Trans Discussion Thread V: Catgirls Don't Need Litterboxes

[Concejos Unidos]

What do you mean by moral education? Stopping teachers from expressing their beliefs and then shoving beliefs down kids throats, that is propaganda and brainwashing. Also when kids are taught from too young an age about transgenderism and homosexuality it can caused them to become confused. Also yes this does happen because I thought I was bisexual for 6 weeks but looking back I wasn't in love with a man I was in love with love(now I'm heterosexual).

By that standard, are kids "brainwashed" into not being violent to each other and being kind and respectful? Clearly the concept that schools should present specific moral lessons isn't controversial, since no-one takes issue with basic stuff like being kind or not being violent or whatever. Maybe you could say you oppose the concept of teaching tolerance, but you can hardly use this "brainwashing" rhetoric UNLESS you also oppose teaching even the very very basic elements of morality in schools.

The process through which someone experiments with labels and identity until they find what they're comfortable with is "confusion" in the same way that people dating various people before choosing someone to settle down with is "confusion" and that we should therefore arrange all marriages.

[Indiana Controlled Florida]

Why can't you accept that MOST republicans aren't bigots?

I won't speak for ABH, but I'll tell you why I can't accept that: I live in a deeply red state. I was born (and partially-raised) in another deeply red state. Neither of them are particularly unusual among red states. I've seen and interacted with plenty of people in both states who make no bones about being red voters. I used to be a republican. I say all of this to establish one fact: I know the mindset of most republicans, on an instinctual level. And bigotry is inherent to modern republicanism. Has been all of my life (nearly 30 years). Show me a republican who is genuinely not a bigot, and I'll show you a democrat in denial.

EDIT:

Lemme ask you a question, ICF. Why can't you accept that most republicans ARE bigots?

A. As a Republican who is NOT a bigot since I have no problems with trans rights or gay people as long as they don't hurt me, I know plenty of other republicans just like me. You are interacting with the most CONSERTATIVE republicans out there, whether in West Virginia, Alabama, or a Plains state. I would recommend going out to a more moderate state, or atleast a state that is red but isn't VERY conservative. Most people should not have a problem with trans people because that is what I observed all my life.
B. I can't ACCEPT that because I know many Republicans who aren't bigots and I meant only a handful. It also seems like when people say
"MOST" these days, they are trying to say that 80-95% of their targeted group are that way, and they are not. And coming as a REPUBLICAN, it makes me quite angry when people say that I am a bigot/part of the Bigot just because I agree with their polices.

[Dumb Ideologies]

I won't speak for ABH, but I'll tell you why I can't accept that: I live in a deeply red state. I was born (and partially-raised) in another deeply red state. Neither of them are particularly unusual among red states. I've seen and interacted with plenty of people in both states who make no bones about being red voters. I used to be a republican. I say all of this to establish one fact: I know the mindset of most republicans, on an instinctual level. And bigotry is inherent to modern republicanism. Has been all of my life (nearly 30 years). Show me a republican who is genuinely not a bigot, and I'll show you a democrat in denial.

EDIT:

Lemme ask you a question, ICF. Why can't you accept that most republicans ARE bigots?

A. As a Republican who is NOT a bigot since I have no problems with trans rights or gay people as long as they don't hurt me, I know plenty of other republicans just like me. You are interacting with the most CONSERTATIVE republicans out there, whether in West Virginia, Alabama, or a Plains state. I would recommend going out to a more moderate state, or atleast a state that is red but isn't VERY conservative. Most people should not have a problem with trans people because that is what I observed all my life.
B. I can't ACCEPT that because I know many Republicans who aren't bigots and I meant only a handful. It also seems like when people say
"MOST" these days, they are trying to say that 80-95% of their targeted group are that way, and they are not. And coming as a REPUBLICAN, it makes me quite angry when people say that I am a bigot/part of the Bigot just because I agree with their polices.

I sympathise with this perspective insofar as I'm sure there are a great many republicans who do not particularly care about trans issues and they don't play into their vote reasons.

At the same time though I think it's fairly logical that you will find transgender people to be wary of areas where most people vote for republicans given the large part in republican election campaigning that anti trans rhetoric has played lately.

For those who their transgender identity is a big part of their life (and this is sometimes not a conscious choice but a reflection of a hostile environment) then doubting the intent of those who hear some of the quite nasty stuff republicans say to try to rally their base and still go out and vote for them is quite natural.

Part of it is a cognitive trick in which people assume what's most important to them must be why people voted the way they did and take it personally, sure, but clearly that interpretation doesn't take place in a vacuum but is informed by the rhetoric going around largely unchallenged in those circles.

[Indiana Controlled Florida]

A. As a Republican who is NOT a bigot since I have no problems with trans rights or gay people as long as they don't hurt me, I know plenty of other republicans just like me. You are interacting with the most CONSERTATIVE republicans out there, whether in West Virginia, Alabama, or a Plains state. I would recommend going out to a more moderate state, or atleast a state that is red but isn't VERY conservative. Most people should not have a problem with trans people because that is what I observed all my life.
B. I can't ACCEPT that because I know many Republicans who aren't bigots and I meant only a handful. It also seems like when people say
"MOST" these days, they are trying to say that 80-95% of their targeted group are that way, and they are not. And coming as a REPUBLICAN, it makes me quite angry when people say that I am a bigot/part of the Bigot just because I agree with their polices.

I sympathise with this perspective insofar as I'm sure there are a great many republicans who do not particularly care about trans issues and they don't play into their vote reasons.

At the same time though I think it's fairly logical that you will find transgender people to be wary of areas where most people vote for republicans given the large part in republican election campaigning that anti trans rhetoric has played lately.

For those who their transgender identity is a big part of their life (and this is sometimes not a conscious choice but a reflection of a hostile environment) then doubting the intent of those who hear some of the quite nasty stuff republicans say to try to rally their base and still go out and vote for them is quite natural.

Part of it is a cognitive trick in which people assume what's most important to them must be why people voted the way they did and take it personally, sure, but clearly that interpretation doesn't take place in a vacuum but is informed by the rhetoric going around largely unchallenged in those circles.

I have read this, and I do agree.
The political candidates that are saying this crazy, transphobic words are mostly in VERY conservative areas, like Alaska, maybe some Plain States, DEFINTILY WEST VIRGINA, Alabama, and other conservative states.
I feel like, unfortunately, the minority of Bigoted Republicans are louder than the majority of Republicans which causes confusion between who is the majority and who is the minority.
I hope that, eventually, the Bigoted Republicans can be outspoken by the Majority of Republicans who respect trans rights.

[JohnGaltia]

Just because those trans people have a stigmatized mental disorder it does not mean they should be physically assaulted. Even the ones that only have the sexual fetish and not full blown identity disorder should be allowed their perversions as long as they aren’t forcing it on normal people (especially children). There is so much hate but I would think we can all agree on this much. Live and let live I say!

Clearly you didn't read UC's post very clearly.

*** Warned for baiting ***

The rules can be found here

I see this is not a place for diversity of opinion or facts contrary to entrenched orthodoxy. Disagreeing with my statements is not “baiting” (what a silly sheltering term) it’s called fear. Fear of a contrary thought.

[Vassenor]

Clearly you didn't read UC's post very clearly.

*** Warned for baiting ***

The rules can be found here

I see this is not a place for diversity of opinion or facts contrary to entrenched orthodoxy. Disagreeing with my statements is not “baiting” (what a silly sheltering term) it’s called fear. Fear of a contrary thought.

If what you are saying is factual you will be able to provide actual evidence to support those claims. So pony up.

[JohnGaltia]

I see this is not a place for diversity of opinion or facts contrary to entrenched orthodoxy. Disagreeing with my statements is not “baiting” (what a silly sheltering term) it’s called fear. Fear of a contrary thought.

If what you are saying is factual you will be able to provide actual evidence to support those claims. So pony up.

Factual in what regard? That people are different? What facts support that? Or if you are referring to my "facts contrary" statement, that should be obvious. Men and woman are different biologically and there should be no question of that. Now, I will stipulate that a man, for example, may have a mismatch between his actual sex and his feelings about what he wants his sex to be or wishes it was. Fine.

[Vassenor]

If what you are saying is factual you will be able to provide actual evidence to support those claims. So pony up.

Factual in what regard? That people are different? What facts support that? Or if you are referring to my "facts contrary" statement, that should be obvious. Men and woman are different biologically and there should be no question of that. Now, I will stipulate that a man, for example, may have a mismatch between his actual sex and his feelings about what he wants his sex to be or wishes it was. Fine.

So you have no evidence to back up your various claims. Got it.

[JohnGaltia]

Factual in what regard? That people are different? What facts support that? Or if you are referring to my "facts contrary" statement, that should be obvious. Men and woman are different biologically and there should be no question of that. Now, I will stipulate that a man, for example, may have a mismatch between his actual sex and his feelings about what he wants his sex to be or wishes it was. Fine.

So you have no evidence to back up your various claims. Got it.

What "evidence" do I need? lol. You can't possibly believe that basic biology needs to be "cited" and "linked". LOL

[Vassenor]

So you have no evidence to back up your various claims. Got it.

What "evidence" do I need? lol. You can't possibly believe that basic biology needs to be "sighted" and "linked". LOL

“I am right because I say so and don’t need to prove it”

Sure Jan.

[Loeje]

So you have no evidence to back up your various claims. Got it.

What "evidence" do I need? lol. You can't possibly believe that basic biology needs to be "sighted" and "linked". LOL

Really, the problem is that the basic biology that you're describing is a bit too basic. It's not necessarily wrong, but it oversimplifies by ignoring the many exceptions to the male-female binary.

[JohnGaltia]

What "evidence" do I need? lol. You can't possibly believe that basic biology needs to be "sighted" and "linked". LOL

“I am right because I say so and don’t need to prove it”

Sure Jan.

That is your problem. I don't need to prove anything to your satisfaction. That's not how it works. I spelled it out for you. If you want to feel differently and believe differently fine. You keep saying I need "proof" to state there are two different sexes. That proof is self evident. If you think you can dismiss me by saying "prove it" then I think it's pretty clear what I dealing with.

[JohnGaltia]

What "evidence" do I need? lol. You can't possibly believe that basic biology needs to be "sighted" and "linked". LOL

Really, the problem is that the basic biology that you're describing is a bit too basic. It's not necessarily wrong, but it oversimplifies by ignoring the many exceptions to the male-female binary.

Now this is something I can work with. Thank you. Yes it is simple and basic from a biological standpoint. There are exceptions (very rare genetic mutations) physically speaking. I stipulate all of that. If someone's mind is in opposition to their body...fine. I have said that many times. But they need treatment not enabling.

[Illegal Planets]

and also that is a complete lie to say that that doesn't exist in the school system when I am still in school and experience this first hand.

Frankly, I don't believe you and have no reason to. You can't prove this claim and thus as far as I know you're either stretching the truth or outright making it up.

Actually there is plenty of proof. A particularly weird example I recall comes from this instance. Disregarding all the fuss about disrespecting the American flag which I don't give a shit about, i'm more concerned that some teachers are actively seeking to introduce kids to their personal beliefs and sexual preferences. It is happening and anyone who tells you it isn't is gaslighting.

[Vassenor]

Really, the problem is that the basic biology that you're describing is a bit too basic. It's not necessarily wrong, but it oversimplifies by ignoring the many exceptions to the male-female binary.

Now this is something I can work with. Thank you. Yes it is simple and basic from a biological standpoint. There are exceptions (very rare genetic mutations) physically speaking. I stipulate all of that. If someone's mind is in opposition to their body...fine. I have said that many times. But they need treatment not enabling.

And what treatment are you proposing and what science is it backed up by?

Remember, we live in a system that practices evidence-based medicine.

[Vassenor]

Frankly, I don't believe you and have no reason to. You can't prove this claim and thus as far as I know you're either stretching the truth or outright making it up.

Actually there is plenty of proof. A particularly weird example I recall comes from this instance. Disregarding all the fuss about disrespecting the American flag which I don't give a shit about, i'm more concerned that some teachers are actively seeking to introduce kids to their personal beliefs and sexual preferences. It is happening and anyone who tells you it isn't is gaslighting.

So would you have the same objections to a heterosexual teacher talking about their spouse as “actively seeking to introduce kids to their personal beliefs and sexual preferences”?

[Sordhau]

Frankly, I don't believe you and have no reason to. You can't prove this claim and thus as far as I know you're either stretching the truth or outright making it up.

Actually there is plenty of proof. A particularly weird example I recall comes from this instance. Disregarding all the fuss about disrespecting the American flag which I don't give a shit about, i'm more concerned that some teachers are actively seeking to introduce kids to their personal beliefs and sexual preferences. It is happening and anyone who tells you it isn't is gaslighting.

And I'm more concerned about bigots like you trying to pretend that acceptance of people for who they are is some kind of political ideology or act of perversion. The only one gaslighting here is you and the rest of the transphobe crowd trying to infantilize or demonize us and those who fight alongside us as mentally ill, delusional, or pedophiles. You are the only malicious actors here; the ones trying to prevent people from being comfortable in their own bodies because their gender expression makes you uncomfortable.

Maybe get the fuck over yourself and leave people alone, huh? Give that a shot.

[Illegal Planets]

Ah yes, the bigot card. If my children are going to a public school, I as a parent have a right to ask what teachers are telling my kids. A classroom is not the appropriate place to get out all of that repressed "gender expression" to a captive audience of children. Frankly I find your vitriol towards me hilarious. Do you always react this way when the things you assert are challenged? You flipped from saying that such things never happened in schools to decrying me for trying to "prevent people from expressing themselves". Take five and get back to me when you are feeling less emotional.

[Ifreann]

So you have no evidence to back up your various claims. Got it.

What "evidence" do I need? lol. You can't possibly believe that basic biology needs to be "sighted" and "linked". LOL

"sighted"
lol

[Vassenor]

Ah yes, the bigot card. If my children are going to a public school, I as a parent have a right to ask what teachers are telling my kids. A classroom is not the appropriate place to get out all of that repressed "gender expression" to a captive audience of children. Frankly I find your vitriol towards me hilarious. Do you always react this way when the things you assert are challenged? You flipped from saying that such things never happened in schools to descrying me for trying to "prevent people from expressing themselves". Take five and get back to me when you are feeling less emotional.

So would you have the same objections to a heterosexual teacher talking about their spouse as “actively seeking to introduce kids to their personal beliefs and sexual preferences”?

[Illegal Planets]

Ah yes, the bigot card. If my children are going to a public school, I as a parent have a right to ask what teachers are telling my kids. A classroom is not the appropriate place to get out all of that repressed "gender expression" to a captive audience of children. Frankly I find your vitriol towards me hilarious. Do you always react this way when the things you assert are challenged? You flipped from saying that such things never happened in schools to descrying me for trying to "prevent people from expressing themselves". Take five and get back to me when you are feeling less emotional.

So would you have the same objections to a heterosexual teacher talking about their spouse as “actively seeking to introduce kids to their personal beliefs and sexual preferences”?

That totally depends. The vague context you've provided would lead me to say no. If a teacher, gay or straight, was relating an innocent story which involved their spouse to their class, I wouldn't take issue with it. Again, this totally depends and if I felt a teacher was being too intimate with the details of their personal lives, I would probably object.

[Vassenor]

So would you have the same objections to a heterosexual teacher talking about their spouse as “actively seeking to introduce kids to their personal beliefs and sexual preferences”?

That totally depends. The vague context you've provided would lead me to say no. If a teacher, gay or straight, was relating an innocent story which involved their spouse to their class, I wouldn't take issue with it. Again, this totally depends and if I felt a teacher was being too intimate with the details of their personal lives, I would probably object.

So basically you want the right to play morality police like we live in Iran.

[Illegal Planets]

That's a bit hyperbolic isn't it?

That totally depends. The vague context you've provided would lead me to say no. If a teacher, gay or straight, was relating an innocent story which involved their spouse to their class, I wouldn't take issue with it. Again, this totally depends and if I felt a teacher was being too intimate with the details of their personal lives, I would probably object.

So basically you want the right to play morality police like we live in Iran.

[Vassenor]

That's a bit hyperbolic isn't it?

So basically you want the right to play morality police like we live in Iran.

Policing what people can say because it conflicts with your morality is playing morality police. That is not hyperbole.

[Illegal Planets]

That's a bit hyperbolic isn't it?

Policing what people can say because it conflicts with your morality is playing morality police. That is not hyperbole.

Sure. When it comes to figures of authority teaching children in public school, absolutely. It's so funny the way you're trying to frame this though.