phoneyLogic Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 (edited) My own definition goes by what's on the inside--not chromosomes (because those aren't infallible), not ability to produce babies (infertile people exist), not outward appearance, and certainly not your past. :) I haven't claimed that chromosomes define feelings, behaviour, attitudes or someones past.But I think not everyone would agree with your definition. Edited February 25, 2011 by tortured Tomato Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vagrant0 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 My own definition goes by what's on the inside--not chromosomes (because those aren't infallible), not ability to produce babies (infertile people exist), not outward appearance, and certainly not your past. :)You may not like your past, hell, you may even want to believe it never happened... but it did, it's part of who YOU are. There is nobody who does not have an origin or a past, even if it may not be known. To say that it doesn't define you or that it doesn't matter is to suggest that all that pain, suffering, and everything you had gone through to get to where you are now didn't mean anything. Genuine people are not just those who are comfortable in their own skin, but who have also come to terms with what their lives have made them. But, thank you for kind of proving my point as to the whole;there is still that aspect of the person behind the body which most are not as willing to try and unravel or deal with if it involves secrets or having to now re-define the situation.but, for what it's worth, trying to hide your past or being really obscure about things is also common in other groups... and it has the same effect, some people don't care, some people are drawn to the mystery, and some just don't want to deal with it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBaron2 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I was trying to say it does NOT account for the totality of a person, not that it means nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoneyLogic Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 If you say it only depends on how a person is feeling inside, then a man who feels like a woman would basicly be one. On this point, I think there will be lots of people who will strongly disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkeWolf Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 Male, female, transgender, straight, bi, gay, black, white, olive, tan, yellow...I really couldn't care less. I'm just not one for all the drama surrounding it all.I'm pretty much the same way. I treat everybody the same way. If they can earn my respect, then I will treat them better that others. If they get on my bad side, I don't want to deal with them.Otherwise they get treated the same way that all the other strangers do, or the same way that all my friends or so-so friends do. I'll treat everybody equally until they make that change on how I interact with them. Its got nothing to do with anything about the outside, its about what they have inside the shell. Tho tbh, I dont see it as right to lump transgenders in with bi's or gays. Transgenders go thru a much more enormous amount of physical trauma. And physical Risk. The sex change operations, if not done correctly presents a risk to them, the aftereffects are traumatic. Thats a LOT for the body to recover from. Especially going from male to female, with all the hormones and stuff. They go through a much more difficult emotional and mental situation, dealing with not only feeling that they're trapped in a body that shouldnt be theirs, but also with the emotional duress that comes with the actual change. And then of course with being accepted by others afterwards. Can't have kids. Well, not to be horrible, but I have to be blunt. Choices and consequences. Its a choice that was made, and thats a consequence of that choice. However, its no more of a wrong choice than a woman getting their tubes tied, or a guy getting his nuts clipped.And I dont want to sound harsh or uncaring there. I KNOW how much a big deal that is, especially for females. But ya know what... if a person makes it so that they can't have kids, they choose to give up the option.. then that's their choice to make. And just IMO... the genepool is too crowded anyway.Its not going to be a factor against somebody that I'd date if they can't have kids. I dont want kids, personally, so it would actually be in their favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crimsonedge11 Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 I'm surprised there could be any kind of legitimate discussion about something like this, without it turning into a full throttle flame thread. But now that I'm here I guess I will throw in my 2 cents. I don't really care what other people do its their business, but I will be honest and say, that I do look at people who practice this kinda of behavior, very strangely, and would never associate with them personally, or hang around people like this. And if someone who appeared to be a female made a move on me and I found out they weren't? I would see that as disrespectful and it would make me very angry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBaron2 Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 Wow. That's harsh. What's someone from those groups ever done to you personally for you to say you'd never associate with them? If you don't think someone is a bad person, why say you'd never associate with them? It's sad that the most normal thing to do is hate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myrmaad Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 I've been staying away from this topic, but as a woman who struggled with infertility for years, only to have two miscarriages in a row, I'm deeply offended by this line of discourse, and frankly, well I just don't think much of it. You can windbag a topic to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crimsonedge11 Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 (edited) Wow. That's harsh. What's someone from those groups ever done to you personally for you to say you'd never associate with them? If you don't think someone is a bad person, why say you'd never associate with them? It's sad that the most normal thing to do is hate. Has nothing to do with hate, its about who I choose to associate with personally. And I only associate with people of a certain character and moral values. Look at it this way, transgender is a choice, someone isn't born that way, and it is fair to hold someone accountable for the choices they make. But I still support their right to make that choice, but I reserve the right to judge them for making that choice. I think that people who make this choice shouldn't expect to be received by others as normal people, because they are not. Edited March 6, 2011 by crimsonedge11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackBaron2 Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 That is hateful. You yourself said it's not your business what they do, but then you go on to judge them and say they're "not normal". Sorry, but that isn't logical or anything but pure hypocrisy--think about it, you support treating someone else as an "Unperson" (to borrow a term from Margaret Atwood, it means "subhuman"/"less than human"). You wouldn't want anyone to do it to you, you shouldn't do it to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts