The Gender Non-binary debate.

[George Smiley]

descentia said:

George Smiley said:

Yes they do

You wrote the above in reply to the following question....

Do you *really* think that trans women prey on men like you, trying to dupe them into sex with them? Honestly?


So as a george what do you propose is done to stop that happening. Maybe some identifying marks, a coloured badge perhaps to be worn on clothing ?

Why stop there? You coukd offer gov't housing in a walled estate, bravo on turning the plight of trans people to that of ww2 jews.

[descentia]

'

Edited by descentia on Sunday 31st March 22:35

[George Smiley]

There's a world of difference between the persecution of the Jews in ww2, using markings to point then out, and simply asking trans people to identify the fact prior to sex.

[descentia]

'

Edited by descentia on Sunday 31st March 22:36

[George Smiley]

descentia said:

George Smiley said:

There's a world of difference between the persecution of the Jews in ww2, using markings to point then out, and simply asking trans people to identify the fact prior to sex.

Your use of "simply" is rather disingenuous because as you've stated previously you consider trans women to be men and the thought of any sexual contact with them as a homosexual act. Also add to that your repeated accusations that they are predatory and prepared to deceive, lie and cheat to have sex with you which you equate to being sexually assaulted by them. Your stated disgust for trans people shows exactly the same feelings as the Nazis did for people they considered not human. Your repeated use of it, the trans and other insults shows you to be an intolerant, homophobic, bigoted waste of space.

You could "simply" ask me if I was trans a thousand times and I would "simply" tell you it's none of your f--king business each and every time.

Now, Mike, you can ps off to flying your drone over Cherwell ..

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

or even better learn something from your visit to Auschwitz about persecution of those not considered by others to be normal

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiMbN7l8hB2VC_epx...

That's some serious stalking/sleuth work there and not a very good way to try and stop me from having a valid view. You just vindicate the issue I and others have on this thread with yours and others approach. Well done.

At no point have I said anything of the sort that trans women are men, I have stated several times I see them as women BUT would not choose to sleep with one because in my mind it would still be sleeping with a man. That is a difference to saying trans women are just men. I clearly stated ages ago I would not discriminate against or treat differently to a woman OTHER than where it comes to sex. This entire bloody argument started when you and others said that there is no requirement to inform a potential male partner, which I believe is fundamentally wrong.

I see back in the region of p160 that trans people are comparing themselves to the persecuted jews from ww2 which is a shocking claim to make, I don't think there is any such link but ironically you bring this up here

Edited by George Smiley on Saturday 16th March 03:17

[Clockwork Cupcake]

George Smiley said:

That's some serious stalking/sleuth work there and not a very good way to try and stop me from having a valid view. You just vindicate the issue I and others have on this thread with yours and others approach. Well done.

I do not condone the stalking/sleuthing, and I very much object to the implied "guilt by association" by your use of "and others".

George Smiley said:

At no point have I said anything of the sort that trans women are men, I have stated several times I see them as women BUT would not choose to sleep with one because in my mind it would still be sleeping with a man. That is a difference to saying trans women are just men.

Huh? You deny saying that trans women are men, but you would not sleep with one because that would be sleeping with a man. And saying that sleeping with a trans woman is sleeping with a man is somehow different to saying that a trans woman is a man, despite the fact that your reason for not sleeping with a trans woman is that it would be sleeping with a man. But you don't see trans women as men despite seeing trans women as men.

That's some Grade A hair-splitting logic there.

I don't really understand in what way you "see them as women" when you state that in your mind they are men.

You can perhaps understand why people are under the impression that you think of trans women as men when you state that "in [your] mind it would still be sleeping with a man".

Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Saturday 16th March 08:49

[8.4L 154]

I think before GS went off on one about misappropriating the suffering of Jews in Nazi Germany he should have at least gone off and Googled the pink triangle and Magnus Hirschfeld and the burning of LGBT texts and taken particular note of the losses to the trans community of the era.

Here I'll make it easy for him
https://hornet.com/stories/nazis-trans-rights/

What trans people are seeing today with the constant onslaught in the media and attempts to turn back trans rights is frighteningly similar to the precursor to that period of history.

[George Smiley]

Buggles said:

Clockwork Cupcake said:

Huh? You deny saying that trans women are men, but you would not sleep with one because that would be sleeping with a man. And saying that sleeping with a trans woman is sleeping with a man is somehow different to saying that a trans woman is a man, despite the fact that you wouldn't sleep with a trans woman because it would be sleeping with a man. But you don't see trans women as men despite seeing trans women as men.

That's some Grade A hair-splitting logic there.

I don't really understand in what way you "see them as women" when you state that in your mind they are men.

You can perhaps understand why people are under the impression that you think of trans women as men when you state that "in [your] mind it would still be sleeping with a man".

Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Saturday 16th March 08:48

I would guess that he's saying that he's happy to respect a trans woman's right to be recognized as a woman, but would feel uncomfortable having sexual relations with someone that was born a man.

I can see where he's coming from, and in my opinion that's fair enough. Whether that's a situation that's likely to happen, is a whole different matter!

Thanks for putting across what I've meant to say

CC, sorry for the guilt by association with "others", I just think the approach melanie took was somewhat the wrong direction and not the way to go about things.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

Buggles said:

I would guess that he's saying that he's happy to respect a trans woman's right to be recognized as a woman, but would feel uncomfortable having sexual relations with someone that was born a man.

I can see where he's coming from, and in my opinion that's fair enough. Whether that's a situation that's likely to happen, is a whole different matter!

I don't have a problem with that when stated like that. That's stating a sexual preference. Nobody is suggesting that he somehow be compelled to sleep with a trans woman.

However, George has on numerous occasions said that he believes that trans women have a duty of care to declare their history before any sexual congress takes place, and if they do not then they should be prosecuted for sexual assault. He then directly equates that to a case where a lesbian pretended to be a man and penetrated another woman without consent. Now, that *is* sexual assault. However, a trans woman allowing you to penetrate her does not make her the assaulter.

This goes way beyond mere sexual preference.

George also seems to think that there is an army of trans ninjas preying on men, trying to trick them into having sex with them, in order to further the "trans agenda". Or something.

Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Saturday 16th March 11:02

[8.4L 154]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

Buggles said:

I would guess that he's saying that he's happy to respect a trans woman's right to be recognized as a woman, but would feel uncomfortable having sexual relations with someone that was born a man.

I can see where he's coming from, and in my opinion that's fair enough. Whether that's a situation that's likely to happen, is a whole different matter!

I don't have a problem with that when stated like that. That's stating a sexual preference. Nobody is suggesting that he somehow be compelled to sleep with a trans woman.

However, George has on numerous occasions said that he believes that trans women have a duty of care to declare their history before any sexual congress takes place, and if they do not then they should be prosecuted for sexual assault. He then directly equates that to a case where a lesbian pretended to be a man and penetrated another woman without consent. Now, that *is* sexual assault. A trans woman allowing you to penetrate her does not make her the assaulter.

This goes way beyond mere sexual preference.

George also seems to think that there is an army of trans ninjas preying on men, trying to trick them into having sex with them, in order to further the "trans agenda". Or something.

I think he is just scared of being turned gay by having sex with someone with breasts, vagina and soft skin who looks and acts like a woman but has a y chromosome and that it would be a bad thing for him and warranting the prosecution of the other participant, Hence why I think his attitude is a mixture of transphobia and homophobia. Others who have displayed similar attitudes would probably also show a good dose of racism too if they later found out her complexion was not the result of two weeks in Marabella but 25% Afro Caribbean DNA.

[George Smiley]

Clockwork Cupcake said:

Buggles said:

I would guess that he's saying that he's happy to respect a trans woman's right to be recognized as a woman, but would feel uncomfortable having sexual relations with someone that was born a man.

I can see where he's coming from, and in my opinion that's fair enough. Whether that's a situation that's likely to happen, is a whole different matter!

I don't have a problem with that when stated like that. That's stating a sexual preference. Nobody is suggesting that he somehow be compelled to sleep with a trans woman.

However, George has on numerous occasions said that he believes that trans women have a duty of care to declare their history before any sexual congress takes place, and if they do not then they should be prosecuted for sexual assault. He then directly equates that to a case where a lesbian pretended to be a man and penetrated another woman without consent. Now, that *is* sexual assault. However, a trans woman allowing you to penetrate her does not make her the assaulter.

This goes way beyond mere sexual preference.

George also seems to think that there is an army of trans ninjas preying on men, trying to trick them into having sex with them, in order to further the "trans agenda". Or something.

Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Saturday 16th March 11:02

How, just how does it not make it assault? in rubber cock girls case, she duped a girl into believing she was a man and that is why she was prosecuted. If, as stated, I wouldn't knowingly sleep with a transgender woman then found out I have (when they could have let me know up front) I don't see how that is any different.

In case A, the girl would not sleep with another woman
In case B the man would not sleep with someone born a man

By not letting the person know, you are duping them. You might not agree as in your head you are totally female but I believe if you are entering into a sexual relationship with a man, then the man has a right to know.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

Buggles said:

And do you believe that a trans woman should declare their history before engaging in relations with a man? Sexual assault is about more than just penetrative sex, and consent is more than just about saying yes.

If you don't declare that you are a trans woman, then that person hasn't given you an informed decision.

Frankly, it's an artificially constructed situation. In reality, there will be evaluation on both sides before any sexual congress takes place.

A trans woman runs a huge risk of physical assault (or worse) if the guy turns out to be transphobic, so it is very much in her interest to find out if a potential sexual partner is ok with her history or not.
So, really, George has nothing to fear - no trans woman is going to want to sleep with him.

That doesn't mean that she has a duty of care to inform him, though. If anything, he has a duty of care to inform her.

But, sure. If it will make George shut the fk up about this topic, then a trans woman should inform him. Because, as I said, she is going to be wary about going in blind anyway. But, in reality, she isn't going to inform him and then have sex with him anyway, she's going to inform him as she calls a taxi and leaves.

[George Smiley]

Huh? So essentially it is all the duty of the man to find out if the she he is about to sleep with used to be a he? I love this approach, its the have your cake and eat it mentality.

[anonymous-user]

George Smiley said:

Huh? So essentially it is all the duty of the man to find out if the she he is about to sleep with used to be a he? I love this approach, its the have your cake and eat it mentality.

If it is such a concern maybe you should ask before you do anything that is on your list as being a problem.
Maybe team up with the poster who is infallible when it comes to spotting trans people.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

George Smiley said:

How, just how does it not make it assault? in rubber cock girls case, she duped a girl into believing she was a man and that is why she was prosecuted. If, as stated, I wouldn't knowingly sleep with a transgender woman then found out I have (when they could have let me know up front) I don't see how that is any different.

You don't?

Ok, so in your fantasy scenario, which as I have said is not going to ever happen anyway, you meet a trans woman so convincing that you want to have sex with her. And, amazingly, she accepts your advances.

She believes you want to have sex with her because you consider her to be a woman. You have sex with her, and then you find she was born a man and you tell her that you are now disgusted and want some form of redress (legal or otherwise).

You have penetrated her under false pretences, just like rubber cock girl penetrated a woman under false pretences. So if you insist on equating the two, then you are the assaulter since you are the penetrator, and you have penetrated under false pretences just like rubber cock girl did.

But, as I said, this utterly ridiculous scenario is never going to happen anyway.

Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Saturday 16th March 11:29

[descentia]

'

Edited by descentia on Sunday 31st March 22:37

[George Smiley]

It is stalkerish though, for someone with such a low post count history, you've basically trawled back through to try and find something to use in a manner to try and intimidate. Quite sad really, it seems that despite transitioning up to 2 decades ago you still carry a lot of "male" traits.

[Clockwork Cupcake]

George Smiley said:

It is stalkerish though, for someone with such a low post count history, you've basically trawled back through to try and find something to use in a manner to try and intimidate.

I have to say, I don't condone it. And, also, it is against PH's Rules of Posting.

George Smiley said:

it seems that despite transitioning up to 2 decades ago you still carry a lot of "male" traits.

You rather lose the moral superiority here though. That's equally out of order.

[descentia]

'

Edited by descentia on Sunday 31st March 22:38

[George Smiley]

descentia said:

George Smiley said:

It is stalkerish though, for someone with such a low post count history, you've basically trawled back through to try and find something to use in a manner to try and intimidate. Quite sad really, it seems that despite transitioning up to 2 decades ago you still carry a lot of "male" traits.

Making assumptions that I have always been on PH under this log-in could be your mistake. Or maybe it isn't.

I didn't know that quantity of posts equated to having something useful to say , it certainly hasn't in your case but carry on with the insults if it makes you feel powerful and in control.

I make no assumptions that this is your only identify, and apologies to CC for the out of order comment regarding male traits but these actions are somewhat disturbing and something I'd attribute more to a threatening demeanour from a male characteristic.