Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Transgender rightsFollow

#302 Mar 15 2013 at 8:05 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,023 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.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#303 Mar 15 2013 at 8:06 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 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
Avatar
*****
15,923 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
**
490 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
******
44,014 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
Avatar
*****
15,923 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
******
44,014 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
Avatar
****
9,023 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?
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#310 Mar 15 2013 at 8:52 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 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
******
44,014 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
Avatar
*****
15,923 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
******
44,014 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
Smasharoo wrote:
A quick browse through the WHO site didn't reveal anything immediately saying "Males who want to call themselves girls are really girls" in their main "Gender & Genetics" section and I wasn't up for browsing all 2,000+ hits on the word "transgender".

You can find the terminology in the GID section of ICD

Ok, then. I looked at the ICD-10 Classification of Mental & Behavioural Disorders: Diagnostic Criteria for Research and category F64 defines transexualism as a mental disorder marked by a desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite ***. In F64.2 (GID in children), it states that in females it is marked by an insistence that "she is a boy" or in males that "he is a girl" (emphasis mine). The online version of the ICD-10 off the WHO's site offers an abbreviated form of the same information.

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.

Edit: Here is the entire GID section from the work cited above:
F64 GENDER IDENTITY DISORDERS

F64.0 Transsexualism
A. Desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite ***, usually accompanied by the wish to make one's body as congruent as possible with one's preferred *** through surgery and hormonal treatment.
B. Presence of the transsexual identity for at least two years persistently.
C. Not a symptom of another mental disorder, such as schizophrenia, or associated with chromosome abnormality.

F64.1 Dual-role transvestism
A. Wearing clothes of the opposite *** in order to experience temporarily membership of the opposite ***.
B. Absence of any sexual motivation for the cross-dressing.
C. Absence of any desire to change permanently into the opposite ***.

F64.2 Gender identity disorder of childhood
For females:
A. Persistent and intense distress about being a girl, and a stated desire to be a boy (not merely a desire for any perceived cultural advantages from being a boy), or insistence that she is a boy.
B. Either (1) or (2):
(1) Persistent marked aversion to normative feminine clothing and insistence on wearing stereotypical masculine clothing, e.g. boys' underwear and other accessories.
(2) Persistent repudiation of female anatomic structures, as evidenced by at least one of the following:
(a) an assertion that she has, or will grow, a *****
(b) rejection of urinating in a sitting position
(c) assertion that she does not want to grow ******* or menstruate
C. The girl has not yet reached puberty.
D. The disorder must have been present for at least six months.

For males:
A. Persistent and intense distress about being a boy and an intense desire to be a girl or, more rarely, insistence that he is a girl.
B. Either (1) or (2):
(1) Preoccupation with female stereotypical activities, as shown by a preference for either cross-dressing or simulating female attire, or by an intense desire to participate in the games and pastimes of girls and rejection of male stereotypic toys, games and activities.
(2) Persistent repudiation of male anatomic structures, as indicated by at least one of the following repeated assertions:
(a) that he will grow up to become a woman (not merely in role)
(b) that his ***** or testes are disgusting or will disappear
(c) that it would be better not to have a ***** or testes.
C. The boy has not yet reached puberty.
D. The disorder must have been present for at least six months.

F64.8 Other gender identity disorders

F64.9 Gender identity disorder, unspecified


Edited, Mar 16th 2013 7:08am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#315 Mar 16 2013 at 5:29 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,023 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.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#316 Mar 16 2013 at 6:58 AM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 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
Avatar
****
9,023 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.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#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
******
29,436 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
****
6,470 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.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#323 Mar 16 2013 at 12:12 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 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
******
29,436 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.
#327 Mar 16 2013 at 2:22 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
9,023 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
I find anyone that even hints at suicide to be trash.


This would strike me as a very silly position to hold.


Selfish trash?
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#328 Mar 16 2013 at 4:12 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
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".

I guess? Subjectively you do seem to be coming across noticeably more dismissive and hostile of this than you would of, say, *** people. Maybe that's not happening, but it "feels" that way.
____________________________
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.

#329 Mar 16 2013 at 5:08 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
Subjectively you do seem to be coming across noticeably more dismissive and hostile of this than you would of, say, *** people. Maybe that's not happening, but it "feels" that way.

Maybe if we said *** people were really "Super-Heterosexual" and calling them anything else was wrong and evil I'd argue back against it the same way Smiley: laugh

But since we're on the topic, I'll not the dissonance between your regular taunts towards religion and this topic. Apparently saying you believe in a deity is mock-worthy because you know that's not true but saying "I'm a girl!" when you have a ***** is something you need to agree with and to do otherwise is hurtful and cruel. Not that I feel you need to change your relationship with religion but it's curious that you're so defensive of humoring one group and not the other. At least in the opposite one could fall back on "Well, there might be a God" but it's really hard to deny the existence of that *****.


Edited, Mar 16th 2013 6:45pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#330 Mar 16 2013 at 5:56 PM Rating: Good
Revolving Door Inspector
Avatar
*****
12,727 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
I find anyone that even hints at suicide to be trash.


This would strike me as a very silly position to hold.


From the outside looking in, its only natural he'd hold a position like that. Inside looking out, imo, suicide is just pure weakness.

I'm sure there are exceptions for situations where you're terminally ill, dying, etc, though.
____________________________
FFXI: Exodus @ San d'Oria since November 19, 2003, Siren Server
FFXIV: Turk Kalahai @ Gridania, Balmung Server
Rift: Kalahai @ Sanctum, Faeblight Server
Exo @ YouTube | Exo @ Tumblr | Exo @ Twitter | Cheese
#331 Mar 16 2013 at 6:52 PM Rating: Decent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
a practising US clinician, talking about transgender matters wrote:
the ICD-10 was completed in 1992 and we're awaiting a revision in 2015. The DSMIV was completed in 1998 and the DSMV will come out in 2014. Basically to talk about these manuals at this point, unfortunately is to talk about things that are out of date and will be revised soon. Most clinicians refer to more current research, their own professions code of conduct or what has been written and said about the upcoming manuals.


I'm in an epic skype, I'll argue the point later.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#332 Mar 16 2013 at 7:27 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
Apparently saying you believe in a deity is mock-worthy because you know that's not true but saying "I'm a girl!" when you have a ***** is something you need to agree with and to do otherwise is hurtful and cruel. Not that I feel you need to change your relationship with religion but it's curious that you're so defensive of humoring one group and not the other.

You don't need to agree with anything, little buddy, but you'll note I don't mask my feelings about religion with rationalizations and claims of tolerance. I'm not particularly tolerant of people who believe in "a higher power". I think it's an obvious failing, a weakness. I think it's harmful, I think it's particularly harmful to children. I think it makes critical thinking more difficult, and lays the groundwork for being sold a whole slew of lies by various groups with whatever agendas.

See the diffidence? I don't have to play pretend. I don't really care if TG people make you uncomfortable. This whole elaborate dance you're doing for the sake of justifying a little soft bigotry, though...what's the point? Just say you don't like it. It's ok. We already know you believe in God, no one's holding you to some standard of reason.

Edited, Mar 16th 2013 9:27pm by Smasharoo
____________________________
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.

#333 Mar 16 2013 at 7:33 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Awwww... you sure you don't want to pat me on the head and humor me and say "You're absolutely right"? I mean, you would if I told you I had a ******, right?

Now my feelings are hurt Smiley: frown
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#334 Mar 16 2013 at 8:02 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
Awwww... you sure you don't want to pat me on the head and humor me and say "You're absolutely right"? I mean, you would if I told you I had a ******, right?

No, that would be pretty odd. If you told me you wanted to be called "she" I really can't see that bothering me in the slightest. I guess I could see it being an issue if I felt threatened or something? Actually I'm sort of guessing, I can't really imagine it being an issue.

Maybe if I thought people were faking it so they could...live some sort of marginalized life where they're regarded as freakish by large segments of society? To feel...special, I guess? It's hard to understand what the motivation would be. We're at a point where it would certainly just be easier to out as *** if was a mask for that, there are 10000 other ailments one could claim to have if sympathy were the goal. So if we can stipulate that's probably not occurring and they genuinely feel the way they say they do, why would you be offended by someone correcting your pronoun usage?

"You mean 'She"
"Oh, right, ok, whatever"

or:
"You mean: She"
"Wait, there's a *****, I mean "He" how dare you to presume to tell me which pronoun to use to refer to a class of people I was certain barely existed in any significant way 10 posts ago! I'll actually link to a dictionary definition of the word 'He' as if that had some sort of provenance here! People like you aren't allowed to tel people like me which word to use, OH NO!"

I'm assuming it went something like that inside your head, but probably with cartoon Jesus vegetables?
____________________________
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.

#335 Mar 16 2013 at 8:12 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
No, that would be pretty odd. If you told me you wanted to be called "she" I really can't see that bothering me in the slightest.

As I said, you'd be happy to humor me despite all evidence to the contrary.

Quote:
I'll actually link to a dictionary definition of the word 'He' as if that had some sort of provenance here!

That was in response to someone saying it fit the standard definition of "girl". Maybe you feel we need the ICD Or maybe Wikipedia! to look up the standard definition?

Quote:
I'm assuming it went something like that inside your head, but probably with cartoon Jesus vegetables?

You must feel threatened, you bigoty hate-filled hater-head bigot!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#336 Mar 16 2013 at 8:25 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
That was in response to someone saying it fit the standard definition of "girl"

Ok? I still haven't read the exchange. I still don't think it matters much. Your tone this entire thread has been "Please, we're not going to do that for those people, don't be ridiculous." Which is fine if you feel that way. The part I don't understand is all the posts justifying it, trying to establish this is just an objective thing, and that you're suddenly SUPER concerned with grammar and word definitions because you know, you are NOT bigoted! Not needed. No one's fooled into thinking you're fine with TG people, but no one thinks you're actively trying to make their lives harder, either, It's PAINFULLY obvious you've never had any significant interaction with a TG person in your private life, I'd imagine none whatsoever. So, xenophobia and all that, I guess. It's just weird to me.
____________________________
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.

#337 Mar 16 2013 at 8:32 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
Maybe you feel we need the ICD to look up the standard definition?

As previously noted, I think it's as important as how "marriage" is defined in the dictionary to the subject of *** marriage. Ie: Not very. I notice that metaphor hasn't interested you much in your replies. I could hazard guesses why, I suppose. I'm sure it'll turn out that it wasn't worth dignifying with a response. I'll ask Nexa about the ICD thing tomorrow. It may have been a revision or a yearbook or something. It's genuinely not something I made up. I could certainly be mus-remembering, that happens, but not really that often. Actually, I won't. Let's just go with you're right and I was wrong. I can't imagine anything changing if I found it, anyway.
____________________________
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.

#338 Mar 16 2013 at 8:42 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
That was in response to someone saying it fit the standard definition of "girl"
Ok? I still haven't read the exchange. I still don't think it matters much.

You didn't read the exchange you're making some half-assed attempt to taunt me about but it doesn't matter anyway.

Well, okay then! Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#339 Mar 16 2013 at 8:48 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Exodus wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
I find anyone that even hints at suicide to be trash.


This would strike me as a very silly position to hold.


From the outside looking in, its only natural he'd hold a position like that. Inside looking out, imo, suicide is just pure weakness.

I'm sure there are exceptions for situations where you're terminally ill, dying, etc, though.


Is that a defense? Setting aside "pure weakness" for a second - he said "anyone that even hints at suicide is trash." That's not quite the same thing as saying that they're weak.

"Pure weakness" itself is a gross oversimplification; as convenient a mental dissonance as the one that lets some rich folks believe that the poor are only poor because they deserve as much.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#340 Mar 16 2013 at 9:08 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
You didn't read the exchange you're making some half-assed attempt to taunt me about but it doesn't matter anyway.

Making half attempts to taunt people is my entire persona, can't be that shocking. In all seriousness, though, you seem to have some sort of issue with this. Maybe you think it's not real or is so rare as to be effectively meaningless, I don't know. Maybe that's not the case at all, obviously you have a better idea of how you feel about it than I do.

I have an issue with very young onset, personally. It's a hard sell to me that a 5 year old feels like he should have been a girl. If my son told me that at 5, I probably wouldn't encourage him to live as a girl at 5. It would be equally hard for me to identify a 5 year old as ***. It doesn't seem to me to be something that would be fixed at that stage of life, or if it were, not to have presented that early. As a parent, I think I'd choose the "well, let's try living as a boy and if you still feel this way in a few years we'll do something about it" route sooner than the "let's make you the focus of the school and fight to change things for you" route. I think there's damage to be done there, trying to accommodate obviously socially deviant feelings at that age, regardless of how genuine they may be. So, while I'd support letting the kid use the girls bathroom, it's that I think there's no harm in it, not that it's a laudable crusade against injustice. I'm sure that makes me bigoted in some way, and I'm ok with that. You should be too, in my opinion, if that's the case.

The god thing on the other hand, I really don't understand. You're too smart to not realize it's a ludicrous proposition that you lucked into being born into the correct geographic area and point in the history of humanity to happen get the myth that turns out to be true. I imagine you like the tradition and the idea that there's something more to life, etc, but the specificity doesn't trouble you?
____________________________
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.

#341 Mar 16 2013 at 9:16 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
Making half attempts to taunt people is my entire persona, can't be that shocking.

Well, it was shockingly poor Smiley: laugh

Quote:
In all seriousness, though, you seem to have some sort of issue with this.

Not especially but there's nothing I could say to convince someone otherwise. Hence ignoring all the "You're so threatened!" and "You obviously have a problem", etc remarks. Playing the whole shame-emotion card is pretty overdone but I can't stop you from doing it. No sense in responding to what's obviously bait though. I honestly don't spend much time thinking about the topic at all but, regardless, don't buy into the whole "You're a girl if you just say you are" schtick and haven't seen anything to the contrary to logically say why I should. Just appeals to emotion and shame for not playing along.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#342 Mar 16 2013 at 9:27 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts

Not especially but there's nothing I could say to convince someone otherwise. Hence ignoring all the "You're so threatened!" and "You obviously have a problem", etc remarks. Playing the whole shame-emotion card is pretty overdone but I can't stop you from doing it.


I don't think there's shame involved in either case, really. I'm just honestly telling you that you seem to be treating this topic radically differently than you treat others. Which you do with a few others, but it's fairly unusual and immediately noticeable. I felt the same way when you were couching hitting kids in terms of "oh a little swat on the bottom never hurt anyone" or whatever. It's bizarre to me that you hit your kids. I can't think of a better word for it. No interest in re-hashing that topic, but my point was that it's the same feeling in this thread for me. It's not understanding the motivation or reasoning behind your posts, which is unusual. Then again, maybe that's all me. I mean it's known that you're a complicated man and that no one understands you but your woman.


No sense in responding to what's obviously bait though.

I promise you it isn't. Perhaps someone else will chime in and feel the same as I do. Obviously I'm not someone anyone should worry about being held in high esteem by.

I honestly don't spend much time thinking about the topic at all but, regardless, don't buy into the whole "You're a girl if you just say you are" schtick and haven't seen anything to the contrary to logically say why I should. Just appeals to emotion and shame for not playing along.

It appeals to compassion. Why wouldn't you "play along" and call someone who feels they are a woman "a woman"? To remind them that they aren't? They know, trust me.

"that there should be no division in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another. And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it."

Some ******* from Tarsus said that once. It might apply here.
____________________________
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.

#343 Mar 16 2013 at 9:39 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
I mean it's known that you're a complicated man and that no one understands you but your woman.

No, I puzzle her too.

Quote:
It appeals to compassion.

i.e., "emotion"

Quote:
Why wouldn't you "play along" and call someone who feels they are a woman "a woman"?

I likely would "in real life". Partially out of kindness, partially out of not caring enough to make it a point. As an abstract, I think it makes as much sense as saying "That there fellow is a gorilla. He told me it's so. Be careful, because that means he can lift over a thousand pounds, climb trees and is threatened by prolonged eye contact."
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#344 Mar 16 2013 at 9:48 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
As an abstract, I think it makes as much sense as saying "That there fellow is a gorilla. He told me it's so. Be careful, because that means he can lift over a thousand pounds, climb trees and is threatened by prolonged eye contact."

This crystallizes what I'm saying when I talk it about it seeming unlike you. The above essentially dismisses GID as a legitimate phenomenon. People who understand psychology far better than either of us seem to be fairly certain it is. If the G stood for Gorilla instead of Gender and it was a pervasive, then it would be a legitimate comparison. It's a thing. Really.

I don't quibble with midgets wanting to be called "little people", nor do I link midget and argue with them if they want to be called little people.

I mean, I do pick them up by the feet and shout "You're a fucking a midget! Say it, Say I'm a midget!!!" if I meet one, but that's different, I'm usually trying to find their pot of gold by then.

Edit: Oh and it feels like the "if we let gays get married then people will marry dogs!" stuff, too. There's not much of a slope to slide down here, that I see.

Edited, Mar 16th 2013 11:52pm by Smasharoo
____________________________
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.

#345 Mar 16 2013 at 9:54 PM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
I promise you it isn't. Perhaps someone else will chime in and feel the same as I do.


I'll raise my hand. Joph's approach to the topic weird's me out. Stuff like this:

"...the whole "You're a girl if you just say you are" schtick"

(bolding mine)

...is oddly flippant and dismissive, especially for a topic like this.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#346 Mar 16 2013 at 10:20 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
This crystallizes what I'm saying when I talk it about it seeming unlike you. The above essentially dismisses GID as a legitimate phenomenon.

It is legitimate. It is, per the previously mentioned texts, a legitimate mental disorder. It's a state of perceiving something that isn't actually true. A "desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite ***" because they are not actually a member of that ***.

How is this different from any other disorder where you perceive something that isn't true?

Quote:
I don't quibble with midgets wanting to be called "little people", nor do I link midget and argue with them if they want to be called little people.

Me neither. Because neither term is contradictory to who they are. If they demanded to be called giants, I'd probably have a different opinion.

Edited, Mar 16th 2013 11:35pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#347 Mar 16 2013 at 10:38 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
It is legitimate. It is, per the previously mentioned texts, a legitimate mental disorder. It's a state of perceiving something that isn't actually true. A "desire to live and be accepted as a member of the opposite ***" because they are not actually a member of that ***.

How is this different from any other disorder where you perceive something that isn't true?


Because gender is more complex than *** organs? It's a "disorder" because there needs to be a diagnosis for treatment. Surgery or whatever the endgame ends up being for each person. I don't think the feeling among clinicians is that it's any more of a "disorder" than begin *** is. Or to phrase it more clearly, the "disorder" is being born the wrong gender not "Perceiving something that isn't true" You seem to view it as Billy hallucinating that he has a ****** and no *****.

If we accept that differences in gender extend beyond anatomy, which current research indicates seems to be the case, then Billy might enjoy "The View" and hate boxing...or whatever the criteria is. I don't know how it works in someone else head. I can't project myself into the POV of someone in that circumstance. It doesn't seem that unlikely to me that there could be a genetic component to a "female brain" that can be distinct from "female chromosome" and occasionally result in someone being born with the wrong brain/genitals. Much crazier genetic expression happens fairly frequently. You can rest assured, though, that many many methods to "correct" the misconception that someone is actually another gender have been attempted, with virtually no success. Far less success than those attempted for people who seem to think they are a hat or broccoli, or the 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.

#348 Mar 16 2013 at 10:44 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
Me neither. Because neither term is contradictory to who they are. If they demanded to be called giants, I'd probably have a different opinion.

You realize I understand the argument your making, right? I get it. You're correct, it's not a great metaphor. There aren't any. Gender identity is a complex thing. Why can't a boy who feels born a girl be just as happy assuming the gender role he sees girls performing? I don't know. They aren't though. This isn't my field, it's Nexa's, actually. If you want to know why and how people organize to kill trans people, THAT I can speak to with some authority.
____________________________
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.

#349 Mar 16 2013 at 11:00 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
Because gender is more complex than *** organs?

*** organs are, however, the primary determiner we used for ascribing the labels "boy", "girl", "man", "woman", etc.

Quote:
Or to phrase it more clearly, the "disorder" is being born the wrong gender not "Perceiving something that isn't true" You seem to view it as Billy hallucinating that he has a ****** and no *****.

Not at all. I quoted what the disorder was (although in children it can apparently manifest as a belief that they will grow the opposite genitalia). Although, neither the term "Gender Identity Disorder" nor the definition suggest that the disorder is being "born the wrong gender". The disorder is in their gender identity. Again, perceiving something that is not accurate (that they are a girl). Obviously I'm not an expert or anything but the sources I've been turned to don't seem exceptionally ambiguous on the point.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#350 Mar 16 2013 at 11:03 PM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
The most important *** organ is the brain.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#351 Mar 16 2013 at 11:03 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
BTW: I find the specific poster in question to be annoying, also. You can understand what it is though, right? A sense of empowerment likely after years of struggle. She's probably fairly screwed up. In my anecdotal experience, that's pretty common. It would seem fairly difficult to end up well adjusted and philosophical after dealing with a lifetime of being stigmatized and ostracized. It would seem to have to suck a lot. I'm equally annoyed by deaf people who are angered when others have surgery to restore hearing, or people who say how great their autistic kid is and how it's really a blessing. All of that I have little patience for, but it's usually a coping mechanism, not malice. Or maybe she's just an asshole. I haven't seen any mental or physical deviation that rules that out.
____________________________
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.

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 51 All times are in CDT