Having sex with a chick who used to be a dude is apparently cool

[macdaddymario]

America is supposed to stand for a place there one can feel safe. Hard to feel safe when the person you sleep with lies about having an STD that can harm you physically, or they are hiding something that can damage you mentally/emotionally. The transgender has the right to change sex without judgment, and I'm not trying to stop that from happening. I'm saying that they can't expect special treatment because they are transgender. Just like women activists, they want to be treated like men, but want all the benefits of being a woman. Men not raising a hand to them, chivalry, all that fun jazz.

This is a "have your cake and eat it too" situation. You can't have both, without compromising the rights of the other party involved.

I'm reading that being a transexual/transgender is false advertisement and is illegal.

No, you're reading that false advertisement is illegal.

Clearly we should make it so that no one is allowed to say whether or not they've had the surgery. We can call it "Never ask, never tell." That way, no one flips out and kills innocent people instead of the trannies who deserve to die, like in your unlikely and unrealistic scenario above.

I never said they deserve to die. As for a never ask/never tell. That could would in favor of both parties, however then you have the issue of when a man falls in love with a transgender and wants a family. Now they have to tell, and feel even MORE betrayed.

To say that the scenario is unlikely is fair. To call it unrealistic is not, we live in a day and age where people have a fist fight, and when one loses, he goes home and grabs a gun comes back and shoots the guy that won.

 

[Zeonix]

Do I really have to post the Benjamin Franklin quote? I mean, really?

 

[macdaddymario]

You can post whatever you like, it wouldn't change the fact that the argument I make holds merit. Does it make it right? No. The only solution? Not at all. But it holds merit.

 

[Zeonix]

Your argument's only merit is its sincerity. Because I truly believe you are sincere in your bigotry and willingness to dismantle the rights of of citizens in order to feel safer at night.

 

[sub]

MacDaddy, do you believe that we should have those airport security scanners that essentially show a picture of the person being scanned as naked at airports / train stations / wherever?

 

[macdaddymario]

MacDaddy, do you believe that we should have those airport security scanners that essentially show a picture of the person being scanned as naked at airports / train stations / wherever?

No I don't, however we do need to find a way that allows people to be honest without making them feel threatened.

Your argument's only merit is its sincerity. Because I truly believe you are sincere in your bigotry and willingness to dismantle the rights of of citizens in order to feel safer at night.

Ha, so now I'm a bigot for wanting to make sure no one is hurt for something someone did/didn't say? Your logic astounds me. How about you stop making it personal. It's a forum post on the internet.

 

[Zeonix]

There is a way. Stop being bigoted. Holy ****. Now this person can tell you they're a trans without feeling like you're going to beat the ever-living **** out of them. Amazing!

 

[macdaddymario]

That works, if they tell you before hand. The issue is when they DON'T say anything until after the fact. That's what this debate was about, the ones who don't saying anything. The ones that do are a non issue, since they don't have to worry about tricking the wrong person. The ones that do the tricking, are the issue because they feel that they are protected by law. To a point they are, but they are only protected to the same degree that the person they fooled is protected.

 

[Zeonix]

@ Your initial post: No, you're a bigot for trying to create and enforce legislation that would make it illegal not to out yourself for being different based on the absurd notion that everyone would flip out and kill that particular transgendered person, and possibly others. This not only highlights your own bigotry, but your belief that others share your view. Why shouldn't I take this personally, when this is something you actually believe? Am I to ignore the views of people who live in my nation because they're voiced on the internet? Am I to assume these people will never in their lives vote for anything and that their backward views will not weasel their way into politics in one form or another?

Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and fight injustice every chance I get, be it on a forum or in a courthouse or on a corner. It's kind of my thing.

@ the above post: The same people who would murder someone over finding out they slept with a tranny are the same people who would resort to violence knowing they were about to have sex with a tranny. The real issue I'm seeing here is mentally unstable *******s incapable of detecting the gender of an individual through critical thinking skills, and their inability to react in a civilized manner.

 

[macdaddymario]

@ Your initial post: No, you're a bigot for trying to create and enforce legislation that would make it illegal not to out yourself for being different based on the absurd notion that everyone would flip out and kill that particular transgendered person, and possibly others.

I'm a bigot for trying to protect the rights of people to get a sex change, and the rights of people to know the truth about everyone? That's the freedom of the press, the right to know everything about everyone, reguardless of sex, race or creed. To deny people that is to deny their basic rights as an American.

Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and fight injustice every chance I get, be it on a forum or in a courthouse or on a corner. It's kind of my thing.

Yet, here you stand, trying to stop what is a basic right in the constitution. That would be injustice itself. Here I am trying to protect everyone, which is every ones right, to feel safe.

The same people who would murder someone over finding out they slept with a tranny are the same people who would resort to violence knowing they were about to have sex with a tranny. The real issue I'm seeing here is mentally unstable *******s incapable of detecting the gender of an individual through critical thinking skills, and their inability to react in a civilized manner.

Now you are basically saying that, because one person throws a controller after getting mad at a video game, all people that get mad at games throw controllers. Which is obviously not true. Just because someone gets mad that they were lied to, does not make them violent. You're working on the assumption that there are only set types of people, and not that every person is different.

 

[Zeonix]

I'm a bigot for trying to protect the rights of people to get a sex change, and the rights of people to know the truth about everyone? That's the freedom of the press, the right to know everything about everyone, reguardless of sex, race or creed. To deny people that is to deny their basic rights as an American.

No one has the right to know everything about everyone. You're at war with the very concept of privacy. Freedom of the press and forcing people to divulge information they'd rather not give are not the same, and to hide behind one right to take another away from a group of people is cowardly.

Yet, here you stand, trying to stop what is a basic right in the constitution. That would be injustice itself. Here I am trying to protect everyone, which is every ones right, to feel safe.

And what right is that? The right of Big Brother to peer into your bedroom at will?

Now you are basically saying that, because one person throws a controller after getting mad at a video game, all people that get mad at games throw controllers. Which is obviously not true. Just because someone gets mad that they were lied to, does not make them violent. You're working on the assumption that there are only set types of people, and not that every person is different.

You need to make up your mind on this point. Are people so emotionally and psychologically distraught by sleeping with a transvestite that they resort to murder, or are they simply "mad" about the situation? And if we are to assume the actions of one person are not to be attributed to a larger group, why should we steal the rights of a group of people because an extremely small minority is capable of murdering another person for something that should have been obvious to the murderer? Clearly, there isn't as big of a problem as you seem to think, or else we'd be reading and hearing about these murders every day, right?

And again, I maintain that people capable of murder over finding out they slept with a transvestite would react similarly to being led on. If it makes it to the bedroom, a reactionary response is almost guaranteed from that kind of person.

You use words like safety and security, and say we should dismantle the liberties our constitution guarantees us in pursuit of those things. The last decade should be evidence enough that sacrificing our freedoms and liberties in the name of security grants us neither. People should not have to live in fear of others because of who they are. I'm absolutely for disclosing whether or not you're a transvestite before intercourse. But it isn't an issue that should be forced. It isn't an issue that should be mandated by the law. It is a moral issue, and that responsibility lies on the parties involved. If you want disclosure, they need to know that you're not going to murder or otherwise react violently to them in a state of "temporary insanity". You give, they give. They give, you give.

 

[macdaddymario]

You use words like safety and security, and say we should dismantle the liberties our constitution guarantees us in pursuit of those things. The last decade should be evidence enough that sacrificing our freedoms and liberties in the name of security grants us neither. People should not have to live in fear of others because of who they are. I'm absolutely for disclosing whether or not you're a transvestite before intercourse. But it isn't an issue that should be forced. It isn't an issue that should be mandated by the law. It is a moral issue, and that responsibility lies on the parties involved. If you want disclosure, they need to know that you're not going to murder or otherwise react violently to them in a state of "temporary insanity". You give, they give. They give, you give.

If you are asking me if I would give up one of my rights, to protect countless others from possible harm, then I would. I'm not saying that if you are having a friendly conversation with someone who happens to be a transvestite, they need to disclose that information. However, under current legislation, you could press criminal charges on one, whom you slept with without them disclosing that information to you first under the guise of reckless endangerment, due to the amount of trauma one may suffer.

You tell me that I'm saying we should dismantle liberties out constitution grants us.. but then you take other ones that are also granted to us via the same page of legislation, and say they don't apply in this situation.

It's quite clear that current legislation needs to be looked into and reworked if there is to be any sort of satisfactory consensus for all sides of this debate.

 

[Zeonix]

If you are asking me if I would give up one of my rights, to protect countless others from possible harm, then I would. I'm not saying that if you are having a friendly conversation with someone who happens to be a transvestite, they need to disclose that information. However, under current legislation, you could press criminal charges on one, whom you slept with without them disclosing that information to you first under the guise of reckless endangerment, due to the amount of trauma one may suffer.

You tell me that I'm saying we should dismantle liberties out constitution grants us.. but then you take other ones that are also granted to us via the same page of legislation, and say they don't apply in this situation.

It's quite clear that current legislation needs to be looked into and reworked if there is to be any sort of satisfactory consensus for all sides of this debate.

You're not just giving up your rights. You're giving up my rights and the rights of everyone else, and for what? To keep the insane from injuring others? To keep prejudice alive because a small percentage of the population is both unable and unwilling to control how much they drink, and their actions after getting drunk? Funny story, transvestites are the ones getting attacked by bigots, not the other way around. Be it out in the street, or in the bedroom, or anywhere really, they're the ones being targeted by fine young civil rights leaders like yourself.

What rights am I taking away by changing nothing? You are not the press. You do not have the right to look through everyone's **** because you feel like it, or because you're paranoid. Why? Because we retain the right to privacy. This protects us from people like you.

Again, why does the legislature need to get involved at all? What is so difficult about forcing an ******* to, I don't know, not kill another person when his life is not in danger. The entire reason for him flipping out in the first place is because of the social stigma surrounding perceived homosexuality and transexuality. It's a learned response, and a learned overreaction.

 

[Avenger]

You'll always be pretty in a dress to me, Zeo. Axe in hand.

 

[Zeonix]

IT'S A TOMAHAWK

 

[Avenger]

...which is a type of axe. But I appreciate you being specific, Zeo.

 

[sub]

Let's get this topic back on track
With this fact
that Sweden was just caught in the act
of sterilizing people wanting to get a tacked
on penis.

I'm sorry. Basically, Sweden is sterilizing people and forcing them to divorce if they're trans and want to officially change their papers from male to female. I thought the situation called for some mad rhymes.

http://motherjones.com/mixed-media/2012/01/sweden-still-forcing-sterilization