Jamie in Chile wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 18, 2017 5:31 pm
I disagree with zzz. I think it's a good thread. I think issues like this are important, as are other issues like feminism and race equality. It's good to discuss these things. I have commented on the UK politics thread though!
Jamie in Chile is correct. Issues such as this are very important, and I was wrong to dismiss this thread. That is why I am here. I have had a recurring dream where John Maynard Keynes has appeared to me. He looked like one of the puppets off of Spitting Image
and he reminded me of this thread and told me that I ought to make a post explaining how my position has evolved.
I do not believe that I have actually communicated with the spirit of John Maynard Keynes. However, coincidentally, one of his most famous quotes was "When the facts change, I change my mind". Of course, the facts have not changed in this case. All that has changed is my understanding of them. Since 2016, I have became more aware of the issues relating to trans people and of their importance. So, without further ado, I'm going to give my thoughts on this thread that I hope should be conveyed with much more nuance than my original post.
The topic itself
First of all, the thread title is in itself complete gobbledegook. There is no such thing as "a transgender". What there does exist, and what I believe Cloppy was referring to, is "a transgender person" or "a trans person".
Secondly, it says a lot about the position of trans people in society when the statement "I wouldn't date a trans person" is considered less bigoted than, let's say, the statement "I wouldn't date a Jew". As shown by the poll, the majority of people who visited this thread would
date a trans person, however, most of their responses have been quite willing to entertain the reasons why somebody would not be willing to. I sincerely doubt that if Cloppy had titled this thread "Would you date a Jew?", there would have been the same response.
The only people who have expressed significant outrage at this thread (besides myself for erroneous reasons) are EquALLity, and a user named "Whole", who appears to have made their only post on this thread. The points that they made I am wholly in sympathy with. However, they were met with this response from brimstoneSalad:
brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑
Mon Apr 17, 2017 4:05 am
Whole, EquALLity, the hostility to Cloppy is unhelpful to the ends of educating.
Why not post pictures of pretty girls instead so Cloppy can reflect on the nature of attraction?
Again, I scarcely believe brimstoneSalad would have made this same response if this thread were titled "Would you date a Jew?". What would be the more expected response to somebody saying that they would never date a Jew? Hostility, or posting some pictures of Scarlett Johansson and Natalie Portman so that the anti-semite in question can relate on the nature of attraction?
Indeed, this is not only the case for this thread. One of the major smears directed by the mainstream media in the UK towards Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn is that he is an anti-semite. This is not true in the slightest. Corbyn is not an anti-semite. He is merely critical of the state of Israel. Indeed, anti-semitism is much worse in the Conservative Party which has backed the anti-semitic far-right regime of Viktor Orban in Hungary. That being said, there is a problem with anti-semitism in the Labour Party, although not as severe and widespread as the media makes out. What is much more severe and widespread in the Labour Party is transphobia. The Labour Party is riddled with TERFs ("TERF" stands for "Trans exclusionary radical feminist", although they are neither "radical" nor "feminist"). These TERFs kicked up a massive fuss when trans women were allowed onto all-women shortlists. Now, thankfully, most of these TERFs decided to leave the party because of this. However, there are probably still plenty in it. Where was the media outrage over transphobia in the Labour Party? Where were the media attempts to smear Corbyn as a transphobe? There were none, because transphobia is nowhere near as controversial as antisemitism. Nor, indeed, is it as controversial as misogyny, racism, homophobia or biphobia. The fact is that the position of Jews, women, people of colour, homosexuals and bisexuals (although not perfect) is much higher than the position of trans people.
That being said, there are some legitimate points that have been raised by those who have expressed concerns about dating a trans woman who may be still partway through transitioning, and thus may not "pass". I don't believe that this is bigoted any more than it would be to not date a cis woman who has a masculine appearance. However, here is how I would determine if somebody is bigoted towards trans people:
If I were dating somebody who I found attractive and got along well with, and I found out that they were a neo-Nazi, I would end that relationship with them immediately. If I were dating somebody who I found attractive and got along well with, and I found out that they were a flat earther, I would be very concerned, however, I would not see this as reasonable grounds to immediately end the relationship. If I were dating somebody who I found attractive and got along well with, and I found out that they were Jewish, that would not even register as a concern in my head.
All of these scenarios detail dating somebody and finding out new information about that person. What differs is my response to those things. Now, if you were dating somebody who you found attractive and got along well with, and you found out that they were trans, which response matches yours? If it is the same as my response to the neo-Nazi or the flat earther, then that is bigotry, for the same reason that it would be bigoted to react that way to a Jew. Now, if you picked my response to the flat earther, you may argue that you can't control how you feel about trans people. That is legitimate, however, still bigoted as if you felt that way about Jews, you also would not be able to control the way you feel. However, the fact that one might hold either of these prejudices does not make them a bad person and the best thing to do is to recognise this bigotry in order to control it.
My first post
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:55 pm
I am torn between amusement and exasperation. The fact that there is an election about to happen in France, another one about to happen in the UK and the possibility of a World War 3 is being discussed due to tensions on the rise with DPRK, USA, Syria and Russia, and that this is all overshadowed by a discussion on whether you would date a transgender is unbelievable. Utterly unbelievable. I cannot believe that this is happening. If this is what our beautiful forum has fallen to, then I am beside myself. I am having a mental breakdown. I will crumble to pieces. Well, I suppose I'd better contribute to this discussion rather than simply expressing my disgruntlement with the whole thing.
When I read some of the posts I made on this forum in the past, I sometimes feel like building a time machine so that I can go back in time to when I made them, and give myself from the past a couple of good slaps to the face, and then once I have finished doing that, go back in time to when Hitler was a baby and kill him. I have never felt this feeling so strongly as I am now, reading this one.
So firstly, it should go without saying that although there are issues much more important than the one discussed in this thread, such as the environment, economics and foreign policy (for the sheer impact that decisions concerning these issues can have), that does not automatically make the issue of dating preferences regarding trans people unimportant! When I made that post, I was very active on the "Break a wish" topic. How on earth was that
as important as the issues I mentioned???
Secondly, what the hell was going on in the latter half of that paragraph? "Having a mental breakdown"? Was that meant to be funny? Jesus fucking Christ!
If I had known somebody who was a nice person and treated me well and who I felt a connection towards, the fact of whether they were cisgendered or transgendered would not bother me.
I think this is the only sensible thing that I said in that post. My post ought to have been just that and nothing else!
In my opinion, there are only two genders
Well, "my opinion" was bullshit and based on memes rather than on scientific fact. Non-binary people exist and I think this is a good video regarding non-binary genders: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoUORx0LeIc
this does not discontinue the fact that one may be born in the one that they do not identify with. This can be explained by science. For instance, a man might identify as a woman if they are the youngest child that their mother has had. When a woman is pregnant a lot of times, the body begins to see the foetus as a foreign object and produces antibodies and antigens that feminize it.
I can't remember where I heard this and I don't know whether it is true or not. Nevertheless, there are many biological causes for people identifying as transgender: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_transsexuality
Before reading that article, I must point out that the psychological causes proposed in this article are very flawed. In regards to rearing, as pointed out in the article, Dr. Sherer details how parents rearing their children can influence their gender expression
, but not their gender identity
. In regards to Blanchard and autogynephilia, I would recommend this video which debunks them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6czRFLs5JQo
There. Now can we PLEASE get back to discussing politics?
Shut the fuck up.
Responses to my post
miniboes wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 18, 2017 1:08 pm
Although i share your general disinterest in the subject of this thread, this is not a forum about politics primarily. It's a forum about veganism and other stuff with the sole exception of celebrity gossip. If you don't want to discuss this then just ignore the thread or scan it like I've been doing
Some very wise points, however, I am greatful that I made the post, stupid as it was, due to the fact that I can confront the ridiculous views I held in the past. The fact that celebrity gossip isn't allowed on this forum is news to me. Does this mean that we can't talk about the administration of President Trump?
Jebus wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 18, 2017 1:48 pm
The transgender question is original and a few of the posts were interesting or entertaining. I can put on the news right now to watch discussions about the things you mention.
I've already responded as to why I think Jebus's point about the news was a weak one. However, I must ask if "the transgender question" was really the choice of phrasing he wanted to go for. Does he not think it sounds a little bit... Hitler-y? Considering that Jebus is a transphobe (as I shall review later on in this post), one might wonder whether he has a "final solution" in mind to the "transgender question". I think his choice of wording is even worse than how Red keeps abbreviating "social security" as "SS"!
Either brimstoneSalad was just being polite, or was suffering a severe lapse of judgement when they wrote this.
Cloppy and Jebus
Cloppy and Jebus are, evidently, the two transphobes who voted "no" on the poll. I shall now go on to review their reasons for doing so. I shall start with Jebus, since his reasons seem somewhat more well thought out and less like a madman ranting about stuff which he doesn't understand than Cloppy's, although that isn't saying much.
Jebus wrote: ↑
Thu Apr 13, 2017 12:08 am
I would be worried to date one even if I found him/her physically attractive. I don't know any transgenders personally but I have a hard time thinking that they would be much fun being around. My guess is that they are gender fixated and/or victims of a gender fixated society. Many of them, I guess, are also attention seeking.
When I first revisited this thread, it came to me as no surprise that Jebus would say something akin to this. It also came to me as no surprise that he would not give any evidence for his (admitted) guesses that "they are gender fixated and/or victims of a gender fixated society" or that many of them are "attention seeking". I don't really need to rebut either of these claims as that which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Nevertheless, I will say that trans people are indeed victims of a gender fixated society, just not in the way that he is implying. Society assigns the roles of "male" and "female" to people at their birth based solely upon their genitals. From then on, roles are ascribed to them which they are expected to conform to. As a result of that, trans people (and also gender non-conforming people) are indeed victims of a gender fixated society. However, when trans people finally do come out as trans, this is not a result of them living in that society, but as a result of them escaping from its fixation on gender. As well as that, Jebus's claim that many trans people are attention seeking is just plain daft. I am somebody who will confess to being a bit of an attention seeker and I have a hard time believing that any, let alone many, people would be willing to potentially undergo costly medical surgery and attempts to legally change gender simply to receive attention. Even if they don't undergo these things (which could be due to a multitude of reasons, such as financial instability), the amount of positive attention will be so minimal that it would be barely worth sacrificing their identity to receive. They may, however, receive a significant amount of negative attention including verbal threats and physical violence, which I sincerely doubt anybody would go out of their way to achieve. The fact is as well that there are much simpler ways of getting attention than proclaiming yourself to be a gender other than the one you were assigned at birth.
Jebus wrote: ↑
Thu Apr 13, 2017 3:11 am
Being black, provided that education is controlled for, predicts very little about one's behavior, whereas one can make some predictions of how a transgender will act.
Regardless of whether you can make some predictions of how trans people will act, NonZeroSum and EquALLity were correct to point out that you can not make blanket statements about them, in the same way that you can't about black people. Jebus has changed the subject from whether one can make blanket statements which apply to all trans people at all times, to whether one can make predictions about their behaviour, effectively making itself easier for him to prove his point. In my discussions with him in the past, it seems that he quite enjoys doing this.
That being said, his point is still flawed. Even when education is controlled for, being black can predict a lot about a person's behaviour. For instance, a study by the London School of Economics shows that blacks in England and Wales are 8.4 times more likely than whites to be stopped and searched. As a result of this, one can predict that blacks will take a more negative view of the police due to the fact that they are more likely to be discriminated against. This, like education, is an external factor in judging the behaviour between different races. Likewise, any differences in actions performed by cis people and trans people are likely going to come as a result of external factors. For instance, trans women may be more likely to present as stereotypically feminine than cis women, and trans men likewise may be more likely to present as stereotypically masculine than cis men, and this comes as a result of the fact that there is more pressure on trans people to present as the gender they identify as than there is an cis people.
The idea that your gender should have anything to do with how long you grow your hair, what clothes or make-up you wear, or whether or not you wear a tie is ridiculous and I suspect this is something that will go away in the future. Hence I think transgenders are closed-minded in the sense that they feel a need to look like their current society expects their gender identity to look.
Nobody is claiming that one's gender "should have anything to do with how long you grow your hair, what clothes or make-up you wear, or whether or not you wear a tie is ridiculous and I suspect this is something that will go away in the future". There is a clear distinction to be made between gender non-conforming people (men who may enjoy wearing dresses and women who may enjoy wearing ties) and trans people (those who experience gender dysphoria: distress felt at the difference between the sex they are assigned at birth and the gender they identify as). As for saying "transgenders are closed-minded in the sense that they feel a need to look like their current society expects their gender identity to look", that is a truly stupid thing to say on so many levels. If a trans person does not put effort into expressing their gender identity through conventional means, society deems that they can't actually be the gender they claim to be (e.g. "If they really are a woman, then why don't they wear a skirt?"). If they do put effort into expressing their gender identity through conventional means, then the response is similar to what Jebus is saying now (i.e. "Why do they feel a need to look like we expect them to look?"). The fact that Jebus not only buys into this hypocritical narrative, but doesn't even recognise the doublethink necessary to believe it, due to not recognising that some trans people don't put effort into expressing their gender identity through conventional means, due to his obsession with making blanket statements about all trans people, is truly appalling!
It's been a while since Jebus made those posts and there is every chance that he, like me, has changed his mind since. However, if I know that if there is one thing which Jebus does not excel at, it is admitting that he is wrong. What I will note is that this thread appears to debunk a hypothesis that Red has floated about in our discussions on his discord server. Red has postulated that Jebus puts a high value on the thoughts of brimstoneSalad, and that the reason he has yet to (and likely will never) respond to our posts on the thread "Should the Senate be abolished?" is because brimstoneSalad disagrees with him about the number of people actively viewing the thread, and has expressed concerns about his thoughts on abolishing the President. As shown by his responses in this thread, he is clearly capable of disagreeing with brimstoneSalad. So, here is my
hypothesis on how Jebus formulates his opinions:
1. Make a guess about something.
2. Make a post about your guess on the Philosophical Vegan Forum explaining, "My guess is (x)" and treating your guess as fact.
3. If somebody provides evidence contrary to your guess, move the goalposts.
4. If they call you out on this, call them stupid and keep moving the goalposts.
5. If they persist, ignore them (repeat step 4 if necessary).
6. Never change your mind on your guess, otherwise you
Anyway, now onto Cloppy:
Cloppy wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:51 pm
Personally, I wouldn't. I would prefer real girls or real guys, so for me it's no. I also never got along with them. So even if I would, I think it would have gone bad anyway.
Cloppy's point about preferring "real girls or real guys" is one that is very easy to poke holes in. Even if we ignore the scientific consensus that trans women are real women and that trans men are real men in favour of Cloppy's emotionally charged hogwash, if a trans woman is not a "real girl", then she would (by default) be a "real guy". Furthermore, EquALLity's points about why
Cloppy never got along with trans people are spot-on.
Cloppy wrote: ↑
Wed Apr 12, 2017 10:32 pm
Well, most are very sensetive to everything it's like I can't say anything to them without them getting triggered, start hating me or start trolling me. Last time I asked a question to one of them and they started hating me for no reason. Well, it's pretty much because I said I wasn't into transgender then they started sending me transgender porn, well, more like spamming it. So yeah my experience with them wasn't a good experience at all. I of course can't start a debate about anything with them without being seen as a very evil guy. I guess I'm just not compatible with them.
I will reiterate: EquALLity's points about why Cloppy never got along with trans people are spot-on. I don't need to personally know Cloppy in order to understand that. If somebody was to say "Personally, I wouldn't date a Jew. I would just feel weird about it and in general they have a different mentality that is not compatible with me at all. I also never got along with them. So even if I would, I think it would have gone bad anyway.", I should hardly be surprised to hear that that many Jews would have hostile feelings towards that person and decide to spam them with Jewish-themed pornography (if such a thing exists) in order to troll them.
Cloppy wrote: ↑
Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:07 am
I also think that it's not natural and bad for society since now you have a lot more transgenders than before and children are learning about it and are exposed to all of it.
The same nonsensical argument which Cloppy is using here has been used to oppose same-sex relationships. Considering that Cloppy is a bisexual, I find it peculiar that he didn't notice the irony.
Society today just doesn't make sense anymore and everyone is so sensitive, they just start caring more about those minorities than caring about the rest, the aren't looking at the real problems and most of the real problems are just ignored if it has anything to do with a sensitive subject. We are really just too many people on this planet and too many of them are just being useless and have no future.
This is the same argument I made in the first post I made on this thread: Why are we discussing issues regarding trans people when there are elections and foreign conflicts and other more important stuff going on? So I'll give Cloppy a rephrased version of the response that I made to myself: It should go without saying that although there are issues much more important than certain trans issues such as the environment, economics and foreign policy (for the sheer impact that decisions concerning these issues can have), that does not automatically make trans issues unimportant! Cloppy is the one who made the post about dating trans people. How on earth was that
one of the "real problems" that needs to be discussed, but trans issues that are raised by trans people are not???
Instead of caring so much about what gender you are and what clothes you should wear just think of what you're going to do in life and do something useful.
Instead of being directed towards trans people, I think that statement ought to be rephrased and directed towards transphobes: Instead of caring so much about what gender other people are and what clothes other people should wear just think of what you're going to do in life and do something useful.
The people today think it's possible to change human nature, it's not. For example racism is human nature and it has always existed. It still exist today and we can't change it. Trying to fight for it just doesn't work, just like the people of different races are now racist against white people and attack them or see them as evil. This is still racism.
of all people was able to make a good point against Cloppy here:
Jebus wrote: ↑
Sun Apr 16, 2017 3:22 am
Incorrect. Racism is learned. Little kids don't care who they are playing with. It's later in life that they become racists because of shitty parents, shitty friends, jealousy etc.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day!
Secondly, trying to fight against racism doesn't work? Seriously? The position of people of colour in today's society is not perfect, for sure, but I think it's safe to say that it's miles better than it was in the past.
Thirdly, "the people of different races are now racist against white people and attack them or see them as evil"? Only "now"? You think that anti-white racism was only invented recently? I'm sure Jean-Jacques Dessalines would love to hear about that!
Fourthly and finally, claiming that it is impossible to change human nature is nonsense. It was once human nature to live in caves and in hunter-gatherer societies. Indeed, it was once human nature to not be a human, that is a homo sapiens, at all. That's evolution. As Agent Smith from the Matrix might put it: "Like the dinosaur, the transphobes have had their time. The future is our world. The future is our time."
So let's have a little interlude to focus on this comment here:
Cloppy wrote: ↑
Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:36 am
DarlBundren wrote: ↑
Sun Apr 16, 2017 4:40 am
Psycho wrote:and just an aside, I'm not a brony, but my dashie is cooler than yours by at least 20%...
As a little OT, can anyone explain to me what's going on with the 'My little pony' thing?
Just watch it and see what it is. Maybe you would like it too.
DarlBundren made some good points against Cloppy's ideas that there are only two genders and that trans men are not men and that trans women are not women. Cloppy chose to ignore them in favour of promoting a cartoon that he likes. Unbelievable. Just fucking unbelievable.
Cloppy wrote: ↑
Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:45 am
As for Blaire White, I noticed she was a transgender just by looking and hearing her voice.
I sincerely doubt this is true. Those who actually do try to see if people are trans by looking at them and hearing their voices are often mistaken. This is exemplified by conspiracy theorists on the internet who are using that metric to claim that cis female celebrities such as Taylor Swift, Keira Knightley and Jodie Whittaker are in fact secretly trans.
It's often funny how facial features and other things that distinguish a trans person for a cis person are only noticed after
it is pointed out that that person is trans, as is depicted in this cartoon:
The thing is I don't like them this way, if they want to be my friend and are not like all the other I've met before and actually nice to me then it's okay but just friend.
I doubt that any trans people would want to be Cloppy's friend, simply for the same reason that no Jew would want to be the friend of somebody who would make statements such as the one I imagined.
Same as I wouldn't date a woman with fake boobs or anything, I prefer them natural.
Cloppy has contradicted himself quite a bit with this statement. He claims that physical appearance isn't an issue and that it is due to the "mentality" which he claims all trans people have, and yet with this statement he appears to be claiming that physical appearance is
an issue. That is unless he is willing to claim that there is a mentality which is held by all women who have breast implants that makes him incompatible to enter into a relationship with them.
And no, being born male is not an accident.
No, because nobody is "born male". A newborn baby has no conception of gender at all. What is an accident is being incorrectly assigned male at birth.
Cloppy wrote: ↑
Thu Apr 27, 2017 6:37 am
PsYcHo wrote: ↑
Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:38 pm
I can't speak for Cloppy (but apparently "cloppping" is a euphemism for masturbating for those who actually watch the MLP show
As for clopping I would say it's equivalent to hentai if you know what it is.
Overall I think it's a bad idea to have sex change surgery and that the transgenders should learn to accept who they are instead, but in the end it's their choice I guess.
Trans people are
accepting who they are, hence getting sex change surgery in order to live as the gender that they really are. For instance, you would never think to say that somebody who is getting braces in order to straighten their teeth because they are uncomfortable with their teeth being crooked needs to "learn to accept who they are". They are accepting who they are! They are accepting that it is normal to be uncomfortable with their teeth being crooked and to want to change that. Likewise, trans people are accepting that it is normal to be uncomfortable living as the gender that they are assigned at birth and to want to change that.
More research should be done for finding a way to fix that problem mentally instead of physically.
Does he mean like gay conversion therapy, but for trans people? Again, you would think Cloppy, who is bisexual, would notice the irony, but he clearly really is that dense.
I doubt that I shall get a response from either Cloppy or Jebus to my post. Cloppy has not been on this forum since March, so unless he ends up pulling a "Vegan Atheist" and returning to the forum after going on hiatus, I think that he shall follow the line of most forum members who make a bunch of posts and then go away to busy themselves with their next interest. Jebus appears to be returning to the policy of ignoring me, effectively putting his fingers in his ears and going "la la la" so that any arguments I make against him won't resonate. So that's that.
I think that there are four lessons to be learned from this thread:
1. Don't go claiming that there are issues more important than the one being discussed, as if that invalidates the importance of the one being discussed.
2. Don't go making blanket statements about people who you have never had any interaction with due to "guesses".
3. If you insult an entire group of people based on bigoted pseudoscientific BS, don't be surprised if most people in that group don't care much for you.
And most importantly:
4. Never be afraid to change your mind in the face of new evidence.
When the brilliant American science communicator Bill Nye made an episode of his television programme Bill Nye Saves the World
talking about the gender spectrum in which he made the distinction between sex and gender, he faced a severe backlash for it. Many people on social media spread screenshots of Nye from his old television programme Bill Nye the Science Guy
where he was holding up a picture of a human chromosome in which he is subtitled as saying "Gender is determined by your chromosomes". Now this screenshot was actually faked. Nye was actually saying something completely different when he was holding up that picture of a chromosome. However, even if the screenshot was real, those who spread it are missing the point entirely. Nye is a man of science. The whole point of science is to change its views in the face of new evidence. It was once thought that there were only five elements. Now it is recognised that there are at least 118. It was once thought that the sun moved and the earth stood still. Now it is recognised that the inverse is true. Those who spread that screenshot are making the same mistake as the creationists who made this cartoon:
That cartoon comes from Answers in Genesis, which is presided over by Ken Ham, who debated with Bill Nye over evolution vs creationism back in 2014. You would have thought that the internet "skeptic community" which was head over heels in love with Nye during that period would recognise the irony in their adopting the tactics of Ham's organisation, but no. Like Cloppy, they really are that dense.
We can only hope that the rights of trans people will improve in the future. However, time is running out. The UN reckons we have 12 years to avoid catastrophic climate change (Something I didn't mention as a more important issue in my original post, largely because at the time, the issues I mentioned were ones that interested me and I wasn't interested in climate change, so I was pretty much just bitter that there was a popular thread on this forum about something that didn't interest me). Unless some miraculous victory should come at the eleventh hour and the world embraces nuclear power and trans rights, then the situation looks pretty bleak. As John Maynard Keynes put it, "In the long run we are all dead".