Trans Discussion Thread: Catgirls Don't Need Litterboxes

[Armeattla]

Bold of to you to assume "real equality" has been achieved at any point in recent history.

The Wolfangel says everything.

[Undemocacy]

Bold of to you to assume "real equality" has been achieved at any point in recent history.

The Wolfangel says everything.

what's a wolfangle?

[Neu California]

The Wolfangel says everything.

what's a wolfangle?

Best google got me was that the wolfsangel is a neo-Nazi symbol in Eastern Europe.

[Armeattla]

The Wolfangel says everything.

what's a wolfangle?

It's an old heraldic symbol (based on a hunting tool) which was extensively used by the nazis, and especially the SS.
After WW2 it continued to be used by fascists and neo-nazis.

[Ameriganastan]

what's a wolfangle?

It's an old heraldic symbol (based on a hunting tool) which was extensively used by the nazis, and especially the SS.
After WW2 it continued to be used by fascists and neo-nazis.

And by dumbass kids on TikTok. I remember a year or so ago there was some TikTok trend those Gen Z kids were doing. Apparently they thought a 'Z' with a line through it looked rebellious and cool...not knowing it looked an awful lot like a Nazi symbol.

Which is further proof we need to keep teaching kids about WW2 in school.

[Armeattla]

It's an old heraldic symbol (based on a hunting tool) which was extensively used by the nazis, and especially the SS.
After WW2 it continued to be used by fascists and neo-nazis.

And by dumbass kids on TikTok. I remember a year or so ago there was some TikTok trend those Gen Z kids were doing. Apparently they thought a 'Z' with a line through it looked rebellious and cool...not knowing it looked an awful lot like a Nazi symbol.

Which is further proof we need to keep teaching kids about WW2 in school.

Apparently that trend died out - with the "creator" pulling out after the nazi-relations were pointed out.

Anyways, we should get on topic.

[Glagoly]

Hardly. The minorities have been pushed to the bottom, and so these "special rights" which mainly consist of not being allowed to discriminate based on someone's race, religion, gender, sexual identity, etc. and adding special modifiers for hate crimes, (the main secondary I can think of is allowing transgender individuals to change their gender on their birth certificate) are hardly going to lead to some "unconventional LGBT dictatorship."

Changing the gender on the birth certificate is absurd. A person born a man will be a man until his death, no matter how many plastic surgeries he has done and no matter how he identifies himself. The physiological difference between men and women is banally too great. It is enough to take as an example the sports competitions of transgender men and women. The first one will have a greater chance of winning.

[Neu California]

Back on topic: ‘The Last Of Us’ Star Bella Ramsey Is Unfazed By Backlash Over LGBTQ+ Characters: “They’re Gonna Have To Get Used To It”

I do always find it hilarious how people get worked up whenever an LGBT character is shown in media.

LGBT character: *exists*
Right wingers: *lose their minds*

[Undemocacy]

It is enough to take as an example the sports competitions of transgender men and women. The first one will have a greater chance of winning.

hence why we only see trans athletes at the Olympics since they've been permitted to compete since 2004. Oh wait I forgot that didn't happen.

[Neu California]

Hardly. The minorities have been pushed to the bottom, and so these "special rights" which mainly consist of not being allowed to discriminate based on someone's race, religion, gender, sexual identity, etc. and adding special modifiers for hate crimes, (the main secondary I can think of is allowing transgender individuals to change their gender on their birth certificate) are hardly going to lead to some "unconventional LGBT dictatorship."

Changing the gender on the birth certificate is absurd. A person born a man will be a man until his death, no matter how many plastic surgeries he has done and no matter how he identifies himself. The physiological difference between men and women is banally too great. It is enough to take as an example the sports competitions of transgender men and women. The first one will have a greater chance of winning.

I note you didn't respond to the rest of my post.

Ignoring the athlete question, for the moment, as it's complex and I don't really know what the right answer is (partly because I'm admittedly rather ill-informed on that topic), what harm comes from letting someone change their gender on their birth certificate to the gender that they feel themselves being?

[Glagoly]

Bold of to you to assume "real equality" has been achieved at any point in recent history.

The Wolfangel says everything.

How many times have I already explained it, but I will explain it again. This is a Ukrainian symbol that appeared in 1991 in Ukraine. This is NOT a type of folsfgangel. It has nothing to do with fascist and Nazi ideology at this time. This is the Idea of the Nation (Ідея Nації), a generalized symbol of Ukrainian nationalism.

You can read research about the history of this symbol in this thread: https://twitter.com/ACRains/status/1605929797812510720
There is also a thread in English, but, unfortunately, I don't have enough time to search for it now.

[Glagoly]

I note you didn't respond to the rest of my post.

Ignoring the athlete question, for the moment, as it's complex and I don't really know what the right answer is (partly because I'm admittedly rather ill-informed on that topic), what harm comes from letting someone change their gender on their birth certificate to the gender that they feel themselves being?

I will answer. Unfortunately, I have limited time to communicate.

[Armeattla]

Hardly. The minorities have been pushed to the bottom, and so these "special rights" which mainly consist of not being allowed to discriminate based on someone's race, religion, gender, sexual identity, etc. and adding special modifiers for hate crimes, (the main secondary I can think of is allowing transgender individuals to change their gender on their birth certificate) are hardly going to lead to some "unconventional LGBT dictatorship."

Changing the gender on the birth certificate is absurd. A person born a man will be a man until his death, no matter how many plastic surgeries he has done and no matter how he identifies himself. The physiological difference between men and women is banally too great. It is enough to take as an example the sports competitions of transgender men and women. The first one will have a greater chance of winning.

You obviously have no idea of transitioning...
Or biology for that fact.
Physiology is the function of our body and cells, and the physiological differences are rather narrow between male and female. And Physiology is in fact regulated by hormones.
Funny thing is... Hormones is the most prominent and widespread measure of medical transition.
Hormone regulate physiology, changing skin type, hair type as well as hair distribution - they also change the physiology of the genitals. In fact it also changes things like muscle growth and distribution - hence why trans women don't actually have any significant advantage to sports.
Hormones also regulate growth, and hence anatomy. Trans women for example will grow genuine breasts - no plastic surgery needed. If you are lucky it will also cause you to get wider hips for transfeminine people, or broader shoulders for transmasculine people.


Also your example is dog shit... because transgender men "used to be women". And ofc they will have an advantage in most sports*... What you were looking for was "trans women", who still don't have much an advantage, if at all. Especially after losing a great deal of their muscle mass.

[Undemocacy]

Also your example is dog shit... because transgender men "used to be women". And ofc they will have an advantage in most sports... What you were looking for was "trans women"

What a surprise, the person arguing against accepting trans people doesn't know what they're talking about!

[Glagoly]

I disagree. Part of the problem is that we need to work against an institutional bias. If we focused on just making everything equal legally, said extralegal bias would remain, so to counter that, the law needs to put its thuimb on the scale a bit.

No. There will always be bias. This is a psychological component of a person. A common example is interracial couples. The human brain immediately perceives this as disgusting, abnormal. A person's beliefs about this topic do not affect the reaction in any way. Real, true, without processing. Same with homosexual couples. No matter what position a person takes, no matter how he supports it, he will subconsciously be disgusted by it. Of course, a person will reject it, or even not understand it.

Only if that's the reason for the beating. If you beat up a gay guy over, say, an argument about a football game, you're not getting the hate crime modifier added to your charges, nor should you. The idea is to dissuade people from such crimes. This has actually gone as far back as the Civil Rights Act of 1871, when hate crimes against blacks were specifically criminalized.

Beating a person is the main thing. Someone committed a crime. If I am beaten because I am Ukrainian, the criminal will not receive a longer term. Likewise, if they beat a Jew or a Muslim. However, for some reason, if a person, it doesn't matter which of them all, had an unconventional orientation, then the punishment would be more severe.

I am for the fact that if people want equality, absolute equality should be given. No "privileges". Otherwise, sooner or later it will turn into the opposite discrimination. Personally, I do not support all these movements, I mean LGBT. However, I understand that the orientation is innate, and therefore it cannot be influenced in any way. I would even compromise: same-sex marriages are allowed, true legal equality is coming, however, any propaganda of non-traditional orientation is prohibited.

Considering that anti-LGBT hate crimes have been on the rise, and conservative states keep trying to take away their rights, I'd say they have good reason to feel under attack, and perhaps oppressed.

And these are just different views on life. In fact, I have little interest in the relationship with LGBT people in other countries.

[Glagoly]

Changing the gender on the birth certificate is absurd. A person born a man will be a man until his death, no matter how many plastic surgeries he has done and no matter how he identifies himself. The physiological difference between men and women is banally too great. It is enough to take as an example the sports competitions of transgender men and women. The first one will have a greater chance of winning.

You obviously have no idea of transitioning...
Or biology for that fact.
Physiology is the function of our body and cells, and the physiological differences are rather narrow between male and female. And Physiology is in fact regulated by hormones.
Funny thing is... Hormones is the most prominent and widespread measure of medical transition.
Hormone regulate physiology, changing skin type, hair type as well as hair distribution - they also change the physiology of the genitals. In fact it also changes things like muscle growth and distribution - hence why trans women don't actually have any significant advantage to sports.
Hormones also regulate growth, and hence anatomy. Trans women for example will grow genuine breasts - no plastic surgery needed. If you are lucky it will also cause you to get wider hips for transfeminine people, or broader shoulders for transmasculine people.


Also your example is dog shit... because transgender men "used to be women". And ofc they will have an advantage in most sports*... What you were looking for was "trans women", who still don't have much an advantage, if at all. Especially after losing a great deal of their muscle mass.

Then please provide links to scientific studies on this topic.

[Glagoly]

what's a wolfangle?

It's an old heraldic symbol (based on a hunting tool) which was extensively used by the nazis, and especially the SS.
After WW2 it continued to be used by fascists and neo-nazis.

Also, don't spread misinformation. Because what you said is russian propaganda.

[Armeattla]

Then please provide links to scientific studies on this topic.

A study done using participants from the military. It'S main issues are small sample size and a rather short sample time. Which makes it suspectible to individual behaviour (e.g. trans women doing cardio after transitioning for the sake of their appearance). It still however shows clear trends.

Also, don't spread misinformation. Because what you said is russian propaganda.

LMAO, "anyone I don't like is a russian propagandist!"
There are plenty of neo-nazis who use the wolfsangel outside of Ukraine, don't worry.

[Techocracy101010]

I disagree. Part of the problem is that we need to work against an institutional bias. If we focused on just making everything equal legally, said extralegal bias would remain, so to counter that, the law needs to put its thuimb on the scale a bit.

No. There will always be bias. This is a psychological component of a person. A common example is interracial couples. The human brain immediately perceives this as disgusting, abnormal. A person's beliefs about this topic do not affect the reaction in any way. Real, true, without processing. Same with homosexual couples. No matter what position a person takes, no matter how he supports it, he will subconsciously be disgusted by it. Of course, a person will reject it, or even not understand it.

Only if that's the reason for the beating. If you beat up a gay guy over, say, an argument about a football game, you're not getting the hate crime modifier added to your charges, nor should you. The idea is to dissuade people from such crimes. This has actually gone as far back as the Civil Rights Act of 1871, when hate crimes against blacks were specifically criminalized.

Beating a person is the main thing. Someone committed a crime. If I am beaten because I am Ukrainian, the criminal will not receive a longer term. Likewise, if they beat a Jew or a Muslim. However, for some reason, if a person, it doesn't matter which of them all, had an unconventional orientation, then the punishment would be more severe.

I am for the fact that if people want equality, absolute equality should be given. No "privileges". Otherwise, sooner or later it will turn into the opposite discrimination. Personally, I do not support all these movements, I mean LGBT. However, I understand that the orientation is innate, and therefore it cannot be influenced in any way. I would even compromise: same-sex marriages are allowed, true legal equality is coming, however, any propaganda of non-traditional orientation is prohibited.

Considering that anti-LGBT hate crimes have been on the rise, and conservative states keep trying to take away their rights, I'd say they have good reason to feel under attack, and perhaps oppressed.

And these are just different views on life. In fact, I have little interest in the relationship with LGBT people in other countries.

… So im disgusting…. Guess that explains why everyone bullied me growing up and why im always alone…. imma log off

[Glagoly]

LMAO, "anyone I don't like is a russian propagandist!"
There are plenty of neo-nazis who use the wolfsangel outside of Ukraine, don't worry.

I have already cited the research above. There is evidence, including writings and documents from the Middle Ages, that support the history and interpretation of the modern symbol. That neo-Nazis exist is of course true. Only a fool would reject it. However, do not confuse nationalism with Nazism. What I have on my flag is a generalized symbol of Ukrainian nationalism.

As for the Wolfsgängel, this sign can be found in many places in Germany and France. For example, on the coats of arms of cities (oh my god, are they also Nazis? whole cities!!!).

Also, please note that I did not say that I did not like you. I did not make any statement in your direction, and especially trying to make you look bad in some way.

[Ameriganastan]

As for the Wolfsgängel, this sign can be found in many places in Germany and France. For example, on the coats of arms of cities (oh my god, are they also Nazis? whole cities!!!).

And the Swastika can be found in old Buddhist temples and such. Doesn't mean you should go around parading it as your flag.

[Neu California]

I disagree. Part of the problem is that we need to work against an institutional bias. If we focused on just making everything equal legally, said extralegal bias would remain, so to counter that, the law needs to put its thuimb on the scale a bit.

No. There will always be bias. This is a psychological component of a person. A common example is interracial couples. The human brain immediately perceives this as disgusting, abnormal. A person's beliefs about this topic do not affect the reaction in any way. Real, true, without processing. Same with homosexual couples. No matter what position a person takes, no matter how he supports it, he will subconsciously be disgusted by it. Of course, a person will reject it, or even not understand it.

You're trying to apply your own biases to the whole world. I see an interracial couple or a same-sex couple and don't feel a hint of disgust or abnormality, instead just reacting with a resounding meh. I'd love to see your sources for suggesting.otherwise, though.

Only if that's the reason for the beating. If you beat up a gay guy over, say, an argument about a football game, you're not getting the hate crime modifier added to your charges, nor should you. The idea is to dissuade people from such crimes. This has actually gone as far back as the Civil Rights Act of 1871, when hate crimes against blacks were specifically criminalized.

Beating a person is the main thing. Someone committed a crime. If I am beaten because I am Ukrainian, the criminal will not receive a longer term. Likewise, if they beat a Jew or a Muslim. However, for some reason, if a person, it doesn't matter which of them all, had an unconventional orientation, then the punishment would be more severe.

I am for the fact that if people want equality, absolute equality should be given. No "privileges". Otherwise, sooner or later it will turn into the opposite discrimination. Personally, I do not support all these movements, I mean LGBT. However, I understand that the orientation is innate, and therefore it cannot be influenced in any way. I would even compromise: same-sex marriages are allowed, true legal equality is coming, however, any propaganda of non-traditional orientation is prohibited.

Slippery slope. Also, define "propaganda of non-traditional orientation" for the class. Does including a gay romantic option in a video game count as propoganda? Or showing a gay couple or transgender character as completely normal in a tv show?

And, to tie it into history, should blacks have "compromised" on ending segregation in return for leaving all the anti unpack laws and practices (eh all white juries) untouched?

Considering that anti-LGBT hate crimes have been on the rise, and conservative states keep trying to take away their rights, I'd say they have good reason to feel under attack, and perhaps oppressed.

And these are just different views on life. In fact, I have little interest in the relationship with LGBT people in other countries.

People attacking others for being different =\= different views on life.

[Glagoly]

As for the Wolfsgängel, this sign can be found in many places in Germany and France. For example, on the coats of arms of cities (oh my god, are they also Nazis? whole cities!!!).

And the Swastika can be found in old Buddhist temples and such. Doesn't mean you should go around parading it as your flag.

Totally agree. That's why I don't use the Wolfsgangel on my flag.

[Glagoly]

You're trying to apply your own biases to the whole world. I see an interracial couple or a same-sex couple and don't feel a hint of disgust or abnormality, instead just reacting with a resounding meh. I'd love to see your sources for suggesting.otherwise, though.

I have been studying psychology for a long time. I didn't say it was subconscious for a reason. It is something that man has no control over. The only thing I did not clarify is the absence of this reaction in a person of non-traditional orientation, for obvious reasons. Likewise with interracial couples. Bias will disappear only when a person gets used to it, namely in relationships.

I will provide links to the study of this phenomenon later, as well as answers to other questions. I say in advance that if I have not answered someone's question, then I am busy and will answer later. Thanks for understanding.

[Orcuo]

As I am an anti-smart human being, the concept of being transgender is a bit strange to me. While I don’t necessarily have anything against the transgender community, however certain aspects of the community and fundamental idea of “being transgender” are, at best, slightly question. So, if someone would be so kind, I had a few question that hopefully someone in the community could answer. I’ll probably ask questions and debate you on certain things, so if you reply just be ready for that.

1. The Definition of a “Male” and “Female”

More specifically, a “Human Male” and a “Human Female”. Their seems that there is a split amongst everyone on what a Male and Female is. Some say it’s this, other’s say it was that, and from what I’ve gather, it’s a pretty lucid. Now, point to bias, I was raised up in a household that says being Male and Female are rooted in biology. Yet, opinion could change. If someone could simply give me the definition of what a Male is (Human Male), and what a Female is (Human Female), I would be happy.

2. Bathrooms

Now, you may not believe in the right to privacy, and that’s fine. However, some people do. And from what I’ve seen, there’s been no effort from any side of the community to work out a middle ground between trans rights and the right to privacy. So if anyone could explain why that is, or could provide a middle ground of their own design, I’d be delighted.

3.I’m a Heretic (Apparently)

Seemingly, every time I have one of these little debates. I find myself being called a transphobic moron because I didn’t say something that trans people liked, or offered some type of solution or middle ground that wasn’t exactly what all the trans people wanted. If anyone can tell me why this is, I would love to know.

Really you could just answer question 1. and I would be happy.