- Joined
- May 18, 2019
- Messages
- 19,701
- Reaction score
- 3,726
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
The problems come when the trans zealots demand that, from both a legal and public policy standpoint, trans women, specifically, be considered as women in places where there has historically been gender segregation, i.e. bathrooms, locker rooms, and competitive athletics. This is where their ideology starts to harm others and why it's reasonable to push back.I'm wondering how many realize this is not a debate about truth pretty much.
It's a debate about owning the definitions.
The two statements a
1. trans woman is not a woman.
2. Trans woman is a woman.
Are both true for the speaker because truth depends on definitions and they're using different definitions.
Ultimately it boil down to a debate about the importance of biological sex in everyday language.
Obviously the extreme left wants to obfuscate biological sex and diminish its importance. You shouldn't care about biological sex when considering a mate to the extreme left for example.
And redefining traditional terms to obfuscate that serves that purpose.
Others like myself wanting easy way to distinguish biological sex and know what's what.
I don't want to have to do any extra investigating or digging to know someone's biological sex inquiring minds want to know.
Others like myself wanting easy way to distinguish biological sex and know what's what.
I don't want to have to do any extra investigating or digging to know someone's biological sex inquiring minds want to know.
On the other hand I don't have a problem with someone hiding it. I just don't want it to be easy in the norm.
Now that is funny.Most people don't know their biological sex
I do care about the women in my life and that their rights and their personal safety be taken into account
By that reasoning we should not worry about rapists in the park, yes?The biggest risk to women is straight male intimate partners. You think segregation will fix that too?
So…what it boils down to is that you are afraid you may find someone attractive and then find out that they are not biologically what you thought they were?Others like myself wanting easy way to distinguish biological sex and know what's what.
I don't want to have to do any extra investigating or digging to know someone's biological sex inquiring minds want to know
The most prevalent park rapists are cis men.By that reasoning we should not worry about rapists in the park, yes?
By that reasoning we should not worry about rapists in the park, yes?
Whenever you hear someone discussing sex or gender as being "assigned at birth" you know you're talking to someone who has more than one serving of trans Kool-Aid. Seriously, was your eye color assigned at birth? Were your limbs? How about your lungs?
The only thing missing from trans-speak is a laugh track.
You missed the point. Spud' is attempting to say we should not care about fairness or women's health issues in the trans debate because most women are harmed by men in their personal lives. That is a ridiculous reason to ignore the problems created by treating trans women as women.The most prevalent park rapists are cis men.
See post 13.No. Women are safer in the park by themselves (or in a bathroom with a transwoman) than home with a man. Is segregation the answer?
Best cancel all further gender reveal parties so many young people enjoy having.Whenever you hear someone discussing sex or gender as being "assigned at birth" you know you're talking to someone who has more than one serving of trans Kool-Aid. Seriously, was your eye color assigned at birth? Were your limbs? How about your lungs?
The only thing missing from trans-speak is a laugh track.
See post 13.
The problems come when the trans zealots demand that, from both a legal and public policy standpoint, trans women, specifically, be considered as women in places where there has historically been gender segregation, i.e. bathrooms, locker rooms, and competitive athletics. This is where their ideology starts to harm others and why it's reasonable to push back.
I really don't care whether I can identify that someone is trans or not. I do care about the women in my life and that their rights and their personal safety be taken into account, and neither should be put at risk just to indulge someone else's gender fantasy.
Weird…I didn’t see @spud_meister say that.You missed the point. Spud' is attempting to say we should not care about fairness or women's health issues in the trans debate because most women are harmed by men in their personal lives. That is a ridiculous reason to ignore the problems created by treating trans women as women.
Which seems to raise rather obvious questions. Are there any examples of women being endangered by transexuals, or are the so-called risks merely unsubstantiated fears about nothing? Have you evidence of any widespread danger to women in locker rooms by the trans community?I really don't care whether I can identify that someone is trans or not. I do care about the women in my life and that their rights and their personal safety be taken into account, and neither should be put at risk just to indulge someone else's gender fantasy.
Well if we are going to jump to ridiculous extents because reality doesn’t match tradition…then we should cancel Christmas using the same logic considering there is no basis for celebrating Jesus’s birth on December 25th.Best cancel all further gender reveal parties so many young people enjoy having.
The science forms the conclusion of what's to come at these events.
Right?So…what it boils down to is that you are afraid you may find someone attractive and then find out that they are not biologically what you thought they were?
Sounds like a personal issue.
One that could be resolved by talking to the person and asking them? Getting to know a person?
Crazy concept, right
Don't worry - Trump and the federal government will fix all of this.No. Women are safer in the park by themselves (or in a bathroom with a transwoman) than home with a man. Is segregation the answer?
No, that is illogical.Well if we are going to jump to ridiculous extents because reality doesn’t match tradition…then we should cancel Christmas using the same logic considering there is no basis for celebrating Jesus’s birth on December 25th.
It isn't really a single debate but the debates certainly are (or should be) about truth. The only reason to move away from that is if the truth doesn't support your pre-determined position.I'm wondering how many realize this is not a debate about truth pretty much.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?