"UK refusal to issue gender-neutral passports unlawful, high court told"

Pmsl at the comment from Sasha Tourk.

Its a woman's penis WTF! lol :D:D

I guess that within the framework of their belief system (whereby simply stating you're now a woman is sufficient) then they're kind of consistent.

the "something about sucking a **** just feels queer to me" is brilliant too :D
 
Hard to track the actions of a criminal in your country if they enter using a gender they don't identify as or say is wrong when questioned for said crime
 
Tish tosh bosh; Just base it on birth-gender as designated by the persons birth certificate. People can identify and dress up as whatever they wish. job done.

Well, not really!! Gender is not the same as biological sex. So what you are really saying here is that when someone is born they are assigned a gender that is the same as their biological sex... and that's exactly what the protestors don't want to happen. They want to be able to assign their own choice, not be told what it is.

I think the real problem with all this is that the majority of people don't actually know the difference between gender, biological sex and even orientation. Education is required!!

I mean I listen to people talking about trans people and fearing sharing toilets with them. Fine, fine, but you do realise that the guy stood next to you in the urinals could be gay? I mean far more important than gender in toilets is orientation, yet no one even mentions that!! Yep, I stick to my belief here that people don't understand the differences and they need to be educated. Then they are in a position to make an informed decision.
 
I mean I listen to people talking about trans people and fearing sharing toilets with them. Fine, fine, but you do realise that the guy stood next to you in the urinals could be gay? I mean far more important than gender in toilets is orientation, yet no one even mentions that!! Yep, I stick to my belief here that people don't understand the differences and they need to be educated. Then they are in a position to make an informed decision.
Sharing toilets with gay people isn't a problem, and I'm not sure why it should be. What's the worst that can (legally) happen? Nothing really. (I'm assuming you haven't wandered into the men's toilets in a gay club by "mistake" :p)

Also there are no issues there surrounding honesty/deception. A gay bloke wanting sex with a man isn't pretending to be anything other than a gay bloke wanting sex with a man... (Ignoring the situation of a gay bloke in a straight relationship hiding his gayness, because that's a different kettle of worms).

Trans"women" in "deep stealth" is the most worrisome problem that I can see. Those who believe their previous gender is irrelevant history, and that they have no need to reveal it to a potential partner. And are similarly convinced that they are in fact women, and that those who disagree don't deserve to have their opinion respected.

Of course that only works if physical features do not betray the birth sex. But the fact that so many people in the trans community advocate for stealth - even attacking others in their community that feel differently - I find that in particular very disturbing.
 
[..]
I think the real problem with all this is that the majority of people don't actually know the difference between gender, biological sex and even orientation. Education is required!!

On both sides, because there are people on both sides claiming that sex and gender are the same thing. Someone who is male is not female and vice versa. You can't change biology/physiology by decree. That takes surgery and hormone treatment. You can change gender by decree, as that's mostly just made up anyway. But you can't change sex by decree. That's just a lie or a delusion.

If I were to decide to be predominantly feminine (by whatever standards exist in the time and place I was in), then I would be predominantly feminine (gender) and male (sex). There's a difference. Sex and gender are not the same thing. To become female (sex), I would have to have my biology/physiology changed enough to count as female.

Education is indeed required, but it's only on one side where people are saying that sex == gender to such an extent that they believe people can change sex solely by decree while not changing physiology at all, to such an extent that they talk about a woman's penis (for example).
 
Trans"women" in "deep stealth" is the most worrisome problem that I can see. Those who believe their previous gender is irrelevant history, and that they have no need to reveal it to a potential partner.

So basically an imaginary boogyman you'll never ever meet is a worrisome problem?

Jesus


*psst if you're a "gentleman" in the bed room theres no way they could stealth you ^_^
*The more you know*
 
On both sides, because there are people on both sides claiming that sex and gender are the same thing.

Yes. Just because someone knows there is something "different" about themselves doesn't mean to say they understand what. I have heard trans people get gender and sex and orientation all mixed up just like someone who has never even given a second thought to all that stuff.
 
If I were to decide to be predominantly feminine (by whatever standards exist in the time and place I was in), then I would be predominantly feminine (gender) and male (sex). There's a difference. Sex and gender are not the same thing. To become female (sex), I would have to have my biology/physiology changed enough to count as female.
Not possible. You'd just be a mutilated male.

The idea that a complete, biologically functional male (not some intersex) can become a female is also a lie/delusion. It's mutilation, not transitioning to the opposite sex.
 
Not possible. You'd just be a mutilated male.

The idea that a complete, biologically functional male (not some intersex) can become a female is also a lie/delusion. It's mutilation, not transitioning to the opposite sex.

I go with "close enough" as a working definition in this context.

How do you define a person's sex in such a way that it's always accurate, based on biology/physiology and unalterable?

You can't use chromosome type, because that doesn't correlate for everyone. Genes are plans for things, not the things themselves.
You can't use primary sexual organs unless you're willing to class everyone without them as unsexed. If so, would a man who has one testicle removed for some reason be half male half neuter? A woman with one ovary removed be half female half neuter?
You can't use secondary sexual organs for the same reason. Also, those can be changed so that definition would fail on the "unalterable" criterion.
Gendered physical characteristics make even less sense as the basis for your definition. They don't always correlate with sex and they can usually be changed.

Someone with no primary sexual organs, female genitalia, a feminine hormone balance and generally feminine physical characteristics...I'd say they're female. I think there isn't a completely accurate definition of a person's sex and "close enough" will always have to be, well, close enough.
 
I found this conversation quite interesting in regards to transex
it's all so confusing these days:

jNUiEcH.jpg.png

But whats gay about sucking a penis providing the person its attached to is wearing a dress?

EVERYTHING.

For more of this nonsense see here:

https://www.resetera.com/threads/ne...y-of-cis-people-wont-date-trans-people.50541/

The reason these poor people are SO unhappy and SO screwed up in their heads is that they have been fed this garbage that they can be what they want, call themslves what they want, behave as exceptionally as they want, and everyone else will play along no problem at all,

Why arent men interested in sucking my girl penis?

FFS.
 
I go with "close enough" as a working definition in this context.

How do you define a person's sex in such a way that it's always accurate, based on biology/physiology and unalterable?

You can't use chromosome type, because that doesn't correlate for everyone. Genes are plans for things, not the things themselves.
You can't use primary sexual organs unless you're willing to class everyone without them as unsexed. If so, would a man who has one testicle removed for some reason be half male half neuter? A woman with one ovary removed be half female half neuter?
You can't use secondary sexual organs for the same reason. Also, those can be changed so that definition would fail on the "unalterable" criterion.
Gendered physical characteristics make even less sense as the basis for your definition. They don't always correlate with sex and they can usually be changed.

Someone with no primary sexual organs, female genitalia, a feminine hormone balance and generally feminine physical characteristics...I'd say they're female. I think there isn't a completely accurate definition of a person's sex and "close enough" will always have to be, well, close enough.
Well the most obvious one...

If all women on Earth were transwomen, and all men on Earth were transmen... we'd be royally ****ed :p

But the results of the procedure are often below expectations. Not only is there extensive scarring; not only is the procedure high risk; but sensation is often poor, size and function is often very poor for FTM...

It's an awful hack, I'm afraid, compared to the real thing.
 
Well, not really!! Gender is not the same as biological sex. So what you are really saying here is that when someone is born they are assigned a gender that is the same as their biological sex... and that's exactly what the protestors don't want to happen. They want to be able to assign their own choice, not be told what it is.
You mean, a parent or guardian wants to choose or define what gender their child is or isn't?

I'll rephrase my point then. Birth-sex should be recorded on the birth certificate. As the child matures; they can work it out for themselves what they wish to be referred to as.
 
You mean, a parent or guardian wants to choose or define what gender their child is or isn't?

I'll rephrase my point then. Birth-sex should be recorded on the birth certificate. As the child matures; they can work it out for themselves what they wish to be referred to as.
lmao, you're kidding right?
 
The simple way of thinking is the correct way of thinking. You look between its legs, then you know its sex. That's it.

If it wants to pretend to be a different sex later, well, who cares. But that doesn't mean its sex is actually different. Calling it gender doesn't change anything.
 
since when do women have a penis..

unless you have a period each month you are a man.

I respect peoples wishes to live life like a woman or a man if they want to, but that doesn't make them one
 
Back
Top Bottom