Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Transgender rightsFollow

#302 Mar 15 2013 at 8:05 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Rachel wrote:
Uh...?


Etymology defines references, not who has the authority to validate a label or a definition of a word. Many words are used in several ways, not all of those ways are recognized as true meanings.

Rachel wrote:
Same reason i'm upset with what gbaji said. Same reason i'm upset when someone is called a "*******". Because it very quickly tells me that you don't accept trans people for who they are.


On the contrary. I fully accept a "*******" as a male. 'Tis you who don't accept trans people for who they are by labeling them something that they are not.
#303 Mar 15 2013 at 8:06 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
*****
15,952 posts
Beyond the first first beat of surprise the first time I ever noticed one, I've always been comfortable with TG females, and lesbians in public bathrooms with me. Even before I consciously figured out I was bi. (My friends and classmates in school thought I was bi long before I did. Go figure.) Because without exception, the TG females and the lesbians behaved just like "normal" straight women when they were in public bathrooms. They adhered to public bathroom etiquette. They didn't look me in the eye. They didn't furtively check me out that I ever caught. They didn't have their shoulders or feet facing me at any time. They gave me my invisible privacy bubble, and stuck in their invisible privacy bubble. All was well. Later, when I hit the ***** dance clubs, I noticed that lesbians would behave in a much different manner in the bathroom than out in the club. In the bathroom I was never checked out or hit on. Outside the bathroom I was checked out and hit on a lot.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#304 Mar 15 2013 at 8:08 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
*****
15,952 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Rachel wrote:
Uh...?


Etymology defines references, not who has the authority to validate a label or a definition of a word. Many words are used in several ways, not all of those ways are recognized as true meanings.

Rachel wrote:
Same reason i'm upset with what gbaji said. Same reason i'm upset when someone is called a "*******". Because it very quickly tells me that you don't accept trans people for who they are.


On the contrary. I fully accept a "*******" as a male. 'Tis you who don't accept trans people for who they are by labeling them something that they are not.
So you're a rude person that no intelligent female would want to pick up.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#305 Mar 15 2013 at 8:09 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
496 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Rachel9 wrote:
A world that accepts me for who i am.
Someone who contemplates whether they want to live on this world based on some text on a computer screen? Good luck with that.
It's easy to ignore an idiot being an idiot on the internet when you don't face the same **** in the real world.
____________________________
#306 Mar 15 2013 at 8:17 PM Rating: Good
******
49,745 posts
Depends how thin your skin is, I guess.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#307 Mar 15 2013 at 8:26 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
*****
15,952 posts
When a lot of people think it's ok to beat up a TG or homosexual to a pulp, even up to hospitalization, brain damage or death, it's not just a matter of thin skins. Society needs to change more than the boundary skills of TGs and ****** while this stuff is still going on.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#308 Mar 15 2013 at 8:34 PM Rating: Decent
******
49,745 posts
Yes, and I'm sure all that will change when we pass laws and put cops in front of shitholes to enforce those laws and we'll live hand in hand and rainbows and unicorns and everything, but that really wasn't the subtopic.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#309 Mar 15 2013 at 8:44 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Arip wrote:
So you're a rude person that no intelligent female would want to pick up.

I prefer not to be with a female who doesn't know the difference between a male and a female. That doesn't express the level of intelligence that I would want to converse with.

Quote:
When a lot of people think it's ok to beat up a TG or homosexual to a pulp, even up to hospitalization, brain damage or death, it's not just a matter of thin skins. Society needs to change more than the boundary skills of TGs and ****** while this stuff is still going on.


You mean like nerds, goths, fat people, skinny people, tiny people, popular people, attractive girls, promiscuous girls, ethnic origins, religious preferences, women in general, etc?
#310 Mar 15 2013 at 8:52 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
*****
15,952 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Arip wrote:
So you're a rude person that no intelligent female would want to pick up.

I prefer not to be with a female who doesn't know the difference between a male and a female. That doesn't express the level of intelligence that I would want to converse with.

Well I am bisexual, so you have a fair point there. You're still rude and uncouth and undesirable.

Almalieque wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
When a lot of people think it's ok to beat up a TG or homosexual to a pulp, even up to hospitalization, brain damage or death, it's not just a matter of thin skins. Society needs to change more than the boundary skills of TGs and ****** while this stuff is still going on.


You mean like nerds, goths, fat people, skinny people, tiny people, popular people, attractive girls, promiscuous girls, ethnic origins, religious preferences, women in general, etc?
Yes, it's not ok to beat up those "different from me" people either. Society needs to change when that's still going on. These people don't need to get thicker skins and put up with it either. At least four of those groups of people have had laws and court procedures extensively changed and enforced, just for them, to adjust society in general's treatment of them.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#311 Mar 15 2013 at 8:56 PM Rating: Good
******
49,745 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
These people don't need to get thicker skins
Apparently it was too hard to follow the conversation, but I was telling Rachel9 to get thicker skin when reading internet forums.
Aripyanfar wrote:
At least four of those groups of people have had laws and court procedures extensively changed and enforced, just for them, to adjust society in general's treatment of them.
And those four groups now enjoy unquestioning acceptance.

Edited, Mar 15th 2013 11:02pm 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.
#312 Mar 15 2013 at 9:11 PM Rating: Decent
Everyone's Oiran
*****
15,952 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
These people don't need to get thicker skins
Apparently it was too hard to follow the conversation, but I was telling Rachel9 to get thicker skin when reading internet forums.
My mistake. It is indeed VERY important to have either a rhino-hide skin, or a really good coping mechanism, when interacting on internet forums, especially The Asylum. But Rachel's point about the extreme trash she puts up with in public, and that it is neither just nor fair that she do so, is also a valid point. Public civility is and should be held to a higher standard than most internet forums.
lolgaxe wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
At least four of those groups of people have had laws and court procedures extensively changed and enforced, just for them, to adjust society in general's treatment of them.
And those four groups now enjoy unquestioning acceptance.
I'm not sure if you're being intentionally ironic or sarcastic here. While those four groups I'm talking about are still not as enfranchised as male white men, their lot in society has undeniably improved out of sight. Legal protections that counter old social rules have worked to a great extent as intended, even if not to an ideal extent.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#313 Mar 15 2013 at 9:57 PM Rating: Default
******
49,745 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
But Rachel's point about the extreme trash she puts up with in public, and that it is neither just nor fair that she do so, is also a valid point.
Equality means I have to treat everyone equally, not that I have to love them or coddle them. I find anyone that even hints at suicide to be trash.
Aripyanfar wrote:
I'm not sure if you're being intentionally ironic or sarcastic here.
Sardonic if anything.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#314 Mar 16 2013 at 4:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Message has high abuse count and will not be displayed.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#315 Mar 16 2013 at 5:29 AM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Arip wrote:
Yes, it's not ok to beat up those "different from me" people either. Society needs to change when that's still going on.


I don't deny the quoted part at all; however, self-respect plays a major part in how those people see you. I always got made fun of for taking advanced and honors courses in school. I countered by making fun of them for willingly wanting to be stupid. That isn't necessarily the best solution, but you can't allow people to punk you either. No matter who you are, how successful you are, people will hate on you and do and say things to put you down.

This isn't taking away from the extreme prejudice, but at the same time, it doesn't make them unique either.
#316 Mar 16 2013 at 6:58 AM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
*****
15,952 posts
Psychiatry is very firm about when there is NOT a mental illness. It acceptes that humans are a very diverse species. If a person has aberrant behaviour or thoughts, that is, behaviour or thoughts that are far outside the norm, but they are content with their aberrance, and they are not harming anyone by their aberrances, and they are not harming themselves with it, then no mental disorder exists.

The person is to be treated as a sane adult and their behaviour accommodated within society.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#317 Mar 16 2013 at 7:06 AM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Aripyanfar wrote:
If a person has aberrant behaviour or thoughts, that is, behaviour or thoughts that are far outside the norm, but they are content with their aberrance, and they are not harming anyone by their aberrances, and they are not harming themselves with it, then no mental disorder exists.

That's contraindicated by the definition given in the ICD which is the text I was steered to as the authority regarding these matters.

I didn't attempt to show that it was a mental disorder, I just asked about the clinical accuracy of calling a boy who thinks he's a girl a girl or "she". I was directed to the WHO and then to the GID section of the ICD as the authority on who makes these determinations. Said text clearly marks transsexualism as a mental disorder and uses the person's "biological" status as the basis for their pronouns versus their imagined status.


Edited, Mar 16th 2013 8:12am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#318 Mar 16 2013 at 7:09 AM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Beside being false, I don't follow the connection of what you wrote to what I said. I never mentioned or hinted mental illnesses.
#319 Mar 16 2013 at 7:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
Beside being false, I don't follow the connection of what you wrote to what I said. I never mentioned or hinted mental illnesses.

Ari was upset about me using the term "mental disorder" which was quoted from the ICD.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#320 Mar 16 2013 at 8:14 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
I don't think that 'a mental disorder in which a male insists that he is a girl' is the same thing as "The WHO says he's really a girl" but that's just my take on it.

There's a "terminology for clinicians" section, but again, I'm still struggling to see the point of the argument? Is your point that most people would call a female identified boy in a dress a "boy in a dress"? Stipulated. If your point is what that person would be referred to by a case worker in a clinical setting, and what the recommended terminology is after a diagnosis has been made, you're wrong.

I still don't know what you think this has to do with bathrooms, and it still harkens back to "look it says in the law "marriage requires a man and a woman" type arguments.
____________________________
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.

#321 Mar 16 2013 at 8:25 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
There's a "terminology for clinicians" section, but again, I'm still struggling to see the point of the argument?

Really?

Well, I could explain it but it's not even really important. The simple question is who is setting the standards for this. Especially when others in the thread are espousing it as rock-solid gospel. You don't have to like or understand the "point" of the question. I've already chased several leads on this now that all brought me back to "there's no clinical authority for defining a boy in a dress as a girl*" so unless someone has an actual cite (chapter, verse, quote) I guess I'm considering the point settled. Edit: A quick word find through the entire ICD-10 for "Gender Identity Disorder" did not turn up anything more substantive than what I previously quoted.

*Whatever the social implications are or even whether you want to go along with someone isn't particularly relevant. I'm referring to the repeated assertions that a male who thinks of himself as a girl is, in fact, a girl and opinions to the contrary are clinically wrong.


Edited, Mar 16th 2013 9:33am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#322 Mar 16 2013 at 9:08 AM Rating: Good
****
6,471 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
I find anyone that even hints at suicide to be trash.


This would strike me as a very silly position to hold.
#323 Mar 16 2013 at 12:12 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
Well, I could explain it but it's not even really important. The simple question is who is setting the standards for this. Especially when others in the thread are espousing it as rock-solid gospel. You don't have to like or understand the "point" of the question. I've already chased several leads on this now that all brought me back to "there's no clinical authority for defining a boy in a dress as a girl*" so unless someone has an actual cite (chapter, verse, quote) I guess I'm considering the point settled. Edit: A quick word find through the entire ICD-10 for "Gender Identity Disorder" did not turn up anything more substantive than what I previously quoted.

I don't have a copy in front of me. It may be an appendix. I've lost interest though. You have Wikipedia, you know as much as anyone could about this subject, you win the internet debate. I was mistaken. There's no appropriate terminology in a clinical setting, and to be accurate terms that are actively hurtful should definitely be used to refer to people because it's vitally important that we measure their gender correctly in scientific terms, no matter how harmful to them. I guess?
____________________________
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.

#324 Mar 16 2013 at 12:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
You have Wikipedia

Why would I need Wikipedia when I have the authoritative word of the WHO and the ICD?

Maybe it's written in the copyright notice though. I didn't think to check within the copyright notice. Or maybe the copyright notice on Wikipedia has it.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#325 Mar 16 2013 at 12:51 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts

Why would I need Wikipedia when I have the authoritative word of the WHO and the ICD?

Maybe it's written in the copyright notice though. I didn't think to check within the copyright notice. Or maybe the copyright notice on Wikipedia has it.


Really. I concede the point. You were correct and I was mistaken. I'm not sure what you gained, but it's not critically important to me. If I happen upon what I was thinking of I'll let you know. No qualifications. I was wrong and your dedicated researching demonstrated that. Why it's important, I'm not sure, but I have nothing at hand to indicate I was anything but entirely incorrect.
____________________________
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.

#326 Mar 16 2013 at 12:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
I'm not sure what you gained

Not a thing. If someone's going to call me a hateful bigot (not you, you just jumped in on it), I think I deserve to question it without it being about whether I "win" or "lose".
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 90 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (90)