The Gender Non-binary debate.

[Aphex]

Halb said:

Keira Knightley instead then?

But she looks like a boy..

[descentia]

'

Edited by descentia on Sunday 31st March 22:06

[Clockwork Cupcake]

descentia said:

Nobody is forcing you to have sex with anyone. It's the description of that sexual encounter or partnership as revulsive, wrong or engendering hatred towards it is the phobic part.

I think you are being ambiguous here, and he might not get what you are saying. Use smaller words.

[xjay1337]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

So because my example is wrong, my position is wrong? Despite the fact that I then invited you to discard the example and clarified my position.

And you claim you're not closed-minded?

You give an example to support your position
Example is crap, so your position cannot be supported?

Rivenink said:

I disagree, I don't think its a particularly grey area. You could equivocate, and obfuscate your true feelings, but what would be the point. Blunt honesty is refreshing

If I'm following right; you think trans-women are male, which is why a male having sexual relations with a trans-woman is a homosexual act.

What would change your mind about whether a trans-woman is female or male?

I accept that a trans woman wants to be classed as a female.
That's fine.

But, she is a man.

Nothing would change my mind on that, because you can't change fact.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

xjay1337 said:

Nothing would change my mind on that, because you can't change fact. my mind is incapable of change.

FTFY

[biggbn]

xjay1337 said:

Clockwork Cupcake said:

So because my example is wrong, my position is wrong? Despite the fact that I then invited you to discard the example and clarified my position.

And you claim you're not closed-minded?

You give an example to support your position
Example is crap, so your position cannot be supported?

Rivenink said:

I disagree, I don't think its a particularly grey area. You could equivocate, and obfuscate your true feelings, but what would be the point. Blunt honesty is refreshing

If I'm following right; you think trans-women are male, which is why a male having sexual relations with a trans-woman is a homosexual act.

What would change your mind about whether a trans-woman is female or male?

I accept that a trans woman wants to be classed as a female.
That's fine.

But, she is a man.

Nothing would change my mind on that, because you can't change fact.

A trans woman is not a man. What's the big problem here.

[Rivenink]

xjay1337 said:

I accept that a trans woman wants to be classed as a female.
That's fine.

But, she is a man.

Nothing would change my mind on that, because you can't change fact.

A fact is simply a known thing, or something that has proven to be true.

Up until new evidence is presented that contradicts the previously known truth.

Then it is no longer a fact and a new fact is created.

It used to be a fact that horses were the fastest method of travel. Until that fact was proven to not be true.

Would you agree with this description of the nature of facts?

[biggbn]

I guess the problem is evolving the mind to accept new information. For some, due to social, cultural and environmental drivers, a trans woman can never be a woman. For others it's not a big issue. I find it hard to be tolerant to intolerance but sometimes when you scratch the surface, the enormity of the task of redefining accepted, outdated parameters become.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

biggbn said:

I guess the problem is evolving the mind to accept new information. For some, due to social, cultural and environmental drivers, a trans woman can never be a woman. For others it's not a big issue. I find it hard to be tolerant to intolerance but sometimes when you scratch the surface, the enormity of the task of redefining accepted, outdated parameters become.

Indeed.

I do find it somewhat odd that someone can say they accept that a trans woman thinks she is a woman, and even use female pronouns in saying so, and then conclude that she is a man.

Even if one does not accept that she is a woman it seems a little odd to say she is a man. I suppose if you only acknowledge an "either / or" scenario then it must be difficult to know what to think.

In many cultures other than ours, both in location and history, they got round this by defining a "third gender" or "neither" or "something other than". It seems to me that could be a common ground. At least in the interim.

Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Thursday 21st February 17:49

[Rivenink]

biggbn said:

I guess the problem is evolving the mind to accept new information. For some, due to social, cultural and environmental drivers, a trans woman can never be a woman. For others it's not a big issue. I find it hard to be tolerant to intolerance but sometimes when you scratch the surface, the enormity of the task of redefining accepted, outdated parameters become.

It's the Tolerance paradox.

[V1nce Fox]

Rivenink said:

biggbn said:

I guess the problem is evolving the mind to accept new information. For some, due to social, cultural and environmental drivers, a trans woman can never be a woman. For others it's not a big issue. I find it hard to be tolerant to intolerance but sometimes when you scratch the surface, the enormity of the task of redefining accepted, outdated parameters become.

It's the Tolerance paradox.

Is it wrong to want to differentiate between a trans woman and a biologically "original" woman though?

[xjay1337]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

xjay1337 said:

Nothing would change my mind on that, because you can't change fact. my mind is incapable of change.

FTFY

You cannot argue genetics.

Rivenink said:

xjay1337 said:

I accept that a trans woman wants to be classed as a female.
That's fine.

But, she is a man.

Nothing would change my mind on that, because you can't change fact.

A fact is simply a known thing, or something that has proven to be true.

Up until new evidence is presented that contradicts the previously known truth.

Then it is no longer a fact and a new fact is created.

It used to be a fact that horses were the fastest method of travel. Until that fact was proven to not be true.

Would you agree with this description of the nature of facts?

Ok..........
What does horses have to do with it?

The horses didn't go "I want to identify as a car" and then become known as cars.......

If you are born a male with XY chromosomes and then undergo a transition to a female, you may have your wang chopped off and boobs added but genetically YOU ARE A MALE.

You can do all the womanly things you want. Go roller skating with your friends. Use the female toilets. Etc.
You may have the mindset of a woman.
That's fine, go ahead. And power to you. As I've already said.

But GENETICALLY YOU ARE A MAN - So I'm not going to change science to suit your outlook.

I will accept your choosing to claim your gender as female. No issues
But your SEX is male and that is ultimately what you are.

[Davos123]

xjay1337 said:

Ok..........
What does horses have to do with it?

The horses didn't go "I want to identify as a car" and then become known as cars.......

If you are born a male with XY chromosomes and then undergo a transition to a female, you may have your wang chopped off and boobs added but genetically YOU ARE A MALE.

You can do all the womanly things you want. Go roller skating with your friends. Use the female toilets. Etc.
You may have the mindset of a woman.
That's fine, go ahead. And power to you. As I've already said.

But GENETICALLY YOU ARE A MAN - So I'm not going to change science to suit your outlook.

I will accept your choosing to claim your gender as female. No issues
But your SEX is male and that is ultimately what you are.

The problem here is that you keep on using male and female interchangeably with men and women. They are not the same thing. Sex and gender are not the same thing.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

xjay1337 said:

What does horses have to do with it?

*sighs*

Are you pretending to be thick, or are you just thick?

[George Smiley]

He may identify as thick, it seems you are intolerant of the thick.

[Davos123]

George Smiley said:

He may identify as thick, it seems you are intolerant of the thick.

I'm sure he thinks he's smart from the way he posts.

It doesn't matter if you think or say you're smart if you were born thick. You may look like you're smart, think that you're smart, but you're still thick. It's biology and you can't change it.

[_dobbo_]

[_dobbo_]

It's bizarre to me to have formed such a strong view on a topic that can't possibly impact you in any meaningful way.

It's more bizarre to then go on a forum and POST IN CAPS all about GENETICS and SCIENCE to support your strong view, when you are so tragically out of touch with up to date information on those topics.

Anyway, around we go again on the groundhog day thread.

[xjay1337]

It's a debate thread.
Is that not where such discussions should take place?

[xjay1337]

Davos123 said:

The problem here is that you keep on using male and female interchangeably with men and women. They are not the same thing. Sex and gender are not the same thing.

I know that. I have said before.
You may use the term gender to give whatever label you want but, talking about relationships and shagging etc I care about your sex not your gender.

So I won't be sleeping with a trans woman thank you :-)
Willfully or unwillingly...!
I view that as gay.

I asked my Mrs what she thinks and she would be in a relationship with a trans man. But only if she met him as a guy.
I said that makes her a lesbian - and then we ate ice cream.