Your opinion of transgender people

[Neutraligon]

1. No, that just makes me normal.

2. In the United States, as far as I know, that right exists. A person can go through gender reassignment surgery. What more do you want? Do you want the government (the taxpayer, me) to pay for your operation? Good god no. I will never support that.

3. Do I really need a source for that? These identity politics have sapped up the creative energies of a generation, whereby memes in order to put down opposing politicians passes for meaningful discourse.

4. I really resent the idea that you think that a normal, straight male like myself cares what you do. I really don't, as I have far better things to concern myself with, and the vast majority of people like me feel the same way. However, if a person of whatever alternative lifestyle either tries to get me to pay for their fetish, or tries to push their lifestyle in the public sphere, or wants me to congratulate them and celebrate diversity, then there is going to be resistance.

1. Yes, because most people are cisgender.

2. Yes, the ability go through transition does exist. But, believe it or not, there are people opposed to our ability to get it. And yes, some assistance in paying for a very expensive and medically necessary operation that insurance often times won't cover would be greatly appreciated. As would some legislation preventing discrimination against us in the workplace, and the ability to get an M changed to an F on our legal documents, without having to get the surgery, simple things like that, that would more easily allow us to hold down a job outside of the sex industry.

3. So I take it that you blame the civil rights movement for us not having robot servants, flying cars, fusion power, and moon bases?

4. Just an FYI, its not a fetish.

trans agenda. it's basically only a matter of time until we rise up and establish our reich, and then everyone will be j-lo.


man, i'm not a heterosexual. i'm just a normal male.

"fetish"

i dunno, i've actually heard of a few trans* physicists. seem to have done pretty well.

Not to mention that more than a few of us are going to go to college to study science and engineering.

raises hand, genderqueer here studying engineering.

[Zottistan]

1. You are cisgender if your gender identity matches your physical sex.

2. Supportive, in this context, refers to supporting the rights of trans* people to be trans*, to go through transition, etc.

3. Source?

1. No, that just makes me normal.

2. In the United States, as far as I know, that right exists. A person can go through gender reassignment surgery. What more do you want? Do you want the government (the taxpayer, me) to pay for your operation? Good god no. I will never support that.

3. Do I really need a source for that? These identity politics have sapped up the creative energies of a generation, whereby memes in order to put down opposing politicians passes for meaningful discourse.

1. If by "normal" you mean "conforming to the norm", then yes. The norm being cisgendered.
2. Government paying for it with tax money=/=taxpayer paying for it.
3. Of course you need a source for it. Do I need a source to say that Jewish people are running a media conspiracy? You betcha.

[Neutraligon]

1. No, that just makes me normal.

2. In the United States, as far as I know, that right exists. A person can go through gender reassignment surgery. What more do you want? Do you want the government (the taxpayer, me) to pay for your operation? Good god no. I will never support that.

3. Do I really need a source for that? These identity politics have sapped up the creative energies of a generation, whereby memes in order to put down opposing politicians passes for meaningful discourse.

1. If by "normal" you mean "conforming to the norm", then yes. The norm being cisgendered.
2. Government paying for it with tax money=/=taxpayer paying for it.
3. Of course you need a source for it. Do I need a source to say that Jewish people are running a media conspiracy? You betcha.

the 3rd is a known fact, it's just you don't know what else we are doing

[Empire of Narnia]

I don't know how to state my opinion of this without getting a warning. I was going to post a picture from a certain 1940's era country but I thought better of it.

[Souseiseki]

I don't know how to state my opinion of this without getting a warning. I was going to post a picture from a certain 1940's era country but I thought better of it.

oh come on, what country. don't leave us hanging.

I don't know how to state my opinion of this without getting a warning.

have a better opinion~

[Immoren]

I don't know how to state my opinion of this without getting a warning. I was going to post a picture from a certain 1940's era country but I thought better of it.

Switzerland?

[Zottistan]

I don't know how to state my opinion of this without getting a warning. I was going to post a picture from a certain 1940's era country but I thought better of it.

Keep your terms as broad and vague as possible and you should be fine.

I mean, you'll probably be gangfucked by the collective of NSG, but you shouldn't get warned

[Fine Fellows]

I don't know how to state my opinion of this without getting a warning. I was going to post a picture from a certain 1940's era country but I thought better of it.

so you're weak troll who only dares post that your opinion would get you a warning? Why not phrase it a bit less abrasively? Or is that beyond your creativity? Man, fine and all that you don't like transgenders etc, but at least just write that down rather than this vague type of post.

This is either "halp the moderation is hurting my free speech by warning me for my opinion. " or you are so unhinged that you can't politely state your dissent and can barely control keep yourself from writing down a vitrolic tirade.

Both of those options are sad indeed.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

One day I will finally stick on a fixed gender identity. Then I shall be unstoppable.

But why? Being the way you are makes you unstoppable already. You're a veritable weapon of mass destruction already!

[Grenartia]

So, how do those of us who are not trans and not cisgendered answer the poll?

You're agender, right? I classified that as trans*.

1. Yes, because most people are cisgender.

2. Yes, the ability go through transition does exist. But, believe it or not, there are people opposed to our ability to get it. And yes, some assistance in paying for a very expensive and medically necessary operation that insurance often times won't cover would be greatly appreciated. As would some legislation preventing discrimination against us in the workplace, and the ability to get an M changed to an F on our legal documents, without having to get the surgery, simple things like that, that would more easily allow us to hold down a job outside of the sex industry.

3. So I take it that you blame the civil rights movement for us not having robot servants, flying cars, fusion power, and moon bases?

4. Just an FYI, its not a fetish.




Not to mention that more than a few of us are going to go to college to study science and engineering.

raises hand, genderqueer here studying engineering.

What specifically? I'm going to be studying Aerospace eng.

1. I don't know how to state my opinion of this without getting a warning. 2. I was going to post a picture from a certain 1940's era country but I thought better of it.

1. The rules about flaming are loose enough that you can say almost anything you want, so long as you're civil about it, as I recall. I mean surely you can state your opinion in a civil manner.

2. Of what relevance to this discussion is it?

[Neutraligon]

So, how do those of us who are not trans and not cisgendered answer the poll?

You're agender, right? I classified that as trans*.

OK thanks

raises hand, genderqueer here studying engineering.

What specifically? I'm going to be studying Aerospace eng.

Mechanical engineering. Specifically I'm studying medical robotics from a mechanical rather than electrical or bio engineering perspective. I'm researching prosthesis.

[Cameroi]

cool with me. i just think humans are kind of dull regardless.

[Desperate Measures]

You're agender, right? I classified that as trans*.

OK thanks

What specifically? I'm going to be studying Aerospace eng.

Mechanical engineering. Specifically I'm studying medical robotics from a mechanical rather than electrical or bio engineering perspective. I'm researching prosthesis.

But how do you guys find the time to science while being all not normal? It boggles the mind.

[Nadkor]

Mechanical engineering. Specifically I'm studying medical robotics from a mechanical rather than electrical or bio engineering perspective. I'm researching prosthesis.

What? This is an outrage. You're not cisgendered, do you not realise that you're only capable of doing gender studies which isn't a proper thing because I don't understand it? Engineering, indeed. Pfft.

[Grenartia]

You're agender, right? I classified that as trans*.

OK thanks

What specifically? I'm going to be studying Aerospace eng.

Mechanical engineering. Specifically I'm studying medical robotics from a mechanical rather than electrical or bio engineering perspective. I'm researching prosthesis.

Kick ass.

[Sentinel Optik]

2. Government paying for it with tax money=/=taxpayer paying for it.

I'd like to know where you think tax money comes from if not from taxpayers. Please, do enlighten me.

The problem with this movement is that while people like me do not care what you do with your ding dongs, people like me care what you do with my money. I do not support collectivized healthcare because I do not consider it to be efficient. I am a fiscal conservative due to my belief that the private sector provides better goods and services at a cheaper price than the public sector. My political views have nothing to do with bigotry, rather what I think is best for society.

The transgenders want collectivized public support for their lifestyle. I do not support this due to my economic beliefs. I similarly would not support collectivized public support for cancer treatment. This doesn't mean I want people to die of cancer, I simply feel that the private sector (insurance companies) are better able to devise funding schemes rather than the government. This doesn't mean that insurance companies are good, or even competent, but rather that the government is far more incompetent and should not be given additional responsibilities.

Any attempts by transgender activists to frame people of my position as bigots is tremendously short-sighted, and shows why opposition to your movement exists among fiscal conservatives, including those like myself who are not moralistic or religious. In my perception, you want something for free, in this case medical care.

If insurance companies will not cover the procedure, there's your public mandate that the people do not want to collectivize resources in pursuit of that goal. Why you are expecting to get results in advancing your cause among those who are unlikely to actually desire to contribute financially to these types of procedures is unknown. Actually, it is known, in that you want to marshal support for a future political victory whereby you can mandate that the public is forced to pay for these procedures. Perhaps now you understand why resentment exists among certain people in relation to your cause.

It's not bigotry, it's economics.

[Neutraligon]

Mechanical engineering. Specifically I'm studying medical robotics from a mechanical rather than electrical or bio engineering perspective. I'm researching prosthesis.

What? This is an outrage. You're not cisgendered, do you not realise that you're only capable of doing gender studies which isn't a proper thing because I don't understand it? Engineering, indeed. Pfft.

Ah but I'm also Jewish, we can do anything we want since we control everything. All I need to do is access the hive mind and there I go.

[Nadkor]

2. Government paying for it with tax money=/=taxpayer paying for it.

I'd like to know where you think tax money comes from if not from taxpayers. Please, do enlighten me.

The problem with this movement is that while people like me do not care what you do with your ding dongs, people like me care what you do with my money. I do not support collectivized healthcare because I do not consider it to be efficient. I am a fiscal conservative due to my belief that the private sector provides better goods and services at a cheaper price than the public sector. My political views have nothing to do with bigotry, rather what I think is best for society.

The transgenders want collectivized public support for their lifestyle. I do not support this due to my economic beliefs. I similarly would not support collectivized public support for cancer treatment. This doesn't mean I want people to die of cancer, I simply feel that the private sector (insurance companies) are better able to devise funding schemes rather than the government. This doesn't mean that insurance companies are good, or even competent, but rather that the government is far more incompetent and should not be given additional responsibilities.

Any attempts by transgender activists to frame people of my position as bigots is tremendously short-sighted, and shows why opposition to your movement exists among fiscal conservatives, including those like myself who are not moralistic or religious. In my perception, you want something for free, in this case medical care.

If insurance companies will not cover the procedure, there's your public mandate that the people do not want to collectivize resources in pursuit of that goal. Why you are expecting to get results in advancing your cause among those who are unlikely to actually desire to contribute financially to these types of procedures is unknown. Actually, it is known, in that you want to marshal support for a future political victory whereby you can mandate that the public is forced to pay for these procedures. Perhaps now you understand why resentment exists among certain people in relation to your cause.

It's not bigotry, it's economics.

So...basically what you're saying is that you have horrible opinions and that we should all stop paying you any attention whatsoever?

Fine with me.

[Souseiseki]

2. Government paying for it with tax money=/=taxpayer paying for it.

I'd like to know where you think tax money comes from if not from taxpayers. Please, do enlighten me.

The problem with this movement is that while people like me do not care what you do with your ding dongs, people like me care what you do with my money. I do not support collectivized healthcare because I do not consider it to be efficient. I am a fiscal conservative due to my belief that the private sector provides better goods and services at a cheaper price than the public sector. My political views have nothing to do with bigotry, rather what I think is best for society.

The transgenders want collectivized public support for their lifestyle. I do not support this due to my economic beliefs. I similarly would not support collectivized public support for cancer treatment. This doesn't mean I want people to die of cancer, I simply feel that the private sector (insurance companies) are better able to devise funding schemes rather than the government. This doesn't mean that insurance companies are good, or even competent, but rather that the government is far more incompetent and should not be given additional responsibilities.

Any attempts by transgender activists to frame people of my position as bigots is tremendously short-sighted, and shows why opposition to your movement exists among fiscal conservatives, including those like myself who are not moralistic or religious. In my perception, you want something for free, in this case medical care.

If insurance companies will not cover the procedure, there's your public mandate that the people do not want to collectivize resources in pursuit of that goal. Why you are expecting to get results in advancing your cause among those who are unlikely to actually desire to contribute financially to these types of procedures is unknown. Actually, it is known, in that you want to marshal support for a future political victory whereby you can mandate that the public is forced to pay for these procedures. Perhaps now you understand why resentment exists among certain people in relation to your cause.

It's not bigotry, it's economics.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/ ... CMP=twt_gu

that's just the tip of the iceberg, but, you're wrong. however, you're wrong in the wrong thread so i'm not sure how far to proceed.

e: yes, the transgenders want to force you to pay for their sex changes and "lifestyle". as the queen of transgenders (naturally, there are many pretenders to my throne in this thread alone, but that is another issue) i have consulted the transgender parliament and we have reached a unanimous decision, pay for my vagina.

[Desperate Measures]

2. Government paying for it with tax money=/=taxpayer paying for it.

I'd like to know where you think tax money comes from if not from taxpayers. Please, do enlighten me.

The problem with this movement is that while people like me do not care what you do with your ding dongs, people like me care what you do with my money. I do not support collectivized healthcare because I do not consider it to be efficient. I am a fiscal conservative due to my belief that the private sector provides better goods and services at a cheaper price than the public sector. My political views have nothing to do with bigotry, rather what I think is best for society.

The transgenders want collectivized public support for their lifestyle. I do not support this due to my economic beliefs. I similarly would not support collectivized public support for cancer treatment. This doesn't mean I want people to die of cancer, I simply feel that the private sector (insurance companies) are better able to devise funding schemes rather than the government. This doesn't mean that insurance companies are good, or even competent, but rather that the government is far more incompetent and should not be given additional responsibilities.

Any attempts by transgender activists to frame people of my position as bigots is tremendously short-sighted, and shows why opposition to your movement exists among fiscal conservatives, including those like myself who are not moralistic or religious. In my perception, you want something for free, in this case medical care.

If insurance companies will not cover the procedure, there's your public mandate that the people do not want to collectivize resources in pursuit of that goal. Why you are expecting to get results in advancing your cause among those who are unlikely to actually desire to contribute financially to these types of procedures is unknown. Actually, it is known, in that you want to marshal support for a future political victory whereby you can mandate that the public is forced to pay for these procedures. Perhaps now you understand why resentment exists among certain people in relation to your cause.

It's not bigotry, it's economics.

I oppose your idea of healthcare but how to pay for gender reassignment surgery is a separate topic and really shouldn't reflect on what you think of transgenders as a whole. I'm sure there are a great many transgendered folk that would agree with your economic ideas. Not to mention that the majority of transgendered people have no plan whatsoever to get SRS.

[Zottistan]

2. Government paying for it with tax money=/=taxpayer paying for it.

I'd like to know where you think tax money comes from if not from taxpayers. Please, do enlighten me.

The money that the government spends is no more the taxpayers' than a shopkeeper's money is his customers'. The money that you pay in tax to the government belongs to the government after you pay it. What they do with it is none of your business.

The problem with this movement is that while people like me not care what you do with your ding dongs, people like me care what you do with my money. I do not support collectivized healthcare because I do not consider it to be efficient. I am a fiscal conservative due to my belief that the private sector provides better goods and services at a cheaper price than the public sector. My political views have nothing to do with bigotry, rather what I think is best for society.

Except it's not your money, it's the governments.

The transgenders want collectivized public support for their lifestyle. I do not support this due to my economic beliefs. I similarly would not support collectivized public support for cancer treatment. This doesn't mean I want people to die of cancer, I simply feel that the private sector (insurance companies) are better able to devise funding schemes rather than the government. This doesn't mean that insurance companies are good, or even competent, but rather that the government is far more incompetent and should not be given additional responsibilities.

You don't get to decide what an entity does with its own money. The government has as much right to be inefficient as any private corporation, because, in essence, the government is a private entity.

[Sentinel Optik]

I oppose your idea of healthcare but how to pay for gender reassignment surgery is a separate topic and really shouldn't reflect on what you think of transgenders as a whole. I'm sure there are a great many transgendered folk that would agree with your economic ideas. Not to mention that the majority of transgendered people have no plan whatsoever to get SRS.

The problem is that social issues are tied to economic issues. I greatly dislike the religious right and I wish they would gtfo of the Republican Party. Similarly, I am deeply opposed to the Democratic Party on economic, foreign policy, and defense issues but generally do not care about their social positions. The homosexual community in the United States is overwhelmingly aligned with the Democrats, and in my opinion this alignment is due to social issues, and not issues which I consider to be far more important. I can and do respect those with differing economic positions as long as they have given due consideration to their views and can discuss them intelligently. Those who support a party's economic views due to social considerations (religious right/homosexuals) will get no respect from me.

Here is my point: for the transgenders, I don't have a problem with you per se, but if you align with a party without considering important non-social issues, if you try to get your party to collectivize an incredibly expensive benefit that only your small group will benefit from, and if you frame those who oppose this collectivization as bigots, then I will not support you. If that indeed makes me a bigot, so be it.

[Souseiseki]

if you try to get your party to collectivize an incredibly expensive benefit that only your small group will benefit from

except, you know, if it did happen everyone would benefit

and if you frame those who oppose this collectivization as bigots, then I will not support you. If that indeed makes me a bigot, so be it.

on one hand you're sort of covered for bigotry, since you extend your view to cancer patients too. good for you. on the other, you're lumping everyone into one monolithic groups of transgenders and it's hard to tell if you just think it's a lifestyle choice/fetish.

[Sentinel Optik]

except, you know, if it did happen everyone would benefit

Sorry, no. I derive no benefit from Chaz Bono feeling good about him/herself and feel no urge to contribute to his/her cosmetic surgery. If you would benefit from it, please by all means upload a copy of the check you sent to a charity which pays for transgender operations.

[Souseiseki]

except, you know, if it did happen everyone would benefit

Sorry, no. I derive no benefit from Chaz Bono feeling good about him/herself and feel no urge to contribute to his/her cosmetic surgery. If you would benefit from it, please by all means upload a copy of the check you sent to a charity which pays for transgender operations.

i meant by UHC, which i assumed is what you were ranting about by proxy

but yeah, now you're sorta approaching the bigoted line. when you say cosmetic surgery i hope you're not referring to...

"WPATH standards of care posted:
“Sex reassignment is not “experimental”, “investigative”, “elective”, “cosmetic”, or optional in any meaningful sense. It constitutes very effective and appropriate treatment for transsexualism or profound GID.”

Pfallin, 1993 posted:
“In over 80 qualitatively different case studies and reviews from 12 countries, it has been demonstrated during the last 30 years that the treatment that includes the whole process of gender reassignment is effective.”

GIRES (2006) "Atypical gender development - A review" posted:
“The hormonal, surgical and psychological procedures of transition reduce the dissonance between the psychological identification as male or female, on the one hand, and the phenotype and associated gender role on the other. Such
treatments are regarded as highly successful.”

Lawrence, 2002 posted:
2002 Lawrence study of MtF patients gives 3% of 232 participants giving quality of life after SRS as either “unchanged” or “worsened” - Only 1 participant responded with “worsened”, 7 with “unchanged”. “No participants reported consistent Regret"

Lawrence, 2002 "Factors associated with satisfaction or regret following male-to-female SRS" posted:
“Even patients who develop severe surgical complications seldom regret having undergone surgery. The importance of surgery can be appreciated by the repeated finding that quality of surgical results is one of the best predictors of the overall outcome of sex reassignment”

In short, this is seen as one of the most effective treatment for trans people and it literally saves lives. I also have a lot of data on the increased risk of suicidality of trans people who are not allowed access to treatment, and data on how GID is an isolated diagnosis - It is not a sign of delusions or other severe mental illness. Cole et al (1997) study into co-morbidity will provide this data, if you want to take a look."

still shamelessly stolen from noreaus