Transgender

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Please be aware that the tolerance of anti-trans language on BF is at an all-time low. Jokes and insults that are trans-related, as well as anti-trans and bigoted rhetoric will be met with infractions, threadbans etc as required. It's a sensitive (and important) topic, so behave like well-mannered adults when discussing it, PARTICULARLY when disagreeing. This equally applies across the whole site.
 
Last edited:
Something probably needs to be said...

Posters of the SRP, there has been a lot of posts moved from the main board to the SRP. Some of those are posts sharing a series of opinions that are moderated differently here than they were over there, due to board specific differences; some posts that would not be infraction worthy over there are infraction worthy here.

If a poster chooses not to post on the SRP due to this, that is their right. Attempts to draw people into threads if they indicate a desire to leave conversation will result in warnings then infractions should they continue.

While this might be considered unpopular, you do not have the right to another's attention or conversation.
 
Gough said:
Clinical destruction of an ideologue by Jon Stewart.
Click to expand...
He is smarter and better prepared than a US state AG.

She is wily, though. "I'm sorry I wasn't prepared for a supreme court argument ... "

A Supreme Court argument being basic facts to support her argument.

This is the Murdochs. The ****ing Murdochs.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

gouki88 said:
American legacy media really does disgrace itself by so consistently being outdone by people like Stewart, a comedian
Click to expand...
Yes. And here's another one (of sorts):



John Oliver last night did a full segment on transgender rights and its well worth a watch for those with a working brain. Summary here:

www.theguardian.com

John Oliver: ‘Some on the right have truly lost their minds about trans rights’

The Last Week Tonight host looks at the extraordinary legal attack on trans rights in the US and conservative disinformation around gender-affirming care.
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Last edited:
Festerz said:
Yes. And here's another one (of sorts):



John Oliver last night did a full segment on transgender rights and its well worth a watch for those with a working brain. Summary here:

www.theguardian.com

John Oliver: ‘Some on the right have truly lost their minds about trans rights’

The Last Week Tonight host looks at the extraordinary legal attack on trans rights in the US and conservative disinformation around gender-affirming care.
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...

meanwhile media watch on the ABC going the other way
 
Just on Transgender - something i have never really seen an answer on - though often thought (I appreciate this discussion has probably been had many times and in no way do i proclaim to be the first to think of it)

If someone is allowed to "identify" as something that is physically not true because that is how their brain and sense of self is wired.

Do we then accept that other identifications differing from objectively true facts should also be allowed?

Can someone be trans-racial?

When do the rights of an individual then exceed that of the society they live in?
 
The Falcon Strike said:
Just on Transgender - something i have never really seen an answer on - though often thought (I appreciate this discussion has probably been had many times and in no way do i proclaim to be the first to think of it)

If someone is allowed to "identify" as something that is physically not true because that is how their brain and sense of self is wired.

Do we then accept that other identifications differing from objectively true facts should also be allowed?

Can someone be trans-racial?

When do the rights of an individual then exceed that of the society they live in?
Click to expand...
Gender is not sex. Your conflation of the two leads to misguided, incorrect sentences such as the emboldened.
 
gouki88 said:
Gender is not sex. Your conflation of the two leads to misguided, incorrect sentences such as the emboldened.
Click to expand...
not a good faith argument worth engaging with I wouldn't have thought
 
The Falcon Strike said:
If someone is allowed to "identify" as something that is physically not true because that is how their brain and sense of self is wired.

Do we then accept that other identifications differing from objectively true facts should also be allowed?

Can someone be trans-racial?
Click to expand...

Just as a thought exercise alone - I honestly don't mind if someone identified as transracial. I'm actually of the increasing opinion that nothing TRULY matters except how we treat each other. Human rights are universal. Respect is universal.

'Respect' and 'admiration' are two very separate things and when I hear people say 'Respect should be earned and never given' I feel they are confusing respect and admiration. I admire someone's achievement/s. I respect them as a human.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

gouki88 said:
Gender is not sex. Your conflation of the two leads to misguided, incorrect sentences such as the emboldened.
Click to expand...

They are the same. The term gender has been hijacked by the LGBTQI movement.

This BS about gender identity, expression etc... has gotten out of hand. Noone actually cares what you identity as and who you are sexually attracted to. They've made up 50+ terms that don't make sense.

When you're asked for your Sex/Gender they want to know if you're a biological male or female. Simple as that. Yes there are a tiny minority of people who are born intersex. Generally they will still have a dominant sex.
 
I really do wonder sometimes what someone who wanders into this thread, thinking they're going to learn all those insert whatever perjorative for someone who isn't gender critical with their groundbreaking 'Sex and Gender are the same thing!' as though it's the first anyone's conceived of the notion, genuinely thinks they're accomplishing.

THECHIEFTON, see the stickied post before you'd like to continue.
 
Gethelred said:
I really do wonder sometimes what someone who wanders into this thread, thinking they're going to learn all those insert whatever perjorative for someone who isn't gender critical with their groundbreaking 'Sex and Gender are the same thing!' as though it's the first anyone's conceived of the notion, genuinely thinks they're accomplishing.

THECHIEFTON, see the stickied post before you'd like to continue.
Click to expand...
It wasn't meant to be innovative. I just know it rustles them.
 
THECHIEFTON said:
They are the same. The term gender has been hijacked by the LGBTQI movement.

This BS about gender identity, expression etc... has gotten out of hand. Noone actually cares what you identity as and who you are sexually attracted to. They've made up 50+ terms that don't make sense.

When you're asked for your Sex/Gender they want to know if you're a biological male or female. Simple as that. Yes there are a tiny minority of people who are born intersex. Generally they will still have a dominant sex.
Click to expand...
They aren't though. While it's true that many cultures in many time periods have had largely one to one concepts of sex to gender, that's not the case for all cultures, and it's certainly true that genders have evolved over time within the same cultures (separate to biological sex).

It's also hard to accept that the term "gender" has been hijacked by the (presumably modern) LGBTQI movement, when there have been more than 2 genders in many societies over millennia, and it's been discussed in Western academia, separately to sex, for at least 80 years.

And lastly, even if we had only recently started using "gender" in different ways to explain real things, you know, learning about how the world works and then applying that, finding ways to discuss it - I fail to see what the problem is. So the definition of the word/concept of "gender" has evolved / been expanded, that's the way that definitions sometimes work. If we picked another word other than "gender", that really wouldn't stop people complaining, because the opposition largely comes not from the definitions of words (which sometimes change/expand), but opposition to the actual thing the definition is attempting to describe.
 
Last edited:
Geelong_Sicko said:
It's only fair that all partners are open and honest with each other. Although there is some truth to the old saying that true love is blind to all, I personally would like to know what the go was if I met a post-op woman and really fell for her.

It's more a 'respect' thing than anything else.
Click to expand...
So you dont believe post op women and pre op women are the same thing? Is that not trans exclutionary?
 
Gough said:
Any discussion on LGBTQI issues always ends up going to extremes, people marrying horses, bigamy, or in this case trans Olympians. The original point at hand was about people being able to identify as something other than male, or female on the census which seems perfectly reasonable.
Click to expand...
Except for those who believe in both logic And feminism. Its not reasonable for those people.

if sex is a biological thing then you cant identify as it without actualy having the biological attributes making the concept of identity redundant. You either are biologically female, biologically part female, or not biologically female at all. Its simply not logically possible to identify as a biological concept without having the right biology as the biology is what defines the concept. There is no concept without it.

and if sex is a behaviourial thing, rather than a biological thing, then it completely undoes feminism which states that women can behave just like men and there are no specific male and female behaviours. I.e. a behaviorial description of females and males is not consistent with feminism.
 
Last edited:
Seeds said:
So you dont believe post op women and pre op women are the same thing? Is that not trans exclutionary?
Click to expand...

Speaking for myself? As I get older I'm having less and less of a care factor in worrying that the person I meet is not their 'birth gender' and as a sex-positive individual I could actually see myself going for it pre-op OR post-op if the chemistry is there between us..

Not everyone feels this way though.

Informed consent is a thing..In the ways of body autonomy and the right to say 'no' one of the only things left by way of outright discrimination in a progressive society is that of sexual choice. Informed consent is a considerable portion of this act of sexual choice.

Unfortunately for the rejected, it may be a rough road. But that's the game isn't it? Most of us humans will feel rejection at some stage, be we straight, queer, pan-sexual or other.

Consent and/or the withdrawal of consent in a sexual encounter are non-negotiable. If someone genuinely doesn't want to be with a transgender individual I think they should have the right to informed choice before things kick off.
 
Seeds said:
Except for those who believe in both logic And feminism. Its not reasonable for those people.

if sex is a biological thing then you cant identify as it without actualy having the biological attributes making the concept of identity redundant. You either are biologically female, biologically part female, or not biologically female at all. Its simply not logically possible to identify as a biological concept without having the right biology as the biology is what defines the concept. There is no concept without it.

and if sex is a behaviourial thing, rather than a biological thing, then it completely undoes feminism which states that women can behave just like men and there are no specific male and female behaviours. I.e. a behaviorial description of females and males is not consistent with feminism.
Click to expand...
You can tell what you've been reading by the degree to which you misunderstand subjects you understood a week ago.
 
Marcel Proust said:
colorsofindia.media

NHS should’ve taken ‘sensible’ approach to trans matters ‘years ago’ | Colors of India, India’s Global Platform for News, Media, Marketing & Advertising

Writer Douglas Murray says it’s upsetting to consider the younger individuals whose lives have already been “irreversibly ruined”, following the NHS’ change of recommendation relating to youngsters who consider they’re …
colorsofindia.media colorsofindia.media
Click to expand...
Marcel Proust said:
www.telegraph.co.uk

Most children who think they’re transgender are just going through a ‘phase’, says NHS

Doctors told not to encourage young people to change their names and pronouns
www.telegraph.co.uk www.telegraph.co.uk
Click to expand...
I'd remind you to step carefully, Marcel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

sherb
Launceston Newspaper Gets Caught Publishing Letter About Non-Existent Transgender Incident
Replies
7
Views
873
schneebly111
S

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top