, like a broken record, you did mention that you can't change gender. You can change your body though, if you don't identify with whichever gender you've been assigned. And it wouldn't hurt you (or others on this thread, because let's face it, you're not long for this forum) to tolerate that. That's all you're being asked, tbh, just to tolerate how other people live their lives.

That is not all that is being asked. Modern people are on the whole reasonable and accepting as we have seen time and again - you do your thing so long as it does not harm anyone else. But society is being asked to detach gender from biology and this includes teaching children that gender is a feeling, to accept that there is no inherent male or female - ness. Society is being told that very high doses of hormones in childhood are the best way to treat dysphoria.

And with the massive increase in Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria in children one would have to suspect a number of possible reasons - this is a
significant indicator of something different going on. It is not that these children have always been there - if so the population of adults would have a lot more older transexuals. Either there has been some huge disruptor to the endocrine systems of developing children - in utero or early childhood, or there is some huge environmental disruptor, either physical as in chemical or the change is via culture. In the case of the first two possibilities we should seriously investigate possible causes. It is quite possible that there has been some biological disruptor - after all autism rates have soared for reasons that are not yet settled. As an adjunct there is some indication of concomitance between autism and gender dysphoria. In fact there is significant psychiatric comorbidity with childhood gender dysphoria and quite a number of conditions - these factors all need to be looked at, rather than rushing to affirm a child's discomfort with radical treatment that has lifelong affects.

In the case of the third possible reason for increase - enculturation - we should also seriously examine the roots of what is a very disruptive outcome to children regardless of how they are treated for dysphoria. The influence of media such as television programs that are narcisstic and sexualised at a very young age cannot be discounted. Social forums that welcome in alienated children are also indicated. There is an early sexualising element at play in my opinion, whether from media or adult influence - I am struck by the erotic undertones in the photographs of transkids or their sexualised movements in videos. There is a lot of vamping and being 'fabulous' and I think some of this is enculturation. The girlishness of the transgirl and the boyishness of the transboy seem to be somehow exagerated.



About your medical claims. Have you a source for claiming most medical personnel are on board?

Yes, one can change the body. But it is my opinion that one cannot actually change the biology. Perhaps that is yours too? The X and Y chromosomes will always remain the same. Transgendered people will need lifelong hormones and many also choose numerous surgeries. This is their right to choose as adults, though I do feel sorry for the pain it must cause them. I am not even going to go into the trans people who feel that hormones or surgery are irrelevant and that some women literally have penises, and that we must fully accept that. Thus it is my feeling that a male cannot be changed into a female or vice versa; instead they can be trans-sexuals. What's wrong with that? I have seen quite a few transpeople on social media say that they know perfectly well that they are not a biological woman or a man, but rather a transwoman or a transman. And that is cool - that does not mean the civilisation at large must deny science.

The whole ''we can rebuild it'' thrust is really where transgenderism and transhumanism intersect. This is an interesting article on the subject. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/zoltan-istvan/the-future-of-the-lgbt-movement-may-involve-transhumanism_b_7657388.html
Interesting times ahead.

suicide_circus

Tis Yourself? wrote: »

Shouldn't the 'B' be expelled from LGBT? Doesn't bisexual imply there are only two genders?

Sounds pretty hateful and problematic to me.

FurBabyMomma

Ffs, are we just going to blindly accept as true the very unlikely fact that a doctor was fired from his job for his views on gender because some random person said so? Is it too much to actually find and read the article? Because that poster is cherry picking and that is not at all what happened.

The doctor was let go from training from a government position involving dealing with/interviewing the public when he made it known he would only address people by the gender they were given at birth. So he can have his views, just not on government time or dime.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/08/government-drops-doctor-says-gender-given-birth/

BattleCorp

To be honest, I'm 95% in the same camp as the doctor. Not because of religious reasons though. If someone wants to change their physical appearance through hormones or surgery, then that's their business. But if a someone I knew made this transition, I'd still consider them the same sex that I knew them before as.

I struggle with the concept of 'I identify as'. As a white male, can I identify as a black male? As an able bodied person, can I identify as being disabled? Are you discriminating against me by not letting me park in disabled parking bays if I identify as disabled? Is identifying as disabled any different to identifying as male/female?

suicide_circus

BattleCorp wrote: »

To be honest, I'm 95% in the same camp as the doctor. Not because of religious reasons though. If someone wants to change their physical appearance through hormones or surgery, then that's their business. But if a someone I knew made this transition, I'd still consider them the same sex that I knew them before as.

I struggle with the concept of 'I identify as'. As a white male, can I identify as a black male? As an able bodied person, can I identify as being disabled? Are you discriminating against me by not letting me park in disabled parking bays if I identify as disabled? Is identifying as disabled any different to identifying as male/female?

it's a rejection of the notion of objective truth. So it is accepted that an individual with xy chromosomes is male, and xx is female but in this brave new world these determinations no longer matter, it's based on feelings. When you play thiz logic out in various scenarios you run into all sorts of problems.

wexie

Omackeral wrote: »

The T doesn't really fit in with the LGB. It's not a sexual orientation. I wonder is LGB vs T a trend? Is there a divide?

Apparently?! Not sure how big of a trend, all getting very confusing

"The GBT community today, by supporting the rights of males who "identify as lesbians" (also called "transwomen") over the rights of lesbians to choose their sexual partners (on the basis of their sex, not how they "identify") is in fact enforcing heterosexuality on lesbians.

"This is a misogynistic and anti-lesbian manifestation of the rape culture we live in."

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-44757403

Is anyone else becoming rather confused by all of this?

GLB.. that i can understand (although I'm told I need to be GLB to understand). We've had time to adjust our thinking over decades of campaigning, and most of us know a variety of GLB people. But the rest? I just don't understand it. Oh, I've read a load of articles, and read the threads on boards.. but, nope. The penny has not dropped.

Could someone also explain to me why we must instantly accept Transgenders? I really don't understand this requirement to accept something that seems a relatively new movement with a very low population who don't seem to have established themselves yet. It's obvious they're seeking very public recognition for themselves as a group... why aren't they taking the time to ease into our public consciousness rather than hitting us with a hammer?

ceadaoin.

wexie wrote: »

Apparently?! Not sure how big of a trend, all getting very confusing



https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-44757403

Yes, lesbians are now being told that they are hateful bigots and subjected to vile abuse online if they don't want to have a sexual relationship with a person that has a penis. Is this meant to be progressive? I don't see any difference between this subsection of the trans community and incels tbh. Both seem to have a sense of entitlement to sex with women.

Women in the UK who want to meet to discuss how the proprosed GRA will affect them are also being threatened with violence, one has already been attacked by a trans activist, masked men showed up to one meeting, bomb threats were made against another. This is where we are in 2018. No discussion allowed. Even trans people who aknowledge that they can't change sex but can present how they choose can't speak out without being abused.

silverharp

wexie wrote: »

Apparently?! Not sure how big of a trend, all getting very confusing



https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-44757403

I happened to see a Sargon video being bemused by the whole thing. the radical "L" think the "T" are being conservative, its difficult to keep up with this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adb-6zTzwOQ

wexie

Deleted User wrote: »

Is anyone else becoming rather confused by all of this?

yes I have to say I find it all quite confusing. Most especially when it comes to kids. I think it's pretty firmly established that both brains and personalities aren't fully developed until people are well into their teens if not beyond. So how it could possibly make sense to start messing with that at such young ages is beyond me. To me it's kinda like saying you want to rebuild your house because you're not happy with it, before you've finished building it (poor analogy I know).

Deleted User wrote: »

Could someone also explain to me why we must instantly accept Transgenders?

Well that one's easy, because they are people! I try to accept people for who they are rather than what they are. One of our neighbours is a young transgender woman that I've known for a long time. Was a nice kid when she was a boy, still a nice person now. I can't say I quite understand what she is going through but she hasn't changed much as a person. Having said that she certainly seems a lot more open to questions and a lot less combative than some posters on here.

Deleted User wrote: »

I really don't understand this requirement to accept something that seems a relatively new movement with a very low population who don't seem to have established themselves yet. It's obvious they're seeking very public recognition for themselves as a group... why aren't they taking the time to ease into our public consciousness rather than hitting us with a hammer?

Have to agree with this, I certainly think it's probably not easy but the attitude some display (like the Tweet a few pages back) can't be doing much good for overall understanding and acceptance. But I guess the craziest voices shout the loudest.

wexie

ceadaoin. wrote: »

how the proprosed GRA will affect them are also being threatened with violence,

I presume you're not talking about the Garda Representative Association?

wexie

wexie wrote: »

Well that one's easy, because they are people! I try to accept people for who they are rather than what they are. One of our neighbours is a young transgender woman that I've known for a long time. Was a nice kid when she was a boy, still a nice person now. I can't say I quite understand what she is going through but she hasn't changed much as a person. Having said that she certainly seems a lot more open to questions and a lot less combative than some posters on here.

Ok, let me put this way. Your bad example, and my bad example.

Say a group of people, around 9000 people decide to get surgery done to their bodies, so that they can look like Klingon's from Star Trek. They speak to each other in Klingon, behave as Klingon's would, and follow the traditions from Star Trek. They demand to be considered as Klingon's and not human. They want to be treated as a separate race completely, gain recognition, and "protection" as an alien race.

Do we accept that? After all, if gender is something that people can simply choose to change, surely people can decide to change their humanity? Do we simply accept their choices, and accommodate them? Or are we allowed to consider them nutjobs and seek to avoid them as much as possible?

ceadaoin.

wexie wrote: »

I presume you're not talking about the Garda Representative Association?

Gender recoginition act. It will basically erase any sex based protections and exclusions that are currently in place and allows for "self ID" rather than needing a diagnosis by a medical professional to change passport etc. So any person only has to say they are trans to be allowed access to women's shelters, women's prisons, wards, changing rooms etc. No proof or even effort to change their appearance is needed. Obviously this has the potential to cause some problems when it comes to places where vulnerable women might be housed, such as domestic violence shelters, psychiatric facilities and prisons. Discussion of these potential problems is not allowed.

Funnily enough, it has been written into the proposal that female members of the nobility cannot identify as male to inherit land. So it's aknowledged that biological sex does exist in those cases. I thought that was transphobic?

Annasopra

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Yes, lesbians are now being told that they are hateful bigots and subjected to vile abuse online if they don't want to have a sexual relationship with a person that has a penis. .

Absolute and utter rubbish - Nobody is saying lesbians must have sexual relationships with a person with a penis.

Annasopra

Deleted User wrote: »

Ok, let me put this way. Your bad example, and my bad example.

Say a group of people, around 9000 people decide to get surgery done to their bodies, so that they can look like Klingon's from Star Trek. They speak to each other in Klingon, behave as Klingon's would, and follow the traditions from Star Trek. They demand to be considered as Klingon's and not human. They want to be treated as a separate race completely, gain recognition, and "protection" as an alien race.

Do we accept that? After all, if gender is something that people can simply choose to change, surely people can decide to change their humanity? Do we simply accept their choices, and accommodate them? Or are we allowed to consider them nutjobs and seek to avoid them as much as possible?

I don't think thats a relevant comparison given that transgender people are no longer considered mentally ill by the World Health Organisation and pretty much the vast majority of medical professionals and medical professional assocations

wexie

Deleted User wrote: »

Ok, let me put this way. Your bad example, and my bad example.

Say a group of people, around 9000 people decide to get surgery done to their bodies, so that they can look like Klingon's from Star Trek. They speak to each other in Klingon, behave as Klingon's would, and follow the traditions from Star Trek. They demand to be considered as Klingon's and not human. They want to be treated as a separate race completely, gain recognition, and "protection" as an alien race.

Do we accept that? After all, if gender is something that people can simply choose to change, surely people can decide to change their humanity? Do we simply accept their choices, and accommodate them? Or are we allowed to consider them nutjobs and seek to avoid them as much as possible?

I'm not sure that's really comparable is it? Considering transgender people are likely to just go about their lives without harming anyone. Klingons.....not so much (at least that's my understanding of it, not a Trekkie)

Creative83

For the most part this thread is political correctness gone absolutely mad!

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I don't think thats a relevant comparison given that transgender people are no longer considered mentally ill by the World Health Organisation and pretty much the vast majority of medical professionals and medical professional assocations

Where did I say they were mentally ill apart from the last sentence?

My example stands.

bodice ripper

Creative83 wrote:

For the most part this thread is political correctness gone absolutely mad!

Give over, the thread largely consists of straight people asserting that gender is immutable and determined by chromosomes.

ceadaoin.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Absolute and utter rubbish - Nobody is saying lesbians must have sexual relationships with a person with a penis.

Have you been on Twitter or the internet in general lately, because they definitely are.

wexie

wexie wrote: »

I'm not sure that's really comparable is it? Considering transgender people are likely to just go about their lives without harming anyone. Klingons.....not so much (at least that's my understanding of it, not a Trekkie)

You're missing the point. It seemed an obvious point. But ok, I won't pursue it.

WinnyThePoo

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You're missing the point. It seemed an obvious point. But ok, I won't pursue it.

Thanks.

Malayalam

Deleted User wrote: »

Ok, let me put this way. Your bad example, and my bad example.

Say a group of people, around 9000 people decide to get surgery done to their bodies, so that they can look like Klingon's from Star Trek. They speak to each other in Klingon, behave as Klingon's would, and follow the traditions from Star Trek. They demand to be considered as Klingon's and not human. They want to be treated as a separate race completely, gain recognition, and "protection" as an alien race.

Do we accept that? After all, if gender is something that people can simply choose to change, surely people can decide to change their humanity? Do we simply accept their choices, and accommodate them? Or are we allowed to consider them nutjobs and seek to avoid them as much as possible?

Yes, I think we accept them. Klingons, otherkin, whatever. If they change into Klingons as adults. And if they don't tell everyone else that we are all potential Klingons at birth, and that we just don't know that we may identify that way yet. That there is no such thing as Human, but some fluid identity that may or may not at some stage settle.