RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights?

RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

popeye1250 -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/5/2007 3:20:09 PM)
Lady Ellen, yeah, I don't have any problem with trannys or crossdressers it's just like I said, it creeps me out in public for some reason if the tranny or crossdresser is obviously a man. Last year I said that they have all kinds of sites to go on but we in the B&D world don't have that many save this and one other.

Alumbrado -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/5/2007 3:31:22 PM)
quote: The best way to accomplish what needs to be achieved is gradually, through education and example. Show the world we are normal people, not rabid angry people, not evil deviants wanting to overturn the world, and things will go much more smoothly. I very much respect your feelings on this. And I do believe that taking the high ground is a good thing. It just saddens me to no end, when I look at history, and see the exact opposite lesson being taught... those who have waited patiently for acceptance, have been accepted... as deserving to wait some more. And the groups that finally gave up on patiently waiting for the intolerant to be impressed with their civilized demeanor, and took a more confrontational approach, achieved progress toward more parity in comparatively short order. Wish that it were otherwise, but after this many decades of seeing intolerance play these games, I'm more inclined to attack it head on.

sundownhawk -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/5/2007 3:53:21 PM)
quote: The bill would make it illegal for an employer to fire, refuse to hire, or offer less pay to a person “because of such individual's actual or perceived sexual orientation.” ORIGINAL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21113678 Seems reasonable to me.

Aswad -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/5/2007 3:55:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen I'd say he's learned that I'm TS, I dont conform to or confirm the stereotype he formerly had, and he's revised his ideas. Reminds me of something I read here or elsewhere. Someone commenting that a lot of people in his country were rather racist, and wanted to close off the borders and instute lots of heavy xenophobic legislation, while the same people would usually have a foreigner living in their own neighbourhood, and rather universally, this one foreigner was entirely okay, and not at all like how "all the other foreigners" were. It's not that the original stereotype has been revised, just that exceptions have been noted. Problem being that no lessons are drawn from encountering the exceptions, usually. I'm not saying that's the case for Popeye, but it wouldn't be atypical if it were. FWIW, I'd second his offer; TS isn't a barrier, though age gap and geography may well be. I have no issues with TS and IS people, and support both with regard to rights, etc. IS genital mutilation in the west, for instance, pisses me off more than even FGM. (The reason being that the west is hypocritical about it; double standards, etc.) Health, al-Aswad.

Aswad -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/5/2007 4:00:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado Wish that it were otherwise, but after this many decades of seeing intolerance play these games, I'm more inclined to attack it head on. It is a rare day when I agree with you on something, Alumbrado, but this is such a day. Health, al-Aswad.

popeye1250 -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/5/2007 4:09:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen I'd say he's learned that I'm TS, I dont conform to or confirm the stereotype he formerly had, and he's revised his ideas. Reminds me of something I read here or elsewhere. Someone commenting that a lot of people in his country were rather racist, and wanted to close off the borders and instute lots of heavy xenophobic legislation, while the same people would usually have a foreigner living in their own neighbourhood, and rather universally, this one foreigner was entirely okay, and not at all like how "all the other foreigners" were. It's not that the original stereotype has been revised, just that exceptions have been noted. Problem being that no lessons are drawn from encountering the exceptions, usually. I'm not saying that's the case for Popeye, but it wouldn't be atypical if it were. FWIW, I'd second his offer; TS isn't a barrier, though age gap and geography may well be. I have no issues with TS and IS people, and support both with regard to rights, etc. IS genital mutilation in the west, for instance, pisses me off more than even FGM. (The reason being that the west is hypocritical about it; double standards, etc.) Health, al-Aswad. Aswad, I'm not against foreigners being in my country just illegal aliens. I have a few friends here in the U.S. legally from Ireland.

Aswad -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/5/2007 4:37:57 PM)
Popeye, I was not referencing you with the xenophobia comment. I was illustrating a difference in ways of thinking: adjusting the rules vs listing exceptions. Health, al-Aswad.

ChicagoSwitchMal -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/5/2007 5:00:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen quote: ORIGINAL: ChicagoSwitchMal I know I'm going to take some heat for this but I'm not sure what I think about this. I'm not sure I want a TS or TG male to female in a girls locker room working as a high school coach for example. To me that's still a man in a girls locker room. If I were female I don't think I want a TS or TG male to be able to walk into the women's bathroom at work because they had a dress on. To me that still a man in a woman's washroom. The part of the bill that was dropped said "employers could not discriminate against workers on the basis of "gender identity” which his bill defined as “the gender-related identity, appearance, or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual's designated sex at birth.” For most jobs I'm okay with this protection. But I do worry about jobs related to children especially. Female to male TS or TG as a girl scout leader? Female to male TS or TG as a football coach? Not that females can't teach football but coachs are more than that. They are male roll models. How can a TS/TG do that? I'm sorry I just don't get it. Okay, now let the flaming begin. [sm=boxer.gif] Now as for the wording of the Bill - I agree to be honest; its very poorly worded in the excerpt you quote. Nice motivation, but poor. And the reason its poor, is that it falls into the trap of allowing any man who chooses to wear a dress to be regarded as a female - which I agree does open the possibilities of the scenarios you mentioned. First off CandyLover - I hope you didn't take offense. You and I have talked and I hope we're cool. LadyEllen - I think you just nailed it for me. I think I could accept this if the criteria was defined better. Cuz right now someone can just decide or even just say they feel like a woman and get equal opportunity for a job. "“the gender-related identity" doesn't mean they have to emulate women in any sense although that's included too. This sure would wreck affermative action for women as any man smart enough could simply SAY he's a woman to get an equal shot at H.R.'s quote system. Women loosing jobs to men who say they're women? If this lauguange passed I love to see the precident set when a man (who says he's a man) looses a job to a man (who says he's a woman) to fill the quota. Or how about the lawsuit when a man (who says he's a woman) claims sexual descrimination when a man (who says he's man) get a job? This whole things just wreaks of an exploitable mess. And I just can't make sense of it. Unrelated - but it reminds me of men in prison wanted sex change surgery. Maybe they honestly have a gender identity issue. Or maybe they just the surgery so they can go to a prison where the pussy is it. Who knows. But yes, I could swallow this bill is 1. the person is under gender reasignment therapy - or has completed it.

Guilty1974 -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/6/2007 1:52:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Lady Ellen, yeah, I don't have any problem with trannys or crossdressers it's just like I said, it creeps me out in public for some reason if the tranny or crossdresser is obviously a man. Well, if that's how how you feel, then basically that's pretty much your problem I'd say. Have you ever asked yourself why it creeps you out? Do you feel threatend? Do you ascribe the not-so-passable TG's attention-seeking motives? Or? Why does it make you feel uncomfortable if a guy wears a dress in public?

CandyLover -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/6/2007 3:01:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChicagoSwitchMal First off CandyLover - I hope you didn't take offense. You and I have talked and I hope we're cool. No offense taken at all, that emoticon just looked like he was totally craving a fight so I had to give him one.

LadyEllen -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/6/2007 3:59:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Lady Ellen, yeah, I don't have any problem with trannys or crossdressers it's just like I said, it creeps me out in public for some reason if the tranny or crossdresser is obviously a man. Last year I said that they have all kinds of sites to go on but we in the B&D world don't have that many save this and one other. Please dont refer to us as "trannys"? I find it an awful term, on par with the n word. But more positively in relation to your post - and public confession coming up - I have a similar issue over aethetics. Its very very unfortunate, but the effects of testosterone on some - the building of heavy brow bones, jawlines, large Adam's apples and so on, are just very strong and sadly, no amount of make up can hide it. I wouldnt say it creeps me out, but to me it just doesnt look right, and I fear for their safety. Now, if its a crossdresser who's so affected, then whether he ventures out in public is entirely up to him - but an obvious crossdresser is going to get trouble, very simply. If he chooses, and has the funds, then he can get his male features "fixed" of course. But the problem is that there are quite a few diagnosed transsexuals - people who have a clinical need to transition permanently to save their lives - for this can be life threatening and suicide is not uncommon, who also have the same problems. Again though, they face the problem of, if they dont have funds for facial reconstruction they wont get it. Ever. And they have to live every day the trouble the occasional crossdresser experiences. This is why I think that proper diagnoses need to be made and once thats done, all possible assistance given. "Hate crime" laws can do so much, legal recognition can do so much, but no law and no legal recognition is going to protect anyone when the violence starts. On the final point - we went over this before I think? If we're going to say who belongs and who doesnt, then no one belongs. If we're going to say which activities belong and which dont, then none belong. It doesnt say anywhere on this site for instance, that its intended purely for heterosexual dominant males - so you dont belong here going on the reasoning youre using! Though I do take your point that there are many sites devoted to crossdressing, and many devoted to transsexuals; thing is though, this site caters to an interest which these two groups also share, and the only qualification I can see for being here is an interest in and/or participation in bdsm. We wouldnt tell you to go to "retiredcoastguard.com" and keep off here, for instance. E

LadyEllen -> RE: How far will Dems go on transgender rights? (10/6/2007 4:07:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado I very much respect your feelings on this. And I do believe that taking the high ground is a good thing. It just saddens me to no end, when I look at history, and see the exact opposite lesson being taught... those who have waited patiently for acceptance, have been accepted... as deserving to wait some more. And the groups that finally gave up on patiently waiting for the intolerant to be impressed with their civilized demeanor, and took a more confrontational approach, achieved progress toward more parity in comparatively short order. Wish that it were otherwise, but after this many decades of seeing intolerance play these games, I'm more inclined to attack it head on. I see what youre saying, I really do. But we should keep some perspective on this - we are not starting from zero here but piggybacking on a general movement that started with women's rights, the black civil rights movement, through gay/lesbian rights. The awareness that things arent right is there I think, for the majority of people. Yes, occasionally we need to scream and shout but we're moving in the right direction about as quickly as we probably can. Its not the attitudes which you perceive in Popeye which upset me to be honest. Its the attitudes expressed by many leading figures in prior civil rights movements about similar rights being given to us. We have feminists against us. We have ethnic minorities who cling to Mosaic ideas about what is, and is not right, against us. We have lesbians against us. These groups, who have benefitted from rights being ceded to them are our worst enemy I find, not the ignorance, perceived or actual of the majority. E

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625