Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Transgender rightsFollow

#977 Apr 04 2013 at 5:40 PM Rating: Decent
**
496 posts
Almalieque wrote:
No one mentioned anything about trans having problems.
Quote:
I would argue that most women wouldn't want to walk by or see men using urinals. However, If bathrooms were indeed segregated by gender and not sex, that would happen.
#978 Apr 04 2013 at 5:41 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Like I said.. Nothing in there mentions or hints a trans having issues.

Edited, Apr 5th 2013 1:42am by Almalieque
#979 Apr 04 2013 at 5:44 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Quote:
Sigh... He means women sex, not women gender.
Then maybe he should say that.


Or perhaps you should not assume that when someone says "woman" or "man" that they must be referring to gender. Doubly so when the context of the statement being made clearly indicates he meant sex. I mean, you even pointed out that his statement was backwards, but failed to grasp that it wasn't if you assumed he meant sex?

Quote:
Quote:
Restrooms segregated by gender would result in biological women walking by and seeing biological men using urinals, because gender segregation (if it's different than sex segregation) would somewhat require people with different genitalia using the same restroom.
Well yes. I've never known a trans man to be uncomfortable walking by other men in the bathroom just because they're using urinals though. How is this a concern?


Cause the men using the urinal might be uncomfortable with the idea? Did it ever occur to you to consider the issue from anyone's point of view other than your own?

Quote:
Surely he's not really suggesting we ban trans men from the men's bathroom because they might get a little uncomfortable walking past other men?


See above.

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 4:45pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#980 Apr 04 2013 at 5:47 PM Rating: Good
**
496 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Like I said.. Nothing in there mentions or hints a trans having issues.

Edited, Apr 5th 2013 1:42am by Almalieque
Biological females with a male gender are called "trans men". The only biological females who would go into the men's bathroom are trans men. You didn't say the men would have a problem with women walking past them. You said the biological females would have a problem walking past the men.

Quote:
Or perhaps you should not assume that when someone says "woman" or "man" that they must be referring to gender.
But that's all they refer to.

Quote:
Cause the men using the urinal might be uncomfortable with the idea? Did it ever occur to you to consider the issue from anyone's point of view other than your own?
That isn't the argument he made though.

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 7:49pm by Rachel9
#981 Apr 04 2013 at 5:50 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Like I said.. Nothing in there mentions or hints a trans having issues.

Edited, Apr 5th 2013 1:42am by Almalieque
Biological females with a male gender are called "trans men". The only biological females who would go into the men's bathroom are trans men. You didn't say the men would have a problem with women walking past them. You said the biological females would have a problem walking past the men.

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 7:47pm by Rachel9


.......

If bathrooms were segregated by gender, then women bathrooms would also have urinals. Women (biological and gender) would not like seeing a biological man using a urinal inside the women's bathroom.
#982 Apr 04 2013 at 5:51 PM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
gbaji wrote:
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Other way around but you're basically saying people see no difference between a woman in men's clothing and a transgender man?
My larger point is that we can't assume based on how someone looks what their gender is
Really, you can't determine their genders based on those pictures?
#983 Apr 04 2013 at 6:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Really, Ellen's clothes aren't tailored or fitted for a man. They're "men's clothing" only in that you're considering a jacket to be "men's clothing" which isn't really accurate. It's obviously a woman's jacket worn over a woman's shirt.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#984 Apr 04 2013 at 6:18 PM Rating: Good
****
9,526 posts
at this point I am ready to promote unisex bathrooms to make this thread stop. And for the record, I hate sharing a bathroom with anyone at all.
#985 Apr 04 2013 at 6:21 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Really, Ellen's clothes aren't tailored or fitted for a man. They're "men's clothing" only in that you're considering a jacket to be "men's clothing" which isn't really accurate. It's obviously a woman's jacket worn over a woman's shirt.


That's the irony of it all. In the attempt to fight against "pigeon holing" people by certain traits, expectations are made based on their sex. If you want to argue against "gender traits", then dresses aren't for women and suits aren't for men.
#986 Apr 04 2013 at 6:21 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
Still clearly a woman even with a men's suit.

Edited, Apr 5th 2013 2:21am by Aethien
#987 Apr 04 2013 at 6:27 PM Rating: Excellent
I really wish both gbaji and Alma would stop pretending they (1) care what women think, (2) understand women at all, (3) respect women at all, (4) speak for women in any way, and (5) have a clue about women in any way.

#988 Apr 04 2013 at 6:33 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
gbaji wrote:
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Other way around but you're basically saying people see no difference between a woman in men's clothing and a transgender man?
My larger point is that we can't assume based on how someone looks what their gender is
Really, you can't determine their genders based on those pictures?


Not all transvestites are transgender. Not all transgenders are transvestites. And frankly, not all transvestites are about changing their appearance so much as the clothes they wear. Point is there are lots of biological males who wear dresses who are still obviously biological males. This has no bearing on whether their gender identity is male or female. There are biological males who wear what we'd consider traditionally male clothing and also obviously appear "male", but who could be gender male *or* gender female.

And this is before even touching on the subject of sexual orientation as it relates to various trans subgroups. You're comparing a lesbian female, who is obviously not attempting to appear male, with a trans male. They're not even remotely related.

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 5:33pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#989 Apr 04 2013 at 6:38 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Still clearly a woman even with a men's suit.


I'm still unsure what point you think you're making with this. She's not the entirety of all women.

Why not use this picture instead?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#990 Apr 04 2013 at 7:04 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Belkira wrote:
I really wish both gbaji and Alma would stop pretending they (1) care what women think, (2) understand women at all, (3) respect women at all, (4) speak for women in any way, and (5) have a clue about women in any way.



Dear "Ambassador of Women", you don't have to be the opposite sex to have a basic understanding of the other sex. If you believe that, then I feel sorry for your marriage.

As a gentleman, I have much respect for women and I have displayed that more times than not. Don't confuse my lack of respect for people like you who stands tacitly by when other posters make sexist comments then have the hubris to talk for an entire sex and the audacity to attack me because I don't feed into posters fictional beliefs.

That's one of the many problems with this forum. Posters have become "enablers" for people with obvious problems. I understand the concept of having a place to express yourself with emotional support, but there is a limit.
#991 Apr 04 2013 at 7:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
I really wish both gbaji and Alma would stop pretending they (1) care what women think, (2) understand women at all, (3) respect women at all, (4) speak for women in any way, and (5) have a clue about women in any way.



Dear "Ambassador of Women", you don't have to be the opposite sex to have a basic understanding of the other sex. If you believe that, then I feel sorry for your marriage.

As a gentleman, I have much respect for women and I have displayed that more times than not. Don't confuse my lack of respect for people like you who stands tacitly by when other posters make sexist comments then have the hubris to talk for an entire sex and the audacity to attack me because I don't feed into posters fictional beliefs.

That's one of the many problems with this forum. Posters have become "enablers" for people with obvious problems. I understand the concept of having a place to express yourself with emotional support, but there is a limit.


Plenty of men understand and respect women. You and gbaji just don't happen to be two of them. The very fact that you think you can rattle off a few stereotypical "female" things and explain an entire gender is proof of your lack of respect and understanding. Especially when "over-emotional" is one of those "feminine gender traits." More often than not, you are showing your disdain for women. It doesn't stop there, of course. But it's the most obvious.
#992 Apr 04 2013 at 7:18 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Belkira wrote:
Plenty of men understand and respect women. You and gbaji just don't happen to be two of them.


Excuse me? What have I said in this thread that makes you conclude I don't respect women? I'm sorry, but I really really dislike the "if you don't agree with me, you're a <hater of some group>" argument. It's cheap.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#993 Apr 04 2013 at 7:33 PM Rating: Good
**
496 posts
Quote:
If bathrooms were segregated by gender, then women bathrooms would also have urinals.
We already went over this. They most certainly would not. Whether they have penises or not, women (that's referring to gender, if you can't tell) by and large do not use urinals. I think it's safe to say that <.001% do, ever. Would you install a urinal in a bathroom where <.001% of the people who go into it would use it? Because i sure as hell would not. And even if you did, they would go unused for decades at a time, so it's still not an issue.

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 9:35pm by Rachel9
#994 Apr 04 2013 at 8:12 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Belkira wrote:

Plenty of men understand and respect women. You and gbaji just don't happen to be two of them. The very fact that you think you can rattle off a few stereotypical "female" things and explain an entire gender is proof of your lack of respect and understanding. Especially when "over-emotional" is one of those "feminine gender traits." More often than not, you are showing your disdain for women. It doesn't stop there, of course. But it's the most obvious.


I do recall apologizing if you felt offended, but it doesn't change the truth. I didn't in any way say that all women behave a certain way, but if you're going to argue that men traditionally aren't emotional enough and women are traditionally too emotional, then you're living in a fantasy land.

Given the context of the thread, it is blatantly obvious that the list was not in any way shape or form meant to be derogatory. The intent was to simply express women gender traits. Ironically, you're only proving the point of being over emotional, because the reality is, that is a trait that you have always expressed on this forum.


Furthermore, I asked you to provide a better list and you couldn't. Unless your argument is that men and women behave the same with no differences, then there exist gender traits. You were just too cowardly to present a list in fear of contradicting yourself.

As stated, you say nothing when people make actual sexist comments, only your intentional misinterpretations. As a result, you have NO grounds to insult me.
#995 Apr 04 2013 at 8:17 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Quote:
If bathrooms were segregated by gender, then women bathrooms would also have urinals.
We already went over this. They most certainly would not. Whether they have penises or not, women (that's referring to gender, if you can't tell) by and large do not use urinals. I think it's safe to say that <.001% do, ever. Would you install a urinal in a bathroom where <.001% of the people who go into it would use it? Because i sure as hell would not. And even if you did, they would go unused for decades at a time, so it's still not an issue.

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 9:35pm by Rachel9


It's amusing on how confused you are on sexuality.

As a biological man, I can argue that I don't have to be pigeon holed into "male" or "female" label. As a human, I posses both male and female traits. Therefore, if the bathroom is segregated by gender, I have the right to use either bathroom. Since I have a *****, I would use a urinal, just like every other biological man would, regardless of their gender.

As I pointed out, you are making the fallacious assumption that a biological man with a female gender would behave as a transgender as opposed to simply relating to a woman's gender. No dresses, wigs, surgery, etc.
#996 Apr 04 2013 at 8:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Most people have different definitions of what respect means to them. Your feminist college professor and traditional housewife (could I stereotype any more?) likely won't agree on what constitutes respectful or offensive behavior. Just tread lightly until you find out what bothers someone, learn their expectations, and do you best not to do something you expect them to disapprove of. Apologize when it appears you have fallen short, and discontinue the offensive behavior. Live and learn.

Also asylum, so exceptions for respectful behavior are rather low. Smiley: rolleyes

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 7:22pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#997 Apr 04 2013 at 8:29 PM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
Almalieque wrote:
As a biological man, I can argue that I don't have to be pigeon holed into "male" or "female" label. As a human, I posses both male and female traits. Therefore, if the bathroom is segregated by gender, I have the right to use either bathroom.
Smiley: oyvey
#998 Apr 04 2013 at 8:33 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Quote:
If bathrooms were segregated by gender, then women bathrooms would also have urinals.
We already went over this. They most certainly would not. Whether they have penises or not, women (that's referring to gender, if you can't tell) by and large do not use urinals. I think it's safe to say that <.001% do, ever. Would you install a urinal in a bathroom where <.001% of the people who go into it would use it? Because i sure as hell would not. And even if you did, they would go unused for decades at a time, so it's still not an issue.


Alma's foolish phraseology aside, none of this changes the fact that the overwhelming percentage of our society doesn't like the idea of people with penises and vaginas using the same restroom facilities at the same time. You can dance around this issue all you want, but it isn't going to go away. And that's ultimately at the heart of the problem here. No amount of demanding that we should only view this from a gender point of view changes the very real fact that most people view it from a sex point of view.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#999 Apr 04 2013 at 8:34 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
We already went over this. They most certainly would not. Whether they have penises or not, women (that's referring to gender, if you can't tell) by and large do not use urinals. I think it's safe to say that <.001% do, ever. Would you install a urinal in a bathroom where <.001% of the people who go into it would use it? Because i sure as hell would not. And even if you did, they would go unused for decades at a time, so it's still not an issue.


You too can use urinals, all it takes is a portable *****!
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#1000 Apr 04 2013 at 8:39 PM Rating: Good
**
496 posts
Quote:
As a human, I posses both male and female traits. Therefore, if the bathroom is segregated by gender, I have the right to use either bathroom.
Having traits typical of one gender does not make you that gender. You have a male gender. You do not have a female gender. You would NOT have the right to use the women's bathroom.
#1001 Apr 04 2013 at 8:45 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
gbaji wrote:
Alma's foolish phraseology aside, none of this changes the fact that the overwhelming percentage of our society doesn't like the idea of people with penises and vaginas using the same restroom facilities at the same time.
So what bathroom should this guy use according to you?
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 296 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (296)