http://patriotsandliberty.com/?p=5653
I just don't get it.
Printable View
http://patriotsandliberty.com/?p=5653
I just don't get it.
That's a rather long article. What mentality is it that confuses you? Transgenderism?
Perhaps the fact that the government is yet again trying to cram more laws down your throat.
And why does the article seem to be more heavily bashing male transgenders?
It confuses me that people will hate transgenders so much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vampyre
Well, most of them look like women and identify as a woman to everyone but their boss(Since you have to legally say you are a male on job applications), I don't see the problem with this.Quote:
Suppose a man wearing a dress, lipstick, and high heels gets hired to teach the second grade in your child’s elementary school. (He couldn’t be denied the job!)
What should happen? Should what looks like a girl go into the man's bathroom and start a riot? I have a feeling the same people who wrote this would beat up a guy in a skirt in the guy's bathroom.Quote:
You’re a woman with your daughter in a public rest room and a 6-foot-plus man wearing a miniskirt comes in. (We have video of that actually happening here in Massachusetts, which we will publish soon.)
You’d be risking a fine and jail time for even speaking out!
Why do they oppose awareness of these issues? Maybe because if people understood everything there wouldn't be so much blind hate.Quote:
In the transgender movement, for example, there are women with hormone-induced beards and men with silicone breasts. This concept is also being introduced to kids at “transgender days” in public schools in Massachusetts. It’s a train rolling down the tracks!
This is just ignorance here.Quote:
What?? Thus, legally protected behaviors can range from someone who simply “expresses” himself or herself to be the opposite sex, verbally or by their clothing — to someone who who has parts of his or her body surgically removed or mutilated and takes huge doses of hormones to attempt to “become” the opposite sex — to someone who simply insists on using facilities meant for the opposite sex.
They want people to be able to be fired, denied insurance and employment benefits just because of their gender identity? That's just plain stupid.Quote:
The bill is long and extremely comprehensive, covering a vast range of society, including schools, businesses, restaurants, government, labor unions, apartments, offices, and all public accommodations, including any place “which is open to and accepts or solicits the patronage of the general public,” and any public area. It includes all hiring and firing and employment benefits and insurance coverage. There is no religious exemption.
Oh wow, the irony.Quote:
These people are serious radicals.
Basically the whole article is just full of ignorance and could be summed up with "I don't want them fags on my property"
Probably because they're "fags", and they think that all MtF transsexuals are 6'6" men in miniskirts with deep voices and hairy legs that go around flaunting that they are male but dress like a woman. In reality, most of them just act like normal women. Like you would see them, and you would never guess that they are a male. FtM transsexuals seem to be less flamboyant, and they probably don't see as many of them, even though there are usually more of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Abra
No, but no man should be allowed into a woman's restroom either, regardless of the way they dress. Do you understand the extent to which that can be exploited by sex predators? Bathrooms are sex specific, which means you enter one or the other based on the grounds that you are anatomically male or female.Quote:
What should happen? Should what looks like a girl go into the man's bathroom and start a riot? I have a feeling the same people who wrote this would beat up a guy in a skirt in the guy's bathroom.
The opposition is probably similar to anyone that hates gays. Or racists. Or whatever-else-ists. People get whacked ideas in their heads about hating types of people.
However, anyone that I've known to be transgendered has been a drama whore. I'm not trying to slander transgendered people, but out of the 5 or 6 transgendered people that I've talked with, all of them have been drama whores. That's the only thing that bothers me about them.
And the article is probably directed mostly at male transgenders, because they're more common than female.
I don't think it should be illegal. Most transwoman don't like doing things that amount to wearing a "I USED TO BE A MAN" t-shirt. How would you enforce this, keeping trans people out of the "wrong" bathroom? Check everyone's genitals before they enter?Quote:
Originally Posted by Invader
One could write an essay on that question, I'm sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
Honestly? I haven't the slightest clue. I'll mull that over in the meantime.
I lost any respect I might have had about this opinion about here:
I'd really like to know what doctors are saying that. :roll:Quote:
Keep in mind that “transgenderism” is officially considered a disorder by the mental health profession that can (and should) be treated.
Treatment for Gender Identity Disorder is not aimed at “curing” the person. It is aimed at providing supportive therapy for medical conditions that accompany GID, such as emotional distress (from families giving the individual shiite), depression (from shiitee family abuse), anxiety (from additional crap from guess who?). Societal garbage/attitudes is a predisposing factor to individual's with GID developing anxiety/depression/emotional distress but it is far below the abuse delivered from families.
One of the big points I think that the writer was trying to make is the problem that we have too many hate crime laws. It unbalances and basically causes racism since there are going to be unprotected groups always wanted to take advantage. Drop all of this hate crime bullshit and go back to the basic laws which already existed to protect everyone, regardless of race,sex,religion,feelings?,whatever it may be. Simple is best.
While I don't like the hate crime laws, the main point the writer was making is that all transwomen are some kind of monster that should not be around our children or on our property. The writer even goes out of the way to say they should be able to be denied house ownership, jobs, and use of public areas just because of their gender. The main point of the bill is to give everyone those same freedoms that others have, that we don't have right now. To allow people of all genders and orientations to be able to own a house and use facilities owned by the people without discrimination.Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhalent
I think that if you want 'change' and 'fairness' then you should do it on a social level not judicial. And home owners should be able to do whatever they want with their property. Besides, whatever happened to freedom of speech? That's right, some people are all for it until they are insulted by someone. To me and many others this is just unethical. Although the author of the article is biased, everyone will always have their side. Cheers
The bill only enforced the rules in areas open to the public, you could still do whatever you liked on your own, private property.
And that article was full of ignorance and hatred, but then what do you expect from a site called 'patriots and liberty'.
As a general rule, its always a very bad thing when the government tries to make laws like that. They nearly always make things worse, and almost never help anyone.
That article raises some good points.
Under those laws, any old pervert could throw on a dress and hang out in the women's washrooms. And if you have a problem with that, you get charged?
A law like that would only get passed in my area over my dead body!
Instead of basing your opinion of the bill on what the article said was in it, why don't you read what is actually in it. They lie about a lot of things in that article.Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhalent
I read the full article and the full bill (~10 pages if I can remember correctly). Actually, I read the bill BEFORE I read the article. The bill is very loose and hardly defines 'gender identity' as anything logical (I could just throw on a dress or say I 'feel' like a girl, according to the bill and have my special rights) since it defines it as behavior. There is not much logical about the bill, and the people who draft these sort of bills usually just want elected again (their main base is trans-bi-gay-etc in those cases). The author is thinking logically in many areas, and most people across the country I would say agree, but I do not agree 100% . Maybe you could use some logic, perhaps? I understand you are offended by the lack of 'fair treatment' but this bill is just sloppy.
It is not like they even need these bills passed, because government intervention fails in these areas. Also, there are much much more hated groups, but that conversation is for another time.
This is the last post I am going to make on the matter, since this is just going to be the same reoccurring responses.
Seconded.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cusp
I mean, fuck. The shit someone can get away with just for feeling (or asserting that they're feeling) like they were born in the "wrong" body. Give me a break. There should be a public "don't ask, don't tell" policy that bars these people from getting undeserved special treatment. "Ooh, I feel like I should have been born a woman!" Well too fucking bad. You can use women's restrooms after you get your ding-dong axed, not before.
Yeah, I know I'm a mean ass. But in the case of these people, I can't help but catch a strong whiff of "people who are asking for more than they deserve". Get the damn operation, and then perhaps it'll be socially acceptable.
I'm for homosexual marriage.
I'm against allowing transgenders in opposite bathrooms. You are born one sex, and you use that bathroom. If you change yourself you shouldn't be allowed to use public restrooms, except those one person ones..
It's far too confusing, sounds like a bad idea. If people want to alter themselves go ahead, but you should lose your right to bathroom use.
Their is a reason for womans and mens bathrooms.
Really? I always wondered why we needed gender-seperate public bathrooms. Generally the toilet/etc cubicles are closable anyway. Maybe the only problem is just if some psychopathic guys decide to go in and beat up the next woman that comes in (isn't that why we have security cameras?). Or maybe it's just a convention people are uncomfortable breaking. (Or I'm just missing something massive and obvious due to being drugged up on influenza-related stuff :))Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathCell
Could have something to do with the sexes... Personally Men and Womans bathrooms always made sense.. The ones that are shared are usually one person ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedfishBluefish
Well I'm for one is glad that there are gender specific bathrooms. The queue is always longer for the women's room, so... :p
There is a difference between a transgender person and some old pervert in a dress. Pretending to be transgender to get a job will get someone thrown in jail.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cusp
I have a close friend who's transgender (technically male,) she goes into the women's room, wears women's clothes, gets treated as a woman. I don't see the problem with it.