Trans Rights

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
26,955
9,950
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
All I want is the right to prance up Young St with my nutsack hanging out like all the other "boys"
Before I got to the second line, I fully expected to read….

“All you want is the right to prance up Yonge Street with your vagina hanging out like all the other “boys””….& I’m almost disappointed here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: harrylee

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
114,586
13,252
113
Low Earth Orbit
Before I got to the second line, I fully expected to read….

“All you want is the right to prance up Yonge Street with your vagina hanging out like all the other “boys””….& I’m almost disappointed here.
He'd have to dialate (dildo) quite a bit prior. If they don't dialate it heals over and infects. The body ultimately rejects the surgery and hormone therapy.

Its making huge money from the doomed.

If a gender clinic (all gender focused pre and long term post op) owed by just one surgeon, it can make $2.3M per patient on just gender focused issues. Add in GP, Shrinks and Pharmacy to the clinic and it doubles. 1 surgery per week is 52 per year. In ten years its 520 patients reliant on the body rejecting what it is not.

20 years its 1040.

1/4 billion in 20 years.

Thats just one fucking surgeon bilking Govt funded insurance. Imagine 100 clinics.
 

Serryah

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 3, 2008
10,415
2,572
113
New Brunswick
Exactly what rights should trans people have?

Non-discrimination in employment, education, housing, and places of public accommodation, sure. Obvious.

But what else?

Kind'a went over it already but...

Like everyone, the right to live without fear of being attacked or killed.

Right to choose their medical decisions.

Just a couple others added to what you've thrown out.

I get it "they already have rights" except that while others somehow get to 'fight for their rights', it seems Trans people get thrown under the bus for daring to do the same.

And the big reason we're so loud is exactly what happened on Monday. You tell me, if someone with a stroke of a pen said you were no longer to 'exist', what would you do/think/say?
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
114,586
13,252
113
Low Earth Orbit
Kind'a went over it already but...

Like everyone, the right to live without fear of being attacked or killed.

Right to choose their medical decisions.

Just a couple others added to what you've thrown out.

I get it "they already have rights" except that while others somehow get to 'fight for their rights', it seems Trans people get thrown under the bus for daring to do the same.

And the big reason we're so loud is exactly what happened on Monday. You tell me, if someone with a stroke of a pen said you were no longer to 'exist', what would you do/think/say?
Its starting to sink in that your rights are Trans rights and Trans rights are my rights.

How can they not exist?

Have you ever considered that you lash out at us for not believing the preposterous just so you can feel comfortable accepting it?

Do you truly accept the rewriting of languages. Words that come from infants not long thought out processes of spite. Ma ma and da da mom dad mother father. Are our Rights. You are taking our freedom of speech that transcends all races and language. Do you think babies will gurgle "birthing person" or "sperm donor" to get food when hungry?

Do you truly think this Is realistic?
 
Last edited:

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
114,586
13,252
113
Low Earth Orbit
Short anogenital distance (AGD) is associated with lower testosterone levels

Possible causes of short AGD

Some studies suggest that prenatal exposure to phthalates may be linked to shorter AGD. Phthalates are chemicals found in many household products, including plastics, paints, and soaps.

Fix the taint issue before all else. We got rid of PCB CFCs DDT etc. Why not phalates? Why normalize the physiological issues and create an industry out of the impacts of phalates?

Hormone therapy for the short tainted is more logical than brainwashing people into thinking this mutation is natural.
 
Last edited:

TheShadow

Council Member
Apr 24, 2020
1,069
557
113
Ontario
Oh please, using outliers that consist of not even percentages of a percent to justify an argument is just silly.

Genetically there are males and females in proportions that so far outweigh any genetic anomalies that using these genetic rarities to force the other populations to do anything is foolish.
 

Serryah

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 3, 2008
10,415
2,572
113
New Brunswick
Oh please, using outliers that consist of not even percentages of a percent to justify an argument is just silly.

Actually, that these situations EXIST prove that gender is NOT just a simple XX or XY. Which is the point.

Genetically there are males and females in proportions that so far outweigh any genetic anomalies that using these genetic rarities to force the other populations to do anything is foolish.

You don't know that. We ASSUME, but unless and until you genetic test EVERY single human, you don't know jack shit what the chromosomes are.

Which is the second point.

And then there's the third point; these are the markers for sexual presentation. Gender is NOT determined by these markers alone.
 

TheShadow

Council Member
Apr 24, 2020
1,069
557
113
Ontario
Basing your decisions for 99.99% of society on the .01% is foolish.

It's like demanding that all gloves be made with an extra finger because someone somewhere has an extra digit.

Most people have 4 fingers and 1 thumb.

There will be outliers but demanding the vast immense majority conform or bend to them to make them feel better is simply a childish demand.

Again, demanding that every single person be tested to have a working theory just screams you know you're wrong.

Gender used to me a scientific set of markers and it's since been co-opted to be an emotional state and heck, if people want to live their lives that way, more power to them.

Actual sex markers are male and female and no matter how many rare anomalies you pull out won't change that.
 

Serryah

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 3, 2008
10,415
2,572
113
New Brunswick
Basing your decisions for 99.99% of society on the .01% is foolish.

Are you talking whole of human population, the US, Canada or what?

Decisions for minorities are ALWAYS based on being a lesser percentage, and decisions for them happen all the time. Or are you going to say that we should turn back decisions for people like the disabled? Different races?

It's like demanding that all gloves be made with an extra finger because someone somewhere has an extra digit.

Rather, it's like there are gloves out there with extra fingers that if people who have such things, can buy said gloves. If you don't, then don't buy it. What the hell does it matter to you?

Most people have 4 fingers and 1 thumb.

Most, and sometimes they don't. Sometimes as infants those born with extra fingers or toes get them surgically removed (which oh SHIT that's plastic surgery! It's changing the body to make it look different! All the anti-trans crowd best be against things like that! BTW, I've a friend in Omaha whose son has an extra finger; they didn't remove it so he's got an extra. And question, what about people born with tiny tails?)

There will be outliers but demanding the vast immense majority conform or bend to them to make them feel better is simply a childish demand.

JFC.

No, it's about respect.

The ones demanding others to conform or bend to them are the anti-trans to those of us who are trans. Just to make THEM feel better.

It's like you demanding - from the example above - a kid born with an extra finger to remove said finger, because it "looks weird". The kid doesn't think so, but you push and push, and others around you join in, to make that kid's life hell, all because he doesn't look like you or isn't your idea of what "normal" should be.

You've no more right to do that, than you do to demand trans people to stop being who they are.

Again, demanding that every single person be tested to have a working theory just screams you know you're wrong.

I'm not demanding it; in essence, the people who are anti-trans are pushing for it.

Because they assume that every person is XX or XY, and that's not true. But the only way to prove them right IS to do exactly that.

Meanwhile the ones who they are demanding no longer to exist, don't really give that much of a damn WHAT the chromosomes are. Because gender is more than chromosomes and it shouldn't fucking matter.

Gender used to me a scientific set of markers and it's since been co-opted to be an emotional state and heck, if people want to live their lives that way, more power to them.

Like hell; words to signify gender used to be used for inanimate objects, like ships, ffs.


And science evolves, changes, all the time. If people can realize that the Earth revolves around the sun, the Earth isn't flat (well most people) and other scientific thoughts, then why suddenly can it not be accepted that science proves that trans people not only exist, but are legitimate.

"If people want to live their lives that way, more power to them" - except in cases where no, not more power to them, rather kill the deviants.

Actual sex markers are male and female and no matter how many rare anomalies you pull out won't change that.

Sex markers and gender are intertwined but not the same thing and no amount of denial won't change that. Unless you, as I pointed out, want to test every human on this rock to prove that XX and XY are the dominant, absolute, markers.

BTW, why did the Olympics stop genetic testing women to prove they were, in deed, women?



For your 'education'.



"While gender is often conflated with biological sex, a person is not born with gender. Rather, people learn to act in accordance with the socially constructed expectations of their gender as they grow up. Social constructs are ideas that humans originally invented and continue to perpetuate over time rather than being innate roles that exist in nature. People implicitly and explicitly learn how someone of their gender should act as they grow up by the people around them and by popular media. However, those expectations do not always fit with how people act. Gender-specific expectations often come from stereotypes. Stereotypes include widely held beliefs about a certain group of people based on oversimplified or prejudiced ideas. Some stereotypical expectations of men in the US include that they are supposed to be stoic and competitive, large and muscular, and financially provide for their household. In contrast, some common expectations of women in the US include that they are supposed to be polite and nurturing, slim and petite, and are expected to take on domestic work like raising children and running the household to societal standards.


Expectations of men and women can also vary by culture. The culture of the US may expect women to look and act differently than women in Saudi Arabia or Japan, for example. Moreover, different cultures might even recognize a different number of genders. While many cultures see just man or woman, other cultures have three, five, or more genders. Thus, rather than being universal to biological males, females, or intersex people, each human society uniquely determines the genders and gender roles within it.


Early uses of the word gender in reference to men or women tended to view it as one and the same as biological sex. According to The Oxford English Dictionary, the word gender had been used as early as the 1300s to describe categories of people. The Oxford English Dictionary’s earliest record of using the word to specifically refer to men or women, though, did not occur until 1474, when someone used it in a letter to describe what the writer refers to as the masculine gender. Over the next centuries, when gender was used to refer to men or women, it was often synonymous with biological sex. However, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, during the early twentieth century, the word sex became more associated with sexual intercourse. As discussions of sexual intercourse are largely taboo in the US, people began to use the word gender in its place to refer to a person’s status as a male or female by the end of the twentieth century, a practice that is still largely common as of 2022. However, in the 1950s, gender psychologists who studied differences between the sexes began to reframe gender as something entirely separate from biological sex."
 

TheShadow

Council Member
Apr 24, 2020
1,069
557
113
Ontario
Y
Are you talking whole of human population, the US, Canada or what?

Decisions for minorities are ALWAYS based on being a lesser percentage, and decisions for them happen all the time. Or are you going to say that we should turn back decisions for people like the disabled? Different races?



Rather, it's like there are gloves out there with extra fingers that if people who have such things, can buy said gloves. If you don't, then don't buy it. What the hell does it matter to you?



Most, and sometimes they don't. Sometimes as infants those born with extra fingers or toes get them surgically removed (which oh SHIT that's plastic surgery! It's changing the body to make it look different! All the anti-trans crowd best be against things like that! BTW, I've a friend in Omaha whose son has an extra finger; they didn't remove it so he's got an extra. And question, what about people born with tiny tails?)



JFC.

No, it's about respect.

The ones demanding others to conform or bend to them are the anti-trans to those of us who are trans. Just to make THEM feel better.

It's like you demanding - from the example above - a kid born with an extra finger to remove said finger, because it "looks weird". The kid doesn't think so, but you push and push, and others around you join in, to make that kid's life hell, all because he doesn't look like you or isn't your idea of what "normal" should be.

You've no more right to do that, than you do to demand trans people to stop being who they are.



I'm not demanding it; in essence, the people who are anti-trans are pushing for it.

Because they assume that every person is XX or XY, and that's not true. But the only way to prove them right IS to do exactly that.

Meanwhile the ones who they are demanding no longer to exist, don't really give that much of a damn WHAT the chromosomes are. Because gender is more than chromosomes and it shouldn't fucking matter.



Like hell; words to signify gender used to be used for inanimate objects, like ships, ffs.


And science evolves, changes, all the time. If people can realize that the Earth revolves around the sun, the Earth isn't flat (well most people) and other scientific thoughts, then why suddenly can it not be accepted that science proves that trans people not only exist, but are legitimate.

"If people want to live their lives that way, more power to them" - except in cases where no, not more power to them, rather kill the deviants.



Sex markers and gender are intertwined but not the same thing and no amount of denial won't change that. Unless you, as I pointed out, want to test every human on this rock to prove that XX and XY are the dominant, absolute, markers.

BTW, why did the Olympics stop genetic testing women to prove they were, in deed, women?



For your 'education'.



"While gender is often conflated with biological sex, a person is not born with gender. Rather, people learn to act in accordance with the socially constructed expectations of their gender as they grow up. Social constructs are ideas that humans originally invented and continue to perpetuate over time rather than being innate roles that exist in nature. People implicitly and explicitly learn how someone of their gender should act as they grow up by the people around them and by popular media. However, those expectations do not always fit with how people act. Gender-specific expectations often come from stereotypes. Stereotypes include widely held beliefs about a certain group of people based on oversimplified or prejudiced ideas. Some stereotypical expectations of men in the US include that they are supposed to be stoic and competitive, large and muscular, and financially provide for their household. In contrast, some common expectations of women in the US include that they are supposed to be polite and nurturing, slim and petite, and are expected to take on domestic work like raising children and running the household to societal standards.


Expectations of men and women can also vary by culture. The culture of the US may expect women to look and act differently than women in Saudi Arabia or Japan, for example. Moreover, different cultures might even recognize a different number of genders. While many cultures see just man or woman, other cultures have three, five, or more genders. Thus, rather than being universal to biological males, females, or intersex people, each human society uniquely determines the genders and gender roles within it.


Early uses of the word gender in reference to men or women tended to view it as one and the same as biological sex. According to The Oxford English Dictionary, the word gender had been used as early as the 1300s to describe categories of people. The Oxford English Dictionary’s earliest record of using the word to specifically refer to men or women, though, did not occur until 1474, when someone used it in a letter to describe what the writer refers to as the masculine gender. Over the next centuries, when gender was used to refer to men or women, it was often synonymous with biological sex. However, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, during the early twentieth century, the word sex became more associated with sexual intercourse. As discussions of sexual intercourse are largely taboo in the US, people began to use the word gender in its place to refer to a person’s status as a male or female by the end of the twentieth century, a practice that is still largely common as of 2022. However, in the 1950s, gender psychologists who studied differences between the sexes began to reframe gender as something entirely separate from biological sex."
I don't think that it matters what anyone talks to you about, you won't hear anything because you're too busy screaming.

There are men and women.

You can be one or the other, or pretend to be one or the other, but there are two.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Serryah

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
58,967
8,824
113
Washington DC
Y

I don't think that it matters what anyone talks to you about, you won't hear anything because you're too busy screaming.

There are men and women.

You can be one or the other, or pretend to be one or the other, but there are two.
Hmm. . .

Part of it is a semantic problem, part just plain old gol-dangitness.

Let's agree to leave out the true hermaphrodites, that tiny fraction who possessed the genitialia of both sexes.

OK, next, let's define our terms. I propose that there are two sexes, male and female. The vast majority of the time, males have XY sex chromosomes, and develop with penises and testicles. Those who do not can be described as "variant" or "missing" something (or "got damn careless with power machinery"). The vast majority of the time, females have vaginas, uteri, ovaries, and breasts, and the same exceptions apply. Only females, and not all females by any means, can carry children.

Next step. . . gender, i.e., "men" and "women." If you want to say that "gender" is a perfect synonym for "sex," I'm OK with that. But what Serryah and the "trans community" is saying (roughly, 30,000-foot view) is that gender is a social construct of roles, dress, functions in society, etc. There are many, many examples of males and females crossing gender barriers in their societies, from the FN tribes that had no problem with males dressing, living, and performing as women, to the plots of about half of Shakespeare's plays, to Jeanne d'Arc.

As I understand it, "transgender" really has little to do with sex. It's more about roles in society. And "trans rights" appears to come down to "you have a right to not suffer discrimination if you're a male who behaves in a manner similar to the approximate range of behaviors our societies regard as characteristic of women, or vice versa. Females who have behaved like men have always been tolerated, usually with a patronizing chuckle, from Marlene Dietrich dressing in suits to the occasional large, strong female taking and doing a "man's" job.

So. . . far as I'm concerned, "transgender" people, that is, those who behave in ways typical of the gender that is different from their sex, should be free from discrimination in employment, education, housing, and places of public accommodation.

Everything else is just the shrieking of the precious. I'm perfectly OK with calling Robert "Roberta" and complimenting "her" on "her" frock, or vice versa. That's just courtesy. And as far as who's in the room when I whup it out to pump ship, I really don't care. I've travelled far enough to have encountered every possible set-up for that, and if you happen to catch a glimpse of my l'il feller, I don't imagine you or I have any real reason to claim massive trauma from the experience.

So how 'bout we leave each other the fuck be? If a "man" in a dress wants to read stories to kids, so what? Would you object if Marlene Dietrich in her signature suit read stories to your kids? Or is it the concept that your sons don't absolutely have to play football or hockey and treat women as sexual-relief stations, or that your daughters don't absolutely have to obsess over make-up and make sure they're sufficiently compensated for acting as sexual-relief stations, that bothers you so much?

1737900453898.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Serryah