Transgender Our rights as opposed to those who look the part.

[DragonTotem]

This would be humorious if it weren't so terrifying that someone would actually equate the struggles of women now, and throut history to that of men. certainly there were males that couldn't quite fill the bill. I was born with a males body and was one of those quote/unquote lesser men to those who were anal enough to think they did.

 

 

 

I don't think I exaggerate any at all, since I've heard it from a good many people who know better. Being measured a man, I have been privy to many things that men keep to themselves when discussing the so called ladies. How many times do you think a man thinks about sex and how many times does a women? How many times have men looked at a woman's breast when speaking to them and how many times have they looked around to see what her butt looks like ? What percentage of women's clothes have been designed to show off their bodies as oppsed to men's clothing. How many men walk on spiked heels that damage the back over time? How many little girls have been pulled off into a corner and a kiss forced on them and how many have ended up being sexually assualted , even by members of their own families. I think you have got a lot of catching up to do when it comes with doing a faceoff between the victimization of men and that of women.

 

. This thing about equating struggles is absolutely ludicrous, since it is a known fact throughout history that women have been second class citizens and in some case little more than commodities that were traded for political alignments.

 

And who are they? Either of us don't really know how many times a man or a woman thinks about sex, especially in general. How many times do men check out women? Again, who can know this? Women also check out men, but ultimately it doesn't even matter, so your point is moot. Women can wear whatever clothes they want to. Men also have clothing that show off their bodies, you aren't making any real points here, just asking a bunch of questions that I guess are suppose to mean something. I think you have a lot of learning to do when it comes to the word "victimization." I'm not really concerned about the far past, so why don't we focus on the modern day and stay relevant?

Edited May 27, 2016 by DragonTotem

[kvnchrist]

 

This would be humorious if it weren't so terrifying that someone would actually equate the struggles of women now, and throut history to that of men. certainly there were males that couldn't quite fill the bill. I was born with a males body and was one of those quote/unquote lesser men to those who were anal enough to think they did.

 

 

 

I don't think I exaggerate any at all, since I've heard it from a good many people who know better. Being measured a man, I have been privy to many things that men keep to themselves when discussing the so called ladies. How many times do you think a man thinks about sex and how many times does a women? How many times have men looked at a woman's breast when speaking to them and how many times have they looked around to see what her butt looks like ? What percentage of women's clothes have been designed to show off their bodies as oppsed to men's clothing. How many men walk on spiked heels that damage the back over time? How many little girls have been pulled off into a corner and a kiss forced on them and how many have ended up being sexually assualted , even by members of their own families. I think you have got a lot of catching up to do when it comes with doing a faceoff between the victimization of men and that of women.

 

. This thing about equating struggles is absolutely ludicrous, since it is a known fact throughout history that women have been second class citizens and in some case little more than commodities that were traded for political alignments.

 

And who are they? Either of us don't really know how many times a man or a woman thinks about sex, especially in general. How many times do men check out women? Again, who can know this? Women also check out men, but ultimately it doesn't even matter, so your point is moot. Women can wear whatever clothes they want to. Men also have clothing that show off their bodies, you aren't making any real points here, just asking a bunch of questions that I guess are suppose to mean something. I think you have a lot of learning to do when it comes to the word "victimization." I'm not really concerned about the far past, so why don't we focus on the modern day and stay relevant?

 

You speak as though there have never been studies in these matters. If you would have taken the time, you would have known that. Saying something is or is not and then dismissing my quote/unquote point without even questioning me on it seems to suggest a preconceived narrative . As far as your opinions go, you are intitled to as many of them as you can posibly produce, but acttually making the statement you did about asking questions suggests yuo think there are better ways of exploring society than asking questions. I guess it is for those who have preconceived notions about reality or those who simply don't want them answered. Human nature has not changed. It's just that we are able to conceal more of it behind the anonymity of the internet.

[Marxist ßastard]

Getting back on topic, I'd just like to point out that it's the far right that are changing the laws. The Feds are just maintaining the status quo, and trying to contain this sudden moral panic. So all the cries in this thread against radicalism and change for change's sake are directed toward the wrong side.

 

Before HB2, North Carolina simply did not have any law against being in the "wrong" bathroom. People seem to have gotten along fine in those days. Bathrooms weren't even HB2's main topic. The bill was primarily intended to nullify a number of anti-discrimination ordinances that NC cities had passed. IOW, it was the NC state legislature playing petty tyrant and deciding that cities can't self-govern. Then they just happened to tack on a subsection that dictates from on high when and where people must pee. Ridiculous.

[Harbringe]

Getting back on topic, I'd just like to point out that it's the far right that are changing the laws. The Feds are just maintaining the status quo, and trying to contain this sudden moral panic. So all the cries in this thread against radicalism and change for change's sake are directed toward the wrong side.

 

Before HB2, North Carolina simply did not have any law against being in the "wrong" bathroom. People seem to have gotten along fine in those days. Bathrooms weren't even HB2's main topic. The bill was primarily intended to nullify a number of anti-discrimination ordinances that NC cities had passed. IOW, it was the NC state legislature playing petty tyrant and deciding that cities can't self-govern. Then they just happened to tack on a subsection that dictates from on high when and where people must pee. Ridiculous.

 

Your technically right , but thats because male and female was a biological determination made by medical doctors at birth. So there was no need for any State Legislature to pass any kind of laws in its regard. Most of this has to do with Title IX legislation that was passed by Congress . In that legislation sex was purely a medical determination based on biology , no where is there the concept of self identification of ones own sex or gender. What is now being foisted upon people is a new ideology of what sex or gender is . What is happening is an Administration on a beaureacratic level is using the power of those agancies to redefine an act of Congress based on their own ideology of their own making. To say before HB2 North Carolina simply did not have any law against being in the wrong bathroom is disengenious , because there was no need for anyone to even consider making a law , because they had understood it had been decided under Title IX and its medical determination of what sex was. As for the ordinances Cities may be passing , again they are being told to do that by an Administration that is telling them they must do so to be in compliance with agencies under their control or face consequences . You claim that NC is playing petty tyrant by dictating on high to cities , yet they are at least doing that by passing legislation , the federal govt isn't even bothering with legislation . If they were they would re introduce the Title IX under a new definition of what sex/gender is and pass it through Congress as was originally done. One of the definitions of tyrant is an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution . NC at least passed their law through the legislative process , the Obama Administration did not , they just made an arbitary ruling. Your claim the Feds are just maintaining the status quo is simply false.

 

Now thats not to say I agree with the NC law and certainly not for the reasons such as family values , etc , etc that they commonly cite , but I also disagree strongly with how the Feds have done this. If a law is to be used differently from its original intent a court has to determine if it applies or is deficient, at that point the judiciary would instruct the legislative to make redress if necessary. This all started because the DOJ decided to redefine what sex meant in the Tille IX legislation and they don't have the power to do that.

 

Here's something more to the OP topic

 

 

About the New York gender law thing , Iv'e seen the full pronoun list and there are over 90 definitions as to what pronoun you are to use and quite honestly the vast vast majority I dont even know what they mean or in what context its appropriate to use and that is likely true for the vast majority of New Yorkers . That you could be charged for something that you dont even understand is going way too far.

 

And the allowing of trans males to compete against women is just insane , take running for example , the male and female pelvic structure is different , females is more designed for the purpose of birthing and that is not as conducive to runnin , the male on the other hand is very well designed for runnin , thats due to the fact we would go out and run down the gazelle or run from the lion and our pelvic structure incorporates that over 100's of thousands of years of evolutionary design , women dont have that and its simply unfair to pit them against trans men. Or take something like boxing or wrestling , mens bones are thicker than women and we have generally 10% - 20% more muscle mass for the same weight , meaning we are going to be able to take and dish out more force . Now here is the really ironic thing , those who are promulgating this sort of thing are your SJW types claiming they are doing this to fight sexism , mysogyny , etc , to make the world more equal in some sense . Yet its going to be the actual sexists and mysogynists and other types of miscreants who some day are going to be able to flick on their TV just so they can see some women get her faced caved in by some trans man while boxing or MMA or get her arm/leg broken by some trans man while wrestling. Its going to happen someday if things keep going in this direction.

 

I dont doubt that there isn't such a thing as different sexual identities , I've seen neurological data that clearly defines physiological differences in various brains of various identity people , but whats happening today goes way beyond that data and its spilling out in sociological ways that seem self destructive to the society as a whole . Personally I think its less gender identity and more identity confusion for many people these days . Maybe it what we are teaching them.

[Marxist ßastard]

Trans men are transgender people who identify as men. If you're going to participate in this debate, at the very least get your terminology straight.

[Harbringe]

Trans men are transgender people who identify as men. If you're going to participate in this debate, at the very least get your terminology straight.

 

See what I mean , even when I think I'm saying it right , I'm doing it wrong and in New York you could be charged with a crime for it . You have made my point . lol :ohmy:

[Marxist ßastard]

Trans men are men; trans women are women. Simple. It's only confusing if you're coming from a bigoted standpoint to begin with.

[Harbringe]

Trans men are men; trans women are women. Simple. It's only confusing if you're coming from a bigoted standpoint to begin with.

 

Really I use one term in a mistaken way and thats enough to label me bigoted . See you are whats really wrong about all this , it allows PC authoritarians like you to act like your the moralists of our age . Go phug yourself.

[Marxist ßastard]

I mean we're all bigoted in some way or another, and part of being an adult in society is coming to terms with that, and challenging your prior beliefs. So I don't see the need for such outrage on your part when I merely say that something comes from bigoted thinking.

 

And it does. As I said, trans men are men and trans women are women. If you accept that a person who identifies as a man is a man, then it's really just that simple. It's only confusing if you've internalized the bigoted notion that trans men are really women.

Edited August 21, 2016 by Marxist ßastard

[HeyYou]

I mean we're all bigoted in some way or another, and part of being an adult in society is coming to terms with that, and challenging your prior beliefs. So I don't see the need for such outrage on your part when I merely say that something comes from bigoted thinking.

 

And it does. As I said, trans men are men and trans women are women. If you accept that a person who identifies as a man is a man, then it's really just that simple. It's only confusing if you've internalized the bigoted notion that trans men are really women.

So we need to accept other folks delusions in order to not be bigoted.....

 

If you have the twig and berries, that makes you male. A "man", doesn't matter what you want to pretend to be, as that is all it is. Someone pretending.