Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Transgender rightsFollow

#252 Mar 14 2013 at 5:26 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,865 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
I get that. But then we're also not talking about just this one school, or one class, but everyone who isn't very wealthy. Ultimately, we're looking at two groups with incompatible needs. One group's needs are no more irrational than the other, so doesn't it make more sense to inconvenience the smallest group possible?

Awesome argument for raising the marginal tax rate on income above $300k to 95%.


Except for the whole "One group's needs are no more irrational than the other" part, you'd have a semi-decent analogy.It's rational to expect to keep money you earn, and irrational to demand that others pay for things you didn't earn. But yet, other than that minor difference, you're spot on!

Quote:
Good work, comrade.


Keep trying.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#253 Mar 14 2013 at 5:31 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,646 posts
Minorities have always made majorities uncomfortable. It's why they constantly have to fight for their rights. This is not a new thing. People will get used to the biologically male woman in the restroom (and vice versa). I don't see the majority really getting inconvenienced all that much. But you're asking the minority to inconvenience themselves for their entire lives to conform to what makes the majority comfortable. That's pretty ****** up.
#254 Mar 14 2013 at 5:34 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
496 posts
Quote:
Transphobes are uncomfortable with someone of a different *** using the same restroom because they make that determination based on ***
fixed.
____________________________
#255 Mar 14 2013 at 5:45 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
I tire of this, if you have a point, make it, otherwise read my previous posts, i've already responded.


If you're unable to grasp such as simple concept as why those 11 million people are considered "illegal", then you wont understand anything further.
#256 Mar 14 2013 at 5:48 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,278 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Quote:
Gbaji believes any who are not right-wing, moneyed, white males don't really matter
Super-fixed.

____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
Last week, I saw a guy with an eyepatch and a gold monocle and pointed him out to Flea as one of the most awesome things I've seen, ever. If I had an eyepatch and a gold monocle, I'd always dress up as Mr. Peanut but with a hook hand and a parrot.
#257 Mar 14 2013 at 6:20 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Except for the whole "One group's needs are no more irrational than the other" part, you'd have a semi-decent analogy.It's rational to expect to keep money you earn, and irrational to demand that others pay for things you didn't earn.

No, I understood that part. I think you may not have.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#258 Mar 14 2013 at 7:29 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,865 posts
Belkira wrote:
Minorities have always made majorities uncomfortable. It's why they constantly have to fight for their rights. This is not a new thing. People will get used to the biologically male woman in the restroom (and vice versa).


Why can't the biologically male woman simply get used to using the restroom the rest of the biologically male people use?

Quote:
I don't see the majority really getting inconvenienced all that much.


They are being inconvenienced just as much by having to share a restroom with someone who is biologically a different *** as the transgendered person is having to share a restroom with someone who is biologically the same ***. Seriously? Why is one hang up any more important than the other?

Quote:
But you're asking the minority to inconvenience themselves for their entire lives to conform to what makes the majority comfortable.


You're asking the majority to inconvenience themselves for their entire lives to conform to what makes the minority comfortable.

Quote:
That's pretty @#%^ed up.


Yes. But one way is fucked up to about .01% of the population , while the other way is fucked up to the other 99.99% of the population. Neither hang up has any more legitimacy than the other, so any sane society should go with not inconveniencing the larger group.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#259 Mar 14 2013 at 7:43 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,865 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Quote:
Transphobes are uncomfortable with someone of a different *** using the same restroom because they make that determination based on ***
fixed.


Changing the label doesn't change the logic. Transgendered people who can't handle using a restroom with other people of the same physical *** as themselves are just as phobic. Yet somehow that's ok, but the other isn't? Why?

There is nothing preventing that kid from using the boy's bathroom except his/her own fears and hangups. None at all. Yet, we're expected to require that everyone else set aside their hangups about sharing a restroom with someone of the opposite *** on hold because a very tiny percentage of the population feels uncomfortable the other way around? That makes no sense at all.

If I declare that I'm made uncomfortable at the sight of women with clothing on, can I demand that we change the rules to require that they all walk around nude? I'm the minority here, right? So the fact that most women will be uncomfortable complying with what I want shouldn't matter. They're just bigots and haters of a minority. They simply don't understand the mental and emotional stress I go through every day having to deal with women around me who are wearing clothing! Argh... If the world doesn't fix this, I'll just have to commit suicide.

Silly? Yes. And so is the idea of transgenders imposing their own phobias and hangups on the rest of the society. They're the ones who have a disconnect between their physical *** and their psychological gender. The rest of us don't. They're going to have problems dealing with that regardless of what restrooms they're allowed to use. So we're looking at a ridiculous and largely unworkable demand that isn't really going to fix anything anyway. So how about we just not do it and tell the little boy/girl that the world works this way and that he/she will need to learn how to interact with that world as it is. It's not going to change for him/her.


There's no practical way to change the vast hosts of things in the world that will cause problems for a transgendered person. Better to set realistic expectations and move forward IMO. And guess what? The kids probably not going to get a pony either. That's just the way the real world is kid. Deal with it.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#260 Mar 14 2013 at 7:54 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,646 posts
The majority is inconvenienced once or twice, not their whole life. They are not asked to wear clothing they don't feel comfortable in, to affect mannerisms they are not comfortable with, to use facilities they are not comfortable with, and to present themselves as someone they are not. We're not just talking about public restrooms, gbaji.

Quote:
It's all well and good to say that we're infringing his/her right to be a unique snowflake or something, but the problems don't stop at the grade school level. What happens when it's the locker room, or the showers, or sports? Expecting the whole rest of the world to make way for your own personal preferences is a bit silly. We have social norms for a reason, and fair or not, it's a **** of a lot easier to find ways to adjust to them, rather than make everyone adjust the other direction. This kid is going to encounter problems with his desire to be female for his entire life. Better he learn that now and figure out ways to deal with it, than run headfirst into block after block after block.


If we change society, everyone is better for it. We've done it for race. We can do it for this, too.

Edited, Mar 14th 2013 8:58pm by Belkira
#261 Mar 14 2013 at 8:28 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,865 posts
Belkira wrote:
The majority is inconvenienced once or twice, not their whole life.


No. The majority is inconvenienced every single time they use a public restroom because they know that there could be someone of the opposite *** in there with them. Just as the minority is inconvenienced every single time they use a public restroom because they know there could be someone of the same ***, but opposite gender in there with them. It's the same **** thing. Remember, it's not like it's "this bathroom, in this location". In order for this to work at all, it would have to be "every bathroom, everywhere". Otherwise, the transgendered person would run into the same issue at a restaurant, or a business, or an airport, or bus stop, or gas station, etc, etc, etc.

I'm assuming we're not just saying this one school changes it's rules, right? Cause that's not going to really fix the problems the kid is going to have if using a restroom with other biological males is such a problem.

Quote:
They are not asked to wear clothing they don't feel comfortable in, to affect mannerisms they are not comfortable with, to use facilities they are not comfortable with, and to present themselves as someone they are not. We're not just talking about public restrooms, gbaji.


I'm just talking about public restrooms. No one was talking about clothes or mannerisms. We were specifically speaking of a "girl" being uncomfortable being required to use a men's restroom because she has the physical genitalia of a male. And I'm comparing that to everyone else being uncomfortable with the idea of some of the opposite *** using their restroom, regardless of what that person's gender identity is.

Quote:
If we change society, everyone is better for it. We've done it for race. We can do it for this, too.


If we change the transgender's irrational fears and needs, everyone is better for it too. Only that's a much more achievable goal.

And this is *nothing* like race.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#262 Mar 14 2013 at 8:29 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Changing the label doesn't change the logic. Transgendered people who can't handle using a restroom with other people of the same physical *** as themselves are just as phobic. Yet somehow that's ok, but the other isn't? Why?

There is nothing preventing that kid from using the boy's bathroom except his/her own fears and hangups. None at all. Yet, we're expected to require that everyone else set aside their hangups about sharing a restroom with someone of the opposite *** on hold because a very tiny percentage of the population feels uncomfortable the other way around? That makes no sense at all.


Well, it was the primary idea behind the founding of our country. Aside from that though, no big deal, I guess.

People who actively disagree with your sentiment:

Plato, John Adams, De Toqueville, Mill, Nitche, Aynn Rand, I'll just stop there, I guess.

The entire reason Law exists as a concept is to enforce the rights of minority actors. Even the ones you don't like.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#263 Mar 14 2013 at 8:46 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,865 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Well, it was the primary idea behind the founding of our country. Aside from that though, no big deal, I guess.


You're wrong. Sorry, that's not it. Our system is founded on the idea that rights compete with each other, and a society has to decide which ones are more important to a civil society than another.

Quote:
People who actively disagree with your sentiment:

Plato, John Adams, De Toqueville, Mill, Nitche, Aynn Rand, I'll just stop there, I guess.

The entire reason Law exists as a concept is to enforce the rights of minority actors. Even the ones you don't like.


Wrong again. Laws exist within the context of liberalism to mediate between competing rights. The sociopath has a right to move his hand, pick up a hammer, and smash it into someone's skull, killing them. That right is out weighed by his potential victim's right to *not* have his head bashed in with a hammer and be killed. We first recognize that rights exist, and then act to protect them to the greatest degree possible, always being aware that in order to do this in any society consisting of more than one person, we must infringe some rights in order to protect others that we as a society deem more important.

This means that my right to run around naked with peanut butter and bananas smeared on my body singing "I'm King Henry the Eighth, I am" at the top of my lungs at 3 in the morning is outweighed by the rest of society's right to not have to see people running around naked with peanut butter and banana's smeared on their bodies singing "I'm King Henry the Eighth, I am" at the top of their lungs at 3 in the morning. These sorts of things are necessary impositions on liberty in order for a civil society to exist. And while some of those rules may seem arbitrary, they are ultimately an expression of what the society as a whole wants. And in those areas, a minority opinion does not trump the majority.


Most people don't want to share restroom facilities with people of the opposite ***. Arbitrary or not, that right outweighs the right of the small number of people who do want to do so, regardless of their stated reason for wanting to. Thus, that's our social rule. You can always work to change the minds of the people, but the wrong way to do it is to pass a law forcing them to comply with something that makes them uncomfortable. Doing that is the opposite of the principles of a free society.

Edited, Mar 14th 2013 7:48pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#264 Mar 14 2013 at 8:52 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Most people don't want to share restroom facilities with people of the opposite ***. Arbitrary or not, that right outweighs the right of the small number of people who do want to do so, regardless of their stated reason for wanting to. Thus, that's our social rule. You can always work to change the minds of the people, but the wrong way to do it is to pass a law forcing them to comply with something that makes them uncomfortable. Doing that is the opposite of the principles of a free society.

I'll keep that in mind when SCOTUS goes 7-2 in favor of codifying the right of *** folks to marry in June. I'm lazy, but there are about 72,000 examples of how the US system doesn't and wasn't intended to function the way you describe. Were you thinking, perhaps, of Galt Gulch?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#265 Mar 14 2013 at 8:56 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
496 posts
Quote:
Yes. But one way is ****** up to about .01% of the population , while the other way is ****** up to the other 99.99% of the population. Neither hang up has any more legitimacy than the other, so any sane society should go with not inconveniencing the larger group.
lol, get out. Not all cis people hate trans people. You're also vastly underestimating the number of trans people.

Quote:
Transgendered people who can't handle using a restroom with other people of the same physical *** as themselves are just as phobic.
No, i don't think so. I don't know about anyone else, but personally, i am not afraid of using a men's bathroom. I did it just fine for the first 20 years of my life. I'm simply not comfortable in one. Not because i'm afraid of men, but because i'm in the wrong ******* bathroom. I'm sure i probably feel similar to how you would feel using a women's bathroom.

Quote:
I'm just talking about public restrooms. No one was talking about clothes or mannerisms. We were specifically speaking of a "girl" being uncomfortable being required to use a men's restroom because she has the physical genitalia of a male. And I'm comparing that to everyone else being uncomfortable with the idea of some of the opposite *** using their restroom, regardless of what that person's gender identity is.
Well the thread is about "Transgender rights". Everyone else has in fact been talking about those things. Also, you don't need quotes around girl. That just makes it seem like you're implying she's not really a girl.
____________________________
#266 Mar 14 2013 at 9:23 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
I'm sure i probably feel similar to how you would feel using a women's bathroom.

I don't know you, but I DO know Gbaji, and I'm going to say you're wrong about that.

Dead wrong.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#267 Mar 14 2013 at 11:50 PM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
Quote:
The entire reason Law exists as a concept is to enforce the rights of minority actors.


What a bizarre thing to say.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#268 Mar 15 2013 at 6:49 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
gbaji wrote:

Most people don't want to share restroom facilities with people....

I know!

Bushes are so much more hygienic.



Edited, Mar 15th 2013 2:49pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#269 Mar 15 2013 at 7:36 AM Rating: Decent
******
49,660 posts
Belkira wrote:
The majority is inconvenienced once or twice, not their whole life. They are not asked to wear clothing they don't feel comfortable in, to affect mannerisms they are not comfortable with, to use facilities they are not comfortable with, and to present themselves as someone they are not.
Sounds like my job.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#270 Mar 15 2013 at 7:43 AM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Or high school!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#271 Mar 15 2013 at 12:18 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Rachel wrote:
Also, you don't need quotes around girl. That just makes it seem like you're implying she's not really a girl.


Who decides which label is accurate or not and why?
#272 Mar 15 2013 at 12:48 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
496 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Rachel wrote:
Also, you don't need quotes around girl. That just makes it seem like you're implying she's not really a girl.


Who decides which label is accurate or not and why?
I'm not an etymologist. If you're interested in the subject, I'm sure your local college can explain better than i can.
____________________________
#273 Mar 15 2013 at 12:58 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Rachel wrote:
Also, you don't need quotes around girl. That just makes it seem like you're implying she's not really a girl.


Who decides which label is accurate or not and why?

If I'm going to asked to wear a label into a public restroom I'm picking what mine says.



____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#274 Mar 15 2013 at 1:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Rachel9 wrote:
I'm not an etymologist. If you're interested in the subject, I'm sure your local college can explain better than i can.

Etymologists wouldn't decide if or when to call a biological male a "girl", anyway.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#275 Mar 15 2013 at 1:29 PM Rating: Good
******
49,660 posts
So ... transgender folks are really insects?

Edit: Huh, google lied to me. Hilarious.

Edited, Mar 15th 2013 3:38pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#276 Mar 15 2013 at 1:34 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
496 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Rachel9 wrote:
I'm not an etymologist. If you're interested in the subject, I'm sure your local college can explain better than i can.

Etymologists wouldn't decide if or when to call a biological male a "girl", anyway.
Of course but they might be able to explain why a word is used the way it is. I am not an expert on the subject, so the best answer i can give is "that's just what it means".

Edited, Mar 15th 2013 3:36pm by Rachel9
____________________________
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 75 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (75)