The point being that it's reasonable to institute rules and a code of conduct which basically requires people to behave in a way which is more or less professional.
Yes, but who's responsible for enforcing such rules on women?
I work in a 95% female environment. Women are complete pigs, it's just that they hide most of it around men.
There are many things where men aren't expected and aren't exactly welcome.
And lord have mercy on any transsexual that gets clocked in one of those places. Females are far more sexist and closed-minded than any male I know.
Let me share my experience with both genders when caught as the other gender in a place I shouldn't be as that gender.
There's a reason I use the men's bathroom at bars, even if I'm passing. It's just not worth the drama to use the bathroom of the gender I'm presenting as.
A guy who sees someone apparently female in the men's room is sometimes surprised or shocked. Sometimes the man will become angry, especially if he's older. But yet, at the end of the day, I have not had a single serious problem with being apparently female, even fixing my hair or something, in the men's room. No police, not a ton of drama.
Now, I don't know myself what it's like to be a guy caught in the women's room, but from what I understand, it involves the police, drama, screaming, more drama, and signs that get posted at clubs saying that "crossdressers" must use the men's room. Then you have to show your papers and make sure you always have that letter from the psychologist that says you may use the women's room. Even though that really carries no legal weight and you're still getting your ass escorted out of the bar anyway.
No, females are not the under-privileged sex anymore, if they ever were.
I rarely... actually, NEVER hear about that.
How many guys do you know who want to be in on a baby shower?
Why do we have to keep acting as if they are?
Because nobody understands exactly how men and women are different. It's frustrating trying to relate to a society that believes men and women are different, but in all the wrong ways and for all the wrong reasons.
Once people learn to be as indifferent to a starving woman with 3 starving kids as a man who's failed to provide his family with food, once people learn that those two situations are the same thing, then we might get some true gender equality going on.
Women should not need to be coddled little children. Men and women are different, but women are certainly not weak. They do not need to be coddled. There aren't enough women contributing to wikipedia? What the hell is a man going to do about that? Anything a man does is, by definition, a man contributing to the project. He can't force women to participate.
Look into the drama surrounding a transsexual in an abusive relationship who tries to get into a battered women's shelter, and the truth shall set ye free.
It's a chauvinism designed to keep women irresponsible little children. The worst part is that, for the most part, its women who are propagating it.
Women want to be able to walk through the door to the male side, but they don't want to let anyone in from the other side.
A woman just has to sit back and let her body just do its animal functions, because there will always be a man to rush in and save her
whether personally or by proxy of government assistance.
There will always be someone to feel sorry for her.
A woman has no need for something like wikipedia. Wikipedia has man-knowledge, things that men write down so the next generation can build upon it. Woman-knowledge, on the other hand, is always about transient, animal things, like their period or their pregnancy, things they feel in the moment. Woman-knowledge is always renewed, but yet stagnant. Woman-knowledge is not knowledge for building and improving, like man-knowledge is.
But hey, if you had that deal, would you want to give it up?
there is something about your project that is leaving a number of potential contributors on the table. What is that?
This may be a shock to you, but men and women view knowledge differently. Women find written knowledge and "facts" to be intimidating, sometimes offensive, and some have even gone so far as to compare knowledge to rape. If females don't want to use wikipedia, why force them?
just like you can't prove the non-existence of something.
There's no positive integer x such that x * x = 2. The proof is left as an exercise for you.
Pure mathematics is a completely different realm from the real world. Nobody even understands the mechanism of autism, so providing a mathematical or pure logic proof that a certain vaccination does or does not cause autism given certain circumstances is not possible.
Couldn't tell ya, but all that I know about this subject is that TomTom wants me to believe that as a man, I'm completely incapable of navigating without their product.
Unfortunately for them, I've driven a big truck in 45 states, and I'm pretty sure that paper maps are sufficient for my navigation needs. I've considered buying a GPS for geocaching, but TomTom's commercials have guaranteed that if I do buy a GPS, it won't be one of theirs.
I AM NOT RECOMMENDING, SUGGESTING, OR OTHERWISE INCITING ANY ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES.
Then you go on to say
If you have 250,000 people who believe in your side enough to even show up, you have an army. Imagine those people walking into the US Capitol Building (and other assorted buildings [congressional office buildings]).
Right now I'm imagining it, except they get greeted with riot police telling them to go home because they are demonstrating without a permit.
The rally to restore sanity (and Glenn Beck's rally for that matter) only took place because the powers that be knew that they would do next to nothing.
Would they turn and run as soon as the first police officer showed up? Would they run home after the first tear gas grenade is thrown into the crowd, or the first rubber bullet fired? Unfortunately, I would guess that they would.
Well, they damned better unless you ACTUALLY ARE inciting an illegal activity.
The civil rights movement didn't care about breaking the laws they disagreed with. That's the difference. Non-violent? Yes. Illegal? Also yes.
Now what will happen is that more people will grow up in religious households than not; but that I see as a good thing, as it will decrease the overall fear of religion from people who don't have much direct experience with it.
I would have to disagree with your premise. I grew up in a christian fundamentalist household, and it scared me away from all religion. I am currently atheist.
However, I've realized a certain need in my life for a higher power, but I am so scared of religion and all of the hate that comes with it that I cannot bring myself to go back to it.
Could you imagine the millions of outraged facebook users
Yes, I can. "I hope the government stops them thar terrerists so I can has mah facebookwebs back! Those terrerists hates our facebook-freedoms!"
No, don't pretend that anyone will blame the government for using this power.
They'll blame the terrorists, or pedophiles, or homosexuals, or scientists, or whoever the government is blaming.
They'll view themselves as patriots supporting their morally superior government
by agreeing with the government's morally superior cause.
I hate to reply to my own comment, but doesn't Lady Liberty say (figuratively), "Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free?"
I mean, in a free market, don't you want all the actors you can get? Why do we even have social services that WE can leech off but we must deny to THEM? Why do we even have welfare, food stamps, etc?
That's a serious question. I used to know the answer when I was a young man, but now I don't know anymore.
We don't want people coming to our shores or crossing our borders to leach off of the labor of others.
What I have never understood about this whole hysterical debate about illegal immigration, or immigration in general, is why doesn't anyone ask this: what loopholes are these illegal aliens exploiting? Why can't we just deny hospital service, welfare, food stamps, etc to illegal aliens?
Perhaps I have a bit inhumane suggestion as far as hospital service goes, and rather arbitrary in a "capitalist" medical system, but who's letting them leech?
Seventy years ago if you'd been found out you'd have been murdered. And it's getting better all the time.
Yes, and I'm thankful I only lost my family when I let them know.
In hindsight, I'm lucky that's all that happened, but my family is a little militia-type "the end times are here" kooky anyway.
It's not a big list, but here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unlawfully_killed_transgender_people
The flip side is that I'm always flabbergasted when I talk to a transsexual woman who has an ongoing relationship with a family that accepts her, and that seems to happen frequently.
I probably could patch things up with my family and may do it some day, but what I guess it comes down to is I had stubborn and somewhat loopy parents who had a stubborn and somewhat loopy child.
You mention that you get guys flirting with you, but I'm 100% male inside and out (body and brain), yet gays still hit on me.
That's probably 70% correct in my case since usually my voice gives me away
(which supports your point that things are a lot better for trans folks these days than even 30 years ago, say),
although every now and then someone will think I'm really female while I'm dressed as a male
which is just plain odd.
Without going into details, though, guys that I'm 100% sure are straight have flirted with and/or "ma'amed" me.
And yes, I think there have been a few guys who have flirted with me who were gay or bi, too.
This may shock and amaze you, but in most cases from what I understand, this surgery would not be needed for a male-to-female transsexual to sound female. A masculinized voicebox is, in general, capable of producing a female-sounding voice with practice.
(Anyway, when I use my male voice while dressed as a male,
it astounds me that in spite of how obvious my birth sex ought to be, some people still think I'm female like that!
Just imagine how easy it'll be for me to "trick" one of you boys once I finally get my female voice figured out, lol.)
I hope this information doesn't turn you into a nervous wreck the next time you meet a cute girl!
That's odd, I Googled "transsexual woman" and got something completely different. I think I'll wear that shoe instead.
Pro tip: women born transsexual usually have two options: 1.) Gender transition. 2.) Suicide.
As a culture we need to get over this idea that someone who has the wrong physical sex for their gender
goes through gender transition to satisfy some sexual thrill.
It's wrong, completely wrong. There's a mountain of evidence that says that it's just simply factually incorrect.
You might as well link me to the Flat Earth Society as "proof" that the world is flat.
It's a superstition, nothing more, and a rotten one as it causes people to commit suicide and breaks apart families.
Now, that being said, transsexual women are sexual beings. Most people (not all) are.
Yes, transsexual women have sex, but most have sex like a normal woman would, with their boyfriend
(or girlfriend) in bed with the door closed and curtains shut
(I'm assuming, but that's how I do it personally, ymmv, etc).
However, some people who are sexual like to produce pornography.
Here's the other trick.
Because medical insurance won't cover any of my costs related to gender transition
(some plans do, and the AMA has encouraged health insurance providers to cover at least the sex change surgery itself
and meds iirc),
I've considered whether I'd want to be one of the people that gets returned when searching Google for "tranny."
I'm not sure I'm desperate enough yet to even look into it,
but I imagine some of those girls are up there for the sole reason that they're getting paid
and gender transition is EXPENSIVE.
Guess what? I'd guarantee you that most of those girls you see when you Google "tranny"
were once 7-year old boys who wished they'd just been born female.
(Does anyone have research on transsexual women who participate in pornography and what their reasons are?
I assume most are doing it for the same reason cisgendered women do it,
but I'm curious if any/how many transsexual women do it simply because of anti-trans discrimination
[thus perpetuating this self-fulfilling prophecy that a transsexual woman can only be a sex worker, but I digress].)
However, a 7-year old boy who wants to kill himself because he can't be a girl is NOT a sexual being.
It's time to wake up and realize that transgender feelings aren't a fetish that gets turned on at the age of 12!
Yes, children have transgender feelings.
Why don't you try asking a "tranny" sometime and getting your head out of your ass and listening?
Most transsexual women have known that something was wrong and have wanted to be girls since they were 7, many younger than that.
If you're going to tell me that a 7-year old boy who wants to be a girl is exhibiting a sexual fetish,
you need some serious help.
If it's ok with you that the same person, years later, kills themselves because of the things people like you spout off,
you are a sick individual.
Oh, by the way, don't forget about the gentlemen.
Apparently, "women" get sex changes, too, and then they live as men,
so it's not even something unique to perverted "men,"
as I imagine trans women are in your own little world.
Bone structure. The female skeleton is quite unlike the male skeleton, and no amount of surgery will hide it.
I was going to moderate this thread to hell and back, but decided to reply instead since you have a valid point.
Please pardon my rant since it's not a direct reply to you, but more a commentary on this thread as a whole.
I'm lucky. Despite my male birth, I have a relatively easy time passing and I even get guys flirting with me.
Not all trans women are as lucky as I am in that department.
This issue is why it is critical that transgendered children are identified and diagnosed before puberty.
Transsexualism might be a joke to some men who are insecure and a threat to some women who are insecure
(or vise-versa), but it is a very real aspect of the human condition and is not going away, ever.
Well, I should correct myself. If transgendered children were diagnosed before puberty,
you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a trans woman and a "real woman,"
and man-in-a-dress transsexuality as we know it today would cease to exist.
There would be no need for expensive cosmetic surgery.
(Yes, it is cosmetic, but if there were something about you that made people constantly
and vehemently [and sometimes violently] insist that you aren't the gender you are,
you'd want to do something about it.)
And no, the argument that they aren't women because they can't have children doesn't fly,
unless you want to explain to several thousand "real" women that they need to sign up for selective service
and start using the men's room because they can't have children either.
Biology is messy.
Can't we just finally conclude in this day and age where women can vote, have careers, and own property
that gender is a silly anachronism?
Sure, the vast majority of people are either men or women, even the homosexual ones,
but not everyone is strictly one or the other, and we can split hairs about what exactly
a man or woman is and discuss androgen-insensitive women and kleinfelter's syndrome to hell and back,
but I think it's easier just to say biology is messy and get on with life.
*sigh* Anyway, I know I am asking too much. Thanks for you time.
It's always funny how upset the free market worshiping glibertarians here get when companies pull this shit.
The owner of a Dairy Queen once called the cops on me because I was disappointed about the quality of his product.
That made me upset.
Now here's the real trick: I don't go to Dairy Queen anymore, but I still get ice cream. Life goes on. Someone else gets my money instead. Would I like to see Dairy Queen go out of business or at least give me some free food to keep me as a customer? Sure,
but it's not going to happen.
That's the beauty of the free market. I can visit any number of other places to get my ice cream,
and if Dairy Queen doesn't need my money, I don't have to give it to them. Problem solved.
(I actually do have a Motorola phone, not a droid,
but I will never buy Motorola again for other problems with the phone.)
100 to 1 still means there are 3 million of you, if you could congregate in one state then you should be able to guide political processes without worrying about the mouth breathing masses.
Yeah, but then they'd have to vote to make it happen.
ID is just wrong because A) it isn't science. B) it assumes taking the BIble literally.
It's amazing how people like to take the bible literally when homosexuality and gender transition come up
(which, despite what the bible says, are not choices [well, gender transition is a choice, the other option is suicide
for affected individuals] and are TOTALLY DIFFERENT).
So, ID is wrong because it assumes taking the bible literally,
but it's A-OK to back up homophobia and transphobia with the bible?
so taking a specific translation and treating it as word-for-word literal truth is a simplistic and juvenile approach.
Really, now. Again, as soon as throwing trans people and gay men under a bus gets questioned,
suddenly now it's A-OK to take a specific translation and treat it as word-for-word literal truth.
While you're posting links, can you link to the data that shows AGW?
What I mean is, it's undeniable that temperature is increasing.
However, I also understand there was a glacier covering most of the land where I live currently,
and that it would be hard to explain where that glacier went without global temperatures rising.
The only part I don't comprehend about this debate is jumping to the conclusion that SUVs are responsible
(as much as I hate SUVs and people who like SUVs)
or even supposing humans can do anything at all about the temperature increase.
OTOH, we probably could cool the planet if we really wanted,
but it might be an engineering project instead, and for all we know,
we'd be costing ourselves the opportunity by pursuing a self-flagellation exercise instead.
I'll look at the data tomorrow when I'm more awake.
Thanks for the link.
First of all, despite the popular view[who?] of religion you espouse, most religions[which religions?] and religious individuals[who?] are open to challenges to their faith.[citation needed] Admittedly this is a matter of degree, but to suggest that religions react to every challenge with "blasphemy!" and "you heathen!" is a gross mischaracterization.[citation needed]
Slashdot Mirror
The point being that it's reasonable to institute rules and a code of conduct which basically requires people to behave in a way which is more or less professional.
Yes, but who's responsible for enforcing such rules on women? I work in a 95% female environment. Women are complete pigs, it's just that they hide most of it around men.
There are many things where men aren't expected and aren't exactly welcome.
And lord have mercy on any transsexual that gets clocked in one of those places. Females are far more sexist and closed-minded than any male I know.
Let me share my experience with both genders when caught as the other gender in a place I shouldn't be as that gender.
There's a reason I use the men's bathroom at bars, even if I'm passing. It's just not worth the drama to use the bathroom of the gender I'm presenting as.
A guy who sees someone apparently female in the men's room is sometimes surprised or shocked. Sometimes the man will become angry, especially if he's older. But yet, at the end of the day, I have not had a single serious problem with being apparently female, even fixing my hair or something, in the men's room. No police, not a ton of drama.
Now, I don't know myself what it's like to be a guy caught in the women's room, but from what I understand, it involves the police, drama, screaming, more drama, and signs that get posted at clubs saying that "crossdressers" must use the men's room. Then you have to show your papers and make sure you always have that letter from the psychologist that says you may use the women's room. Even though that really carries no legal weight and you're still getting your ass escorted out of the bar anyway.
No, females are not the under-privileged sex anymore, if they ever were.
I rarely... actually, NEVER hear about that.
How many guys do you know who want to be in on a baby shower?
Why do we have to keep acting as if they are?
Because nobody understands exactly how men and women are different. It's frustrating trying to relate to a society that believes men and women are different, but in all the wrong ways and for all the wrong reasons.
Once people learn to be as indifferent to a starving woman with 3 starving kids as a man who's failed to provide his family with food, once people learn that those two situations are the same thing, then we might get some true gender equality going on.
Women should not need to be coddled little children. Men and women are different, but women are certainly not weak. They do not need to be coddled. There aren't enough women contributing to wikipedia? What the hell is a man going to do about that? Anything a man does is, by definition, a man contributing to the project. He can't force women to participate.
Look into the drama surrounding a transsexual in an abusive relationship who tries to get into a battered women's shelter, and the truth shall set ye free.
It's a chauvinism designed to keep women irresponsible little children. The worst part is that, for the most part, its women who are propagating it. Women want to be able to walk through the door to the male side, but they don't want to let anyone in from the other side.
A woman just has to sit back and let her body just do its animal functions, because there will always be a man to rush in and save her whether personally or by proxy of government assistance. There will always be someone to feel sorry for her. A woman has no need for something like wikipedia. Wikipedia has man-knowledge, things that men write down so the next generation can build upon it. Woman-knowledge, on the other hand, is always about transient, animal things, like their period or their pregnancy, things they feel in the moment. Woman-knowledge is always renewed, but yet stagnant. Woman-knowledge is not knowledge for building and improving, like man-knowledge is.
But hey, if you had that deal, would you want to give it up?
there is something about your project that is leaving a number of potential contributors on the table. What is that?
This may be a shock to you, but men and women view knowledge differently. Women find written knowledge and "facts" to be intimidating, sometimes offensive, and some have even gone so far as to compare knowledge to rape. If females don't want to use wikipedia, why force them?
just like you can't prove the non-existence of something.
There's no positive integer x such that x * x = 2. The proof is left as an exercise for you.
Pure mathematics is a completely different realm from the real world. Nobody even understands the mechanism of autism, so providing a mathematical or pure logic proof that a certain vaccination does or does not cause autism given certain circumstances is not possible.
Couldn't tell ya, but all that I know about this subject is that TomTom wants me to believe that as a man, I'm completely incapable of navigating without their product.
Unfortunately for them, I've driven a big truck in 45 states, and I'm pretty sure that paper maps are sufficient for my navigation needs. I've considered buying a GPS for geocaching, but TomTom's commercials have guaranteed that if I do buy a GPS, it won't be one of theirs.
I AM NOT RECOMMENDING, SUGGESTING, OR OTHERWISE INCITING ANY ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES.
Then you go on to say
If you have 250,000 people who believe in your side enough to even show up, you have an army. Imagine those people walking into the US Capitol Building (and other assorted buildings [congressional office buildings]).
Right now I'm imagining it, except they get greeted with riot police telling them to go home because they are demonstrating without a permit.
The rally to restore sanity (and Glenn Beck's rally for that matter) only took place because the powers that be knew that they would do next to nothing.
Would they turn and run as soon as the first police officer showed up? Would they run home after the first tear gas grenade is thrown into the crowd, or the first rubber bullet fired? Unfortunately, I would guess that they would.
Well, they damned better unless you ACTUALLY ARE inciting an illegal activity.
The civil rights movement didn't care about breaking the laws they disagreed with. That's the difference. Non-violent? Yes. Illegal? Also yes.
Very true.
Now what will happen is that more people will grow up in religious households than not; but that I see as a good thing, as it will decrease the overall fear of religion from people who don't have much direct experience with it.
I would have to disagree with your premise. I grew up in a christian fundamentalist household, and it scared me away from all religion. I am currently atheist.
However, I've realized a certain need in my life for a higher power, but I am so scared of religion and all of the hate that comes with it that I cannot bring myself to go back to it.
Could you imagine the millions of outraged facebook users
Yes, I can. "I hope the government stops them thar terrerists so I can has mah facebookwebs back! Those terrerists hates our facebook-freedoms!"
No, don't pretend that anyone will blame the government for using this power. They'll blame the terrorists, or pedophiles, or homosexuals, or scientists, or whoever the government is blaming. They'll view themselves as patriots supporting their morally superior government by agreeing with the government's morally superior cause.
My personal favorite is the war on alcohol, because that one was lost.
I hate to reply to my own comment, but doesn't Lady Liberty say (figuratively), "Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free?"
I mean, in a free market, don't you want all the actors you can get? Why do we even have social services that WE can leech off but we must deny to THEM? Why do we even have welfare, food stamps, etc?
That's a serious question. I used to know the answer when I was a young man, but now I don't know anymore.
We don't want people coming to our shores or crossing our borders to leach off of the labor of others.
What I have never understood about this whole hysterical debate about illegal immigration, or immigration in general, is why doesn't anyone ask this: what loopholes are these illegal aliens exploiting? Why can't we just deny hospital service, welfare, food stamps, etc to illegal aliens? Perhaps I have a bit inhumane suggestion as far as hospital service goes, and rather arbitrary in a "capitalist" medical system, but who's letting them leech?
I wonder if I can sue them under the Americans with Disabilities act...
Not any more than a transgender person could sue Microsoft for enforcing apparent birth sex for avatar gender on XBox Live.
like the Pill
What's really funny, like hilarious funny, is that the pill prevents eggs from being released from the ovaries, thus preserving life.
Menstruation usually causes an egg to be released, then bled out and killed *dun dun dun*.
Seventy years ago if you'd been found out you'd have been murdered. And it's getting better all the time.
Yes, and I'm thankful I only lost my family when I let them know. In hindsight, I'm lucky that's all that happened, but my family is a little militia-type "the end times are here" kooky anyway. It's not a big list, but here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unlawfully_killed_transgender_people
The flip side is that I'm always flabbergasted when I talk to a transsexual woman who has an ongoing relationship with a family that accepts her, and that seems to happen frequently.
I probably could patch things up with my family and may do it some day, but what I guess it comes down to is I had stubborn and somewhat loopy parents who had a stubborn and somewhat loopy child.
You mention that you get guys flirting with you, but I'm 100% male inside and out (body and brain), yet gays still hit on me.
That's probably 70% correct in my case since usually my voice gives me away (which supports your point that things are a lot better for trans folks these days than even 30 years ago, say), although every now and then someone will think I'm really female while I'm dressed as a male which is just plain odd. Without going into details, though, guys that I'm 100% sure are straight have flirted with and/or "ma'amed" me. And yes, I think there have been a few guys who have flirted with me who were gay or bi, too.
This may shock and amaze you, but in most cases from what I understand, this surgery would not be needed for a male-to-female transsexual to sound female. A masculinized voicebox is, in general, capable of producing a female-sounding voice with practice.
(Anyway, when I use my male voice while dressed as a male, it astounds me that in spite of how obvious my birth sex ought to be, some people still think I'm female like that! Just imagine how easy it'll be for me to "trick" one of you boys once I finally get my female voice figured out, lol.)
I hope this information doesn't turn you into a nervous wreck the next time you meet a cute girl!
Cheers
That's odd, I Googled "transsexual woman" and got something completely different. I think I'll wear that shoe instead.
Pro tip: women born transsexual usually have two options: 1.) Gender transition. 2.) Suicide. As a culture we need to get over this idea that someone who has the wrong physical sex for their gender goes through gender transition to satisfy some sexual thrill.
It's wrong, completely wrong. There's a mountain of evidence that says that it's just simply factually incorrect. You might as well link me to the Flat Earth Society as "proof" that the world is flat. It's a superstition, nothing more, and a rotten one as it causes people to commit suicide and breaks apart families.
Now, that being said, transsexual women are sexual beings. Most people (not all) are. Yes, transsexual women have sex, but most have sex like a normal woman would, with their boyfriend (or girlfriend) in bed with the door closed and curtains shut (I'm assuming, but that's how I do it personally, ymmv, etc). However, some people who are sexual like to produce pornography.
Here's the other trick. Because medical insurance won't cover any of my costs related to gender transition (some plans do, and the AMA has encouraged health insurance providers to cover at least the sex change surgery itself and meds iirc), I've considered whether I'd want to be one of the people that gets returned when searching Google for "tranny." I'm not sure I'm desperate enough yet to even look into it, but I imagine some of those girls are up there for the sole reason that they're getting paid and gender transition is EXPENSIVE.
Guess what? I'd guarantee you that most of those girls you see when you Google "tranny" were once 7-year old boys who wished they'd just been born female. (Does anyone have research on transsexual women who participate in pornography and what their reasons are? I assume most are doing it for the same reason cisgendered women do it, but I'm curious if any/how many transsexual women do it simply because of anti-trans discrimination [thus perpetuating this self-fulfilling prophecy that a transsexual woman can only be a sex worker, but I digress].)
However, a 7-year old boy who wants to kill himself because he can't be a girl is NOT a sexual being. It's time to wake up and realize that transgender feelings aren't a fetish that gets turned on at the age of 12! Yes, children have transgender feelings. Why don't you try asking a "tranny" sometime and getting your head out of your ass and listening? Most transsexual women have known that something was wrong and have wanted to be girls since they were 7, many younger than that.
If you're going to tell me that a 7-year old boy who wants to be a girl is exhibiting a sexual fetish, you need some serious help. If it's ok with you that the same person, years later, kills themselves because of the things people like you spout off, you are a sick individual.
Oh, by the way, don't forget about the gentlemen. Apparently, "women" get sex changes, too, and then they live as men, so it's not even something unique to perverted "men," as I imagine trans women are in your own little world.
Cheers
And the really scary thing is that our brains are a bunch of replaceable parts, too.
(We just haven't figure out how quite yet.)
Bone structure. The female skeleton is quite unlike the male skeleton, and no amount of surgery will hide it.
I was going to moderate this thread to hell and back, but decided to reply instead since you have a valid point. Please pardon my rant since it's not a direct reply to you, but more a commentary on this thread as a whole.
I'm lucky. Despite my male birth, I have a relatively easy time passing and I even get guys flirting with me. Not all trans women are as lucky as I am in that department.
This issue is why it is critical that transgendered children are identified and diagnosed before puberty. Transsexualism might be a joke to some men who are insecure and a threat to some women who are insecure (or vise-versa), but it is a very real aspect of the human condition and is not going away, ever.
Well, I should correct myself. If transgendered children were diagnosed before puberty, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a trans woman and a "real woman," and man-in-a-dress transsexuality as we know it today would cease to exist. There would be no need for expensive cosmetic surgery.
(Yes, it is cosmetic, but if there were something about you that made people constantly and vehemently [and sometimes violently] insist that you aren't the gender you are, you'd want to do something about it.)
And no, the argument that they aren't women because they can't have children doesn't fly, unless you want to explain to several thousand "real" women that they need to sign up for selective service and start using the men's room because they can't have children either.
Biology is messy. Can't we just finally conclude in this day and age where women can vote, have careers, and own property that gender is a silly anachronism? Sure, the vast majority of people are either men or women, even the homosexual ones, but not everyone is strictly one or the other, and we can split hairs about what exactly a man or woman is and discuss androgen-insensitive women and kleinfelter's syndrome to hell and back, but I think it's easier just to say biology is messy and get on with life.
*sigh* Anyway, I know I am asking too much. Thanks for you time.
It's always funny how upset the free market worshiping glibertarians here get when companies pull this shit.
The owner of a Dairy Queen once called the cops on me because I was disappointed about the quality of his product. That made me upset.
Now here's the real trick: I don't go to Dairy Queen anymore, but I still get ice cream. Life goes on. Someone else gets my money instead. Would I like to see Dairy Queen go out of business or at least give me some free food to keep me as a customer? Sure, but it's not going to happen.
That's the beauty of the free market. I can visit any number of other places to get my ice cream, and if Dairy Queen doesn't need my money, I don't have to give it to them. Problem solved.
(I actually do have a Motorola phone, not a droid, but I will never buy Motorola again for other problems with the phone.)
100 to 1 still means there are 3 million of you, if you could congregate in one state then you should be able to guide political processes without worrying about the mouth breathing masses.
Yeah, but then they'd have to vote to make it happen.
ID is just wrong because A) it isn't science. B) it assumes taking the BIble literally.
It's amazing how people like to take the bible literally when homosexuality and gender transition come up (which, despite what the bible says, are not choices [well, gender transition is a choice, the other option is suicide for affected individuals] and are TOTALLY DIFFERENT).
So, ID is wrong because it assumes taking the bible literally, but it's A-OK to back up homophobia and transphobia with the bible?
so taking a specific translation and treating it as word-for-word literal truth is a simplistic and juvenile approach.
Really, now. Again, as soon as throwing trans people and gay men under a bus gets questioned, suddenly now it's A-OK to take a specific translation and treat it as word-for-word literal truth.
Religious people make me sick.
While you're posting links, can you link to the data that shows AGW? What I mean is, it's undeniable that temperature is increasing. However, I also understand there was a glacier covering most of the land where I live currently, and that it would be hard to explain where that glacier went without global temperatures rising.
The only part I don't comprehend about this debate is jumping to the conclusion that SUVs are responsible (as much as I hate SUVs and people who like SUVs) or even supposing humans can do anything at all about the temperature increase. OTOH, we probably could cool the planet if we really wanted, but it might be an engineering project instead, and for all we know, we'd be costing ourselves the opportunity by pursuing a self-flagellation exercise instead.
I'll look at the data tomorrow when I'm more awake. Thanks for the link.
What world do you live in where you have 50 users getting a virus that bypasses their anti-virus software every day?
What world do you live in where they don't?
First of all, despite the popular view[who?] of religion you espouse, most religions[which religions?] and religious individuals[who?] are open to challenges to their faith.[citation needed] Admittedly this is a matter of degree, but to suggest that religions react to every challenge with "blasphemy!" and "you heathen!" is a gross mischaracterization.[citation needed]
FTFY