the TRANS debate

a reply to: ghaleon12
I'm 'Murican. Urban. Have you read everything I wrote in this thread? I'm actually asking.

a reply to: tovenar
You are basically proving my point! Trans-people in the pre-historic Americas were not depressed/unhappy and killing themselves. They were a part of society and accepted. Now, in the exact same places hundreds of years later they are unhappy, and if you actually talk to any of them, they will tell you about how their family disowned them, they lost most of their friends, have been threatened, and worry about basic life issues like using the wrong bathroom. And I've never heard someone claim they were Napoleon. The trans-women I know will admit and understand that they were born males. And the Marylin Monroe comment shows that you only know of trans-people from the MEDIA. Have you met a number of trans-women? They are just normal people who want to live their normal lives in safety. Yes, some of them are Large Marge the Trucker but most of them are just normal XY biological males who want to change their genitalia because the technology is available. And please study some Anthropology and find out what "normal" is. Study the primitive tribes. If Australian Aborigines can have subincitions (look it up), why can't Americans have a sex change if they are adults capable of making their own decisions with their own bodies?

a reply to: AtomicKangaroo
I believe that, because trans-people have existed as a minority in completely separated cultures throughout time on earth that there must be something to it, and I was hoping for scholars to debate with who know the same information I do. I will make the rational assumption that since trans-people have existed in all cultures that socially-accepted them, that in the cultures where they are persecuted they are simply hiding in the closet.

a reply to: tanstaafl
Why do you think I'm lying? Have you ever actually talked to a trans-person, or do you get all your information from the media? And what is the solution? Compassionately forcing them into mental hospitals? And who is really deluded? Most people I know are much more deluded than the average trans-person. For example, I know Christians and Muslims. There is much more proof that the brain's hormonal chemicals physically make a trans-person think and feel like the opposite gender, compared to the crazy stuff that Christians and Muslims believe with zero proof at all, and most of it doesn't even make any logical sense. I will admit, IF trans-people are considered to have a mental disorder, then at least 80% of the world is WAY more crazy.

a reply to: Boadicea
My main point is that trans-people are being used as a pawn to be destroyed. The Media is making it SEEM that all of the trans-people are asking for "special" rights and making demands, but this is not true. ALL of the trans-people I know just want to be safe, and they are scared because: Doctors might not treat them, even in simple emergency situations. If they go to jail, they will be the only vaginal cavity in cages with testosterone-filled men. They worry that since everyone thinks they are crazy they might be rounded up in mental hospitals, and their passports are easily revoked so they won't even have the chance to run away. Looking at the comments in this thread, they do have much to fear because almost no one has said they are not crazy, and I'm sure almost no one would care if they WERE rounded up into mental hospitals. Most of the trans-people just want to live and not die or be genocided.

a reply to: AtomicKangaroo

Atomic, firstly I am a nudist activist. I'm a poly activist. I'm a freedom activist. I don't think you fully understood my point that most trans-people don't want special rights, that it's the media making it seem like they're all asking for these special rights, when all they want is basic rights. Such as .... if they have a vaginal cavity and go to prison, it will be a female prison because they would get torn apart in a male prison. They don't want doctors to refuse them treatment because they are trans. They don't want to be rounded up in hospitals. The media talks about all these trans- sports -players and all that, or how they want to FORCE you to use proper pronouns, while the average trans-person just wants the average freedom other people have. The media has made this a huge issue while the average trans-person is fearing for their lives that they'll be rounded up into mental hospitals, and judging from the comments here, that's what a lot of people seem to want to do to them. I fear for them even more after making this thread.

a reply to: Robotswilltakeover

Most of the trans-people just want to live and not die or be genocided.

Most? Maybe... Maybe not. But what about the very loud and demanding trans activists?

For example, it's certainly not women demanding bio men invade their private spaces... It's the trans activists forcing their way in.

I don't expect you to personally know each and every trans person, but I find it very difficult to believe that you are oblivious to the unreasonable demands and very public abuse from many trans activists.

Do the terms "RadFems" and "TERFs" mean nothing to you? How about the "Cotton Ceiling"? Or "Die Cis Scum"?

Are you unaware of the violent threats by many trans made against others?

Trans Activists in Their Own Words

You paint such an innocent picture, but it's not the whole truth. So I ask again: are you ignorant or gaslighting?

a reply to: Robotswilltakeover

Dyson says his views on global warming have been strongly criticized. In reply, he notes that "[m]y objections to the global warming propaganda are not so much over the technical facts, about which I do not know much, but it's rather against the way those people behave and the kind of intolerance to criticism that a lot of them have.

wiki

That is a pretty insane statement from Dyson.

If you don't know the science, than you aren't qualified to criticize the science.

If you criticize without knowing, its obnoxious. Would Dyson tolerate someone criticizing his scientific views when they know little to nothing of what he's talking about? I don't imagine he would have much patience for such people.

Here's another unreasonable viw of his:

In a 2014 interview, he said that "What I'm convinced of is that we don't understand climate ... It will take a lot of very hard work before that question is settled."[4]

The good news is that the main effect of carbon dioxide ... is to make the planet greener, [by] feeding the growth of green plants of all kinds [and] increasing the fertility of farms and fields and forests."[60]

There is something definitely insane about Dyson's attitude about these sorts of things.

He's basically ignoring the catastrophic positive feedback loops that would result; with more co2 in the atmosphere, the ocean will become more acidic; at a certain point, the ocean can't get any more acidic (i.e warm), which in turn drives the movement of water from the colder bottom to the top. At the bottom of the ocean lie solid blocks of co2 - frozen, but more than enough to double the content in the atmosphere. Oceans absorb most of the suns light, whereas the poles reflect the majority of it. Albedo is a big element which keeps the planet cooler. There is also co2 trapped below the tundra of the Northern hemisphere.

Water is also a greenhouse gas, so as c02 builds up, more water evaporates, which in turn adds to the global warming effect.

Global warming is not an exaggeration, but a realistic picture of what could happen if we don't stop screwing with the planet's climate system. Besides definitely flooding all existent coastal cities on earth today, the situation could end more catastrophic than predicted, given the last time the planet has been this hot is 50 million years ago, a time period when the solar output was less than today.

a reply to: rickymouse

Speaking as a woman who was born with PE (Pectus Excavatum) and had the repair to that defect done in 1976 when I was nine (which involved breaking ribs and sternum to lift the ribcage, then insert a metal pin as it heals) I have something to add to this conversation.
I had to have two reconstructive surgeries just to look normal, and paid out the nose for original Dow silicone implants when I was 22. I am now 51. I need them out because of the deep itching and sometimes burning sensation coupled with living with rheumatoid arthritis for years, also my mom had breast cancer so there are many good reasons to remove them.
Did insurance cover my new breasts just to correct MY WOMAN'S body? NO, it's cosmetic, screw the psyche of a real woman while some dude who THINKS he's a chick gets them for free as part of treatment? No no no no no. I cannot emphasize how angry I am at the idea that a man's delusion comes before a woman's mental health in regard to her self-image when CLEARLY the body they have has some deformity of the breasts. Only women who have had mastectomies are eligible and even then I believe there's arguments saying STILL that it's cosmetic.
So I believe that any surgery they want to do to further their delusions should never be covered by any insurance, if so then implants for women whose secondary (NOT PRIMARY) sexual characteristics are out sorts for ANY reason should also be covered. Period.

originally posted by: thegeneraldisarray
a reply to: rickymouse

Speaking as a woman who was born with PE (Pectus Excavatum) and had the repair to that defect done in 1976 when I was nine (which involved breaking ribs and sternum to lift the ribcage, then insert a metal pin as it heals) I have something to add to this conversation.
I had to have two reconstructive surgeries just to look normal, and paid out the nose for original Dow silicone implants when I was 22. I am now 51. I need them out because of the deep itching and sometimes burning sensation coupled with living with rheumatoid arthritis for years, also my mom had breast cancer so there are many good reasons to remove them.
Did insurance cover my new breasts just to correct MY WOMAN'S body? NO, it's cosmetic, screw the psyche of a real woman while some dude who THINKS he's a chick gets them for free as part of treatment? No no no no no. I cannot emphasize how angry I am at the idea that a man's delusion comes before a woman's mental health in regard to her self-image when CLEARLY the body they have has some deformity of the breasts. Only women who have had mastectomies are eligible and even then I believe there's arguments saying STILL that it's cosmetic.
So I believe that any surgery they want to do to further their delusions should never be covered by any insurance, if so then implants for women whose secondary (NOT PRIMARY) sexual characteristics are out sorts for ANY reason should also be covered. Period.

Bringing something back to normal after surgery is not the same as changing something because you want to. I can see if surgery damages something as a reason for healthcare to fix it within reason. Trouble is that people and doctors will take advantage of this and be abusing the system. Where do you draw the line with that too? The sunken breastbone needed to be fixed, the reconstruction should have been covered to some extent by insurances.

a reply to: Robotswilltakeover

Great post OP and its a valid debate in these troubling and confusing times.

I am old school, I haven't been much on here these days as I am nearing the end of my life but I have no regrets. What I am alarmed about is the delusions that are being propelled into the mindsets of ever day people.

First you have the LGBTQZYZABC123 problem. So in the early days you had Lesbians and Gays actively fighting for their "sexual" rights, then somewhere along the way you had the other letters of the alphabet tag along probably because they witnessed a powerful movement and wanted as much of the limelight as possible to get their agendas into the limelight and public consciousness.

Then the transgender label surfaced and become a word in the public vocabulary and I believe the people in and around this group pushed hard to get their letter of the alphabet tagged along with the now active and worldwide movement fostered by the lesbian/gay/bi/etc... community to give credence to what they are about.

Now here is where it gets a little effed up for my liking. To chime with what Ben Shapiro said about Transgender people I too have no issue with them identifying themselves as "Trans people" what I have an issue with is to then accommodate their delusion into my reality.

What is that delusion?

That they have equal rights to women, that they are women, that by claiming this fact they automatically have the right to take part in all women only activities.

Let me state the obvious: Transgender people are (mostly) men or women "transitioning" into another identity to quote:

"the process or a period of changing from one state or condition to another."

It could also be classed as a transformation because the word transform means:

make a marked change in the form, nature, or appearance of.

Which is probably much more apt compared to Transition which I believe is incorrect and a lie to dupe the public. When a person transforms they are changing their appearance to be like another form but they do not transition into that form (to do that would require a complete change down to the genetic and then conscious and subconscious level).

What really *****'s me off is how these people protest about their rights which are not their rights, they are women's rights they have associated themselves .

This is an insult to women and their rights and equally more delusional are women who then claim to defend the rights of these transgender people yet deep down they are uncomfortable with that fact, just take a look at the recent headlines regarding the women cyclist where one of them said it wasn't fair, no it wasn't!

I ma not uncomfortable with the issue that the person is a "transgender person" my issue is when this person then claims to be a woman for example when clearly it is not the case!

So what is the solution?

Give Transgender people their own rights, their own label and identity and do not associate them in any way to men or women who are not the same (I mean you do not see men crying about equal rights to women but it does happen the other way). By having their own rights, their own identity and then being correctly identified by this old-new term they would in fact gain many more rights and have a much more credible platform in society.

What ******es people off is not their body transformation, its B.S like sharing toilets with women, being identified as a woman and then having access to all their rights, laws and privileges!

If my friend Steve puts on a bra do I have to start identifying him as a woman? If my friend Amy puts on a strap on do I have to identify her as a man from that point on? NO its a ridiculous statement and so is this whole trans debate!

So in a nutshell

Give them their own identity, their own rights, their own brand (so to speak)
Do not associate them in any way or form to women unless they are biologically women
Do not associate them in any way or form with men unless they are biologically men

By those last two points what I mean is that the person who "transforms" into this transgender identity they no longer should be known or associated with men or women and should correctly be identified as a transgender person.

The biggest problem of all is then how people, the media and so on take all of these things put them into one pot and expect us folks to accept its all the same when its clearly not!

Good day!

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Ahem - not just women, lesbian and homosexuals.

You're right sorry! In the UK they want to change the process so you can just apply to have your birth certificate sex changed without any fuss. And on the other side of the pond you have Trump looking at taking that away and its hate speech if you use the wrong pronoun (I think Canada?). Its all over the show!

But its clear I know what I do want.

I want the kids left alone, no pushing for transition for under 18's, none.

I want the Equality rights left alone in terms of protected spaces and sex specific jobs, so the usual exclusions to this Act would still apply.

I would dearly really like to see trans stop reinforcing gender stereotypes, stop it already, a boy can want to wear dresses and play with dolls - this does not make him a girl, and a girl can want to wear shorts and play football and this does not make her a boy. And if that boy is attracted to other boys, then that makes him homosexual, again not trans.

You see the difference from all those things and trans is simple, you can easily be and do gender roles and be homosexual but you cannot be the other sex. Not possible under current medical procedures. It can be simulated greatly, especially when kids are given hormone blockers but only a great simulation. The underlying biology remains either the same or not much in difference. Until the day we can change every part of the person, from bone density, muscle formations, skeletal structures to brain. That wont happen any time soon so you cannot be the other sex.

I was supposed to just bullet point my thoughts and ended up with paragraphs. But how weird is it to have to write these things down, stuff that is generally accepted as truths, obvious stuff! You know like penis = male and vagina = female of the species, I'm thinking trans people have been led down an insane path of bs with their therapy!

a reply to: old_god

This is a little bio-piece from:

As a teenager, Fox believed she may have been a gay male, but learned about the term transgender at the age of 17.

Link

So the identity issue preceding his/her transition into the opposite gender was homosexuality.

Does it take that much imagination to infer that this person had a troubling, trauma-filled early life?

The delusion that you speak of is the cartesian dualism that postmodernists blithely accept despite the fact that the entirety of the physical, biological and psychological sciences utterly disprove it.

So, here I am, watching Colbert, Democracy Now!, and other liberal shows, and they repeat the same irritating cliche of people "narrowly defining gender to biology". And how much more powerfully does this cliche operate when the badguy Donald Trump is making an extra effort to 'discriminate' against them.

A part of me wonders whether this is yet another example of a hegelian dialectic. Bad guy says this, and because the majority of the population is opposed to this bad guy, its easy to 'smuggle in' beliefs about identity and reality along with a general opposition to the bad guy. Its more or less exploiting the current tension in our politics to screw with people's object relations. And screwing with peoples object relations they very much are!

originally posted by: Robotswilltakeover
a reply to: Thejoncrichton

You did not read what I wrote. I mentioned several times that I don't believe someone can identify as an animal. You are not debating. You have not read what I wrote. Your comment should be deleted.

But if you believe they can identify as a man or a woman but not an animal you are indeed limiting someones rights. If a man wants to be identified as a woman, who are you to tell the next person who identifies as a horse they cannot identify as such?

Someone is eventually going to appropriate your bigotry on behalf of horse man and run for office!

If you are going to change societal norms for one group, how can you deny that right for another group no matter how absurd? If you don't agree, your whole post should be deleted.

a reply to: Scifi2424

Do you actually believe what you wrote? It is a childish view of the world.

a reply to: Robotswilltakeover

If they just wanted to live their lives then why did they start demanding acceptance?

a reply to: cynicalheathen

Yep. When I was 6 years old, I thought I was Conan the Destroyer and when I tried to pick the end of a small log up and couldn't lift it, it occurred to me that I was not who I thought I was.

originally posted by: Robotswilltakeover
a reply to: cynicalheathen

I was asked a question that I answered several times; I was not silencing debate.

But should a trans-woman should go to a male prison? Should doctors be allowed to let them die? Should they be put in mental hospitals while a billion people believe that they eat Jesus crackers every Sunday unquestioned?

Yes. No. Yes.

originally posted by: Robotswilltakeover
a reply to: luthier

I do believe in free speech, so I don't think it's 'hate speech' to mis-gender someone with 'offensive' pronouns ..... just for the record.

And yes, chemicals in the environment can alter our hormones, and in 100 years we'll probably be blended with machines and barely human anymore.

Meh. That's what we were saying 100 years ago. We were supposed to be zipping around on hoverboards and landing our cars in our driveways by this century. We're not. And we will never will be.

originally posted by: Robotswilltakeover
a reply to: cynicalheathen

I would disagree on DNA testing for prison populations. They should be based on hormone levels and genitalia. You're basically saying that a 'post-op' estrogen-dominant trans-woman (who looks like a beautiful young woman with a vagina) should be thrown into cages with testosterone-filled men. This is a reason why they are scared and threatened.

And as far as I know, doctors can currently deny dealing with trans-people ..... I will check on the laws though. I think you were correct years ago, but they changed the laws more recently.

It's prison. Who cares. They aren't going there to be pampered. Dudes get rammed through in prison, too.

originally posted by: Robotswilltakeover
a reply to: Skywatcher2011

Would you consider yourself "gay" if you found out that a "woman" you had sex with had XY-DNA?

F*ck no. I would consider myself dirty and I would light my clothes on fire and see the doctor right if I contracted anything from this XY mentally disordered being. Then I would go legally after this person for not identifying themselves as a trans.

a reply to: AthlonSavage

Exactly right. This is nothing more than a "gateway" problem.

a reply to: yuppa

Yeah right. 9 times out of 10, you will notice the manish features in a woman that used to be a man, and feminine features in a man that used to be a woman. It's gross. And gender isn't mental. We're not living in the 2008-2016 era anymore, WAKE UP.

a reply to: Skywatcher2011

I'd look like Ace Ventura after he realized Ray Finkle was Lois Einhorn.