Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

Thermal said:
IDGAF
Click to expand...
To the extent that this thread is about whether or not we choose to implement reforms proposed by gender activists, you might consider tryna GAF.

ETA: Not just law and policy reforms, but also reforms to language and shared concepts, such as whether "sex" should be taken to mean something objective or subjective.
 
Last edited:
Thermal said:
Who's 'he', and where was it specified? d4m10n, Paul Grahm or...you, none of whom said anything about homosexuals in the post Louden Wilde was commenting on?
Click to expand...
Louden specified heterosexual. Again, did you not notice? Here, I'll make it easy for you.
Thermal said:
Louden Wilde said:
and again- young heterosexual males are never going to broadly regard any subset of males as potential partners for long-term relationships.
Click to expand...
Wait till you hear about homosexuality.
Click to expand...
Given that he specified heterosexual, I'm pretty sure Louden is well aware of homosexuals. What I don't know is what you think that has to do with Louden's post. And Louden is the one you quoted and responded to, not Paul or d4m10n or anyone else.
 
d4m10n said:
To the extent that this thread is about whether or not we choose to implement reforms proposed by gender activists, you might consider tryna GAF.

ETA: Not just law and policy reforms, but also reforms to language and shared concepts, such as whether "sex" should be taken to mean something objective or subjective.
Click to expand...
Said it many times: IDGAF what extremists want, particularly when I disagree with their endgame and find their objectives unreasonable.
 
Ziggurat said:
Louden specified heterosexual. Again, did you not notice? Here, I'll make it easy for you.

Given that he specified heterosexual, I'm pretty sure Louden is well aware of homosexuals. What I don't know is what you think that has to do with Louden's post. And Louden is the one you quoted and responded to, not Paul or d4m10n or anyone else.
Click to expand...
I take it you didn't read my follow up. What a heterosexual even is, when how a woman is defined is in flux, gets a tad slippery. An article was put up recently about lesbians being pressured into (what we would call) heterosexual sex with transwomen under the guise of lesbianism with ladydicks gets me ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ cranky.
 
Thermal said:
I take it you didn't read my follow up. What a heterosexual even is, when how a woman is defined is in flux, gets a tad slippery.
Click to expand...
Bwahahahaha!

No. That's stupid. Everyone knows exactly what heterosexual means, even if they pretend that they don't. The definition isn't in flux, and it's not slippery at all.

There are some people who don't fit neatly into a hetero/homo binary, sure, but that's not a problem or an ambiguity in what "heterosexual" means. And most people are heterosexual, not these weird fringe sexualities.
 
Ziggurat said:
Bwahahahaha!

No. That's stupid. Everyone knows exactly what heterosexual means, even if they pretend that they don't. The definition isn't in flux, and it's not slippery at all.

There are some people who don't fit neatly into a hetero/homo binary, sure, but that's not a problem or an ambiguity in what "heterosexual" means.
Click to expand...
As I said, the issue gets me cranky. I was reading an article (off thread) that was questioning the self-reported sexual orientation of transgender respondents, specifically because they answered under their own definitions. Reporting themselves as heterosexual when we would describe it as homosexual, strictly because they believe they are women.
Ziggurat said:
And most people are heterosexual, not these weird fringe sexualities.
Click to expand...
"Weird". Well, kudos to you for openly showing your colors.
 
Thermal said:
I have not. You could try reading harder?
Click to expand...

It's what lead you to telling a sceptics forum that "Theres nothing inherently bigoted about being devoutly religious" yesterday. It's what led to to say a hypothetical woman must be a paranoid manic before she could be a rape victim if she didn't want to intimately examine you
 
Last edited:
Manger Douse said:
It's what lead you to telling a sceptics forum that "Theres nothing inherently bigoted about being devoutly religious" yesterday
Click to expand...
Ya I see you're still really excited about talking about the off topic subject that you assured us you would be wasting no further time on.
 
Thermal said:
Ya I see you're still really excited about talking about the off topic subject that you assured us you would be wasting no further time on.
Click to expand...
I said you shouldn't waste your time denying it - this is still an education forum as far as I know and I'm going to educate you like a puppy that ◊◊◊◊ on my carpet
 
Thermal said:
As I said, the issue gets me cranky. I was reading an article (off thread) that was questioning the self-reported sexual orientation of transgender respondents, specifically because they answered under their own definitions. Reporting themselves as heterosexual when we would describe it as homosexual, strictly because they believe they are women.

"Weird". Well, kudos to you for openly showing your colors.
Click to expand...
You're pointing your anger in the wrong direction. I'm not the source of your irritation. And I don't know why you're objecting to me calling it weird when you clearly think some of this stuff is weird yourself. Isn't it weird for a male who is sexually attracted to males to pose as a female and call themselves heterosexual? It is weird. You know it's weird.

Is it hateful to call it weird? No, it really isn't. I'm not advocating doing anything to anyone because their sexuality is weird, but there's no point in denying that it is weird. Stuff that's far outside the norm is weird basically by definition. That doesn't automatically attach any moral judgment to that weirdness, and if you will notice, in the post in question I didn't.

You're looking for an excuse to judge me, even though I'm not actually guilty of anything you didn't do.
 
Thermal said:
Gotta give you credit for sticking to your fantasy land guns.
Click to expand...
Yeah as I said, I'll be wasting no time arguing with you about the definition of bigoty. Now I'm just rubbing your nose in the fact that you told a sceptics forum "Theres nothing inherently bigoted about being devoutly religious" until you learn not to post such undeniable nonsense. How's that carpet taste?
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
unisex toilets work
Click to expand...
Please clarify something for me. When you refer to unisex toilets, what kind of facility are you actually describing?

Is it secure, single-occupant privies, perhaps with a unisex communal hand-washing area?

Or is it a fully communal unisex intimate space?

(Or is it some other thing that I haven't thought of?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom