DescentBB

Nightshade wrote:Ever heard of 'gender dysphoria?'

Yes, and it's not the same as species dysphoria. That's my point. "Cat" is not a gender.

sigma wrote:...or else your face may meet up with my knee several times.

Typical barbarian prattle. Grow up.

vision wrote:Does anyone have a reason for rejecting transgender persons that isn't rooted in ignorance and bigotry?

Anyone?

So you have no problem with your daughter going into a public swimming pool and using the shower only to have some hairy older man walk in while she's mid soap.

Wanna try burning down that blatant strawman, or are you leaving it to the rest of us?

sigma wrote: or else your face may meet up with my knee several times.

a physical threat. excellent. say bye bye.

woodchip wrote:So you have no problem with your daughter going into a public swimming pool and using the shower only to have some hairy older man walk in while she's mid soap.

trying to equate trans with paedophilia. hilarious straw man.

woodchip wrote:So you have no problem with your daughter going into a public swimming pool and using the shower only to have some hairy older man walk in while she's mid soap.

Is the "hairy older man" a transwoman? If so, then I have no problem with it, though it doesn't matter what I think because I'm not the one in the shower, it matters what she thinks.

But if she doesn’t like it, she’s probably just a bigot.

Right?

Spidey wrote:But if she doesn’t like it, she’s probably just a bigot. Right?

That depends on her reasoning.

ah, the reliable 'what if' justification again!!! Like, "what if your daughter(age unknown....mine is 27) was in the bathroom when some hairy man(an odd look for a transgendered male to maintain, in my limited experience like NEVER) walks in(never mind the rather small frequency in the population of fully transgendered individuals)? And(wait, there's more!), what if she is offended, repulsed, scared(not that we haven't established a transparently bad strawman already with the 'hairy man' thing, we now have to ponder the reaction to an undetermined contact from SOMEONE ELSE)? Yeesh, get back to me if you want to discuss reality.

Ferno wrote:

sigma wrote: or else your face may meet up with my knee several times.

a physical threat. excellent. say bye bye.

woodchip wrote:So you have no problem with your daughter going into a public swimming pool and using the shower only to have some hairy older man walk in while she's mid soap.

trying to equate trans with paedophilia. hilarious straw man.

Once again your great intellectual brain comes up flawed. It's a pretty straight forward question but if you want to read something else in it then so be it.

Nightshade wrote:

Jeff250 wrote: I've never heard of anyone being born with cat parts, and so I find it less biologically plausible to have the mind of a cat in the body of a man.

So, do you have a ribcage? "Cat part" right there... Eyes? Cat part... Heart...liver...intestines...etc.

Again... what's the difference in delusion?

Obviously none of those things are unique to cats so they don't prove anything.

Being intersex isn't when you have something that both men and women have because otherwise everyone would be intersex because I have ribs that women have too. It's when you have both something that is ordinarily uniquely male and also something that is ordinarily uniquely female.

So unless you find someone born with cat whiskers, your examples aren't legitimate. Can you imagine if sometimes people were born with cat whiskers and cat tails though? If that actually happened, then I would find the idea of someone being born with a cat brain pretty plausible too, wouldn't you Nightshade?

woodchip wrote:

vision wrote:Does anyone have a reason for rejecting transgender persons that isn't rooted in ignorance and bigotry?

Anyone?

So you have no problem with your daughter going into a public swimming pool and using the shower only to have some hairy older man walk in while she's mid soap.

So you would rather have your daughter shower with men who look like women than women who look like men? I actually don't know the correct answer to this, but that you seem to think the answer is simple is surprising.

callmeslick wrote:ah, the reliable 'what if' justification again!!! Like, "what if your daughter(age unknown....mine is 27) was in the bathroom when some hairy man(an odd look for a transgendered male to maintain, in my limited experience like NEVER) walks in(never mind the rather small frequency in the population of fully transgendered individuals)? And(wait, there's more!), what if she is offended, repulsed, scared(not that we haven't established a transparently bad strawman already with the 'hairy man' thing, we now have to ponder the reaction to an undetermined contact from SOMEONE ELSE)? Yeesh, get back to me if you want to discuss reality.

The problem with people like you is they have navel gazed for so long that reality is a abstract idea. So you wouldn't mind if some older man who claims he is transgender, walked in on your 11 year old daughter (and slick, at one time your daughter was 11. I guess you forgot how sensitive girls can be at that age.) So what I'm reading is none of you would mind and I suspect that most of you never had a child ...let alone a daughter. Nice that some of you used the strawman to cover up your lack of understanding.

Jeff250 wrote:

woodchip wrote:

vision wrote:Does anyone have a reason for rejecting transgender persons that isn't rooted in ignorance and bigotry?

Anyone?

So you have no problem with your daughter going into a public swimming pool and using the shower only to have some hairy older man walk in while she's mid soap.

So you would rather have your daughter shower with men who look like women than women who look like men? I actually don't know the correct answer to this, but that you seem to think the answer is simple is surprising.

If the man has the operations to look like a woman, then there is no problem as the girl wouldn't know. And Jeff do try to read a little closer. Anyone can say they are transgender, but I suspect there will be a certain number who are not and are taking advantage of the new permissiveness.

woodchip wrote:

Jeff250 wrote:

woodchip wrote:So you have no problem with your daughter going into a public swimming pool and using the shower only to have some hairy older man walk in while she's mid soap.

So you would rather have your daughter shower with men who look like women than women who look like men? I actually don't know the correct answer to this, but that you seem to think the answer is simple is surprising.

If the man has the operations to look like a woman, then there is no problem as the girl wouldn't know. And Jeff do try to read a little closer. Anyone can say they are transgender, but I suspect there will be a certain number who are not and are taking advantage of the new permissiveness.

"Read a little closer" to what? You're mentioning that concern for the first time. I'm already very familiar with it though, and it doesn't change my question. If we only have two different kinds of bathrooms, then you have to pick whether you want your daughter to shower with men who look like women or women who look like men (or both, or have them both shower with your son). You can use something like a concern about people pretending to be transgender to justify your answer, but you still have to choose one of those options (or propose an alternative rule).

Jeff250 wrote:

ST wrote:If you're going to go around saying that men are born with the brains of women, or vise-versa, it leaves you to prove both that the brain is actually completely physically unique to the opposite gender, and then that the seat of their gender resides within the brain.

Brains of course aren't completely unique to different genders, but men and women for instance are known to have differences in brain structure that can be easily measured. Where else would gender reside than in the brain? Gender is probably something more subtle than simply brain structure though. For instance, maybe gender is a configuration of neural connections?

ST wrote:I believe strongly, based on my experience, that a person's will is not seated in their physical body at all, and I would tend to accept the same of their gender, and probably also their mind.

You mean it is seated in their soul? Obviously I disagree, but I don't know if that really changes anything. It's not any clearer that someone through biological processes can't get the wrong body for their soul than someone can't get the wrong body for their brain, unless God is actively divinely intervening to make sure that this never happens.

In fact, many Muslims in Iran (which has legalized sex change operations) believe that gender is seated in the soul but use that to justify sex change operations.

Dr Mir-Jalali wrote:Unlike homosexuals, they suffer from a separation of body and soul where they believe their own body doesn't belong to them.

So it's not clear to me that believing that gender is seated in the soul magically solves any of this. When you are talking about human development, a biologically fallible process that is governed by natural laws, you have to allow for these kinds of mismatches to be possible.

vision wrote:

Spidey wrote:But if she doesn’t like it, she’s probably just a bigot. Right?

That depends on her reasoning.

vision wrote:Does anyone have a reason for rejecting transgender persons that isn't rooted in ignorance and bigotry?

Anyone?

Spidey wrote:

vision wrote:

Spidey wrote:But if she doesn’t like it, she’s probably just a bigot. Right?

That depends on her reasoning.

vision wrote:Does anyone have a reason for rejecting transgender persons that isn't rooted in ignorance and bigotry?

I see what you think you did there but didn't. I'm still looking for someone with a good reason. I'm not going to hypothetically invent a reason for a hypothetical person in a hypothetical situation. "It depends" still stands. The hypothetical person could have a good reason, and I would love to hear it!

all I'm seeing is "appeal to the supernatural"

Jeff250 wrote:

Nightshade wrote:

Jeff250 wrote: I've never heard of anyone being born with cat parts, and so I find it less biologically plausible to have the mind of a cat in the body of a man.

So, do you have a ribcage? "Cat part" right there... Eyes? Cat part... Heart...liver...intestines...etc.

Again... what's the difference in delusion?

Obviously none of those things are unique to cats so they don't prove anything.

Being intersex isn't when you have something that both men and women have because otherwise everyone would be intersex because I have ribs that women have too. It's when you have both something that is ordinarily uniquely male and also something that is ordinarily uniquely female.

Again, the great majority of 'transgender' people have nothing but rationalized delusion. Very few actually have mismatching 'brain structure' unique to the opposite sex they weren't outwardly physically born as.

It's a psychological dysphoria at best. At worst, it's a diseased fetish or fantasy they want to force upon others around them.

Nightshade wrote:the great majority of 'transgender' people have nothing but rationalized delusion. Very few actually have mismatching 'brain structure' unique to the opposite sex they weren't outwardly physically born as.

So you're acknowledging then that there are sometimes legitimate cases of transgender people? It's just that you think most claims are illegitimate?

Nightshade wrote:Again, the great majority of 'transgender' people have nothing but rationalized delusion. Very few actually have mismatching 'brain structure' unique to the opposite sex they weren't outwardly physically born as.

Interesting statement. Can you back that up with some data?

Nightshade wrote:It's a psychological dysphoria at best. At worst, it's a diseased fetish or fantasy they want to force upon others around them.

yeah like that argument hasn't been used almost word for word in regards to gay people.

woodchip wrote:

Ferno wrote:

sigma wrote: or else your face may meet up with my knee several times.

a physical threat. excellent. say bye bye.

woodchip wrote:So you have no problem with your daughter going into a public swimming pool and using the shower only to have some hairy older man walk in while she's mid soap.

trying to equate trans with paedophilia. hilarious straw man.

Once again your great intellectual brain comes up flawed. It's a pretty straight forward question but if you want to read something else in it then so be it.

Actually as a teenager, I almost became a victim of a pedophile - a transvestite.

I'll tell you about the case.
When I was 12 or 13 years old, one day in the store to me a man came up and tried to take me away with him. He was friendly and asked me, would you like to serve in elite special forces? I replied that of course I want. He said that he is the commander, and he is looking for young tough guys for further training and service. I was certainly happy. He took me by the hand and said that I had a great future ahead, blah blah blah. I went with him, but remembered that I should tell my mom about it. He asked where my mom. I said that she in the other section chooses new purchases, I'll tell her, and quickly come back. He said that of course I need to consult with my mom. When I returned with my mother, the man was gone.
After a while I saw the photo of this man in criminal news. At his house was sexy hangout and child Porno studio for boys.

Of course, now I don't maim any transsexual just for the sexy look, but every time they are for moment before the start of big trouble, because I'm really very, very difficult to control myself in such cases.

woodchip wrote:The problem with people like you is they have navel gazed for so long that reality is a abstract idea. So you wouldn't mind if some older man who claims he is transgender, walked in on your 11 year old daughter (and slick, at one time your daughter was 11. I guess you forgot how sensitive girls can be at that age.) So what I'm reading is none of you would mind and I suspect that most of you never had a child ...let alone a daughter. Nice that some of you used the strawman to cover up your lack of understanding.

completely laughable. Men walk into women's rooms, some with ulterior motives, from time to time. The least of the issues around that, the
ABSOLUTE LEAST worry, would be someone who is genuinely transgender. And, changing the laws won't affect the incidence, I suspect, one bit.

Nightshade wrote: Again, the great majority of 'transgender' people have nothing but rationalized delusion. Very few actually have mismatching 'brain structure' unique to the opposite sex they weren't outwardly physically born as.

have some proof of this?

It's a psychological dysphoria at best. At worst, it's a diseased fetish or fantasy they want to force upon others around them.

I've sort of read your posts about Islam that way for years now.

No vision, it’s not about what I did, it’s about what you did.

You made a statement disguised as a question, and are now claiming some sort of plausible deniability.

Spidey wrote:No vision, it’s not about what I did, it’s about what you did.

Instead of acting childish, maybe you can come forward with a reason to discriminate against transgender persons that isn't based on ignorance and bigotry? I assume you have one since you are targeting me on my statement. Please, we would all love to hear it.

Totally pointless, because you already have your mind made up.

And I’m not really in the mood for one of your “that’s the stupidest thing I have ever heard” lectures.

Besides I never disagreed with you, I just wanted you to fess up to what you implied.

Spidey wrote:Totally pointless, because you already have your mind made up.

And I’m not really in the mood for one of your “that’s the stupidest thing I have ever heard” lectures.

Besides I never disagreed with you, I just wanted you to fess up to what you implied.

he didn't imply anything, and that is one of the worst cop-outs i've read.

you came in with a loaded question, and you're getting indignant over his genuine question.

Ok fine, the problem here is the definition of discriminate, while I see no need to discriminate against transgender people, I do see a reason to keep men out of the ladies room, based on something other than ignorance or bigotry.

You ready for it…here it comes…

Men don’t belong in the ladies room…plain and simple…no bigotry or ignorance involved whatsoever.

Now vision you have two choices.

1. Accept my reasoning.
2. Prove what I predicted.

Your move.

Spidey wrote:Ok fine, the problem here is the definition of discriminate, while I see no need to discriminate against transgender people, I do see a reason to keep men out of the ladies room, based on something other than ignorance or bigotry.

You ready for it…here it comes…

Men don’t belong in the ladies room…plain and simple…no bigotry or ignorance involved whatsoever.

Now vision you have two choices.

1. Accept my reasoning.
2. Prove what I predicted.

Your move.

In this day and age, what would you define as "man" and what would you define as "woman"?

...

Spidey wrote:As in their biological sex.

You define both sexes by their genitals. Hm. outdated.

And what concern is it of yours to be worried about their genitals?

...

Ferno wrote:

Spidey wrote:As in their biological sex.

You define both sexes by their genitals. Hm. outdated.

And what concern is it of yours to be worried about their genitals?

Defining genders by genitals...yes, that would just make too much sense.

JFTR, I never said anything about defining a persons sex by their genitals, that was a dumb remark by Ferno.

And basically the reason I bailed from this thread.

Spidey wrote:JFTR, I never said anything about defining a persons sex by their genitals, that was a dumb remark by Ferno.

yes you did, don't lie to us.

As in their biological sex.

how the ★■◆● else would you define their 'biological sex'? by the way they talk? come on, this is horseshit.

go ahead, bail again. run away.

Biological sex is determined by the X & Y chromosomes.

Spidey wrote:Biological sex is determined by the X & Y chromosomes.

and water is wet. no ★■◆●.

What's the effect of having an XX or XY chromosome?

A whole ★■◆●ing lot of things.