If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Not News: Two cute teens fall in love. Fark: They were both born the opposite sex (w/pics)   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 401
    More: Sappy, sex-change operations, sex steroid, recitations, Katie Hill  
•       •       •

32469 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Nov 2012 at 2:31 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



401 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-11 08:37:42 PM

rynthetyn: runcible spork: ciberido: It's too early to be 100% certain, yes. But scientific evidence for the "born this way" theory of both transgender and homosexual (and bisexual) people seems to be mounting. I don't think that it's that much of a stretch to say that it will PROBABLY turn out that most lbgt people were born lbgt...

I abhor the idea of carelessly and ignorantly linking the "T" to the "LGB" grouping. It makes barely any sense. While it may have pragmatic political value (though I consider it to be dubious), especially in the short term, it ultimately confuses and misinforms people.

Except that a lot of the discrimination that LGB people face is less about orientation than it is about non-normative gender presentation. Or, in other words, women who are discriminated against for being insufficiently "feminine" in their gender presentation or men who are discriminated against for being insufficiently "masculine". The trans issues are part and parcel with the way that society policies gender and tries to quash anyone who is gender non-conforming. Make it better for one group and you make it better for all groups.

Besides, I think it's wrong on a moral standpoint to leave trans people behind as the rest of us get more equality because they've been there fighting for equality alongside LGB people from the beginning. At Stonewall, people talk about how "the drag queens fought back", well, a lot of those people who fought back weren't actually drag queens, they were trans women. LGB people wouldn't be on the verge of full equality without those trans women saying that no, they weren't going to let the police shove them around anymore, and to ignore them now or cut them out of the movement that they've been fighting in for decades is wrong.


Very true, I know not all the issues are the same but everybody benefits if people can be who they are without threat of violence or discrimination.
 
2012-11-11 08:39:42 PM

Toddicusrex: The ironic thing here is that Katie is better looking then every single subby described 'hottie' that I have seen in every article on Fark. EVER.


You're right man.. Everyone keeps posting about weird boners, but it's not weird. I let my boner decide what is sexy and what is not!

/boner
 
2012-11-11 08:46:17 PM
ciberido, rynthetyn, tinfoil-hat maggie, et al:

It's a mistake to conflate gender and sexuality, and the general populace will never become educated if the groups are lumped together simply because they're both marginalized and have "something to do with sex." It promulgates ignorance and misinformation. To use a freighted expression, it's a shotgun wedding, at best. Short-term pragmatism, as I said.

The truth is, many transsexual people are quite conservative when it comes to sexuality and/or gender and the expressions thereof. Obviously I'm not referring to those who identify as "gender-fluid," "gender outlaws," or who have for whatever reasons a pathological inclination to challenge society's dualistic expectations and norms. Ironically, in many ways transsexual folks are much less threatening to the status quo (except for the big one, that so many people for whatever reasons (religious dogma, societal priming, who knows?) have a deeper visceral disapprobation to a seemingly more fundamental "deviation").
 
2012-11-11 08:50:06 PM
(Yes, I admit that I can be obdurate, and sometimes naïve. And I also realize that this can be a self-defeating combination.)
 
2012-11-11 08:55:52 PM

runcible spork: Further, you apparently think I'm looking at it from the LBG camp rather than the T aspect, which would have been plainly evident, even to you, had you bothered to look at any of my other comments in this thread.


In that case, let me lay point number six on you:

If you're transsexual, people are always going to think you're homosexual, whether you are or not. Look at for Chaz Bono as one example, and compare him to Matt Kailey. Both are transmen or female-to-male trannsexuals. Bono is attracted to women; Kailey is attracted to men. Bono considers himself to be a straight man; Kailey considers himself to be a gay man -- or at least, he is, and has always been, attracted to men. But many people call Chaz Bono a lesbian, and people who see Kailey walking down the straight holding his boyfriend's hand will think of him as a gay man.

In other words, whether a particular transsexual perceives herself as gay or not, somebody is going to call her a homosexual, as is going to treat her the same way he treats other homosexuals. So pretty much all transsexuals are going to have to deal with homophobia on some level.

Actually, if you have the time, get a copy of Kailey's book "Just Add Hormones" and read the chapter titled "you say GLB, I say GLBT." It lays out the argument better than I can. 

But that's reason number six. whether or not you as a transsexual consider yourself to be gay, you're going to be subjected to homophobia, guaranteed.
 
2012-11-11 09:02:25 PM

runcible spork: ciberido, rynthetyn, tinfoil-hat maggie, et al:

It's a mistake to conflate gender and sexuality, and the general populace will never become educated if the groups are lumped together simply because they're both marginalized and have "something to do with sex." It promulgates ignorance and misinformation. To use a freighted expression, it's a shotgun wedding, at best. Short-term pragmatism, as I said.

The truth is, many transsexual people are quite conservative when it comes to sexuality and/or gender and the expressions thereof. Obviously I'm not referring to those who identify as "gender-fluid," "gender outlaws," or who have for whatever reasons a pathological inclination to challenge society's dualistic expectations and norms. Ironically, in many ways transsexual folks are much less threatening to the status quo (except for the big one, that so many people for whatever reasons (religious dogma, societal priming, who knows?) have a deeper visceral disapprobation to a seemingly more fundamental "deviation").


Okay, so what would you're answer be? They not be inclusive, either the LGB or T? Why? so many of the issues are right there and to say transsexual people are conservative have you ever heard of log cabin republicans? Also I'm thinking your talking about the way older set of trans gender. Ya, I've met a few of them over the years but well the case I named the marriage thing was actually on of them but I haven't spoken to her in years so hopefully she's change her mind.
 
2012-11-11 09:02:52 PM

runujhkj: The only problem I have with articles like these is that when they're called out as transgendered in the headline, I'm just looking at the picture going "well duh, I can totally tell." You should withhold that information so I'm looking at the picture saying "what a strangely typical couple, what's odd about this?" Then, at the end, BAM - transgendered. And then people are shaken, like "whaaaat I totally couldn't tell from that picture." Maybe make a few people think. Not many, but maybe a few.


THIS. I recently learned that one of my coworkers was transgender. Been working with her for about a year and a half, Never had a clue. She, on the other hand, was shocked that I *didn't* know.
 
2012-11-11 09:03:14 PM

ciberido: runcible spork: Further, you apparently think I'm looking at it from the LBG camp rather than the T aspect, which would have been plainly evident, even to you, had you bothered to look at any of my other comments in this thread.

In that case, let me lay point number six on you:

If you're transsexual, people are always going to think you're homosexual, whether you are or not. Look at for Chaz Bono as one example, and compare him to Matt Kailey. Both are transmen or female-to-male trannsexuals. Bono is attracted to women; Kailey is attracted to men. Bono considers himself to be a straight man; Kailey considers himself to be a gay man -- or at least, he is, and has always been, attracted to men. But many people call Chaz Bono a lesbian, and people who see Kailey walking down the straight holding his boyfriend's hand will think of him as a gay man.

In other words, whether a particular transsexual perceives herself as gay or not, somebody is going to call her a homosexual, as is going to treat her the same way he treats other homosexuals. So pretty much all transsexuals are going to have to deal with homophobia on some level.

Actually, if you have the time, get a copy of Kailey's book "Just Add Hormones" and read the chapter titled "you say GLB, I say GLBT." It lays out the argument better than I can. 

But that's reason number six. whether or not you as a transsexual consider yourself to be gay, you're going to be subjected to homophobia, guaranteed.



... if people remain uneducated and confusion is promulgated by misinformation. See?
 
2012-11-11 09:19:59 PM

Silly Jesus: This is an abomination against God.


Next you'll blame them for Hurricane Sandy, right? Why don't you and God go help some of those unfortunate people and leave these two the fark alone?
 
2012-11-11 09:20:07 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: runcible spork: ciberido, rynthetyn, tinfoil-hat maggie, et al:

It's a mistake to conflate gender and sexuality, and the general populace will never become educated if the groups are lumped together simply because they're both marginalized and have "something to do with sex." It promulgates ignorance and misinformation. To use a freighted expression, it's a shotgun wedding, at best. Short-term pragmatism, as I said.

The truth is, many transsexual people are quite conservative when it comes to sexuality and/or gender and the expressions thereof. Obviously I'm not referring to those who identify as "gender-fluid," "gender outlaws," or who have for whatever reasons a pathological inclination to challenge society's dualistic expectations and norms. Ironically, in many ways transsexual folks are much less threatening to the status quo (except for the big one, that so many people for whatever reasons (religious dogma, societal priming, who knows?) have a deeper visceral disapprobation to a seemingly more fundamental "deviation").

Okay, so what would you're answer be? They not be inclusive, either the LGB or T? Why? so many of the issues are right there and to say transsexual people are conservative have you ever heard of log cabin republicans? Also I'm thinking your talking about the way older set of trans gender. Ya, I've met a few of them over the years but well the case I named the marriage thing was actually on of them but I haven't spoken to her in years so hopefully she's change her mind.


"conservative when it comes to sexuality" does not equate to voting republican.

i'm going out on a limb here to suggest he means not letting it all hang out or content to fly under the radar.

/I also think it should be LGB and T, not LGBT.
 
2012-11-11 09:25:38 PM

ciberido: runcible spork: Further, you apparently think I'm looking at it from the LBG camp rather than the T aspect, which would have been plainly evident, even to you, had you bothered to look at any of my other comments in this thread.

In that case, let me lay point number six on you:

If you're transsexual, people are always going to think you're homosexual, whether you are or not. Look at for Chaz Bono as one example, and compare him to Matt Kailey. Both are transmen or female-to-male trannsexuals. Bono is attracted to women; Kailey is attracted to men. Bono considers himself to be a straight man; Kailey considers himself to be a gay man -- or at least, he is, and has always been, attracted to men. But many people call Chaz Bono a lesbian, and people who see Kailey walking down the straight holding his boyfriend's hand will think of him as a gay man.

In other words, whether a particular transsexual perceives herself as gay or not, somebody is going to call her a homosexual, as is going to treat her the same way he treats other homosexuals. So pretty much all transsexuals are going to have to deal with homophobia on some level.

Actually, if you have the time, get a copy of Kailey's book "Just Add Hormones" and read the chapter titled "you say GLB, I say GLBT." It lays out the argument better than I can. 

But that's reason number six. whether or not you as a transsexual consider yourself to be gay, you're going to be subjected to homophobia, guaranteed.


And on the flip side, I can't remember the source, but there is a fairly decent case to be made that given what is known about brain structure and how gay men tend to have brains that are more similar to straight women than to straight men and that gay women tend to have brains more similar to straight men than to straight women, that LGB really all belong on a broader T spectrum. I'm not sure I necessarily agree with that classification, but the idea that anyone who is transgressing traditional gender expectations is in a similar boat is worth considering.
 
2012-11-11 09:30:13 PM

dumbobruni: tinfoil-hat maggie: runcible spork: ciberido, rynthetyn, tinfoil-hat maggie, et al:

[ ... ]

"conservative when it comes to sexuality" does not equate to voting republican.

i'm going out on a limb here to suggest he she means not letting it all hang out or content to fly under the radar.

/I also think it should be LGB and T, not LGBT.



Maggie's correct in pointing out that it's associated with an "old-school" mentality, but there are many, many younger transsexual people who want to be "stealth." Some might say it's still the gold standard (although it certainly would be nice if society wasn't so uptight and judgmental).
 
2012-11-11 09:30:53 PM

runcible spork: ciberido: runcible spork: Further, you apparently think I'm looking at it from the LBG camp rather than the T aspect, which would have been plainly evident, even to you, had you bothered to look at any of my other comments in this thread.

In that case, let me lay point number six on you:

If you're transsexual, people are always going to think you're homosexual, whether you are or not. Look at for Chaz Bono as one example, and compare him to Matt Kailey. Both are transmen or female-to-male trannsexuals. Bono is attracted to women; Kailey is attracted to men. Bono considers himself to be a straight man; Kailey considers himself to be a gay man -- or at least, he is, and has always been, attracted to men. But many people call Chaz Bono a lesbian, and people who see Kailey walking down the straight holding his boyfriend's hand will think of him as a gay man.

In other words, whether a particular transsexual perceives herself as gay or not, somebody is going to call her a homosexual, as is going to treat her the same way he treats other homosexuals. So pretty much all transsexuals are going to have to deal with homophobia on some level.

Actually, if you have the time, get a copy of Kailey's book "Just Add Hormones" and read the chapter titled "you say GLB, I say GLBT." It lays out the argument better than I can. 

But that's reason number six. whether or not you as a transsexual consider yourself to be gay, you're going to be subjected to homophobia, guaranteed.

... if people remain uneducated and confusion is promulgated by misinformation. See?


Well what good does it do to have it all as separate issues?
 
2012-11-11 09:33:11 PM

dumbobruni: tinfoil-hat maggie: runcible spork: ciberido, rynthetyn, tinfoil-hat maggie, et al:

It's a mistake to conflate gender and sexuality, and the general populace will never become educated if the groups are lumped together simply because they're both marginalized and have "something to do with sex." It promulgates ignorance and misinformation. To use a freighted expression, it's a shotgun wedding, at best. Short-term pragmatism, as I said.

The truth is, many transsexual people are quite conservative when it comes to sexuality and/or gender and the expressions thereof. Obviously I'm not referring to those who identify as "gender-fluid," "gender outlaws," or who have for whatever reasons a pathological inclination to challenge society's dualistic expectations and norms. Ironically, in many ways transsexual folks are much less threatening to the status quo (except for the big one, that so many people for whatever reasons (religious dogma, societal priming, who knows?) have a deeper visceral disapprobation to a seemingly more fundamental "deviation").

Okay, so what would you're answer be? They not be inclusive, either the LGB or T? Why? so many of the issues are right there and to say transsexual people are conservative have you ever heard of log cabin republicans? Also I'm thinking your talking about the way older set of trans gender. Ya, I've met a few of them over the years but well the case I named the marriage thing was actually on of them but I haven't spoken to her in years so hopefully she's change her mind.

"conservative when it comes to sexuality" does not equate to voting republican.

i'm going out on a limb here to suggest he means not letting it all hang out or content to fly under the radar.

/I also think it should be LGB and T, not LGBT.


Do you believe any transperson always gets to "fly under the radar"?
/ I just don't get it.
 
2012-11-11 09:40:33 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: Well what good does it do to have it all as separate issues?



It's apples and oranges. Gay rights followed civil rights for black people. That by the way is a valid analogy. There are some black people who happen to also be gay (or vice-versa, if you want to look at it that way), but sexuality and gender have about as much in common as sexuality and race (or skin color, if you want to be a little more politically correct). But there's no reason our more information-rich and information-fluid society can't handle gay rights and transgender rights in parallel (with T understandably but unfortunately currently lagging behind due to a late start). They are fundamentally different phenomena, regardless of rynthetyn's recent mention of the brain structure studies.
 
2012-11-11 09:41:00 PM

rynthetyn: ciberido: runcible spork: Further, you apparently think I'm looking at it from the LBG camp rather than the T aspect, which would have been plainly evident, even to you, had you bothered to look at any of my other comments in this thread.

In that case, let me lay point number six on you:

If you're transsexual, people are always going to think you're homosexual, whether you are or not. Look at for Chaz Bono as one example, and compare him to Matt Kailey. Both are transmen or female-to-male trannsexuals. Bono is attracted to women; Kailey is attracted to men. Bono considers himself to be a straight man; Kailey considers himself to be a gay man -- or at least, he is, and has always been, attracted to men. But many people call Chaz Bono a lesbian, and people who see Kailey walking down the straight holding his boyfriend's hand will think of him as a gay man.

In other words, whether a particular transsexual perceives herself as gay or not, somebody is going to call her a homosexual, as is going to treat her the same way he treats other homosexuals. So pretty much all transsexuals are going to have to deal with homophobia on some level.

Actually, if you have the time, get a copy of Kailey's book "Just Add Hormones" and read the chapter titled "you say GLB, I say GLBT." It lays out the argument better than I can. 

But that's reason number six. whether or not you as a transsexual consider yourself to be gay, you're going to be subjected to homophobia, guaranteed.

And on the flip side, I can't remember the source, but there is a fairly decent case to be made that given what is known about brain structure and how gay men tend to have brains that are more similar to straight women than to straight men and that gay women tend to have brains more similar to straight men than to straight women, that LGB really all belong on a broader T spectrum. I'm not sure I necessarily agree with that classification, but the idea that anyone who is transgressing traditional gen ...


Truthfully I believe it's all related gay, trans, intersex are all related but oh well, I can't prove anything and each have there own sets of problems it's just there so simaler in so many ways.
 
2012-11-11 09:43:36 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: dumbobruni: tinfoil-hat maggie: runcible spork: ciberido, rynthetyn, tinfoil-hat maggie, et al:

It's a mistake to conflate gender and sexuality, and the general populace will never become educated if the groups are lumped together simply because they're both marginalized and have "something to do with sex." It promulgates ignorance and misinformation. To use a freighted expression, it's a shotgun wedding, at best. Short-term pragmatism, as I said.

The truth is, many transsexual people are quite conservative when it comes to sexuality and/or gender and the expressions thereof. Obviously I'm not referring to those who identify as "gender-fluid," "gender outlaws," or who have for whatever reasons a pathological inclination to challenge society's dualistic expectations and norms. Ironically, in many ways transsexual folks are much less threatening to the status quo (except for the big one, that so many people for whatever reasons (religious dogma, societal priming, who knows?) have a deeper visceral disapprobation to a seemingly more fundamental "deviation").

Okay, so what would you're answer be? They not be inclusive, either the LGB or T? Why? so many of the issues are right there and to say transsexual people are conservative have you ever heard of log cabin republicans? Also I'm thinking your talking about the way older set of trans gender. Ya, I've met a few of them over the years but well the case I named the marriage thing was actually on of them but I haven't spoken to her in years so hopefully she's change her mind.

"conservative when it comes to sexuality" does not equate to voting republican.

i'm going out on a limb here to suggest he means not letting it all hang out or content to fly under the radar.

/I also think it should be LGB and T, not LGBT.

Do you believe any transperson always gets to "fly under the radar"?
/ I just don't get it.


No i don't. But they should be allowed to if they want to be, instead of demonized for being "conservative" as you tried to do above.
 
2012-11-11 09:52:42 PM
A man can never truly be a women unless technology advances enough to allow them to carry a child. Same with woman never really being a man unless it gets testicles that can produce viable sperm. At the end of the day it's all cosmetics. Whatever makes them happy. Just shouldn't kid themselves.
 
2012-11-11 09:53:55 PM

ParagonComplex: A man can never truly be a women unless technology advances enough to allow them to carry a child. Same with woman never really being a man unless it gets testicles that can produce viable sperm. At the end of the day it's all cosmetics. Whatever makes them happy. Just shouldn't kid themselves.


So what, is an infertile woman not truly a woman? An infertile man not truly a man?
 
2012-11-11 09:57:02 PM

dumbobruni: No i don't. But they should be allowed to if they want to be, instead of demonized for being "conservative" as you tried to do above.


What? I didn't bring the word conservative into this, have I known conservative trans people in the past yes. granted in my experience they are few are far between and I don't really know how they feel right now as that was many years ago. Although I do and always have thought voting for a politician that was gonna deny your civil rights yet give you tax cuts was dumb. And I didn't say if they could fly under the radar they shouldn't, I said do you think they always have.

/Why do I feel I just got trolled?
 
2012-11-11 10:02:04 PM

runcible spork: tinfoil-hat maggie: Well what good does it do to have it all as separate issues?

It's apples and oranges. Gay rights followed civil rights for black people. That by the way is a valid analogy. There are some black people who happen to also be gay (or vice-versa, if you want to look at it that way), but sexuality and gender have about as much in common as sexuality and race (or skin color, if you want to be a little more politically correct). But there's no reason our more information-rich and information-fluid society can't handle gay rights and transgender rights in parallel (with T understandably but unfortunately currently lagging behind due to a late start). They are fundamentally different phenomena, regardless of rynthetyn's recent mention of the brain structure studies.


I really don't understand anything you're saying right now. I know it's probably my point of view that is keeping me from it but really how are trans right's lagging behind right now? I don't understand your argument.
 
2012-11-11 10:04:10 PM

rynthetyn: ParagonComplex: A man can never truly be a women unless technology advances enough to allow them to carry a child. Same with woman never really being a man unless it gets testicles that can produce viable sperm. At the end of the day it's all cosmetics. Whatever makes them happy. Just shouldn't kid themselves.

So what, is an infertile woman not truly a woman? An infertile man not truly a man?


You'd be surprised at the mental gymnastics trans haters go through : /
 
2012-11-11 10:07:42 PM

ParagonComplex: A man can never truly be a women unless technology advances enough to allow them to carry a child. Same with woman never really being a man unless it gets testicles that can produce viable sperm. At the end of the day it's all cosmetics. Whatever makes them happy. Just shouldn't kid themselves.


If you will read The Jami Turman Fan Club's post above, you'll see a woman with complete androgen insensitivity. She has XY chromosomes, but no uterus or fallopian tubes. Is she not really a woman?
 
2012-11-11 10:10:28 PM

DrPainMD: B) There is no "scientific consensus," as psychology isn't science. It's political correctness; those psychologists/psychiatrists who haven't conformed have, to a large degree, been run out of the profession. That's not scientific consensus.


You sound Scientologic.
 
2012-11-11 10:16:38 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: I really don't understand anything you're saying right now. I know it's probably my point of view that is keeping me from it but really how are trans right's lagging behind right now? I don't understand your argument.



Sorry, I don't mean to be confusing. Maybe I'm not expressing myself clearly. I think transgender rights are lagging behind gay rights because (a) they got off to a later start as far as public awareness is concerned, and (2) transsexuality remains less widely understood, really understood, by the general populace than homosexuality; continuing to be yoked to the LGB "community" will not advance such understanding.
 
2012-11-11 10:22:52 PM

runcible spork: tinfoil-hat maggie: Well what good does it do to have it all as separate issues?

It's apples and oranges. Gay rights followed civil rights for black people. That by the way is a valid analogy. There are some black people who happen to also be gay (or vice-versa, if you want to look at it that way), but sexuality and gender have about as much in common as sexuality and race (or skin color, if you want to be a little more politically correct). But there's no reason our more information-rich and information-fluid society can't handle gay rights and transgender rights in parallel (with T understandably but unfortunately currently lagging behind due to a late start). They are fundamentally different phenomena, regardless of rynthetyn's recent mention of the brain structure studies.


If you accept the idea that trans* is a spectrum and that brain structure studies suggest that LGB people fall on one end of that spectrum, then yes, trans issues very much are LGB issues.
 
2012-11-11 10:29:29 PM

runcible spork: tinfoil-hat maggie: I really don't understand anything you're saying right now. I know it's probably my point of view that is keeping me from it but really how are trans right's lagging behind right now? I don't understand your argument.

Sorry, I don't mean to be confusing. Maybe I'm not expressing myself clearly. I think transgender rights are lagging behind gay rights because (a) they got off to a later start as far as public awareness is concerned, and (2) transsexuality remains less widely understood, really understood, by the general populace than homosexuality; continuing to be yoked to the LGB "community" will not advance such understanding.


I don't know what to say other than maybe you haven't been paying attention too stuff like this.

We've come along way and there is no benefit to dividing things up it really is an all or nothing thing and to says straight people aren't getting educated then how do all these early transitioning trans people come about?
 
2012-11-11 10:33:10 PM

rynthetyn: runcible spork: tinfoil-hat maggie: Well what good does it do to have it all as separate issues?

It's apples and oranges. Gay rights followed civil rights for black people. That by the way is a valid analogy. There are some black people who happen to also be gay (or vice-versa, if you want to look at it that way), but sexuality and gender have about as much in common as sexuality and race (or skin color, if you want to be a little more politically correct). But there's no reason our more information-rich and information-fluid society can't handle gay rights and transgender rights in parallel (with T understandably but unfortunately currently lagging behind due to a late start). They are fundamentally different phenomena, regardless of rynthetyn's recent mention of the brain structure studies.

If you accept the idea that trans* is a spectrum and that brain structure studies suggest that LGB people fall on one end of that spectrum, then yes, trans issues very much are LGB issues.



But I don't accept that, not at this point anyway. Just because there may be some superficial structural similarities in some brain studies, I don't feel it's unequivocal enough to go ahead and bundle everything together. Besides, the fact remains that gender and sexuality are fundamentally different aspects (regardless of the possible presence of shared causality) and are expressed in fundamentally different ways, and are furthermore interpreted by society in fundamentally different ways. It's useless to regress to anatomical semantics when the issue is societal integration of distinct epiphenomena.
 
2012-11-11 10:35:57 PM

rynthetyn: If you accept the idea that trans* is a spectrum and that brain structure studies suggest that LGB people fall on one end of that spectrum, then yes, trans issues very much are LGB issues.


I'm trying to remember the movie where the Log cabin republican types didn't want drag queens in the pride march , actually I think there may be a few of them but really it's one of those things where since it's similar enough issues well....
 
2012-11-11 10:42:02 PM

runcible spork: rynthetyn: runcible spork: tinfoil-hat maggie: Well what good does it do to have it all as separate issues?

It's apples and oranges. Gay rights followed civil rights for black people. That by the way is a valid analogy. There are some black people who happen to also be gay (or vice-versa, if you want to look at it that way), but sexuality and gender have about as much in common as sexuality and race (or skin color, if you want to be a little more politically correct). But there's no reason our more information-rich and information-fluid society can't handle gay rights and transgender rights in parallel (with T understandably but unfortunately currently lagging behind due to a late start). They are fundamentally different phenomena, regardless of rynthetyn's recent mention of the brain structure studies.

If you accept the idea that trans* is a spectrum and that brain structure studies suggest that LGB people fall on one end of that spectrum, then yes, trans issues very much are LGB issues.

But I don't accept that, not at this point anyway. Just because there may be some superficial structural similarities in some brain studies, I don't feel it's unequivocal enough to go ahead and bundle everything together. Besides, the fact remains that gender and sexuality are fundamentally different aspects (regardless of the possible presence of shared causality) and are expressed in fundamentally different ways, and are furthermore interpreted by society in fundamentally different ways. It's useless to regress to anatomical semantics when the issue is societal integration of distinct epiphenomena.


You still haven't said what you're solution is, and I still don't understand where you're coming from, the fact remains that each group can be bullied, harassed, and killed right now remains as well as denied employment and housing. I really don't understand your argument.
 
2012-11-11 10:42:39 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: I don't know what to say other than maybe you haven't been paying attention too stuff like this.

We've come along way and there is no benefit to dividing things up it really is an all or nothing thing and to says straight people aren't getting educated then how do all these early transitioning trans people come about?



I follow the news, was aware of that appointment and other stories. I'm not looking to divide things up unnecessarily, Coming from an analytic and science background, I'm interested in promoting understanding and acceptance of facts. Muddying the issue up and confusing people for convenience's sake is anathema to me. There's no benefit to that, in my opinion. Indeed, we've come a long way, but there's no need to continue oversimplifying such issues.

If there were more and clearer understanding about transsexuality, it would be even easier for people to transition earlier, which is so much better.
 
2012-11-11 10:50:35 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: You still haven't said what you're solution is, and I still don't understand where you're coming from, the fact remains that each group can be bullied, harassed, and killed right now remains as well as denied employment and housing. I really don't understand your argument.


My point is that there are many minority or "fringe" groups which have been historically and are currently persecuted as a result of bigotry, ignorance, hate, and so forth. There is no reason to create an unnatural alliance of those who are homosexual and those who are transsexual. It promotes the very ignorance it seeks to overcome. I repeat, just because they are both marginalized because they appear to be related ("something to do with sex") they shouldn't be lazily combined.

tinfoil-hat maggie: I'm trying to remember the movie where the Log cabin republican types didn't want drag queens in the pride march , actually I think there may be a few of them but really it's one of those things where since it's similar enough issues well....



I remember not many years ago there was severe discrimination (and eviction?) against transsexual women who tried to attend the Lilith Fair concerts. Don't know if that sort of thing still goes on.
 
2012-11-11 10:58:14 PM

runcible spork: tinfoil-hat maggie: I don't know what to say other than maybe you haven't been paying attention too stuff like this.

We've come along way and there is no benefit to dividing things up it really is an all or nothing thing and to says straight people aren't getting educated then how do all these early transitioning trans people come about?

I follow the news, was aware of that appointment and other stories. I'm not looking to divide things up unnecessarily, Coming from an analytic and science background, I'm interested in promoting understanding and acceptance of facts. Muddying the issue up and confusing people for convenience's sake is anathema to me. There's no benefit to that, in my opinion. Indeed, we've come a long way, but there's no need to continue oversimplifying such issues.

If there were more and clearer understanding about transsexuality, it would be even easier for people to transition earlier, which is so much better.


I guess that's where we disagree I don't see it as muddying the issues, and I don't think anyone is trying to confuse anyone the process of coming out trans and coming out gay are very different at least as far as what happens next but everyone involved with the LGBT I think is wanting a safe society in witch to make that decision and for the people who have and haven't decided yet to be safe and free of persecution.
 
2012-11-11 11:00:42 PM

runcible spork: tinfoil-hat maggie: You still haven't said what you're solution is, and I still don't understand where you're coming from, the fact remains that each group can be bullied, harassed, and killed right now remains as well as denied employment and housing. I really don't understand your argument.

My point is that there are many minority or "fringe" groups which have been historically and are currently persecuted as a result of bigotry, ignorance, hate, and so forth. There is no reason to create an unnatural alliance of those who are homosexual and those who are transsexual. It promotes the very ignorance it seeks to overcome. I repeat, just because they are both marginalized because they appear to be related ("something to do with sex") they shouldn't be lazily combined.


It's not an "unnatural alliance" though. LGB and T people have been working together since the very beginning of the modern gay rights movement. It would be immoral to ditch the T from LGB just at the point where we're on the verge of equality, not when they've fought for the same things with us for so long.

Whether you want to admit it or not, gender and sexuality ARE intertwined in our culture, and anyone who does not conform to gender roles is afforded outsider status because of it. LGB people are outsiders because we don't conform to the traditional roles, T people are outsiders for the same reason. If you leave trans people behind, you're going to end up leaving butch lesbians and effeminate gay men behind too, because just like trans people, they aren't accepted largely due to their gender presentation.
 
2012-11-11 11:12:58 PM

rynthetyn: It's not an "unnatural alliance" though. LGB and T people have been working together since the very beginning of the modern gay rights movement. It would be immoral to ditch the T from LGB just at the point where we're on the verge of equality, not when they've fought for the same things with us for so long.

Whether you want to admit it or not, gender and sexuality ARE intertwined in our culture, and anyone who does not conform to gender roles is afforded outsider status because of it. LGB people are outsiders because we don't conform to the traditional roles, T people are outsiders for the same reason.



It was a marriage of convenience, and it's high time people understand and appreciate what transsexuality is all about, independent of homosexuality. Society can and does change.

If you leave trans people behind, you're going to end up leaving butch lesbians and effeminate gay men behind too, because just like trans people, they aren't accepted largely due to their gender presentation.

I disagree completely with that prognostication and its underlying notion. Such people are still part of the gay community, or spectrum if you want to call it that. And please keep in mind I'm no absolutist, never-the-twain-shall meet Cassandra. There are of course people who are both transgender and homo- or bisexual (as has been mentioned earlier), and there are some times when it makes sense for those who are [LGB] and those who are [T] to come together to fight or lobby for common cause. But no need to callously yoke them together.
 
2012-11-11 11:18:15 PM

rynthetyn: If you leave trans people behind, you're going to end up leaving butch lesbians and effeminate gay men behind too, because just like trans people, they aren't accepted largely due to their gender presentation.



And who said anything about "leaving trans people behind" anyway? If transsexual people are perpetually in the hidden shadows of the "LGBT community" there will never be meaningful advancement.
 
2012-11-11 11:23:52 PM

runcible spork: And who said anything about "leaving trans people behind" anyway? If transsexual people are perpetually in the hidden shadows of the "LGBT community" there will never be meaningful advancement.


Paul Ryan and Barney Frank, amongst others, when discussing ENDA. I could go on, but I have a more important post to make in a few. Not trying to pick a fight here, at all, but the queer community doesnt like us trans folk, in general.
 
2012-11-11 11:25:55 PM

runcible spork: tinfoil-hat maggie: You still haven't said what you're solution is, and I still don't understand where you're coming from, the fact remains that each group can be bullied, harassed, and killed right now remains as well as denied employment and housing. I really don't understand your argument.

My point is that there are many minority or "fringe" groups which have been historically and are currently persecuted as a result of bigotry, ignorance, hate, and so forth. There is no reason to create an unnatural alliance of those who are homosexual and those who are transsexual. It promotes the very ignorance it seeks to overcome. I repeat, just because they are both marginalized because they appear to be related ("something to do with sex") they shouldn't be lazily combined.

tinfoil-hat maggie: I'm trying to remember the movie where the Log cabin republican types didn't want drag queens in the pride march , actually I think there may be a few of them but really it's one of those things where since it's similar enough issues well....

I remember not many years ago there was severe discrimination (and eviction?) against transsexual women who tried to attend the Lilith Fair concerts. Don't know if that sort of thing still goes on.


To say it is an unnatural alliance is just, wow. I'm sorry but it is for the best and more and more people are learning acceptance, why can't you?
/ Yea, yea women born women only Bornstien talked about that, maybe things haven't changed but really going it alone is not the answer. I don't see why you can't get that granted I don't know your situation but you seem angry right now. I've had you Favorited for awhile and I'm sorta surprised.
 
2012-11-11 11:31:56 PM

rynthetyn: And on the flip side, I can't remember the source, but there is a fairly decent case to be made that given what is known about brain structure and how gay men tend to have brains that are more similar to straight women than to straight men and that gay women tend to have brains more similar to straight men than to straight women, that LGB really all belong on a broader T spectrum. I'm not sure I necessarily agree with that classification, but the idea that anyone who is transgressing traditional gender expectations is in a similar boat is worth considering.



Thinking about this some more. Without researching it, I seem to recall that those studies finding similarities between gay men and straight women, and gay women and straight men, had more to do with fMRI (or similar) activity to stimuli rather than actual brain structure. In contrast, there have been studies finding structural similarities of transsexual brains to those of their ...uhm... nonsomatic analogues? Gah. Translation: that transsexual women's brains are physically similar to those of cisgender women, and ditto for transsexual men and cisgender men.
 
2012-11-11 11:34:42 PM

runcible spork: rynthetyn: If you leave trans people behind, you're going to end up leaving butch lesbians and effeminate gay men behind too, because just like trans people, they aren't accepted largely due to their gender presentation.

And who said anything about "leaving trans people behind" anyway? If transsexual people are perpetually in the hidden shadows of the "LGBT community" there will never be meaningful advancement.


What the hell do you mean by this? Straight up. Tell me, say it. You really think more people aren't more educated about trans issues than 10 yr's ago? You admit you knew Obama made a transgender appointment, yet no advancement? What's really going on here?
 
2012-11-11 11:36:43 PM

alienated: runcible spork: And who said anything about "leaving trans people behind" anyway? If transsexual people are perpetually in the hidden shadows of the "LGBT community" there will never be meaningful advancement.

Paul Ryan and Barney Frank, amongst others, when discussing ENDA. I could go on, but I have a more important post to make in a few. Not trying to pick a fight here, at all, but the queer community doesnt like us trans folk, in general.


It is what we make it.
 
2012-11-11 11:40:35 PM

alienated: Paul Ryan and Barney Frank, amongst others, when discussing ENDA. I could go on, but I have a more important post to make in a few. Not trying to pick a fight here, at all, but the queer community doesnt like us trans folk, in general.



Do trans folk (excluding the "fluid" poseurs and provacateurs) like the queer community?

tinfoil-hat maggie: To say it is an unnatural alliance is just, wow. I'm sorry but it is for the best and more and more people are learning acceptance, why can't you?
/ Yea, yea women born women only Bornstien talked about that, maybe things haven't changed but really going it alone is not the answer. I don't see why you can't get that granted I don't know your situation but you seem angry right now. I've had you Favorited for awhile and I'm sorta surprised.



I've long had you Favorited too. I'm not angry, but honestly feel very strongly about this "LBGT" grouping. I want more people to have clarity. Not trying be divisive for the sake of being divisive. What do you think I'm not accepting of, Maggie? I tend to express my opinions without stating my situation, and have a habit of frequently speaking vaguely, so I realize my messages may be muddled. (Ironic, considering my claims of desire to espouse understanding and clarity.)
 
2012-11-11 11:46:23 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: What the hell do you mean by this? Straight up. Tell me, say it. You really think more people aren't more educated about trans issues than 10 yr's ago? You admit you knew Obama made a transgender appointment, yet no advancement? What's really going on here?



No denying it, progress in understanding transsexuality is occurring, but far too slowly because it's lumped in with the queer community (which is a much more cohesive, though not absolutely so, community than the transgender community, if there is such a thing*). It's no longer necessary for transsexuality to be cloaked in the shadows, riding under the coattails of the LGB club.

*Eminently arguable. Not here, not now, though.
 
2012-11-11 11:46:45 PM

ParagonComplex: A man can never truly be a women unless technology advances enough to allow them to carry a child. Same with woman never really being a man unless it gets testicles that can produce viable sperm. At the end of the day it's all cosmetics. Whatever makes them happy. Just shouldn't kid themselves.


So an infertile man isn't a man? And an infertile woman isn't a woman? My mother had a hysterectomy. She's not a woman anymore?
 
2012-11-11 11:47:59 PM

Myria: No, it's an issue with the current limit of medical technology. I don't think that doctors can do anything to help me look female, since my body type is so strongly masculine. I can afford surgeries, but they wouldn't do any good. I'm better off dead.


This might be long.
Hey there, I am late to reply to this as I took a good while to try and come up with something that would not sound odd, or creepy.
So, here goes. I dont know you, at all, but I am pretty sure it was mentioned for the Oceanside Fark party that you are Trans, and I thought ' wow, more than one of my kind at a fark party' ? However, I could not get a replacement so I had to skip it.
I am also mtf, which i am sure has shocked many fark Modmins and others that now that I came out after a while- I have met over the years at meet ups / parties/ sports by brooks impromtu things, as I only accepted what I knew at 4 when I hit 40. There is no way even in a really dark room that I can pass- im 5 11 and I am skinny but I have a pooch belly. I pluck eyebrows and shave- just for me. I am mostly in guy mode / androgen mode as I have, well, after this long a life- mostly boy clothes- plus- makeup on a daily basis is kinda of a pita.
Do I feel bad because of the mistake that was made at the human factory ? Yes.
Do I think of just ending it ? Yes.
But, then who would feed gordie or mammaberry ? (cats) . Who would take madhonib to her physical therapy ? IDK if you are into the bar scene at all- I mostly am not, but, at the Oxwood, in the Valley of San Fernando, you can meet plenty of non pass trans folks who just do not give a damn about being non pass/ pass , and many of them are good people.
I would have emailed this but, well- you have a private email.
I am just saying to please do not just roll over / give up.
Take that as you wish, Lass. 
And please- be well.
 
2012-11-11 11:52:21 PM

runcible spork: Do trans folk (excluding the "fluid" poseurs and provacateurs) like the queer community?


I am only one person, so- I dont know. I tend to have a better time in queer bars when I go to a bar vs a straight one- most gays and lesbians are nice, based on my experiences.
 
2012-11-11 11:57:24 PM

runcible spork: 've long had you Favorited too. I'm not angry, but honestly feel very strongly about this "LBGT" grouping. I want more people to have clarity. Not trying be divisive for the sake of being divisive. What do you think I'm not accepting of, Maggie? I tend to express my opinions without stating my situation, and have a habit of frequently speaking vaguely, so I realize my messages may be muddled. (Ironic, considering my claims of desire to espouse understanding and clarity.)


Well, truth be told none of your reasons hold up, the facts are more people are educated about trans issues, and many of those issues coincided with the LGB and yea drop the T and then drop the B because that one's supposed to be a choice right? Well we don't chose who we fall in love with, it just happens. And you haven't given any evidence that trans people would be better of going it alone and have giving no consideration to the trans people that cannot or won't fully transition.

Otherwise, what I'm saying is not knowing your status or position in life as far as gender goes, I think you're really wrong and if you were trans it would be self defeating.
 
2012-11-12 12:10:22 AM

runcible spork: tinfoil-hat maggie: What the hell do you mean by this? Straight up. Tell me, say it. You really think more people aren't more educated about trans issues than 10 yr's ago? You admit you knew Obama made a transgender appointment, yet no advancement? What's really going on here?

No denying it, progress in understanding transsexuality is occurring, but far too slowly because it's lumped in with the queer community (which is a much more cohesive, though not absolutely so, community than the transgender community, if there is such a thing*). It's no longer necessary for transsexuality to be cloaked in the shadows, riding under the coattails of the LGB club.

*Eminently arguable. Not here, not now, though.


My skin
Sorry I just think you're wrong.
EiP if you ever wanna talk about it.
 
2012-11-12 12:13:50 AM

alienated: runcible spork: Do trans folk (excluding the "fluid" poseurs and provacateurs) like the queer community?

I am only one person, so- I dont know. I tend to have a better time in queer bars when I go to a bar vs a straight one- most gays and lesbians are nice, based on my experiences.


Very true, and now I have to wonder what a fluid poseur is.
 
2012-11-12 12:15:34 AM

tinfoil-hat maggie: Well, truth be told none of your reasons hold up, the facts are more people are educated about trans issues, and many of those issues coincided with the LGB and yea drop the T and then drop the B because that one's supposed to be a choice right? Well we don't chose who we fall in love with, it just happens.



What I'm saying is that although more people are now educated about TG/TS issues, it's slow going and it could be happening faster and in a less encumbered context. Historically those issues may have, or may have at least appeared to have "coincided with [those of] the LGB" group, but that's no longer necessary.

I see no reason to drop the B from there; each of those letters represents a sexuality that is not 100% heterosexual (but really, how many people are 100% heterosexual?), so what if it may be only some of the time for those who identify as bisexual? Anybody should be allowed to love and be with whomever they want, as long as it's consensual.

And you haven't given any evidence that trans people would be better of going it alone and have giving no consideration to the trans people that cannot or won't fully transition.

How can I prove something that hasn't be allowed to happen? And further, there's no reason to exclude those who cannot or will not; that's why I refer to transgenderism as well as transsexualism. Also, with greater acceptance and understanding, it's more likely that transsexual people will have insurance coverage for transition, and will be able to transition earlier (read: more definitive successes).

Otherwise, what I'm saying is not knowing your status or position in life as far as gender goes, I think you're really wrong and if you were trans it would be self defeating. 

I don't follow this argument. Also, getting sleepy.
 
Displayed 50 of 401 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report