RE: Beating a transsexual's ass

RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

tweakabelle -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/6/2012 8:09:04 PM)
quote: I don't grok NS's attitude/bigotry any more than I grok religious fundies or teabagger conservatives or racists. That's not surprising HK - it all comes from the same place doesn't it? Most bigotry can be sourced to the bigot's own insecurities, self-loathing and unresolved conflicts and desires. It's fanned by all kinds of social pressures and manifests itself in a myriad of differing hatreds, aided and abetted by the deliberate ignorance bigots need to maintain to keep their worldview intact. If you don't hate yourself at one level or another, it's pretty difficult to hate others. This perspective is hardly a secret in today's world. What surprises me is that so few bigots have cottoned on to it. When they open their ugly mouths and spread their vile hate, they're telling the world how much they hate themselves, and deep down, how much they desire the object of their bile. I'm unsure whether it's more sad than pathetic or the other way around.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/6/2012 8:32:13 PM)
~FR~ Actually there is a sociobiological aversion to TS, or even homsexuality in many males. Most do not realize and reconcile it, and so since it is not understood it turns into hatred or phobia. Hatred and phobia are often rooted in the unknown. The aversions comes from the natural desire to procreate. It is not an excuse for us to not use the reasoning portions of our brains to make decisions though. More deeply rooted is the debate on gender assignment and what causes it. My personal views on it is that it is determined primarily by biology, but recent reading does allow me to at least keep my mind open that there are other factors that create exceptions to that.

xssve -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/6/2012 8:50:31 PM)
I think that's a crock, it may well be why you're not into it, has nothing to do with organized discrimination. I don't believe that discrimination is either natural or biological: most indigenous cultures manage to take it in stride, doesn't seem to bother anybody at all, and they don't all go gay or stop having babies or anything, they just go about their business, doing what comes natural - which you can do perfectly well without getting all worked up about an occasional sport or Chimaera. It's a thing you mainly see in urban civilizations, and not even all of them, and it has to do more with political-economics than anything - guys don't want to take care of kids or do laundry, genitalia is destiny, and it's mostly deliberately playing on castration/emasculation fears - it's really not that much more complicated than that I'm afraid.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/6/2012 9:01:34 PM)
Well then I would suggest some reading into sociobiology on the subject. So do you have a PhD in anti-crock to make your statement, or is yours pretty much an opinion like mine is an opinion. Both of which would be based upon our experiences and what we have read. I would suggest starting with Human Behavioral Evolution starting at pair bonding, and then moving forward in your reading. You see it is called sociobiology for a specific reason. Notice I did not say it was just "biological". Now we can have a discussion on it, or we can have snide remarks and joust. I feel the former is better as it can show different perspectives, experiences and make for good discussion and information. We can go for the snide remarks mixed in and just create entertainment, with the substance being lost in the snark (snide remarks). This options seems to be more of what the forums are going to anyway. Is this where I should make a snark comment about you or your post? Sorry I am not used to the new way of the forums operating.

xssve -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/6/2012 9:15:51 PM)
It's a crock becuse that's a pseudo-scientific meme used to rationalize discrimination, there is nothing biological about it, it's completely unknown among any other mammalian species, and only intermittently in this one, not just geographically, but in the same population in different time periods - it's not socio-biological, it's social, period. If it's biological, it's brain damage.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/6/2012 9:29:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve It's a crock becuse that's a pseudo-scientific meme used to rationalize discrimination, there is nothing biological about it, it's completely unknown among any other mammalian species, and only intermittently in this one, not just geographically, but in the same population in different time periods - it's not socio-biological, it's social, period. If it's biological, it's brain damage. So if it is unknown among other mammalian species it means what? Procreation and the natural desire to create progeny is definately biological, combined with it trigger a defensive reaction on a social level because it threatens the gender paradigm. You seem very intolerant to a differing view to yours, and derogatory to any opposition. Now what is that called again? So your comment about biological being brain damage means exactly what? I also did not offer it as an excuse, you will notice that I stated that if it is not reconciled what happens, and regardless we should still use rational thought to make our conclusions. Is this where I stick my tongue out at you and say "neener, neener" or something. Again I must confess to this new way of discussion, exchange ideas and opinions, or sharing experiences.

Duskypearls -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/6/2012 9:47:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf quote: ORIGINAL: xssve It's a crock becuse that's a pseudo-scientific meme used to rationalize discrimination, there is nothing biological about it, it's completely unknown among any other mammalian species, and only intermittently in this one, not just geographically, but in the same population in different time periods - it's not socio-biological, it's social, period. If it's biological, it's brain damage. So if it is unknown among other mammalian species it means what? Procreation and the natural desire to create progeny is definately biological, combined with it trigger a defensive reaction on a social level because it threatens the gender paradigm. You seem very intolerant to a differing view to yours, and derogatory to any opposition. Now what is that called again? So your comment about biological being brain damage means exactly what? I also did not offer it as an excuse, you will notice that I stated that if it is not reconciled what happens, and regardless we should still use rational thought to make our conclusions. Is this where I stick my tongue out at you and say "neener, neener" or something. Again I must confess to this new way of discussion, exchange ideas and opinions, or sharing experiences. No, not neener neener, but nanner nanner!

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/6/2012 11:04:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: I don't grok NS's attitude/bigotry any more than I grok religious fundies or teabagger conservatives or racists. That's not surprising HK - it all comes from the same place doesn't it? Most bigotry can be sourced to the bigot's own insecurities, self-loathing and unresolved conflicts and desires. It's fanned by all kinds of social pressures and manifests itself in a myriad of differing hatreds, aided and abetted by the deliberate ignorance bigots need to maintain to keep their worldview intact. If you don't hate yourself at one level or another, it's pretty difficult to hate others. This perspective is hardly a secret in today's world. What surprises me is that so few bigots have cottoned on to it. When they open their ugly mouths and spread their vile hate, they're telling the world how much they hate themselves, and deep down, how much they desire the object of their bile. I'm unsure whether it's more sad than pathetic or the other way around. Indeed, it all does come from the same place. I don't get how some people can go through life without any self-examination whatsoever. They don't seem to ask themselves why they feel a particular way. IMO, that "ID" - driven aversion (some of which may (small may there) be driven by evolution) usually preceeds, and informs, the subsequent rationalization. Introspection isn't a self-improvement tool they possess. Over time, those aversions become reflexive. There's no "reasons" for feeling aversion to melanin, or same-sex attraction, or what have you, only an unthinking reaction. It becomes "If I feel this way, I must be right". I mean, racism isn't genetic. The notion that there are "races" of people isn't something people are born with. They're taught that it's a fact, usually informally, at a very young age. It's a small step to go from "there are different races" to "there are different races with different characteristics". And from there, the theories of Racial superiority. I think the latter is where the majority of bigots start out. They are taught that "Black people are less intelligent than Whites and Asians" and "Whites are more creative than Blacks and Asians", and not even explicitly. Young children absorb this kind of "thinking" from the way their older/adult family members react to melanin or gay people or... I just don't get it.

tweakabelle -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 12:31:18 AM)
For those interested in exploring the question of where does gendered/sexual behaviour originate, there is an almost concurrent thread titled "Where does gender come from?" which might be helpful. Check it out! http://www.collarchat.com/m_3959134/mpage_1/tm.htm

tweakabelle -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 1:20:40 AM)
quote: I mean, racism isn't genetic. The notion that there are "races" of people isn't something people are born with. They're taught that it's a fact, usually informally, at a very young age. It's a small step to go from "there are different races" to "there are different races with different characteristics". And from there, the theories of Racial superiority. I think the latter is where the majority of bigots start out. They are taught that "Black people are less intelligent than Whites and Asians" and "Whites are more creative than Blacks and Asians", and not even explicitly. Young children absorb this kind of "thinking" from the way their older/adult family members react to melanin or gay people or... I just don't get it. Identifying the origins of phobias such as racism, misogyny,homo- and trans-phobia as socially implanted is the key I believe. The same social forces that implant the hate act reinforce the hate throughout life. These can manifest themselves through peer pressure, through political/intellectual efforts at moralising it (It's God's will that ..<insert phobia of your choice here>), rationalising hate ("Black ppl are less intelligent than whites") or, very commonly, naturalising it ("men are naturally stronger than women physically therefore superior"/"The natural order is heterosexuality, anything else is deviant") and a variety of other ways. Everyone has a gender identity and most of us locate it pretty close to the core of our beings. Any anxieties or doubts or insecurities we might feel about our gender can be displaced onto those people who don't fit within our gender paradigms - in our societies that means trans ppl. The level of persecution that trans ppl face is a direct reflection of the widespread and unacknowledged, unspoken anxiety around gender that exists in our society. It's among the more compelling evidence of just how much effort we all put into constructing our genders IMHO. Trans ppl defy the deeply held and widespread (and false) cultural assumption that there are only two genders/sexes and that gentials at birth determines membership of which sex and which gender for eternity. They are an open threat to the paradigm (whether they like it or not) and therefore have to be put into their place. There's a certain comfort in being part of the crowd, a certain security in belonging and this is especially appealing to those who harbour unaddessed and unaddressable insecurities around their gender. It's far easier for them to nourish the hate than challenge the crowd and risk whatever limited privileges their position of conformity confers upon them. This is far from a complete explanation .. but it does attempt to mention some of the more salient aspects of why hate thrives with certain types of people, of why social phobias can prove to be so persistent. There are other factors - a lack of moral courage or intellectual integrity or just plain stupidity for example - that I haven't even mentioned.

xssve -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 4:36:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf quote: ORIGINAL: xssve It's a crock becuse that's a pseudo-scientific meme used to rationalize discrimination, there is nothing biological about it, it's completely unknown among any other mammalian species, and only intermittently in this one, not just geographically, but in the same population in different time periods - it's not socio-biological, it's social, period. If it's biological, it's brain damage. So if it is unknown among other mammalian species it means what? Procreation and the natural desire to create progeny is definately biological, combined with it trigger a defensive reaction on a social level because it threatens the gender paradigm. You seem very intolerant to a differing view to yours, and derogatory to any opposition. Now what is that called again? So your comment about biological being brain damage means exactly what? I also did not offer it as an excuse, you will notice that I stated that if it is not reconciled what happens, and regardless we should still use rational thought to make our conclusions. Is this where I stick my tongue out at you and say "neener, neener" or something. Again I must confess to this new way of discussion, exchange ideas and opinions, or sharing experiences. So gender paradigm is a biological thing? Bullshit. I'm sorry I put that so harshly, but think about it, I am using rational thought: I wish to impregnate a woman, I: A) Find a woman and impregnate her. B) Go beat up a trans. Which thing is likely to get the best results here? Biology accounts for gynophilia, not androphobia, in this instance, one does not axiomatically need include the other, they are completely separate phenomena. i.e., one is going to be just as attracted to a natural born women in the presence of a trans as one would be in the absence, it's irrelevant, it does not interfere with reproduction in any way - even if you slept with the trans - it's just not an issue biologically. In short, not only does it make no sense, there is no evidence whatsoever to support a theory of biological homophobia. Gender paradigm is a social construct.

tazzygirl -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 5:09:06 AM)
~FR STUDY 5 Study 5 was carried out to test the hypothesis that the link between men’s gender self-esteem and sexual prejudice observed in our previous studies will disappear once identity distinctiveness is asserted other than by showing prejudice. Perceived similarity between homosexuals and heterosexuals was manipulated with regard to the biological differences between them. Past correlational research has consistently shown that the belief that homosexuality has a biological basis is related to less sexual prejudice (e.g., Aguero, Bloch, & Byrne, 1984; Ernulf, Innala, & Whitam, 1989; Tygart, 2000; Whitley, 1990). In line with attribution theory (Weiner, 1995), this pattern is explained by the fact that immutable and uncontrollable behaviors are less stigmatized. Positive attitudes toward homosexuality may also be the consequence of the current social tendency to regard homosexuality as a biologically determined variant of human sexuality (e.g., Landén & Innala, 2002) and to construct these beliefs as pro-gays beliefs (Hegarty, 2002). http://www.sagepub.com/mcbridestudysite/study/Chapters/articles/Ch01_Falomir-Pichastor_Article.pdf Thats just the beginning. The study and conclusion just might be a good read.

Duskypearls -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 7:14:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: I mean, racism isn't genetic. The notion that there are "races" of people isn't something people are born with. They're taught that it's a fact, usually informally, at a very young age. It's a small step to go from "there are different races" to "there are different races with different characteristics". And from there, the theories of Racial superiority. I think the latter is where the majority of bigots start out. They are taught that "Black people are less intelligent than Whites and Asians" and "Whites are more creative than Blacks and Asians", and not even explicitly. Young children absorb this kind of "thinking" from the way their older/adult family members react to melanin or gay people or... I just don't get it. Identifying the origins of phobias such as racism, misogyny,homo- and trans-phobia as socially implanted is the key I believe. The same social forces that implant the hate act reinforce the hate throughout life. These can manifest themselves through peer pressure, through political/intellectual efforts at moralising it (It's God's will that ..<insert phobia of your choice here>), rationalising hate ("Black ppl are less intelligent than whites") or, very commonly, naturalising it ("men are naturally stronger than women physically therefore superior"/"The natural order is heterosexuality, anything else is deviant") and a variety of other ways. Everyone has a gender identity and most of us locate it pretty close to the core of our beings. Any anxieties or doubts or insecurities we might feel about our gender can be displaced onto those people who don't fit within our gender paradigms - in our societies that means trans ppl. The level of persecution that trans ppl face is a direct reflection of the widespread and unacknowledged, unspoken anxiety around gender that exists in our society. It's among the more compelling evidence of just how much effort we all put into constructing our genders IMHO. Trans ppl defy the deeply held and widespread (and false) cultural assumption that there are only two genders/sexes and that gentials at birth determines membership of which sex and which gender for eternity. They are an open threat to the paradigm (whether they like it or not) and therefore have to be put into their place. There's a certain comfort in being part of the crowd, a certain security in belonging and this is especially appealing to those who harbour unaddessed and unaddressable insecurities around their gender. It's far easier for them to nourish the hate than challenge the crowd and risk whatever limited privileges their position of conformity confers upon them. This is far from a complete explanation .. but it does attempt to mention some of the more salient aspects of why hate thrives with certain types of people, of why social phobias can prove to be so persistent. There are other factors - a lack of moral courage or intellectual integrity or just plain stupidity for example - that I haven't even mentioned. Excellent post, Tweaka!

xssve -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 9:01:20 AM)
Well biologically, there are phenomena such as territoriality, competition, grouping (ingroup/outgroup, flocking behaviors, etc.), behaviors that arise with regularity, but the objects of disengagement/aggression are largely circumstantial, and shift with circumstance - i.e., there is nothing about homosexuals or transgendered people in particular that warrants any special attention, they're just a fashionable and convenient target of opportunity at the moment for reasons that have nothing to do with their role in biology - they are just symbols in this, and a magnet for symbolic forces.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 12:16:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve So gender paradigm is a biological thing? Bullshit. I am not sure if there is a problem with my keyboard, your monitor, or between your chair and keyboard. I never stated the above. You can go back and read what I posted, otherwise you can look like someone that is hysterically arguing with an invisible person. quote: I'm sorry I put that so harshly, but think about it, I am using rational thought: I wish to impregnate a woman, I: A) Find a woman and impregnate her. B) Go beat up a trans. You see this is where your are either misunderstanding, or purposefully just wanting to argue a point that I never stated. Go back and read what I posted. If you cannot be bothered to read what I post, why waste your time screaming at the wind. Also, I never stated to assault anyone, and to imply that I did, is in at best laughable. Actually I find it kind of sad that you have twisted, and misrepresented what I posted. quote: Which thing is likely to get the best results here? I wouldn't be able to answer that, you seem like the expert here. quote: Biology accounts for gynophilia, not androphobia, in this instance, one does not axiomatically need include the other, they are completely separate phenomena. i.e., one is going to be just as attracted to a natural born women in the presence of a trans as one would be in the absence, it's irrelevant, it does not interfere with reproduction in any way - even if you slept with the trans - it's just not an issue biologically. In short, not only does it make no sense, there is no evidence whatsoever to support a theory of biological homophobia. Gender paradigm is a social construct. Actually there is, though even posting any of it, if I felt like researching it again, would obviously cause great strain to you. I said it was a COMBINATION of two things, I also said that we as people should use REASON to overcome those aversions. So basically you either misunderstood what I posted, or you are baiting me into some kind of flame fest. Have a nice day and hope you convince whoever you are arguing with that they are incorrect. Beating up anyone, including a trans is an unlawful act, as well as saying that someone said that when they didn't could be construed as liable. 1) Biological imperative to create children plus 2) Social construct that threatens the gender pardigm 3) Use reason to overcome these and act rational. There I did it in short sentence, and bullet point for you.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 12:17:06 PM)
Thank for the link tazzy!

xssve -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 6:48:09 PM)
Ok, this sentence confused me at first but now I see hat you're saying. quote: So if it is unknown among other mammalian species it means what? Procreation and the natural desire to create progeny is definately biological, combined with it trigger a defensive reaction on a social level because it threatens the gender paradigm. There is definitely an interaction between biology and social paradigms, but really, my objection goes back to: quote: Actually there is a sociobiological aversion to TS, or even homsexuality in many males. Most do not realize and reconcile it, and so since it is not understood it turns into hatred or phobia. Hatred and phobia are often rooted in the unknown. The aversions comes from the natural desire to procreate. It is not an excuse for us to not use the reasoning portions of our brains to make decisions though. No. The natural desire to procreate leads to the natural desire to procreate - if it leads to any aversions, it leads to aversion to other males who represent competition - if anything homosexuals and transgendered (natural or surgically altered, for the sake of argument, well just call them all transgendered, operating on the assumption that they have the social responses of a female, whatever their morphology, and to simplify, we'll only consider MtF, since they the ones most people seem to be upset about) ought properly be completely ignored, since they theoretically present a much lower threat to a breeding monopoly than another hetero male, and by the same token, they aren't going to compete with the breeding female, because they aren't capable of childbearing - the occupy roughly the same social position as an infertile female. This completely undermines any argument for a biological basis for homo/transphobia, it offers no advantages to reproductive potential, at worst, one can expect indifference. In fact the reason most indigenous cultures don't seem to be bothered by it is that they are less trouble, they contribute to the group and to group fitness without being a threat to anybody in particular, they aren't really competing with breeding hetero males or females either one, for anything other than attention, and in reproductive politics, it's all about paternity, everybody knows who the momma is, who's the daddy? The one thing you do know, is it not the gay/trans, end of issue. Nah, all it can be is social, anything you're not habituated to is going cause cognitive dissonance: if you grow up around it, it's not going to bother you at all - and if it was gonna make us all gay, it would have happened a long time ago.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 7:15:24 PM)
So basically your hysteria over the issue came down to a single sentence? You reacted the way you did, twisted what I said over one sentence? Really? Heck I would have found it more plausable for you to have said you just don't like me, my avatar, or spelling. Okay then. Hope those things work for you.

xssve -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 7:20:22 PM)
That one sentence implied that homophobia has a biological basis, you're gonna have to either clarify or back that up, yes.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Beating a transsexual's ass (2/7/2012 7:27:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve That one sentence implied that homophobia has a biological basis, you're gonna have to either clarify or back that up, yes. yaknow, xssve. I'll say that mayyyyyyybe homophobia has a biological basis. (Biologist by training here) In way back times, groups that tolerated a lot of homosexuality had fewer offspring and tended to field fewer fighters for wars. These groups would die out. The same argument could be made for polygamy and breeding like rabbits. More fighters means more success in annexing your neighbor's property. Those who practiced polygamy would take in 'war widows' and make them errrrrrr productive again. We have entered a different era of humanity. Modern medicine and international politics mean that people don't die like they used to and the old rules don't work. Unfortunately, our biological hardwiring is still with us. Does that make sense?

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875