Your trans-exclusive dating and sexual practices are transphobic.

[JetBlue]

This is really cool of Maher.



And this girl's commentary is spot on.

I used to be an extreme lefty - just like the personalities she mentioned - but critically thinking individuals with actual nerve just can't take a lot of the socio-political garbage that has been rapidly being produced by the left in the last few years; particularly on LGBTRP issues.

 

[Unbeknownst]

Absolutely not.

Totally false equivalence here.

Very typical of people who try to either defend the recent transexual phenomenon - muddy the waters with bullshit anecdotes, hollow metaphors, junk science under the veil of love and compassion until no one knows which way is up.

I'm confused then.

It's "akin to rape" for a trans person to trick someone, leading the person to have a sexual encounter they otherwise would not have had if they were not mislead...

but it's not "akin to rape" for a man to trick a woman, leading her to have a sexual encounter she otherwise would not have had if she was not mislead.

Why the double standard? I can agree there are ethical issues with lying your way into someone's pants, but it certainly isn't rape and never has been considered such. It is no more rape for a transwoman not to disclose her biological sex to a partner than for a man to lie about love and commitment to a woman he wants to sleep with.

If one is rape, the other should be to- and if men lying to women to sleep with them is rape there are a whole lot of rapists.

No I didn't.

I described the likely scenario to unfold should misguided people think that behaving the way that they do is in any way acceptable.

Sex is a powerful thing - doesn't matter who you are - if you actively mess with someone along those lines then you are always asking for trouble.

If a man lies to a woman that he loves her and will marry her so she will have sex with him, is he asking to be beaten and murdered? Just looking for consistency here.

And sadly the above line is the perennial MO for the T community which explains exactly why they suffer the violence that they do.

That is just untrue. Most trans people experience hate crimes from (71.9%), family members (28.1%) and/or law enforcement (31.3%), not sexual or romantic partners.

(https://jhs.press.gonzaga.edu/articles/10.33972/jhs.158/)

(Obviously, the percentages do not add up to 100 because there is overlap, some people have experienced multiple hate crimes from different groups of people).

The answer isn't to celebrate sick, damaged people for being sick and damaged - our culture has gotten this issue so terribly wrong over the last decade that it's not even remotely funny.

And the Ts suffer the most from the way our society has approached the issue.

Transitioning is literally the only treatment we have for gender dysphoria. What would you prefer us do? Not treat gender dysphoria at all, and let people with gender dysphoria suffer until they commit suicide?

Therapy to make a trans person accept and be comfortable with their biological sex and the corresponding gender (also known as conversion therapy) hasn't been successful. In fact, it's been shown to just exacerbate the symptoms of gender dysphoria, and cause depression and suicide.

Trans people do suffer from the way society shames and ridicules them. If you want to help, perhaps you should donate to the Trevor Project and delete your comments on this forum which promote violence against trans individuals.

 

[Aristaeus]

If you are non-binary, and you are only attracted to one (men or women), then what are you? Since you can be neither homosexual nor heterosexual, since what you are attracted to is neither the same nor the opposite of you, and not bisexual or pan sexual since you are not attracted to both or all. I have my own answer, but I am curious to yours.

heterosexual and homosexual are based on sex, not gender.
A non-binary male attracted to women is heterosexual.
A non-binary female attracted to women is homosexual.

 

[Crunchtime]

I made the exact point the article in the OP made here before.

Kind of like when people make comments about my "black hole" posts when actual physicists have said the term is problematically racist.

It's easier to call someone a "troll" or a "Poe" than actually challenge your own transphobia.

Transphobia is normal. Normal people are repulsed by the idea of “trans” anything. That’s reality.

 

[Aristaeus]

Sexual orientation is very different from gender identity. Our sexual orientation is in the hypothalamus, which is a different part of the brain from the amygdala where gender identity appears to originate.

Irrelevant. Your claim is that transwomen are women because part of their brain is more like a woman's brain than a man's.
But that is also true of gay males, so by your argument, gay males are also women.

 

[Unbeknownst]

?

I was making of comparison. If it is akin to rape for a transwoman to trick someone into having sex with her by lying (as JetBlue argued), shouldn't the same standard be held for cismen who trick women into having sex with them by lying?

Obviously, I think neither situation qualifies as rape. Dubiously ethical? Sure. Rape? No. But if JetBlue wants to claim that one is rape, then for consistency's sake both should be rape- unless JetBlue doesn't actually care about lying and sex, and just wants an excuse to be transphobic.

 

[maquiscat]

heterosexual and homosexual are based on sex, not gender.
A non-binary male attracted to women is heterosexual.
A non-binary female attracted to women is homosexual.

I am not arguing against that in and of itself. However that is based upon the premise that one's sexual orientation should be determined by their biological sex. That seems to be a shifting paradigm right now. And in all honesty, my sexual orientation has no objective criteria when it comes to the idea of whether the label for it uses my sex or my gender or nothing at all as a factor in determining the label. Here is the other thing. Being active among the great LBGT community, I have noticed a wider range of attraction criteria than previously assumed. Aside from the being attracted to female women and male men, I have also noticed there are attractions to women or men, regardless of whether the individual is male or female. IOW, as has been noted many times by people on both side of the LBGT support line, for some people genitals matter, and for others they do not.

However, here is a question. Why are you using the sex for the attracted but the gender for the attraction? Would not the use of female over woman be more consistent? Or is it your position that a NB male attracted to women, be they male or female, is heterosexuality?

 

[maquiscat]

Irrelevant. Your claim is that transwomen are women because part of their brain is more like a woman's brain than a man's.
But that is also true of gay males, so by your argument, gay males are also women.

I can see your point. But if the two things, orientation and identity, are controlled by different parts of the brain, then they are two different things. In both cases, the brains may be closer to that of (staying with the example) biological females, but that does not mean that identity for both would be the same. I agreed that the argument gets watered down because it is being applied to both conditions. But the statement does remain true, even if it is different parts of the brain that is closer to female causing the two different conditions. And given that there are two different areas that affect the two conditions, it fits the evidence of trans women who are still attracted to other women. The hypothalamus is not closer to a biological female's, but the amygdala is.

 

[maquiscat]

I was making of comparison. If it is akin to rape for a transwoman to trick someone into having sex with her by lying (as JetBlue argued), shouldn't the same standard be held for cismen who trick women into having sex with them by lying?

Obviously, I think neither situation qualifies as rape. Dubiously ethical? Sure. Rape? No. But if JetBlue wants to claim that one is rape, then for consistency's sake both should be rape- unless JetBlue doesn't actually care about lying and sex, and just wants an excuse to be transphobic.

Sorry you misread the whole post. I was not questioning your comparison. I was quoting you as part of my question to @JetBlue. I happen to agree with you on the consistency thing

 

[maquiscat]

I had to google those terms. Those are new for me.

I am very definitely sapiosexual. I doubt that would surprised anyone who has read my 1500 word typo-laced missives. And if anyone is wondering; I've kissed a girl, but I unlike Katy Perry, didn't like it. Guys are intimately more fun.

Believe it or not, I actually made them up myself at one point. I don't claim to be the originator of the use of them. I'll blame parallel development there, especially since I don't often use them, although my use of them seem to be a bit different than what is common in the greater usage. I'd say maybe a small handful of times in making an argument over the labels that are out there. I know at least once was somewhere on here as I argued that a trans person's orientation does not change when they transition, only their label does, unless they had been in the closet prior to transitioning as well. Even then that's not a change in the orientation, but no longer pretending to be other than your orientation.

As a side note, I would say that sapiosexual is not an orientation in and of itself, and your last bit would be in support of that, intended or not. The sapiosexual seems more like a trigger to your orientation as a heterosexual (assuming you to be female/woman as your profile indicates and you have claimed in the past) than a independent orientation. The same with demisexual.

 

[Aristaeus]

I was making of comparison. If it is akin to rape for a transwoman to trick someone into having sex with her by lying (as JetBlue argued), shouldn't the same standard be held for cismen who trick women into having sex with them by lying?

Obviously, I think neither situation qualifies as rape. Dubiously ethical? Sure. Rape? No. But if JetBlue wants to claim that one is rape, then for consistency's sake both should be rape- unless JetBlue doesn't actually care about lying and sex, and just wants an excuse to be transphobic.

In the UK, women have been convicted of rape (or our female equivalent of rape) for posing as a man and having consensual sex (strap-on) with women, so there is legal precedent for it if it involves misleading someone about your sex.

I don't think anyone would claim that lying about being in love to get sex would be rape. I don't think the two are comparible.

 

[Aristaeus]

I am not arguing against that in and of itself. However that is based upon the premise that one's sexual orientation should be determined by their biological sex. That seems to be a shifting paradigm right now. And in all honesty, my sexual orientation has no objective criteria when it comes to the idea of whether the label for it uses my sex or my gender or nothing at all as a factor in determining the label. Here is the other thing. Being active among the great LBGT community, I have noticed a wider range of attraction criteria than previously assumed. Aside from the being attracted to female women and male men, I have also noticed there are attractions to women or men, regardless of whether the individual is male or female. IOW, as has been noted many times by people on both side of the LBGT support line, for some people genitals matter, and for others they do not.

However, here is a question. Why are you using the sex for the attracted but the gender for the attraction? Would not the use of female over woman be more consistent? Or is it your position that a NB male attracted to women, be they male or female, is heterosexuality?

Because if I used the term non-binary woman, certain posters would leap on it and accuse me of misgendering nb people.

I suppose I could have used females for both for consistency, but since women are by default female, they are just interchange synonyms.

 

[Aristaeus]

I can see your point. But if the two things, orientation and identity, are controlled by different parts of the brain, then they are two different things. In both cases, the brains may be closer to that of (staying with the example) biological females, but that does not mean that identity for both would be the same. I agreed that the argument gets watered down because it is being applied to both conditions. But the statement does remain true, even if it is different parts of the brain that is closer to female causing the two different conditions. And given that there are two different areas that affect the two conditions, it fits the evidence of trans women who are still attracted to other women. The hypothalamus is not closer to a biological female's, but the amygdala is.

Her argument has never been that only one certain part of the brain can be used for that argument; it's always been about comparable brain structure.

Quite frankly, she's moving the goalposts because the tenent of her argument is being used to counter that argument.

 

[maquiscat]

I suppose I could have used females for both for consistency, but since women are by default female, they are just interchange synonyms.

See that's just it. That's the paradigm shift on the label use. Women are not default female right now. Or at least that is what the whole argument is about. Now in and of itself I'm not asking you to accept that sex and gender are separate. But if you are making a point where you are using, in this case, NB, which indicates gender separate from sex, then you should maintain that standard throughout the whole example.

 

[maquiscat]

Her argument has never been that only one certain part of the brain can be used for that argument; it's always been about comparable brain structure.

Quite frankly, she's moving the goalposts because the tenent of her argument is being used to counter that argument.

Has the point you made ever been brought up before with her? I know it's the first time I'm seeing it. If not then I can see not bother to note the difference as the structure point would have been in the context of either homosexuality or transgenderism. And since the context existed there would not have been a need to make the difference known.

 

[What if...?]

Would we tolerate "I'm just not attracted to black women" today?

IDK. Personally I didn’t find many black women attractive until the weave became more common. Now I do find more black women attractive. So apparently it was a hair thing and not a skin color thing.

WE all like different things. I don’t think it’s as cut and dried as you make out.

 

[Aristaeus]

See that's just it. That's the paradigm shift on the label use. Women are not default female right now. Or at least that is what the whole argument is about. Now in and of itself I'm not asking you to accept that sex and gender are separate. But if you are making a point where you are using, in this case, NB, which indicates gender separate from sex, then you should maintain that standard throughout the whole example.

I accept sex and gender are different, my argument is that woman is a sex-based word and that argument stems from the dictionary definition (and also that posters who reject this definition can't provide an alternative one).

The only reason I used female for nb was to avoid certain posters from derailing the discussion.

 

[JetBlue]

Transphobia is normal. Normal people are repulsed by the idea of “trans” anything. That’s reality.

Yep.

The internet is full of damaged individuals though.

So the idea that trans anything is acceptable for any society and that this idea should be accepted without a second thought appears inflated online, and is completely out of touch with the real world.

Internet tone-deafness from people who defend the recent phenomenon.

 

[JetBlue]

I'm confused then.

It's "akin to rape" for a trans person to trick someone, leading the person to have a sexual encounter they otherwise would not have had if they were not mislead...

but it's not "akin to rape" for a man to trick a woman, leading her to have a sexual encounter she otherwise would not have had if she was not mislead.

Why the double standard? I can agree there are ethical issues with lying your way into someone's pants, but it certainly isn't rape and never has been considered such. It is no more rape for a transwoman not to disclose her biological sex to a partner than for a man to lie about love and commitment to a woman he wants to sleep with.

If one is rape, the other should be to- and if men lying to women to sleep with them is rape there are a whole lot of rapists.

If a man lies to a woman that he loves her and will marry her so she will have sex with him, is he asking to be beaten and murdered? Just looking for consistency here.

That is just untrue. Most trans people experience hate crimes from (71.9%), family members (28.1%) and/or law enforcement (31.3%), not sexual or romantic partners.

(https://jhs.press.gonzaga.edu/articles/10.33972/jhs.158/)

(Obviously, the percentages do not add up to 100 because there is overlap, some people have experienced multiple hate crimes from different groups of people).

Transitioning is literally the only treatment we have for gender dysphoria. What would you prefer us do? Not treat gender dysphoria at all, and let people with gender dysphoria suffer until they commit suicide?

Therapy to make a trans person accept and be comfortable with their biological sex and the corresponding gender (also known as conversion therapy) hasn't been successful. In fact, it's been shown to just exacerbate the symptoms of gender dysphoria, and cause depression and suicide.

Trans people do suffer from the way society shames and ridicules them. If you want to help, perhaps you should donate to the Trevor Project and delete your comments on this forum which promote violence against trans individuals.

You need to delete your post immediately.

The ideas you espouse are dangerous to society and are the direct cause of a lot of suicides.

The idea that "transitioning therapy" is the "only way" is complete and utter bullshit.

 

[Phys251]

This is really cool of Maher.



And this girl's commentary is spot on.

I used to be an extreme lefty - just like the personalities she mentioned - but critically thinking individuals with actual nerve just can't take a lot of the socio-political garbage that has been rapidly being produced by the left in the last few years; particularly on LGBTRP issues.

I used to be a righty, but several issues--particularly anti-gay hatred--pushed me to the left.

That's what's happening to young people in droves, who are sick and tired of right-wing bigotry.

 

[Phys251]

You need to delete your post immediately.

The ideas you espouse are dangerous to society and are the direct cause of a lot of suicides.

The idea that "transitioning therapy" is the "only way" is complete and utter bullshit.

Why are you so triggered by potentially lifesaving therapy? Why do you want trans people not to be able to transition?

 

[Lisa]

Irrelevant. Your claim is that transwomen are women because part of their brain is more like a woman's brain than a man's.
But that is also true of gay males, so by your argument, gay males are also women.

Gender identity is not sexual orientation. The amygdala is not the hypothalamus.

A gay male has a male gender identity but an attraction to someone of the same gender

A heterosexual trans female has a female gender identity but is attracted to CIS or bi males.

You cannot make a trans female into a gay man by trying to change her gender identity, or likewise a gay female into a trans guy.

Everyone has a gender identity and a sexual orientation. They are independent and not interchangeable. Obviously, they can not be changed by psychotherapy or medication.

 

[JetBlue]

I used to be a righty, but several issues--particularly anti-gay hatred--pushed me to the left.

That's what's happening to young people in droves, who are sick and tired of right-wing bigotry.

This post might have flown 30 years ago but it's complete garbage now.

You've got things completely backwards.

The pendulum has swung way too far in the other direction since Bush2.

 

[Aristaeus]

Gender identity is not sexual orientation. The amygdala is not the hypothalamus.

A gay male has a male gender identity but an attraction to someone of the same gender

A heterosexual trans female has a female gender identity but is attracted to CIS or bi males.

You cannot make a trans female into a gay man by trying to change her gender identity, or likewise a gay female into a trans guy.

Everyone has a gender identity and a sexual orientation. They are independent and not interchangeable. Obviously, they can not be changed by psychotherapy or medication.

Irrelevant.

Your claim has always been transwomen are women because their physical brain structure is more like a woman's than a man's.

Now that I point out this also applies to gay men, and that by your argument this must mean gay men are women, you've moved the goalposts.

 

[Lisa]

Irrelevant.

Your claim has always been transwomen are women because their physical brain structure is more like a woman's than a man's.

Now that I point out this also applies to gay men, and that by your argument this must mean gay men are women, you've moved the goalposts.

Gender identity is certainly not the same nor can it be substituted for sexual orientation. . CIS=/=trans

Gay men aren't women because gay men have a male gender identity.