The Gender Non-binary debate.
Discussion
_dobbo_ said:
Noodle1982 said:
Dobbo has shown himself to be quite the bigoted individual over the last few pages.
Always the same with these type of liberals. Quick enough to throw labels at others and criticise their views while having a complete disregard for their own use of language.
Brilliant.
Nice try. Wasn't it you in another thread crying about how the racist card gets thrown around. Weird how it doesn't bother you here. Always the same with these type of liberals. Quick enough to throw labels at others and criticise their views while having a complete disregard for their own use of language.
Brilliant.
Rovinghawk said:
I'll completely accept proven or evidential scientific fact.
I accept that trans genders exist although I have no idea what drives someone to do it.
I don't accept the concept of "a woman trapped in a man's body" or similar- I consider this to be mental illness of some sort.
Blokes are blokes, women are women, some undergo a medical procedure to switch. 'Self-identifying' or similar is b
ks.
If you completely accept the science around this then I don't think you would be calling the notion that being trans complete bI accept that trans genders exist although I have no idea what drives someone to do it.
I don't accept the concept of "a woman trapped in a man's body" or similar- I consider this to be mental illness of some sort.
Blokes are blokes, women are women, some undergo a medical procedure to switch. 'Self-identifying' or similar is b
ks.ks, a choice, or a mental illness.Even a cursory understanding of biological science and gender in society would show you that it is not always the case than blokes are blokes and women are women.
If you want to have a nuanced discussion about self-identifying then I'm sure you would find other willing participants, because that is (I think) a political discussion which is quite separate from the basic recognition that trans people exist.
I don't really get all this heat over the idea of self-identifying. Who is more qualified to gauge how someone identifies than the person themself?
I'm sure many people on PH, by its very nature, consider themselves as car enthusiasts. You don't need other people to validate or verify that. You don't even need to own a decent car in order to be a car enthusiast. It's just something you are, and you identify as such.
Same with sexuality. If you 're gay, then you're gay. You don't need some else to validate or verify that. You don't need to prove you're gay - you're just gay.
"Ah but if people like that are allowed to identify like that then they can......."
Wait a moment. Who gave you the right to allow or disallow what someone else can do? How do your opinions overrule that person's sense of identity? Who appointed you the arbiter?
That's what this really all boils down to. It boils down to "I find the idea of how you identify a bit icky, so I'm going to try to stop it. Because my mild discomfort is more important than your right to live how you wish"
(This is just a general ramble on my part, btw. It is not directed at anyone)
I'm sure many people on PH, by its very nature, consider themselves as car enthusiasts. You don't need other people to validate or verify that. You don't even need to own a decent car in order to be a car enthusiast. It's just something you are, and you identify as such.
Same with sexuality. If you 're gay, then you're gay. You don't need some else to validate or verify that. You don't need to prove you're gay - you're just gay.
"Ah but if people like that are allowed to identify like that then they can......."
Wait a moment. Who gave you the right to allow or disallow what someone else can do? How do your opinions overrule that person's sense of identity? Who appointed you the arbiter?
That's what this really all boils down to. It boils down to "I find the idea of how you identify a bit icky, so I'm going to try to stop it. Because my mild discomfort is more important than your right to live how you wish"
(This is just a general ramble on my part, btw. It is not directed at anyone)
Clockwork Cupcake said:
That's what this really all boils down to. It boils down to "I find the idea of how you identify a bit icky, so I'm going to try to stop it. Because my mild discomfort is more important than your right to live how you wish"
No I don't think it is that at all.Just to get this straight I am not talking about self identifying in as much as how you present your self, how you might like to be treated by people on the street and so on (as in, presenting as a man, he/him pronouns etc) I think that basically all sorts its self out no problem.
This is more similar to how gay people present.
When that moves into a legal space I think it creates huge capacity for a vast amount of bureaucracy and complication that I don't think are positive, compared to say the more managed legal process in the UK.
I also think it's a bit horse and cart. There is still a lot of work to be done getting trans people accepted, and there is still a lot of debate even within the community about where we as society should be intervening - what's safe, what's right, what gives people the best chance of becoming fulfilled. I think introducing well intended but actually sweeping and not necessarily constructive legislation may do more harm than good.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
'Earlier statement about arguing the right to exist'
Could I start by totally supporting your right to exist, your right to believe pretty much whatever you like provided it's not a detriment to others, etc?Clockwork Cupcake said:
I don't really get all this heat over the idea of self-identifying. Who is more qualified to gauge how someone identifies than the person themself?
Would you agree that self-ID is by definition subjective rather than objective? I can identify as a horse but it doesn't make it so.Clockwork Cupcake said:
You don't need other people to validate or verify that. You don't even need to own a decent car in order to be a car enthusiast. It's just something you are, and you identify as such.
It's a statement of personal preference not a physical fact.Clockwork Cupcake said:
Same with sexuality. If you 're gay, then you're gay. You don't need some else to validate or verify that. You don't need to prove you're gay - you're just gay.
Accepting that, if you're a bloke you're just a bloke (etc)Clockwork Cupcake said:
Wait a moment. Who gave you the right to allow or disallow what someone else can do? How do your opinions overrule that person's sense of identity? Who appointed you the arbiter?
I totally support someone's (yours in this case) right to personal belief & free speech within legal limits. I also support my right to believe that some beliefs are horsest.Clockwork Cupcake said:
It boils down to "I find the idea of how you identify a bit icky, so I'm going to try to stop it. Because my mild discomfort is more important than your right to live how you wish"
I find it incomprehensible, tbh, but have no desire to stop you doing as you wish. However I feel it acceptable to object to all this being rammed down people's throats whether they want it or not. There's a pair of toilets- non-disabled choice of which bog to use is governed AISI by the presence or absence of a little willy, anything else is someone being a nuisance.Rovinghawk said:
I find it incomprehensible, tbh, but have no desire to stop you doing as you wish. However I feel it acceptable to object to all this being rammed down people's throats whether they want it or not. There's a pair of toilets- non-disabled choice of which bog to use is governed AISI by the presence or absence of a little willy, anything else is someone being a nuisance.
I've been unnecessarily combative on this thread, I'll stop now.Can you consider a scenario? A man is transitioning to a woman. As part of the legal requirement to do so, she has been living as a woman for 18 months, dressing as a woman, etc. She hasn't had a gender reassignment operation yet.
She needs to go the toilet. In your someone being a nuisance world, which toilet does she use?
gregs656 said:
I also think it's a bit horse and cart. There is still a lot of work to be done getting trans people accepted, and there is still a lot of debate even within the community about where we as society should be intervening - what's safe, what's right, what gives people the best chance of becoming fulfilled. I think introducing well intended but actually sweeping and not necessarily constructive legislation may do more harm than good.
I broadly agree, actually. What prompted this thread in the first place is that the government are proposing to slightly relax the process of gaining a Gender Recognition Certificate. Currently you have the situation of having to convince a panel of medical experts that there is something wrong with you, and that the "cure" is transition. And then there is the usual crushing red tape and bureaucracy that only the government and the NHS can manage. What is being proposed is to make the legal process (and it will still very much be a legal process) a little easier. Perhaps a little closer to changing one's name by Deed Poll perhaps (although I don't think it will be as closer to that as many think / fear). It's still a legal process that isn't undertaken on a whim. It's not a question of conferring extra rights and privileges, just changing the acceptance criteria for the existing ones.
As usual on these debates, we've covered all sorts of other related and only-just-related topics too.
_dobbo_ said:
I've been unnecessarily combative on this thread, I'll stop now.
Can you consider a scenario? A man is transitioning to a woman. As part of the legal requirement to do so, she has been living as a woman for 18 months, dressing as a woman, etc. She hasn't had a gender reassignment operation yet.
She needs to go the toilet. In your someone being a nuisance world, which toilet does she use?
Taking a dump or just a quick piss ?Can you consider a scenario? A man is transitioning to a woman. As part of the legal requirement to do so, she has been living as a woman for 18 months, dressing as a woman, etc. She hasn't had a gender reassignment operation yet.
She needs to go the toilet. In your someone being a nuisance world, which toilet does she use?
Serious question ...
Rovinghawk said:
I find it incomprehensible, tbh, but have no desire to stop you doing as you wish. However I feel it acceptable to object to all this being rammed down people's throats whether they want it or not. There's a pair of toilets- non-disabled choice of which bog to use is governed AISI by the presence or absence of a little willy, anything else is someone being a nuisance.
Well, that's the thing isn't it? Nobody likes the Status Quo being upset, especially those who are perfectly happy the way things are. I'm sure many men objected to those pesky Suffragettes ramming Women's Rights down their throats, to pluck an example out of the air. Or what was so bad about sitting at the back of the bus, to choose another. Bit of a nuisance to say otherwise. Change can be disruptive.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
"Ah but if people like that are allowed to identify like that then they can......."
Of course they can and so can you. However, whether they are car enthusiasts or gay they are not immune to being offended or come across people with opposing views.In the world we live in the people will find something in anyone to mock and criticise.
Unfortunately for the trans community it's an easy one as it's a visual. They stand out from the crowd and for as long as there are humans on this planet there will be insults and disgust regardless of how you identify, what you look like, what your interests are ....etc...etc.
Clockwork Cupcake said:
Well, that's the thing isn't it? Nobody likes the Status Quo being upset, especially those who are perfectly happy the way things are. I'm sure many men objected to those pesky Suffragettes ramming Women's Rights down their throats, to pluck an example out of the air. Or what was so bad about sitting at the back of the bus, to choose another. Bit of a nuisance to say otherwise.
Change can be disruptive.
Honestly, why do you bother?Change can be disruptive.
The folks you're "debating" with are either unwilling or unable to change their point of view or would argue black is white simply to be contrary.
Save your blood pressure.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Honestly, why do you bother?
The folks you're "debating" with are either unwilling or unable to change their point of view or would argue black is white simply to be contrary.
Save your blood pressure.
The only people that would argue that black is white are the ones all for self identification. The folks you're "debating" with are either unwilling or unable to change their point of view or would argue black is white simply to be contrary.
Save your blood pressure.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Honestly, why do you bother?
The folks you're "debating" with are either unwilling or unable to change their point of view or would argue black is white simply to be contrary.
Save your blood pressure.
I sometimes wonder. But I think that putting a human face on what would otherwise be a nebulous concept focussed the debate. I'd like to hope that for some people it has made them reappraise their opinions and beliefs, in the light of actually encountering someone like me even if only in a forum. The folks you're "debating" with are either unwilling or unable to change their point of view or would argue black is white simply to be contrary.
Save your blood pressure.
Of course, as you say, some are probably a lost cause.
But I refuse to stay silent on a matter that is so important to me. By being silent I would be complicit in allowing prejudice to continue unopposed.
_dobbo_ said:
I've been unnecessarily combative on this thread, I'll stop now.
Can you consider a scenario? A man is transitioning to a woman. As part of the legal requirement to do so, she has been living as a woman for 18 months, dressing as a woman, etc. She hasn't had a gender reassignment operation yet.
She needs to go the toilet. In your someone being a nuisance world, which toilet does she use?
How about a man that is 6ft 5, thick beard, built like a brick sCan you consider a scenario? A man is transitioning to a woman. As part of the legal requirement to do so, she has been living as a woman for 18 months, dressing as a woman, etc. She hasn't had a gender reassignment operation yet.
She needs to go the toilet. In your someone being a nuisance world, which toilet does she use?
t house, dressed like a man with a cock that would make a horse blush but identifies as a woman and wants to use the female toilets where your 5yr old daughter has just entered on her own to take a piss?I'm not saying the fella is going to attempt anything other than take a piss but how many parents out there would be happy and comfortable with that situation?
Red 4 said:
Who is obsessed with toilets ?
It's a fair question.
Physically still a man but identifying with a woman ...
What's your answer ?
Who is obsessed with toilets? Pretty much anyone who has an opinion on transgender people, in my experience.It's a fair question.
Physically still a man but identifying with a woman ...
What's your answer ?
My answer is stated many times in this thread. I'm getting weary of giving it time and time again. But, one more time, I go to the loo for the gender for which I am presenting as. And nobody bats an eyelid. Because everyone just wants to go to the loo and get out again, with the least amount of hassle.
Frankly the idea of going into the men's loos presenting as female is just ludicrous.
Noodle1982 said:
How about a man that is 6ft 5, thick beard, built like a brick st house, dressed like a man with a cock that would make a horse blush but identifies as a woman and wants to use the female toilets where your 5yr old daughter has just entered on her own to take a piss?
I'm not saying the fella is going to attempt anything other than take a piss but how many parents out there would be happy and comfortable with that situation?
Interesting that you associate penis size with manliness. t house, dressed like a man with a cock that would make a horse blush but identifies as a woman and wants to use the female toilets where your 5yr old daughter has just entered on her own to take a piss?I'm not saying the fella is going to attempt anything other than take a piss but how many parents out there would be happy and comfortable with that situation?
Noodle1982 said:
How about a man that is 6ft 5, thick beard, built like a brick st house, dressed like a man with a cock that would make a horse blush but identifies as a woman and wants to use the female toilets where your 5yr old daughter has just entered on her own to take a piss?
I'm not saying the fella is going to attempt anything other than take a piss but how many parents out there would be happy and comfortable with that situation?
t house, dressed like a man with a cock that would make a horse blush but identifies as a woman and wants to use the female toilets where your 5yr old daughter has just entered on her own to take a piss?I'm not saying the fella is going to attempt anything other than take a piss but how many parents out there would be happy and comfortable with that situation?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff