• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Transwomen are not women - part XI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Samson said:
I am perplexed by one thing.
The only trans person I ever knew was my brother.
I don't believe he was part of a trans community, yet many posters here talk of having a lot of trans friends.
How is this realistically true?
Click to expand...

I have two trans friends, both trans-women.

I had three, but she committed suicide (in a car, hose pipe from the exhaust through window!)

Incidentally, neither of the two I know think trans-women should be using women's restrooms. I never asked the one who killed herself.
 
The Atheist said:
A genuine trans woman is someone born male who actually believes they're the wrong gender. A fake one is doing it to exploit women.

As I've said several times, there isn't an easy way to tell, and the onus on solving the problem rests with the trans community.
Click to expand...

smartcooky said:
I have two trans friends, both trans-women.

I had three, but she committed suicide (in a car, hose pipe from the exhaust through window!)

Incidentally, neither of the two I know think trans-women should be using women's restrooms. I never asked the one who killed herself.
Click to expand...
My brother died 2005, age 53. I never saw a "sister" so I am wilfully misgendering. None of us really engaged or interviewed as it were. He clearly took estrogen, but how or by whom prescribed I have no idea. This would have begun late 40s so appears to follow a pattern of late onset of a need to attend to dysphoria.
 
Meanwhile in Montana:


Have to say, I'm profoundly impressed. GOP reactionaries have managed to pass a law so obviously unconstitutional on its face that even the Roberts Thomas Court won't uphold it.
 
Elaedith said:
Note that LJ applauds the hounding out of those who disagree with the party line, then attaches great significance to people not disagreeing with the party line as though it's a free choice.
Click to expand...


What? Explain please.

Is this perhaps because you feel very uncomfortable that your own beliefs are in such dramatic opposition to those of the mainstream medical community (AKA "the party line" in your parlance)?


As a side note, I am indeed constantly pleased and impressed that around the industrialised world of modern liberal democracies, governments, public institutions, regulatory bodies and other positions of public authority are being ever-more-increasingly populated by those who fully support/endorse the rights & protections of transgender people, and who share the consensus view of global mainstream medicine that transgender identity is valid and real (ie not a mental health disorder).

And at the same time, I'm constantly pleased and impressed that people in public institutions who oppose the fundamental validity/reality of transgender identity, and who fight against the notion of transgender rights and protections, are becoming fewer and fewer*. Just as anti-gay-rights individuals in the 60s-80s became fewer and fewer.


* Which, for clarity, is NOT "applauding the hounding of those who disagree with the party line"
 
Emily's Cat said:
It's not confusing, it's appalling.
Click to expand...


To you it is.

It's a genuine wonder why apparently intelligent people who share your views - people who allegedly possess critical thinking skills - never seem to stop for a moment to wonder why their beliefs on this issue are so extremely out of step with those of almost all the "western" world's executive governments, legislatures, judiciaries and regulatory bodies, as well as being diametrically opposite to modern mainstream medicine's understanding and practice. All of those bodies, incidentally, contain healthy proportions of cis women (or "natal females" in case the usual suspects kick off again....).

I mean, I realise that it's easy and lazy to shout "ideological capture", but it's also wrong to make that claim, isn't it?
 
LondonJohn said:
It's a genuine wonder why apparently intelligent people who share your views - people who allegedly possess critical thinking skills - never seem to stop for a moment to wonder why their beliefs on this issue are so extremely out of step with those of almost all the "western" world's executive governments, legislatures, judiciaries and regulatory bodies, as well as being diametrically opposite to modern mainstream medicine's understanding and practice.
Click to expand...
These are the same governments, legislatures, judiciaries and regulatory bodies which criminalized consensual sodomy in living memory. If it was wrong to appeal to them then, why is it right now?
 
Last edited:
https://twitter.com/Mermaids_Gender/status/1662047099196678144

Mermaids is extremely disappointed by British Cyclings’ new cruel and exclusionary transgender guidance which will see much fewer trans athletes be able to compete in their sport. As a youth organisation we see what these top-down policies mean for the daily lives of trans youth
Click to expand...
I was expecting they'd make a statement about the legitimate need for sex segregation at the elite and sub-elite level, but apparently they want the entire sport to be based on gender rather than sex.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk
 
Ziggurat said:
Our speech is violence, their violence is speech.
Click to expand...

Bold words from the guy whose reaction to someone being beaten for going to the loo that the genitals cops told them to go to was essentially "that's what you guys get for making this so confusing"
 
LondonJohn said:
You're referring to this truly sick bigot?

https://twitter.com/ICanSeeForever1/status/1661647507418492928
Click to expand...

Yep, it's truly sick and bigoted to believe that people being reconciled with the material reality of the only body they have is a safer and more compassionate solution than turning every person who doesn't conform to a set of stereotypes into a permanent medical patient. :boggled:

Seriously, think about this.

A person goes into their therapist and says "I really hate my left arm, it causes me distress"

What's the most sane and compassionate approach to this, in your view? Do you engage in therapy and discussion to alleviate their mental discord and get them to be comfortable with their left arm? Or do you immediately affirm their distress and chop off their arm, even though you know that's going to present them with a lifetime of medical complications and impacts to their ability to function well in society?
 
LondonJohn said:
As a side note, I am indeed constantly pleased and impressed that around the industrialised world of modern liberal democracies, governments, public institutions, regulatory bodies and other positions of public authority are being ever-more-increasingly populated by those who fully support/endorse the rights & protections of transgender people, and who share the consensus view of global mainstream medicine that transgender identity is valid and real (ie not a mental health disorder).

And at the same time, I'm constantly pleased and impressed that people in public institutions who oppose the fundamental validity/reality of transgender identity, and who fight against the notion of transgender rights and protections, are becoming fewer and fewer*. Just as anti-gay-rights individuals in the 60s-80s became fewer and fewer.
Click to expand...

Pretty much, you're super happy that females across the globe are being silenced, threatened, and harassed, are losing their voices in politics, are losing their jobs, and are being forced out of public life. You're really happy and excited that females are being exiled from equal participation in society.

Yay you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom