Bias Against Transgenders

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Nick_A
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by Nick_A » Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:26 am

gaffo wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:56 am
Nick_A wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:50 am
gaffo wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:27 am


the problem is the majority in the middle - partial racists/mysogynists/etc.........and i'm not either - but am SICK of the endless drumbeat of LIGTQA..etc 100+ additions (must include one legged black lesbions too). if the endless drumbeat is driving me away, what is it doing to the vast middle majority?

subtlety please, to appeal to the middle and not make it a trial for those on the left to remain where we have been since the 70's
Some people are unwilling to compromise in the cause of peace and need expert assistance.

Imagine a woman who is used to being raped six times a week buys a gun and tells the rapist if he comes near her again he's a dead man. Now this is a violent reaction and cool heads soon enter the picture and offer the perfect compromise. Since he wants to rape her six times a week and she doesn't want to be raped at all, the perfect compromise is her agreeing to be raped three times week. The ultimate appeal to the middle. He gives a little and she gives a little. A sign of real intelligence.
I don't follow.
i'm dumb and welcome clarification.

thank for reply though!
You are just not used to authentic compromise so it seems unusual. In this case the rapist is used to raping the woman six times a week. It has been going on for a year now. All of s sudden she buys a gun and threatens violence against him if he comes near him. To make matters worse he is an illegal alien so her threat of violence is politically incorrect. Of course we cannot tolerate violence so cooler heads enter the disagreement and offer the reasonable solution of rape only three time a week. The rapist and the woman meet at the middle which is rape only three time a week. A glorious compromise in the spirit of the times. What modern thinkers can be against compromise? It is what they all want.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4391
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by Greta » Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:41 am

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:02 am
From your first post, I've loved you Greta. Why? Because yours is almost always the voice of reason!! ;-) :-* (<-- no worries that kiss was meant for your cheeks, my fellow voice of reason!) Great minds and all that, you know! It's always a breath of fresh air. ;-)
The sad thing is that some others are so unreasonable that it makes me seem like a voice of reason by comparison. As you are aware, all it takes is to make an attempt at fair mindedness rather than failing to question one's intrinsic biases.

So some might see this post as hypocrisy, which you said you liked:
While loathe to jump into the conservative convention here, this policy is a terrible idea that's more likely to foster than dampen transphobia.

Transsexualism is in essence a social and sexual disability and, as with other disabilities, that means some activities might not be available. Otherwise it's not fair on regular women and girls because there are clear physical genetic differences. If it makes them feel better, I expect that any athletic females who are changing over would say goodbye to their sporting days too, not from practicality but inability to compete strongly with the lads. It is this disparity that throws the problem into sharp relief.
Then the fanatics claim this is hypocrisy because, if I argue on the side of Team Liberal (as these simpletons see it) then I should follow the party line as slavishly as they follow Republican policy.

So they don't comprehend the concept of considering issues on a case by case basis. This thread is just an excuse to slander a minority, that's all, to shore up their insecure sense of male sexuality, hence the speed with which the evangelists soon shifted focus from sport to general attacks.

gaffo
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by gaffo » Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:45 am

Nick_A wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:26 am
gaffo wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:56 am
Nick_A wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:50 am


Some people are unwilling to compromise in the cause of peace and need expert assistance.

Imagine a woman who is used to being raped six times a week buys a gun and tells the rapist if he comes near her again he's a dead man. Now this is a violent reaction and cool heads soon enter the picture and offer the perfect compromise. Since he wants to rape her six times a week and she doesn't want to be raped at all, the perfect compromise is her agreeing to be raped three times week. The ultimate appeal to the middle. He gives a little and she gives a little. A sign of real intelligence.
I don't follow.
i'm dumb and welcome clarification.

thank for reply though!
You are just not used to authentic compromise so it seems unusual. In this case the rapist is used to raping the woman six times a week. It has been going on for a year now. All of s sudden she buys a gun and threatens violence against him if he comes near him. To make matters worse he is an illegal alien so her threat of violence is politically incorrect. Of course we cannot tolerate violence so cooler heads enter the disagreement and offer the reasonable solution of rape only three time a week. The rapist and the woman meet at the middle which is rape only three time a week. A glorious compromise in the spirit of the times. What modern thinkers can be against compromise? It is what they all want.
oh, well than its all good then. lol.

i've always been one of "horse sense" - had it since like forever - back in the 70's before PC and now. i ingnore PC as ego "hey i'm special/victim - look at me!"

seriously, when did all of the sudden 1/10th of all of us either have Ausberger's or Autism - and wear it on a sleeve to be championed?, when prior to the 80's the legit number was 1 in 100 or so - nor did those afflicted champion thier affliction as something for others to acknowledge and respect.

to clarify i respect all persons that are respectable - including those with the missfortune of being born with a dissability - if thier character is good.

just sick of PC and it is egoism - gone remant since the last 20 yrs or so.

-----------

a little off topic, but heard Kamala Harris (who i might have voted for - until now) champion her being a women and young (and say in effect "we've had enough of old while guys (Sanders anyone - well i like Sander's Kamala, and your champoioning of trible (young/women/blacks are all good - old/whites and man are all bad - just lost my vote.

i loathe PC myself. I will vote for the honest man/woman/goat - if it happens to be an older than dirt white jewish guy - Sanders (did he vote for the "antiBDS bill? - i will have to find out - all the other young nonjewish nonmale nonwhites in the democratic field did (Ted Liu!!!).

thanks for reply.

gaffo
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by gaffo » Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:54 am

i like Ted Liu, Max Blumenthal, and Adam Shiff - but all three voted via AIPAC mandate - and against the US 1st Amendment to protest Israel via peacefull means (as we did in the 80's WRT South Africa)

so they are Isareli lobbist pussies - affirng 1/5 millon in fine and 5 yr in jail for holding a sign opposing the illegal Isareli occupation of the Westbank, and racist subjugation of the 1 million non-jews living their.

so fk em - not get my vote.

i like Bidon, Sanders and Sheldon Whitehouse - and will have to look into if they are Isareli pussies affirming racism and crimalizing protesting of - before it vote of them.

Chuck Shumer and Andrew Quomo likewise choose to nullify our Bill of Right for AIPAC's master.


----------oh but im sure they are all fine with me holding a sign championing the full rights of gays and queers - all millon or so...................as long as they ain't Palistinian!
Last edited by gaffo on Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:00 am, edited 5 times in total.

Judaka
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2018 5:24 pm

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by Judaka » Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:54 am

Greta wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:41 am
As you are aware, all it takes is to make an attempt at fair mindedness rather than failing to question one's intrinsic biases.
The irony is thick... Even if others' are as hateful as you claim, shouldn't you at least strive to be better than them? You only stoop to their level and indulge in more of the same hate.
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:11 am
It would seem that all you dumb asses, you naysayers of people different than you, are science deficient.
More irony...

You guys are pretty much of the position that ALL Republicans (people different than you) are the scum of the Earth, you assume they have the worst intentions whenever you can and you have no time for nuance.

After my debate with Logik, I need a rest from any sort of hypocrisy and unquestionable self-assurance, I can't continue this here.

gaffo
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by gaffo » Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:02 am

sadly the last repulbican i respected - Ben Sasse - vote against our Bill of Rights, and for AIPAC in the same bill.

lovely.

gaffo
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by gaffo » Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:04 am

are their any presidental candidates that affirmed our Bill of Rights and the right to protest Israel via BDS - from any party?

please offer the names of any (are any not bought out?) so i can know whom i can vote for in 2020.

gaffo
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by gaffo » Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:13 am

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premiu ... -1.6883741

having a hard time to see a "name tally" of who voted for it.

Sanders in not in the clear - for this bill was voted on last year, and back then Gillibrand voted for it (now against it since deciding to run for president - so weak pussy and "no vote now" - when vote for prior - means no vote for president by me.

Sanders? did you vote FOR the same unamerican bill last year?

...........i must do my research before wasting my vote on any shills.

might have to not vote in order to the right thing in 2020.

gaffo
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by gaffo » Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:23 am

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/mi ... -under-bus

note encouraging ;-/.

Bidon? you'r voting record per AIPAC?

gaffo
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by gaffo » Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:32 am

Sanders just lost my 2020 vote -sadly, i like the guy, but he does not think it right for full rights in a One State for all, where jews are a minority: i assume he thinks it is impossible for non-jews (muslims) to affirm democracy, and so chooses the trible option - reject the majority equal rights to afford a jewish minority with full rights:

per comment section of article linked above:

If a two-state solution fails, Takruri asked Sanders, would he support “one-state with equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians alike, and equal citizenship?”

“No, I don’t,” he said. “I mean, I think if that happens, then that would be the end of the state of Israel, and I support Israel’s right to exist.”

He opposes a state in which all citizens would have equal rights. He does so because in his own words, removing the foundations of inequality would bring about the downfall of a state he values. Apartheid is a necessary condition for the survival of that state, and he will continue to defend its interests. How does this position differ from that taken by Strom Thurmond or Theodore Bilbo when they stood against a civil rights movement that would spell the end of Jim Crow and- in their eyes- the Southland they so dearly loved.


this is all i need to know - sadly. I'll miss not voting for your Sanders, so sad, i really am, you showed promise for America, but chose tribalism over humanism so fuck you sir.

no vote from me.

Frank N Stein
Posts: 144
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2019 3:03 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by Frank N Stein » Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:41 am

gaffo wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:32 am
Sanders just lost my 2020 vote -sadly, i like the guy, but he does not think it right for full rights in a One State for all, where jews are a minority: i assume he thinks it is impossible for non-jews (muslims) to affirm democracy, and so chooses the trible option - reject the majority equal rights to afford a jewish minority with full rights:

per comment section of article linked above:

If a two-state solution fails, Takruri asked Sanders, would he support “one-state with equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians alike, and equal citizenship?”

“No, I don’t,” he said. “I mean, I think if that happens, then that would be the end of the state of Israel, and I support Israel’s right to exist.”

He opposes a state in which all citizens would have equal rights. He does so because in his own words, removing the foundations of inequality would bring about the downfall of a state he values. Apartheid is a necessary condition for the survival of that state, and he will continue to defend its interests. How does this position differ from that taken by Strom Thurmond or Theodore Bilbo when they stood against a civil rights movement that would spell the end of Jim Crow and- in their eyes- the Southland they so dearly loved.


this is all i need to know - sadly. I'll miss not voting for your Sanders, so sad, i really am, you showed promise for America, but chose tribalism over humanism so fuck you sir.

no vote from me.
You know that would mean the end of Israel, and that's what you want. Why don't you just mind your own beeswax and clean up your own country?

Nick_A
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by Nick_A » Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:44 am

Gaffo
oh, well than its all good then. lol.
This just shows how much you need the help of the educated progressives to decide right and wrong for you. You are no longer capable of making such important decisions. You need those with the Greta mind to decide right and wrong for you. In previous times rule of law decided right and wrong. Those days are over. Now we have progressive experts who are far superior to rule of law to decide right and wrong. To think that it is all good is insulting to progressive experts who have condescended to teach you right from wrong.

It isn't up to you to question why a man can call himself a woman and enter a ladies room but not be able to play in woman's tennis. Just accept that there is profound reasoning behind this apparent hypocrisy that is beyond your comprehension. Just remember that your progressive government will always know what is good for you and when men are men and women are women. You are so lucky to have your progressive superiors make these decisions for you..

gaffo
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by gaffo » Sun Feb 03, 2019 3:55 am


gaffo
Posts: 2124
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by gaffo » Sun Feb 03, 2019 4:11 am

found the list! for the earlier same-type bill (2 yrs ago - AIPAC has been pushing this for 2 yrs on state and federal levels (and why 26 - soon to be 43 state now make it a crimanl offense to use our 1st amendment right - if it is protesting the illegal occupation of the westbank by israel).

Senator's that voted to criminalize the Bill of Rights in 2016:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-con ... cosponsors

Representatives that voted to criminalize the Bill of Rights in 2016:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-con ... cosponsors

America, land of the free.

lol ;-(.

User avatar
SpheresOfBalance
Posts: 5278
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis

Re: Bias Against Transgenders

Post by SpheresOfBalance » Sun Feb 03, 2019 4:13 am

Greta wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:41 am
SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:02 am
From your first post, I've loved you Greta. Why? Because yours is almost always the voice of reason!! ;-) :-* (<-- no worries that kiss was meant for your cheeks, my fellow voice of reason!) Great minds and all that, you know! It's always a breath of fresh air. ;-)
The sad thing is that some others are so unreasonable that it makes me seem like a voice of reason by comparison. As you are aware, all it takes is to make an attempt at fair mindedness rather than failing to question one's intrinsic biases.
First, I don't see bias as intrinsic, it's always ever taught within the culture one's born into. Of course many psychological factors ensures one is groomed in such a way, rather than rebellious of the status quo. The pressure of environment can be strong indeed, considering the needs of humans to fit in to their surroundings; peer pressure.

So some might see this post as hypocrisy, which you said you liked:
While loathe to jump into the conservative convention here, this policy is a terrible idea that's more likely to foster than dampen transphobia.

Transsexualism is in essence a social and sexual disability and, as with other disabilities, that means some activities might not be available. Otherwise it's not fair on regular women and girls because there are clear physical genetic differences. If it makes them feel better, I expect that any athletic females who are changing over would say goodbye to their sporting days too, not from practicality but inability to compete strongly with the lads. It is this disparity that throws the problem into sharp relief.
Second, I hope that quote wasn't supposed to be me, as I've never said such a thing. Did I miss something? Or in all this hoopla are you confused as to which were my words?

For the record, I despise hypocrisy, which doesn't mean I might not have been considered a hypocrite, after all, (obviously), I didn't major in English! Or even minor in it, for that matter. ;-)


Then the fanatics claim this is hypocrisy because, if I argue on the side of Team Liberal (as these simpletons see it) then I should follow the party line as slavishly as they follow Republican policy.
I agree that any particular moniker, composed of a single word, and a short definition, is not necessarily indicative of the whole of the body of people, that choose to be associated with it, over it's seemingly diametrically opposed counterpart. There is always a much finer degree of association, often unwritten and possibly as yet, not fully explored.


So they don't comprehend the concept of considering issues on a case by case basis. This thread is just an excuse to slander a minority, that's all, to shore up their insecure sense of male sexuality, hence the speed with which the evangelists soon shifted focus from sport to general attacks.
This last sentence of yours I would change to:

'For some, this thread has seemingly become an excuse to slander a minority, that's all, to shore up their insecure sense of male sexuality, hence the speed with which the evangelists soon shifted focus from sport to general attacks.'

Simply to be more correct as to that which I believe is transpiring, so I agree with your analysis! But I, surely like you seem to do, try and be as correct in conveying that analysis, as I can be. No doubt I fail more than you do. You know, that English thing again. ;-)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests