Quote from: Andy8715 on October 26, 2011, 10:51:30 PM
No, that is not trolling, just backing up their arguments with evidence.

2 months ago I seen things from one perspective and know my views have changed from what I thought then so how would that be good proof of anything. Maybe they did but realized the need to stay together.  Just saying.

Quote from: Venus-Castina on October 26, 2011, 11:41:03 PM
It occurs to me that the older people get, the more fragmented they become. In The Netherlands the proposition recently passed that one can change his or her sex without undergoing srs or even hrt. This was changed because the old law in which you needed srs to legally change your sex was found to be discriminatory and against the universal human rights: It forced people to undergo surgery they initially did not require.
It has taken far too long for this proposition to even reach the government because many ts simply could not agree with each other on what would be a good point to legally change ones sex. A case where fragmentation has lead to an unnecessary delay.

Then again, how would you unite people who on some key points fundamentally differ in opinion? I don't think it can be done.

people can differ on opinions (and do) but when such a term as "bigot" is thrown around.........

The difference in opinion is directly based around a stance that is disrespectful and dismissive of how some live and identify.  Many hold a very similar opinion towards all forms of gender variance.  In this case it just seems more targeted based on arbitrarily chosen criteria.

I'm not sure how a lot of people are going to just let that go.

Quote from: Cori on October 27, 2011, 02:46:26 AM
The difference in opinion is directly based around a stance that is disrespectful and dismissive of how some live and identify.  Many hold a very similar opinion towards all forms of gender variance.  In this case it just seems more targeted based on arbitrarily chosen criteria.

I'm not sure how a lot of people are going to just let that go.

I think it's safe to say that the disrespectful and dismissive stance flows both ways......it's all in the eye of the beholder

It's actually not fair to say that at all. You're explicitly denying others the agency to define their identity, and claiming they are disrespecting you when they are just asking you to knock it off.

No one is trying to deprive you of anything. You are not being attacked. All anyone is asking is to cut it out with trying to tell people who they are.

Quote from: LifeInNeon on October 27, 2011, 03:08:40 AM
It's actually not fair to say that at all. You're explicitly denying others the agency to define their identity, and claiming they are disrespecting you when they are just asking you to knock it off.

No one is trying to deprive you of anything. You are not being attacked. All anyone is asking is to cut it out with trying to tell people who they are.

as I said, we all have opinions.  nobody is trying to tell anyone who they are.

Quote from: Jamie Nicole on October 27, 2011, 04:53:31 PM
as I said, we all have opinions.  nobody is trying to tell anyone who they are.

Quite the contrary:

The assumption non-op is no different that crossdresser:

Quote from: Jamie Nicolenaturally, I'm assuming that you are referring to TV and CD's when you mentioned someone who doesnt have the preop/postop status?

And this, in reply to Venus Castina:

Quote from: Venus CastinaBy saying so , do you mean that according to you a non-op transwoman isn't a woman but a man?

Quote from: Jamie Nicoledefining nonop as someone who cannot afford surgery, is fearful of surgery, etc etc, then no
defining nonop as someone who has no intention, no desire, etc etc, then yes

And in reaction to Venus Castina's comment that people see us as mentally ill:

Quote from: Jamie Nicole on October 26, 2011, 01:49:56 AM
that's because we are!! lol  my god, who in their right mind would want to jeopardize being terminated from employment, losing custody of children, being ridiculed by society in general, transforming a penis into a vagina or vice versa? lol

And again, for proper context on this next one, to you, non-op = CD/TV:

Quote from: Jamie Nicole on October 26, 2011, 02:23:32 AM
isnt it past your bedtime?  because I believe that CD and TV's are not women, somehow that translates to being a bigot and an elitist?  exactly how does that perpetrate toxic stereotypes?  my opinions have absolutely nothing to do with being post op, I've felt the same way before I've completed my transition

And then you have these two contradictory sentences:

Quote from: Jamie Nicole on October 26, 2011, 02:14:56 AM
I can assure you, that whatever is or isnt between your legs does not matter to me for I could care less. if you have no intentions of ever completing SRS because you want to keep your junk as is, then yes, I have a problem calling you or anyone else, a woman as well as inclusion in anti discrimination legislation.

Seriously. All you've done since coming back to impart your wisdom is tell people they're not as cool as you, setting yourself up as judge of who is and who is not a woman.

That's what's so ironic about you starting this thread in the first place with that jeremiad about how we're all so fragmented, which you immediately followed with the statement that if someone disagrees with you they need to STFU.

The reason the community is fragmented is that you and others who share your view are trying to push non-ops out. You are the one separating from the group because you do not recognize others' identities as valid. Those of us comfortable getting elbow to elbow with crossdressers, drag queens, genderqueers, androgynes, non-ops, non-transitioners, bigenders, intersex individuals, and so on are perfectly comfortable under the big umbrella and would be more than glad to have supportive pre- and post-op trans men and women involved too. You are the one telling others they can't come in.

No one is trying to push you away or push you out. You insulted others and when you got called on it you cried foul.

Quote from: LifeInNeon on October 27, 2011, 05:48:41 PM
Quite the contrary:

The assumption non-op is no different that crossdresser:

And this, in reply to Venus Castina:

And in reaction to Venus Castina's comment that people see us as mentally ill:

And again, for proper context on this next one, to you, non-op = CD/TV:

And then you have these two contradictory sentences:

Seriously. All you've done since coming back to impart your wisdom is tell people they're not as cool as you, setting yourself up as judge of who is and who is not a woman.

That's what's so ironic about you starting this thread in the first place with that jeremiad about how we're all so fragmented, which you immediately followed with the statement that if someone disagrees with you they need to STFU.

The reason the community is fragmented is that you and others who share your view are trying to push non-ops out. You are the one separating from the group because you do not recognize others' identities as valid. Those of us comfortable getting elbow to elbow with crossdressers, drag queens, genderqueers, androgynes, non-ops, non-transitioners, bigenders, intersex individuals, and so on are perfectly comfortable under the big umbrella and would be more than glad to have supportive pre- and post-op trans men and women involved too. You are the one telling others they can't come in.

No one is trying to push you away or push you out. You insulted others and when you got called on it you cried foul.

LifeInNeon, did you major in Debating? You are excellent at it.

Quote from: LifeInNeon on October 27, 2011, 05:48:41 PM
Quite the contrary:

The assumption non-op is no different that crossdresser:

And this, in reply to Venus Castina:

And in reaction to Venus Castina's comment that people see us as mentally ill:

And again, for proper context on this next one, to you, non-op = CD/TV:

And then you have these two contradictory sentences:

Seriously. All you've done since coming back to impart your wisdom is tell people they're not as cool as you, setting yourself up as judge of who is and who is not a woman.

That's what's so ironic about you starting this thread in the first place with that jeremiad about how we're all so fragmented, which you immediately followed with the statement that if someone disagrees with you they need to STFU.

The reason the community is fragmented is that you and others who share your view are trying to push non-ops out. You are the one separating from the group because you do not recognize others' identities as valid. Those of us comfortable getting elbow to elbow with crossdressers, drag queens, genderqueers, androgynes, non-ops, non-transitioners, bigenders, intersex individuals, and so on are perfectly comfortable under the big umbrella and would be more than glad to have supportive pre- and post-op trans men and women involved too. You are the one telling others they can't come in.

No one is trying to push you away or push you out. You insulted others and when you got called on it you cried foul.

it's obvious that you dont see the humor and sarcasm in the mentally ill comment I've made..........and yes, if you want me to support your cause and advocate for inclusion, dont call me or others an elitist or a bigot because my view is different than yours

I believe it is the intention of this forum to be all-inclusive.  Anything that promotes the opposite, is not welcomed here.

Quote from: Morrigan on October 27, 2011, 06:09:24 PM
I believe it is the intention of this forum to be all-inclusive.  Anything that promotes the opposite, is not welcomed here.

the tos states about inclusion of all groups under the umbrella term, transgender....says nothing about antidiscrimination legislation.  i certainly agree all groups are legitimate under the umbrella term and I fully believe that everybody should be protected but when certain groups are labled with some very despicable terms because opinions vary, well, that kind of rubs me the wrong way

The practical consequence of inclusion under the umbrella is inclusion in legislation. Those two things aren't separable without telling someone they aren't really under the umbrella.

And which groups are being labeled with despicable terms?

Quote from: LifeInNeon on October 27, 2011, 06:34:01 PM
The practical consequence of inclusion under the umbrella is inclusion in legislation. Those two things aren't separable without telling someone they aren't really under the umbrella.

And which groups are being labeled with despicable terms?

I've called a bigot, post ops in general have been called elitists......

Quote from: LifeInNeon on October 27, 2011, 05:48:41 PM


That's what's so ironic about you starting this thread in the first place with that jeremiad about how we're all so fragmented, which you immediately followed with the statement that if someone disagrees with you they need to STFU.

The reason the community is fragmented is that you and others who share your view are trying to push non-ops out. You are the one separating from the group because you do not recognize others' identities as valid. Those of us comfortable getting elbow to elbow with crossdressers, drag queens, genderqueers, androgynes, non-ops, non-transitioners, bigenders, intersex individuals, and so on are perfectly comfortable under the big umbrella and would be more than glad to have supportive pre- and post-op trans men and women involved too. You are the one telling others they can't come in.

No one is trying to push you away or push you out. You insulted others and when you got called on it you cried foul.

Thank you for phrasing it so well.

Quote from: Jamie Nicole on October 27, 2011, 06:41:29 PM
I've called a bigot, post ops in general have been called elitists......

The easiest way to stop being called such things, is to stop portraying yourselves as such.
I won't call another post-op a bigot, because she didn't deserve it, but you are earning your
title.

This legislation issue always arises when it comes to "compromise". People want to trade things
they don't even have, because they'll never miss them, and they think it somehow improves their
chances of passing the bill.

here's a simple example: The red shirt group compromises that they'll never wear
blue shirts if it ends the war. They don't care what the blue shirt group thinks, it's
"not their problem".

Quote from: Andy8715 on October 26, 2011, 11:14:28 PM
My state protects no one who is trans, pre or post op.  It's legal in my state to say "oh you're trans?  Well you're fired"

I don't suppose you live in Utah? or any where else in 'real' America perchance?

Sheesh, sometimes I wish the north would have just let the south leave on their own accord.

I mean, Alabama is the veritable armpit of America. Think about it, do we really need a state full of slack-jawed yokels?
'
Unfortunately, the way the electoral college system is set up, people in small states have crazy amounts of electoral power while the majority of the urban population is virtually disenfranchised in comparison- That's why all the LBGT supporters have to leave the cities and migrate to hick-America.

Think about it, the trade off goes like this: You agree to quit blocking anti-discrimination/civil rights bills at the state and federal levels. And we'll quit 'queering' up your neighborhoods.

The choice is yours Alabama. (Think of the unbridled gay horrors!)