Jump to content

OMG Gender Diversity! Thread


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, 112 said:

trans woman, transgender person, etc.


Ok.

 

Thank you for the info.

 

So a Trans woman is when a male transitions to be a female?  Is that correct?

 

Does a Trans women still have male genitalia?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BPA said:


Ok.

 

Thank you for the info.

 

So a Trans woman is when a male transitions to be a female?  Is that correct?

 

Does a Trans women still have male genitalia?

 

 

Yes, male-to-female transitioners are trans women.

 

A trans woman can have male genitalia if she's not had sexual reassignment surgery.

 

Transgender is a catch-all term, but I believe transsexual is reserved for those who've undergone sex reassignment.

Edited by 112
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 112 said:

Yes, male-to-female transitioners are trans women.

 

A trans woman can have male genitalia if she's not had sexual reassignment surgery.

 

Transgender is a catch-all term, but I believe transsexual is reserved for those who've undergone sex reassignment.

 

I think transsexual is starting to go out of fashion a bit these days, similar to how "transvestite" isn't used much anymore, though some older people probably still use it. The easiest way to refer to them is probably just "transgender person", though I guess each person has their own preferences, especially given how some people can feel like they're at various different points in their journey of transition. It's not uncommon at all for a person to go through several different labels in their journey of self-discovery before often finally settling on something after years of that journey.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, -AJ- said:

 

I think transsexual is starting to go out of fashion a bit these days, similar to how "transvestite" isn't used much anymore, though some older people probably still use it. The easiest way to refer to them is probably just "transgender person", though I guess each person has their own preferences, especially given how some people can feel like they're at various different points in their journey of transition. It's not uncommon at all for a person to go through several different labels in their journey of self-discovery before often finally settling on something after years of that journey.

Yeah, I feel like transsexual has negative connotations about it. Transgender is definitely the best, most general word to use and doesn't have stigma necessarily attached to it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BPA said:

They need those private stalls put in the older community centres asap.  Trans are using women’s swimming change areas (Bonsor).  As of now, there are no safe spaces for women to get changed.


And yes I did witness this.  Although it was only 1 time.  I hadn’t heard or seen anything since then.

 

Nothing wrong with discussing this, does not indict someone as a bigot or phobe for talking about it.

1 hour ago, 112 said:

This is a non-issue.

 

If someone has an issue with something, is uncomfortable or asks questions then it should be something people respect and take seriously. After all this IS what society is teaching.

1 hour ago, BPA said:


No.

 

The young girls exited the community centre in their wet swimming clothes.

 

Again, this would deserve a discussion and can be a teachable moment for anyone involved to better figure out how to make something work for everyone moving forward.

1 hour ago, King Heffy said:

Seems like a pretty poor job by the bigots they have for parents then.

 

Simple garbage response, these kind of replies and labels are why things devolve, too many people try to shut others up by attacking who they are or name calling rather than discussing or even debating things. Very disappointing aspect of society today. 

1 hour ago, Bob Long said:

 

Some parents freaking out for no real reason isn't something to base policy on.

 

This is true, maybe some educational discussions and in general people coming together to work out and talk about their concerns or help others understand things can be helpful.

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

 

Nothing wrong with discussing this, does not indict someone as a bigot or phobe for talking about it.

 

If someone has an issue with something, is uncomfortable or asks questions then it should be something people respect and take seriously. After all this IS what society is teaching.

 

Again, this would deserve a discussion and can be a teachable moment for anyone involved to better figure out how to make something work for everyone moving forward.

 

Simple garbage response, these kind of replies and labels are why things devolve, too many people try to shut others up by attacking who they are or name calling rather than discussing or even debating things. Very disappointing aspect of society today. 

 

This is true, maybe some educational discussions and in general people coming together to work out and talk about their concerns or help others understand things can be helpful.

Transgender women are women. Gender identity and expression are protected by the Charter. Why, then, should they be barred from using female spaces? There is no discussion here.

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand the concern and how cisgender girls/women could be uncomfortable around trans women due to their different anatomy, but the fear of perversion or rape or something stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of trans people and their motives. I can promise that almost every single trans woman in a changing room just wants to do their thing and move on without being a bother to anyone at all. The fear of a trans person doing something malicious in a change room is just as justified as the fear you'll run into a random psycho murderer on the street--it's incredibly unlikely.

 

Regardless, I do think private stalls just solves all problems and is the best solution for all involved.

  • Vintage 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

I can understand the concern and how cisgender girls/women could be uncomfortable around trans women due to their different anatomy, but the fear of perversion or rape or something stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of trans people and their motives. I can promise that almost every single trans woman in a changing room just wants to do their thing and move on without being a bother to anyone at all. The fear of a trans person doing something malicious in a change room is just as justified as the fear you'll run into a random psycho murderer on the street--it's incredibly unlikely.

 

Regardless, I do think private stalls just solves all problems and is the best solution for all involved.

At work we install privacy stalls for public washrooms. Redid gender neutral washrooms at multiple schools. Boom problem solved. Why we have washroom stalls with gaps in the privacy construction is beyond me. I know I sure as fuck wouldn't care if a similarly equipped trans woman took the urinal next to me as long as they adhere to the no talking code found in men's washrooms 🥸

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it's not a surprise for the Vatican to be stuck in the past...

 

Vatican Document Casts Gender Change and Fluidity as Threat to Human Dignity

The statement is likely to be embraced by conservatives and stir consternation among L.G.B.T.Q. advocates who fear it will be used as a cudgel against transgender people.

The sex a person is assigned at birth, the document argued, was an “irrevocable gift” from God and “any sex-change intervention, as a rule, risks threatening the unique dignity the person has received from the moment of conception.” People who desire “a personal self-determination, as gender theory prescribes,” risk succumbing “to the age-old temptation to make oneself God.”

Regarding surrogacy, the document unequivocally stated the Roman Catholic Church’s opposition, whether the woman carrying a baby “is coerced into it or chooses to subject herself to it freely.” Surrogacy makes the child “a mere means subservient to the arbitrary gain or desire of others,” the Vatican said in the document, which also opposed in vitro fertilization.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/08/world/europe/vatican-sex-change-surrogacy-dignity.html

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Satchmo said:

I guess it's not a surprise for the Vatican to be stuck in the past...

 

Vatican Document Casts Gender Change and Fluidity as Threat to Human Dignity

The statement is likely to be embraced by conservatives and stir consternation among L.G.B.T.Q. advocates who fear it will be used as a cudgel against transgender people.

The sex a person is assigned at birth, the document argued, was an “irrevocable gift” from God and “any sex-change intervention, as a rule, risks threatening the unique dignity the person has received from the moment of conception.” People who desire “a personal self-determination, as gender theory prescribes,” risk succumbing “to the age-old temptation to make oneself God.”

Regarding surrogacy, the document unequivocally stated the Roman Catholic Church’s opposition, whether the woman carrying a baby “is coerced into it or chooses to subject herself to it freely.” Surrogacy makes the child “a mere means subservient to the arbitrary gain or desire of others,” the Vatican said in the document, which also opposed in vitro fertilization.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/08/world/europe/vatican-sex-change-surrogacy-dignity.html

 

 

Pass the plate tho. 

 

If the Vatican sold off its assets it could solve hunger, so they can fuck off.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Satchmo said:

I guess it's not a surprise for the Vatican to be stuck in the past...

 

Vatican Document Casts Gender Change and Fluidity as Threat to Human Dignity

The statement is likely to be embraced by conservatives and stir consternation among L.G.B.T.Q. advocates who fear it will be used as a cudgel against transgender people.

The sex a person is assigned at birth, the document argued, was an “irrevocable gift” from God and “any sex-change intervention, as a rule, risks threatening the unique dignity the person has received from the moment of conception.” People who desire “a personal self-determination, as gender theory prescribes,” risk succumbing “to the age-old temptation to make oneself God.”

Regarding surrogacy, the document unequivocally stated the Roman Catholic Church’s opposition, whether the woman carrying a baby “is coerced into it or chooses to subject herself to it freely.” Surrogacy makes the child “a mere means subservient to the arbitrary gain or desire of others,” the Vatican said in the document, which also opposed in vitro fertilization.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/08/world/europe/vatican-sex-change-surrogacy-dignity.html

 

I wasn't aware Jesus said anything about transgenderism. The Church also seems to be operating under a curious definition of dignity; trans people generally don't consider it a dignity to live as their assigned sex.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who assigns sex at birth?

I'm presuming it is a Dr.; so what happens if a Dr says the child is female, even if it has male genitalia?

according to this 'church' decree- there is now nothing to be done, and the kid will just have to live with the doctors mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, -AJ- said:

 

God damn, if the Vatican seriously thinks trans people are trying to "make themselves God", they are even more out of touch with trans people than I thought. It honestly sounds like they've never had an honest converstation with gender-diverse person in their lives.

If I take medication for high blood pressure, am I not also 'playing God' in the same manner as they say trans people are? Their argument can be shewn to be absurd when we think of all the other medical interventions that exist for whatever condition. I'm insulting the unique dignity of my hypertension when I go on beta blockers.

  • Upvote 2
  • ThereItIs 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 112 said:

If I take medication for high blood pressure, am I not also 'playing God' in the same manner as they say trans people are? Their argument can be shewn to be absurd when we think of all the other medical interventions that exist for whatever condition. I'm insulting the unique dignity of my hypertension when I go on beta blockers.

 

I wonder what the Vatican Council thoughts on boner pills are? god intended thee to be limp, lay ye shall be limp. 

 

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 112 said:

If I take medication for high blood pressure, am I not also 'playing God' in the same manner as they say trans people are? Their argument can be shewn to be absurd when we think of all the other medical interventions that exist for whatever condition. I'm insulting the unique dignity of my hypertension when I go on beta blockers.

 

Heaven forbid I get eye surgery to eliminate my "God-given gift" of poor eyesight.

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 2
  • ThereItIs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

 

Heaven forbid I get eye surgery to eliminate my "God given gift" of poor eyesight.

I also wonder about people who have schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder or other psychotic illnesses. Are people with these conditions who take antipsychotics throwing away their seer's/prophet's gift? Would such a thing not be an affront to Christianity?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 112 said:

I also wonder about people who have schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder or other psychotic illnesses. Are people with these conditions who take antipsychotics throwing away their seer's/prophet's gift? Would such a thing not be an affront to Christianity?

 

interestingly, those folks were often viewed as having greater connections to the spirit world in small scale societies, so yeah. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 112 said:

I also wonder about people who have schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder or other psychotic illnesses. Are people with these conditions who take antipsychotics throwing away their seer's/prophet's gift? Would such a thing not be an affront to Christianity?

 

It's wildly inconsistent. They consider gender dsyphoria a mental illness like all these other ones, but for whatever reason, aren't okay with medically treating gender dysphoria when they are for all these other ones. For some reason, with gender dysphoria, your only option is therapy whereas for most other mental illnesses you have permission to take medication to help you be better aligned.

 

At the end of the day, they just rule out gender change before the conversation even begins, so by the time you get to how to deal with gender dysphoria, they've already ruled out any form of transition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...