Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Transgender rightsFollow

#952 Apr 04 2013 at 10:48 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
All when you're involved. Most when you're not. For someone who likes to play semantics with words, you sure don't pay attention when it's not your words your playing semantics on.

A dictionary can help you understand the difference between all and most if you need assistance.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#953 Apr 04 2013 at 12:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Unforkgettable
*****
13,246 posts
There are several posters in here who deserve a rolled up newspaper to the nose.
____________________________
Banh
#954 Apr 04 2013 at 12:19 PM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
A dictionary can help you
Record shows otherwise.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#955 Apr 04 2013 at 12:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
Spoonless wrote:
There are several posters in here who deserve a rolled up newspaper to the nose.


I need to stop, because if I'm not on the list, I'm getting close to being added.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#956 Apr 04 2013 at 12:54 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,966 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
All when you're involved. Most when you're not. For someone who likes to play semantics with words, you sure don't pay attention when it's not your words your playing semantics on.

A dictionary can help you understand the difference between all and most if you need assistance.


blah blah blah... 20 pages... blah blah..
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#957 Apr 04 2013 at 12:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
Just because we were throwing around a 0.2% number earlier...

____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#958 Apr 04 2013 at 12:57 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,681 posts
Reading comprehension still an issue: check!
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#959 Apr 04 2013 at 1:06 PM Rating: Good
******
43,650 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Just because we were throwing around a 0.2% number earlier...
I'm suspicious of any 18-25 year old about being bisexual.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#960 Apr 04 2013 at 1:11 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,896 posts

This sort of implies that over the age of 65 we're still sexually active. - Yay

(I was starting to worry)
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#961 Apr 04 2013 at 1:29 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
490 posts
That's actually surprisingly low. Lumping in a bunch of unrelated groups makes it irrelevant to this though. .2% is probably not so far from the truth.

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 3:29pm by Rachel9
____________________________
#962Almalieque, Posted: Apr 04 2013 at 1:51 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) "Playing semantics" is when the difference in definition doesn't conceptually change the point of the argument. However, when your argument is based on the definition of a word, then having an accurate definition becomes relevant. You can't argue that certain discrimination is based on gender without being able to define the differences between the male and female genders.
#963 Apr 04 2013 at 3:13 PM Rating: Excellent
WHAT ARE YOU EVEN ARGUEING YOU PEDANTIC TWAT?!?!!!
____________________________
"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 **** out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#964 Apr 04 2013 at 3:52 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,575 posts
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm saying that from the perspective of everyone else using the restroom, there's no difference between a transgender female using the women's restroom and a non transgender male wearing a dress so that he can use the women's restroom.
Other way around but you're basically saying people see no difference between a woman in men's clothing and a transgender man?


Ellen Degeneres isn't trying to look like a man though. My statement assumes a non-transgender male disguising himself as a woman in order to use the women's restroom without being detected. I realize that I didn't explicitly state in in that sentence, but in context and given the several other times I've mentioned this, it should have been clear that what I was getting at.

My larger point is that we can't assume based on how someone looks what their gender is. Rachel made a comment about how if a trans female used the mens restroom, it would cause more of a stir than the other way around, and I countered that this is only because the others using the restroom don't know the **** of the person in the dress. And arguing for an exception if someone is trans doesn't work because there's no external means for us to determine if someone really is trans, or is just some perv disguising himself as a women in order to sneak into the womens restroom. Which was what I was talking about in the quoted sentence.

Quote:
Because I don't know about you but I think even Bijou can see that difference from a mile away.


True, but irrelevant. Get back to me when Ellen tries to use a mens restroom.

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 3:00pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#965 Apr 04 2013 at 3:58 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,575 posts


I believe the .2% number was in reference to how many were specifically transgender, which I think we can all agree is going to be a smallish subset of the whole GLBT group.


Also:

Quote:
Research, including this survey, also suggests that young women may be more likely than men to identify as bisexual.

"The pattern across surveys is that men are more likely to identify as gay, whereas women are more likely to identify as bisexual," explained social psychologist Justin Lehmiller. "We don't know exactly why this is, but many psychologists believe it results from women's sexuality being somewhat more 'flexible' or 'fluid' and men's sexuality being somewhat more 'fixed.' "


This is one of the many reasons I've concluded that a whole lot of people in social science fields are complete idiots. They really can't noodle out why this is? It's not magnets either. Sheesh!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#966 Apr 04 2013 at 4:14 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,966 posts
Gbaji wrote:
My larger point is that we can't assume based on how someone looks what their gender is.


That's the point that has been overlooked. A man with a female gender doesn't have to dress up like a woman. If that person were to walk into the woman's bathroom, locker room, dorm, etc. people would say something.

Belkira wrote:
What, exactly, do you guys seem to think goes on in the ladies room...? Pillow fights in our underwear and **** orgies? It's still a toilet for the love of Pete.


It really has less to do with wanting to go in a ladies room. I would argue that most guys have no desire to go inside one. Likewise, 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.

Also, I'm also referring to all areas where clothes are removed to include locker rooms, dorm rooms etc.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#967 Apr 04 2013 at 4:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
gbaji wrote:
This is one of the many reasons I've concluded that a whole lot of people in social science fields are complete idiots. They really can't noodle out why this is? It's not magnets either. Sheesh!

I'm sure they'd argue they have awesome amounts of emotional intelligence.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#968 Apr 04 2013 at 4:20 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,650 posts
gbaji wrote:
Ellen Degeneres isn't trying to look like a man though.
Well, she's not trying to.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#969 Apr 04 2013 at 4:20 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
490 posts
Quote:
It really has less to do with wanting to go in a ladies room. I would argue that most guys have no desire to go inside one. Likewise, 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.
Actually it wouldn't. It would only happen in the opposite case.
____________________________
#970 Apr 04 2013 at 4:34 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,575 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
This is one of the many reasons I've concluded that a whole lot of people in social science fields are complete idiots. They really can't noodle out why this is? It's not magnets either. Sheesh!

I'm sure they'd argue they have awesome amounts of emotional intelligence.


I just find it amazing how people in a field which presumably is supposed to know this stuff, either can't grasp, or more likely are unwilling to say the quite obvious reason for the statistics they're seeing. People's self perception is not 100% driven by internal examination (I'd argue it's not even 10%). It's a reflection of social norms, biases, and expectations. Yes, even people who think they're special unique snowflakes of individuality and free expression and whatnot are still really just reflecting a set of social norms. They may select different norms to reflect, but that's all they're doing. But no one who wants to get grant money in the field will directly say that.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#971 Apr 04 2013 at 4:39 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,575 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
Quote:
It really has less to do with wanting to go in a ladies room. I would argue that most guys have no desire to go inside one. Likewise, 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.
Actually it wouldn't. It would only happen in the opposite case.


Sigh... He means women sex, not women gender. 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 **** segregation) would somewhat require people with different genitalia using the same restroom.


Again, it comes down to which case we're more concerned about. And I'll repeat my assertion that for the overwhelming majority of our society, the issue of biological women sharing a restroom with biological men is the bigger concern. Doesn't matter what gender that woman associates with.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#972 Apr 04 2013 at 4:44 PM Rating: Excellent
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,569 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Some threads, actually contain information that many people did not know, and therefore, are informative. This thread consists almost entirely of gbaji and Alma. There is nothing informative in those posts.

It was briefly entertaining to scroll through entire pages of "User Ignored."
____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#973 Apr 04 2013 at 4:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 posts
gbaji wrote:
I just find it amazing how people in a field which presumably is supposed to know this stuff, either can't grasp, or more likely are unwilling to say the quite obvious reason for the statistics they're seeing. People's self perception is not 100% driven by internal examination (I'd argue it's not even 10%). It's a reflection of social norms, biases, and expectations. Yes, even people who think they're special unique snowflakes of individuality and free expression and whatnot are still really just reflecting a set of social norms. They may select different norms to reflect, but that's all they're doing. But no one who wants to get grant money in the field will directly say that.

Sounds like you're most of the sociologist type than a psychologist type. Smiley: wink

Not something I know tons about. Only thing I really have to add is that human beings are annoyingly complicated. You can give identical twins the same drug and they may react to it very differently. It's the type of thing that drives the more analytical scientist types bonkers. Of course, they argue the rest of us are just in the fields we are because we suck at math.

Crazy talk I tell you. Smiley: disappointed
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#974 Apr 04 2013 at 4:47 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
490 posts
Quote:
Sigh... He means women sex, not women gender.
Then maybe he should say that.

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 **** 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? 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?

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 6:50pm by Rachel9
____________________________
#975 Apr 04 2013 at 4:56 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,560 posts
Elinda wrote:
I'm kind of intrigued with the Alma - Rachel9 relationship. I'd like to see where it goes.


Eh, the Ross - Rachel one was more entertaining
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#976 Apr 04 2013 at 5:33 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,966 posts
Rachel9 wrote:
.
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? 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?

Edited, Apr 4th 2013 6:50pm by Rachel9


No one mentioned anything about trans having problems.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#977 Apr 04 2013 at 5:40 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
490 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
Avatar
****
8,966 posts
Like I said.. Nothing in there mentions or hints a trans having issues.

Edited, Apr 5th 2013 1:42am by Almalieque
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#979 Apr 04 2013 at 5:44 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,575 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 **** 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
Scholar
**
490 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
Avatar
****
8,966 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.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#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?
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#983 Apr 04 2013 at 6:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Really, Ellen's clothes aren't tailored or **** 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
Avatar
****
9,279 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.
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#985 Apr 04 2013 at 6:21 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,966 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Really, Ellen's clothes aren't tailored or **** 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.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#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
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#987 Apr 04 2013 at 6:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
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
******
31,575 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 **** 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
******
31,575 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
Avatar
****
8,966 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 **** 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 **** 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.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#991 Apr 04 2013 at 7:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
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 **** 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 **** 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
******
31,575 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
Scholar
**
490 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 **** 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
Avatar
****
8,966 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.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#995 Apr 04 2013 at 8:17 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
8,966 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 **** 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 penis, 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.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#996 Apr 04 2013 at 8:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,753 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
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#998 Apr 04 2013 at 8:33 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,575 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 **** 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 **** 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 **** 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 penis!
____________________________
"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 **** out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#1000 Apr 04 2013 at 8:39 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
490 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?
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 46 All times are in CDT
gbaji, Jophiel, Samira, someproteinguy, Turin, Xsarus, Anonymous Guests (40)