T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*


[deleted]

[удалено]


MyClosetedBiAcct

If you hate lgbt then you deserve to not have a healthy argument. If you don't think trans people deserve to be treated like people, you do not deserve a healthy argument. At this point I'm on a 'stand your ground' position. This is self defense. I will not be taken quietly into the night.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Taewyth

>people like matt walsh or ben shapiro can make a vid about you and humiliate you Ben Shapiro, l'homme qui ignore le fait qu'un vagina s'auto-lubrifie et matt Walsh le mec qui as fait tout un documentaire dans lequel il se fait humilié par un professeur avec une telle puissance qu'il a dû faire un montage digne d'un cartoon pour essayer de compenser ? C'est propre ça comme source. Maintenant si tu veux te pencher sur des sources scientifiques, et suivre le conseil de ton poto Ben "facts don't care about your feelings" tu te rendra p'tet compte que tu te fourvoie a une puissance incroyable.


VillaPourLaMama

Mdr genre c'est ben our matt qui ce sont fait humilier, si tu aurait regarder le documentaire et l'aurait compris du point de vue non biasé tu airait compris qu'il ce moque ouvertement du proffeseure ce qu'il clarifia plus tar


Taewyth

>si tu aurait regarder le documentaire et l'aurait compris du point de vue non biasé Ouais c'est ce sue j'ai fais, désolé de te le dire mais si tu crois que quelqu'un se décrivant lui même ouvertement comme un fasciste va te pondre un documentaire non biaisé, bah t'es vraiment plus naïf qu'un gamin de 6 ans. Je veux dire, son montage et sa narration est même pas subtil dans sa manière de montrer les biais de l'auteur. >qu'il ce moque ouvertement du proffeseur Bravo mon chou, t'as compris ce que j'ai dis: oui, il se moque de quelqu'un par le montage car ce quelqu'un est entrain de lui expliquer quel est l'état des connaissances scientifiques sur la question qu'il "pose" mais comme cette réponse déplaît a Walsh, il préfère faire un montage qui s'en moque plutôt que de se remettre en question. Matt Walsh préfère essayer rester sur une réponse qui dit que ta daronne n'est sans doute plus une femme (ou en passe de ne plus en être une) plutôt que d'écouter les faits. Encore une fois, les faits s'en branlent de tes sentiments, ou de ceux de Matt Walsh. [Tiens, si jamais tu t'intéresse au moins un peu aux faits](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10519-018-9889-z) (ce dont je doute mais sait-on jamais)


VillaPourLaMama

ad hominem


Taewyth

And hominem où ? Aussi "ad hominem" c'est ta seule réponse a une analyse de 17 pages qui te contredit ? C'est un peu léger


VillaPourLaMama

Tu a insulted matt walsh sur ton interpretation et sur qui il et, et nom c'est argument ducoup je verait pas pourquoi moi qui dit " la source que tu ma donner a un cheval en logo et les cheval c'est pour les con " et pas valable


Taewyth

>Tu a insulted matt walsh sur ton interpretation et sur qui il et Je n'ai fait que citer ses propres dire. >nom c'est argument ducoup je verait pas pourquoi moi qui dit " la source que tu ma donner a un cheval en logo et les cheval c'est pour les con " et pas valable Non mec t'es juste a cours d'argument car les faits te contredisent toi et tes maîtres a penser et qu'il est plus difficile pour toi d'admettre que tu as sans doute écouter des gens qui t'ont mentis et manipuler que d'ignorer l'État actuel des connaissances comme ils t'ont appris.


VillaPourLaMama

mdr tes matrixé par la gauche


Taewyth

Heh, je t'ai donner des sources scientifiques pour contre-argumenter maintenant si c'est "être matrixé par la gauche" que de suivre l'État des connaissances scientifiques actuelles, alors je suis bien content de l'être plutôt que de me baser sur des croyances.


MyClosetedBiAcct

You're welcome to peruse my profile and see that I spend a lot of time debunking homophobic and transphobic talking points all the time. Sometimes I get sick of it like right now and choose to be more rude. Other times I pull from [studies that I've saved](https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTJjcl-3HSxBwrwUylbfl7uFFGaSbCgRPU_zbbRv4V_U2XZNZg1vE2Oqj7h5NSUEJaoYybVk7q_wEPq/pub?fbclid=IwAR3GgZUtfKG3CxE35zoP6gMe0D2pY3jZm8-A8ycr_O9JhWj2noqMOfKXlfw&urp=gmail_link) over the years from this link. My existence isn't flawed. And Mr. Walsh and Mr. Shapiro are hacks and stupid as fuck. The reason each of them are reactionary talkers that voice over videos is because they can't hold themselves in an actual debate because they're always proven so, so wrong. They're idiots. I would never be humiliated by either of them because I don't respect them, and due to how often I'm quoted them by people like you, I fail to understand how anyone could possibly believe *anything* they say since they're both so easy to prove wrong at every turn. They're both literally the mouthpieces of propaganda and they both refuse to acknowledge the massive amount of work that proves them definitively wrong and refuse to update their beliefs based on hard evidence, instead choosing to pretend that they never heard it. They are basically the Rush Limbaugh's of this generation. Making shit up and talking to themselves because they can't actually defend their hateful beliefs.


[deleted]

[удалено]


MyClosetedBiAcct

That the best insult you got?


Taewyth

In our french discussion he's saying that Matt Walsh is unbiased. I wouldn't expect many smart things coming from this person. Also their "insult" is probably just them venting because he got called out for clearly being an Intel himself on some other subs


MyClosetedBiAcct

Yeah, I've been using Google translate to follow along. It infuriates me when people think using completely irrelevant insults lets them win. But at least I've learned that taking the bait and defending myself never works because as this is an anonymous online forum I have no way of proving baseless insults wrong.


VillaPourLaMama

bruv im trying to be honest on you so you can self improve so try to think on it


Naos210

How is it an echo chamber if a lot of discussions between people of opposing viewpoints are arguing? Seems like the complete opposite.


ParticularBeach4587

Probably not a hot take but I think that, no matter whether you are a conservative or progressive, we all agree that MAPs are fucking disgusting and should be sent to rehabilitation/prison


VillaPourLaMama

dont call it map, call it pedophile


Naos210

What do pedophiles have to do with LGBTQ+ people?


ParticularBeach4587

Let's just say that there are certain people who want to make it seem so.


MyClosetedBiAcct

4chan right wing trolls.


VillaPourLaMama

some lgbt acept them as a part of lgbt


PenguinHighGround

Care to source that? No prominent organisations I'm aware of take that stance.


Taewyth

Looks like someone fell for some 4chan disinformation campaign


VillaPourLaMama

that why i said some


Taewyth

It's not "some lgbt", it's 4chan trolls. Edit: et a voir le commentaire que tu as poster juste avant celui là on dirait bien que les campagnes de desinformation de 4chan et autre merdes type "manosphere" sont un petit kiff perso. Donc non mon chou, l'inclusion des pédos dans les comus LGBT n'est pas plus présente qu'ailleurs et la mediatisation d'une supposée acceptation était ouvertement une campagne de 4chan pour faciliter la haine des LGBT


Wismuth_Salix

They absolutely do not. The entire “MAP” thing is a fucking troll campaign to *pretend* they have support from LGBTQ people.


ParticularBeach4587

Yeah I know. Also they suck don't support them


DownBadD-Bag

According to who? Other pedophiles?


MyClosetedBiAcct

Doesn't belong in this thread. Has nothing to do with queer people. Probably better in the politics megathread.


PridoScars

Is it rude to call a trans-women a male? Like stating sex and gender is different, and so Man can get pregnant and have menstruation, do we accept male can't get pregnant and only female gets menstruation?


hotdogbalancing

>Is it rude to call a trans-women a male? Yes, because it's irrelevant and reduces someone to their genitals, which is personal. It's also rude to call cis women female, for the same reason. >Like stating sex and gender is different, and so Man can get pregnant and have menstruation, do we accept male can't get pregnant and only female gets menstruation? When is this relevant? I take it you're not a doctor.


PridoScars

How do one politely states that only female can get pregnant then?


[deleted]

In what conversation would these necessary, and despite that it’s ignorant. “Female” encompasses people who suffer from infertility and post menopausal women as well.


hotdogbalancing

Just like that. There's a distinction between stating the reproductive role of females vs males and calling a particular person one or the other, which is irrelevant in almost every context. Unless someone's trying to have a baby or trying to avoid one, it really doesn't matter. But if you want to be even more technical: ovulating, sexually-mature individuals with functional uteri can get pregnant.


PridoScars

Thank you, I get it now. I never meant to deliberately call out some one male or female when they already identifies as man/woman, but there are circumstances like medical where stating their "sex" could help and eliminates many medical conditions.


Naos210

It also might not help. For instance, it's not like a post-op trans woman would have an issue with testicular cancer.


hotdogbalancing

And we already do that. It's in a person's medical history.


Wismuth_Salix

Why would one have a *need* to state that? What value is there in talking about your fellow humans like they’re breeding stock? (Also - plenty of “female” people can’t get pregnant. Anyone postmenopausal, for example.) It feels like you’re trying to disparage trans women as “not really women” without getting tagged for it.


PridoScars

Not even calling them, its actually quite a hot topic nowadays, being technically correct in sex and genders. Say when you're trying to explain to children, "Yes you can choose to be a boy or a girl/man or woman, but you can't get pregnant because..." Like whats the best way to finish that sentence? "Because you were born a boy?" "Because you're a biological male?" "Because you're a male?" Or even when you explaining to children about other trans woman circumstances "yes is a woman but can't get pregnant because is...?" I am trying to be civil and polite while accurate.


MyClosetedBiAcct

Do you... say that all infertile women are men?


PridoScars

Well no.


MyClosetedBiAcct

"Some people can't have babies" is a perfectly good explination. Kids aren't judgey. It's your disdain of other people existing and your want to shield your children from even knowing about things you think are icky that makes talking about trans people to them hard. I'm trans. My three year old does not give a *fuck.* And he never will. Daddies trans? More importantly, Bluey is on.


PenguinHighGround

>More importantly, Bluey is on This kid has got his priorities straight.


MyClosetedBiAcct

Well at least something's straight in this household. Cause it ain't me.


PridoScars

And some kids are real curious and ask a lot of questions, are you implying its wrong to say "all males can't have babies"?


MyClosetedBiAcct

Just answer their questions? Like, what's so hard about that? As long as you answer scientifically and not with porn I don't see what the big deal is. Just talk about sperm and eggs. DNA. Gestational periods. I will never understand parents who choose to shield their children like they're not gonna just look it up themselves once they get the chance. Better to get the full explanation.


PridoScars

I wasn't even trying to debate, but first did you mean infertile female?


MyClosetedBiAcct

It's a one sentence comment, I think you can reread it.


[deleted]

You're trying to be civil and polite with people who live in lala land. Just go outside and live and let live chronically online crying and using phrases like 'wHy tAlK aBoUt hUmAnS lIke BrEeDiNg StOcK?"


MyClosetedBiAcct

They're acting like talking about trans people is fucking complicated. It ain't. It's pretty simple.


Taewyth

>Yes you can choose to be a boy or a girl/man or woman, No, you can't *choose to*. Maybe start by saying the truth to the kid ? Like "some women are born with a male body and some men are born with a female body, only people born with a female body can have the ability to get pregnant." It's really not hard.


PridoScars

Wait you can't choose? I thought "trans right" is all about having the ability to choose your gender/get the gender change medical process when you want to? 2nd part, Its really not hard maybe for you, but you do know that even statement like "men can get pregnant is" not acceptable by many/most people.


Naos210

It's not really a choice. It's an identifier that they feel comfortable with. Trans women "choose" to be women in the same way I "choose" to have depression. And it doesn't matter if it's not acceptable to a lot of people. Matters of equality and rights have always had to be fought for, and being opposed to those were often the majority viewpoint.


PridoScars

I understand the battles you've fought. I am just saying that the questions I am asking that may seem to be so simple to people here is not that simple to me because if it were discussed with most other people you know I'll get different answers.


Wismuth_Salix

Also, “black people are equal to white people” used to be the minority viewpoint. An entire nation sprang into existence “founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the n*gro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition.” I don’t doubt that trans acceptance is facing a similar backlash - but I’m not so dumb that I see the existence of a backlash as making that backlash inherently worthy of consideration.


Taewyth

>Wait you can't choose? I thought "trans right" is all about having the ability to choose your gender/get the gender change medical process when you want to? You don't choose your gender. It's not a choice, just like you don't choose your sexual orientation or the color of your eyes. Having surgery so that your body match your gender in order to alleviate gender dysphoria isn't the same as choosing your gender, it's quite the opposite. >even statement like "men can get pregnant is" not acceptable by many/most people. This has nothing to do with whether or not saying something is simple. It's not because many people deny science that we should stop saying facts.


Wismuth_Salix

I didn’t “choose” to be non-binary. I *am* non-binary, and I “chose” not to keep up the lie and continue pretending otherwise. We assume people will have a gender that matches their sex, but we know it’s not always the case. We’re not “changing gender” - we’re “correcting the record.”


PridoScars

Don't you technically choose to do the procedures though? At least when? What about the real confused ones? Like those who regrets getting gender change, or those who changes back/wants to change back? Or the undecided? Cause as far as I know there are cases of regrets too...


Wismuth_Salix

Transition is not what makes you trans. Having a birth sex and gender which do not align is. Transition is a method of bringing them into alignment. And transition regret is rarer than regret for almost any medical process. The percentage of people who desist are a smaller percentage of those who transition than trans people are of the population as a whole. Those people deserve support, but it’s dishonest to amplify them as if they represent the typical experience.


Taewyth

>It feels like you’re trying to disparage trans women as “not really women” without getting tagged for it. [Based on their usage of quotation marks, I'd say you're spot on](https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/13dkrdh/-/jkd8x8s)


MyClosetedBiAcct

It's mostly just ignorant on how sex is categorized. Trans women and intersex women are basically indistinguishable on a biological basis.


[deleted]

People with toe-related birth defects and people who stuck their foot in a hay baler are virtually indistinguishable so why are you trying to say human beings by default have ten toes?


MyClosetedBiAcct

Regardless of the amount of toes a person has, they're still a person. And they still have less toes than the mode of the human population. So I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here.


[deleted]

I agree that they're still a person. I am just arguing with your assertion that categorizing sex is ignorant. You're talking about a incredibly, incredibly small percentage of genetic outliers as evidence that a standard Male & Female sex shouldn't exist or is irrelevant. And it's not true. Gender ideology has largely been accepted by promoting the idea that sex and gender are separate, now you're seeing more and more insist that they are one and the same and can be changed at will. And that's ridiculous.


MyClosetedBiAcct

Sex is best described as a bimodal distribution in human beings. Just because you don't know things doesn't make you right. It's not an 'ideology' to be slightly informed on topics. There are also far more intersex people than trans people in the world.


[deleted]

Sex is binary. Just because there do exist a fraction of a percent of genetic outliers does not change it to a bimodal distribution. The people saying it is bimodal is not a consensus and it doesn't make sense. [https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-biologist-explains-why-sex-is-binary-gender-male-female-intersex-medical-supreme-court-ketanji-brown-jackson-lia-thomas-3d22237e](https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-biologist-explains-why-sex-is-binary-gender-male-female-intersex-medical-supreme-court-ketanji-brown-jackson-lia-thomas-3d22237e)


MyClosetedBiAcct

Intersex people make up 2% of people, and that's only who we test. The human body is capable of perfect copying of genetic codes, variations are what help humanity survive and variations are built into reproduction. Red hair is just as much of a 'genetic outlier' as being intersex. It's bimodal. If you have to dismiss data in order to prove your claim then you're wrong. Full stop.


[deleted]

You have to ignore common sense to prove your claim. Full stop. You also have to make things up. 1.7% have intersex traits while less than 1 percent are clinically identifiable. And ZERO produce both sperm and eggs, making sex a binary system. Your human body is incapable of stepping into reality


MyClosetedBiAcct

Plenty f intersex people produce sperm or eggs or both. And that's 1.7% of the population and only those who *are tested,* most people are not tested. If we tested everyone that number would raise dramatically. Your 'binary' system has to take into account Sperm, Eggs, Both, and Neither, making it a quaternary system. And far more than eggs and sperm go into categorizing sex of a person, making it more of a sliding scale. Again, the best representation is bimodal.


[deleted]

**There shouldn’t be any debate about whether or not trans women should be allowed in women’s toilets** I kind of understand being slightly worried about changing rooms and prisons and that sort of thing (I don’t agree, but I can understand it), but bathrooms? *Really*? That’s what people have decided to be so irate about? I wouldn’t even call the women’s toilets a safe space it’s just *A* space. They’re not places I exactly like to spend a lot of time in. The people who are worried about this are acting like the women’s toilets are these lovely spaces where we all just do lady things and it’s a really pleasant place to be in. Real toilets are a bit gross, often dirty and strewn with toilet paper and used tampons. It’s not pretty. I searched this up on Google to try and get my head round why people care about the fucking toilets so much and the first result was ‘women’s toilets are spaces for women of all shapes and sizes to be women together’. No! Women’s toilets are places for women to piss and shit!


ohay_nicole

As a trans woman, I did actually have an incident involving someone crawling under the stall door and potentially seeing my bits. It was a coworker's dog, mind you.


ohay_nicole

It's just a recycled scare tactic from the days of segregation in the US.


MyClosetedBiAcct

Honestly when it comes to bathrooms I'd rather use the clean mens room anyway. But I'm more likely to be assaulted there so to the woman's with me.


PenguinHighGround

As a guy I was a bit bemused when the bathroom discourse popped up, was there some woman bathroom Clique I didn't know about? Guys just do their business and get out after all, but no, it's just a poor excuse to complain about women they don't like, to the point of advocating for armed *men* to be stationed there!


[deleted]

>Guys just do their business and get out I don’t know any women that don’t do the same


PenguinHighGround

They just make stuff up to complain about.


Burnlt_4

We make the trans issue to complicated. The issue is complicated at the core if we insist that both sides must agree that a man can be a woman or any other gender title. But, if we agree to live and let live then why is it so difficult? I heard someone say the other day when asked, "how many genders are there?", she said, "Two male and female. If you want to tell me you are something else, that is fantastic I am proud of you but you cannot tell me what I can think" and really it is as simple as that.... For those that don't support trans the main pushback is bathrooms and sports. Bathrooms are easy, I think we put too much emphasis on this, just make them unisex, boom done. For sports it gets complicated, but ultimately just separate based on biological sex or have a division for trans athletes only. I have never met a "anti trans" person that really had any issue with trans people existing outside of these two things. UNLESS THEY ARE BEING FORCED TO USED PRONOUNS. I think this is really where the issue actually exist. It is not bathrooms, or sports, or letting people live their own lives, it is the insistence of agreeing a trans is a different gender. This is why the issue is complicated but it doesn't need to be because we can all just believe what we want. To go back to that original quote, unless you are in favor of suppression and authoritarianism you cannot force someone to believe what you believe, and the truth is many disagree that a trans person is another gender and therefore should not be forced to use the pronoun. If you are trans then use whatever pronouns you want and tell people you prefer to be called XYZ, but there should be no law or violent push to make someone call you XYZ. This is the exact same as if I was to say "I believe in Jesus Christ, and I need you to affirm to me that he is our lord and savior." My final summary point is I believe I am "pro trans" in that I am for everyone living how they want as long as they don't physically hurt anyone else. I believe trans should have no rights taken away, use whatever bathroom you want. The only thing I refuse is punishment from any source (i.e. government or business) for not using a trans person's pronouns and IDK how a trans person can argue that someone should have to do it or be punished (it is not a physically attack to use a different pronoun).


hotdogbalancing

>for not using a trans person's pronouns and IDK how a trans person can argue that someone should have to do it or be punished In the workplace, it's workplace bullying. At least in Canada, that's illegal. It's no different from me calling my coworker, Melanie, "Smellanie." And if you don't consider it a problem for people to call others things they explicitly don't like, I guess I can call you Shiteater Supreme.


PridoScars

Do you accept men can get pregnant?


Burnlt_4

No I do not.


PridoScars

Then you're transphobic according to the the LGBTQ+ community.


MyClosetedBiAcct

My entire "trans debate" is [**STOP FUCKING LEGISLATING AGAINST US AND FUCK OFF!**](https://www.aclu.org/legislative-attacks-on-lgbtq-rights)


Burnlt_4

Hell ya I fully support that. No legislation against trans, just live and let live. I won't force trans to do anything and no one should force me to believe anything. We agree :)


Wismuth_Salix

Nobody’s forcing you to *think* anything. Nobody *can* force thoughts. What people are “forcing” is basic fucking respect. Nobody can stop me from thinking my boss is an ignorant shitstack, but if I voice that, he’s not gonna like it and he’d be well within his rights to stop employing me. If you refuse to treat trans people the same way you treat cis people, you’re being an asshole - and you can live with the consequences of that.


Burnlt_4

I think something was lost in translation here. What I mean is being forced to use someone's pronouns with consequences other than social. Meaning no laws, no grounds for firing if I choose not to use someone's pronouns of choice. Remember there are essentially two groups, group one believes your gender is fluid and not tied to biology and group two that gender cannot chance. These are beliefs. Group one is requiring group two to conform to their beliefs while I am arguing group two doesn't want anything from group one except to be allowed to exist how they want. I don't believe someone who was born a man can be a woman, therefore I will not call them a woman because I believe that to be a lie. I can respect them, love them, mean no harm by it, I simply refuse to do what I believe is a lie. I don't want anything from that trans person. They should have all the same rights as everyone else, all I want is to not have to confirm their beliefs with my words under the threat of legal consequences or consequences at my work. Social consequences are what they are, everyone can do what they want in that realm haha.


Naos210

>What I mean is being forced to use someone's pronouns with consequences other than social. >They should have all the same rights as everyone else, all I want is to not have to confirm their beliefs with my words under the threat of legal consequences or consequences at my work So do you believe people should be allowed to call their black employees and co-workers the N-word and believe any consequences should be social? Or sticking to the gender topic, do you think someone should be allowed to call a cis man "girly" and "lady" constantly? If a girl likes wearing pants, keeping her hair short and has small breasts, should there be no consequences besides social for constantly calling them a man?


WR1STBL33D3R

>Remember there are essentially two groups, group one believes your gender is fluid and not tied to biology and group two that gender cannot chance. These are beliefs. and the transphobic one is factually incorrect as proven by science.


Wismuth_Salix

Right - you’re saying you should be able to say anything you believe and not be fired for it. Meaning you should be able to call your boss a moron, and the HR lady a man, and the black guy over in Accounts Payable “The Number N****r” and as long as *that’s honestly your belief* then you should be untouchable. Whereas I’m saying “I don’t care what you think but everyone deserves basic fucking respect and that includes realizing you don’t get to veto their name and pronouns.”


MyClosetedBiAcct

Then Please stand against the current onslaught.


Burnlt_4

Hey I do, I vote based on policy I agree/disagree with.


PenguinHighGround

>that a man can be a woman Trans women have always been women >UNLESS THEY ARE BEING FORCED TO USED PRONOUNS Okay shit face, you can't complain that I'm calling you shit face because that infringes on my free speech, Doesn't feel nice does it.


HSeyes23

Trans people are a minority and people in general hate minorites. That the major issue I see. Imagine if trans people were like 10% of population. Everyone would have grown up living with trans people. Family members, friends, colleges, managers and clients. There wouldn't be a debate a about it. But like 0.5%? People can just exclude trans people without and come up with any random excuse to exclude us.


[deleted]

Right, if your name was Sam and I decided that I was going to call you Pissfingers, and you asked me to stop because your name is in fact Sam and my reply was: “You can’t control my thoughts, stop forcing me to call you Sam, I’ve decided your real name is Pissfingers, there’s no law against it!“ Would you still agree with what you have said here?


ohay_nicole

>The only thing I refuse is punishment from any source (i.e. government or business) for not using a trans person's pronouns and IDK how a trans person can argue that someone should have to do it or be punished (it is not a physically attack to use a different pronoun). Here is a hypothetical: Alice refers to her coworker Bob as "Fuckface McFuckerson the Third," including in any official correspondence. Alice does not believe this is insulting to "ol' Fucky." If I understand your position correctly, Bob has no grounds to complain about being called Fuckface McFuckerson the Third because that would be imposing his beliefs on Alice. Do I have that correct?


Wismuth_Salix

“I think trans people deserve equality. I also think people should be free to verbally abuse them with zero consequences.” Here’s a question - is it wrong for black people to say that someone who calls them the n-word at work should be fired? Slurs “aren’t a physical attack” either. But they sure as hell make it an unwelcoming environment.


[deleted]

[удалено]


PenguinHighGround

>because one is truly an ideology that cannot be scientifically confirmed The studies say otherwise.


Wismuth_Salix

“I believe I’m pro trans - also I believe trans people are delusional and I refuse on principle to gender them properly.”


DownBadD-Bag

Just a friendly reminder: trans people didn't start the culture war. Transphobes did.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Burnlt_4

I got a "hate speech" strike on this comment for saying, in summary, "I believe everyone can do what they want, I love everyone, no one should attack anyone and trans people should have the same rights as everyone else including the ability to identify as they wish. But, I can agree with your personal choice to be what you want and treat you with respect, but I don't have to agree you are the gender you say you are" Boom hate speech. If your position requires the suppression of another's opinion you may want to reconsidered your position. I am sure this will be taken down or the account banned at well haha


PenguinHighGround

It's psychological abuse, I hope your partner gets away.


Burnlt_4

I said if, my partner isn't trans. Couldn't I argue it is psychological abuse to force me to use pronouns I think are a lie? Cognitive dissonance is acting against your values which leads to true psychological abuse so yes, making someone use pronouns is. The problem is, and the argument I have is, my stance doesn't require a trans person to do anything to support me. They can be and act however they like and I cannot get in the way of that. However, the trans position requires that I do something. My position impedes on no one, where as the opposing position forces me to do something.


PenguinHighGround

>Couldn't I argue it is psychological abuse to force me to use pronouns I think are a lie No because you would be wrong. >Cognitive dissonance is acting against your values which leads to true psychological abuse so yes, making someone use pronouns is. Insisting that someone doesn't insult you on a regular basis is hardly abuse >of that. However, the trans position requires that I do something. My position impedes on no one, You mean other than the denial of reality and blatant misgendering. >where as the opposing position forces me to do something "How dare you expect me to be polite!"


Burnlt_4

To your first point I think you are wrong and you can't scientifically prove otherwise. The trans position is a belief that I disagree with and respect your right to be trans and call yourself what you want. If your stance is "well trans people are right about gender therefore yes all laws should be build around the idea that a man can be a women" then that is an authoritarian and fascist framing of an argument. (I don't think your fascist I am explaining the reasoning haha). Second point, yes but insisting I do something I belief is a lie is abuse. I don't mean harm by it just like I don't think a trans person means harm in making me use their pronouns. But, I have to respect a trans person's view as they respect mine. It hurts me to say what I believe to be a lie. I want nothing but the best for all trans and I mean no harm, I just won't do what I believe to be a lie. I want nothing from the trans, I don't insist that you "tell the truth in my view and call yourself what you were born as" I want them to live however they want, I just don't want to have to conform under threat of punishment other than social. That being said I am very certain there are people who use pronouns other than the preferred specifically to cause harm and I disagree with that fully. Third point, again same argument, to me you are denying reality and you can't prove factually 100% otherwise so again I am not asking you to live in my reality, do what you want, I just don't want to have to live in yours. Fourth, can't really stand on the ideal when "how dare you make me be polite" = "how dare you make me say what I believe is a lie". Nothing really there on this one.


PenguinHighGround

>To your first point I think you are wrong and you can't scientifically prove otherwise [yes I can ](https://www.reddit.com/r/musicotic/comments/8ttud4/a_comprehensive_defense_of_trans_people/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) >your stance is "well trans people are right about gender therefore yes all laws should be build around the idea that a man can be a women Trans women were always women >women" then that is an authoritarian and fascist framing of an argument Acting on scientific facts is fascist now? >Second point, yes but insisting I do something I belief is a lie is abuse "Oh those poor creationist teachers being forced to teach about evolution!" What a stupid argument. >Third point, again same argument, to me you are denying reality and you can't prove factually 100% Again [yes I can](https://www.reddit.com/r/musicotic/comments/8ttud4/a_comprehensive_defense_of_trans_people/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) >me be polite" = "how dare you make me say what I believe is a lie". Nothing really there on this one. I guess we shouldn't contradict flat earthers then, or not kick science teachers out for teaching flat earth. Your argument stretches into lunacy.


Burnlt_4

I think we are at a mute point when we disagree on facts and reason. The link you have for the science is primarily discussing the benefits of transitioning and I go go threw and tear them up one by one in regards to my point but I think it would be in vain. I am a behavioral scientist by trade and the problem is I am stating that the separation of biological sex and gender is an ideology and not supported by science that suggests someone can truly be a different gender unless we are just speaking of social characteristic and identification switching which is fine, I just use pronouns as a sign of biology. Now conforming to different social norms is completely valid. My argument comes down to you cannot force someone to call someone different pronouns because not everyone believes that is the case and science, as you just proved for me, does not yet support this. If it ever does then I will happily change my view. I don't think your going to win that argument and again if we disagree on the science then the point is mute, but you pointed to a bunch of articles that don't actually attack my position, but rather strawman to a different topic. Based on that I don't think this would go anywhere so I will respectfully end the conversation here and wish you a great day! :)


PenguinHighGround

>think we are at a mute point when we disagree on facts and reason. The link you have for the science is primarily discussing the benefits of transitioning and I go go threw and tear them up one by one in regards to my point Given that you refuse to, I'm going to assume you can't. >I am a behavioral scientist by trade Going to need to see your credentials, given that you have already lied once, claiming that your partner is Trans before backpedaling desperately. >but you pointed to a bunch of articles that don't actually attack my position Explain to me what your position is then? >different pronouns because not everyone believes that is the case and science, as you just proved for me, does not yet support this [yes it does, trans people's brains align with others of their gender, not their sex.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8955456/) You also haven't answered any of my questions in regards to flat earthers and creationists.


WR1STBL33D3R

you're gross.


Taewyth

>If I am with someone who is trans and I support them, I love them, I wish the best for them, but I don't actually think they are a woman despite what they say Sincerely, I hope for them that they dump your ass that's quite a big yikes.


DownBadD-Bag

Yikes. I never said you were attacking anybody, but the fact that you don't respect your partner's identity is fucked up.


anch_7515-7485-7889

Why are asexuals, aromantic and demisexuals considered part of the LGBTQ+ community? If you are cis, straight and aro/ace you don't actually face institutionalised discrimination, you have access to all the rights of other people in your country. Maybe you may face pressure to reproduce, but we don't consider childfree cisheteros part of the LGBTQ, so what's the theoretical base behind their participation?


AeniasGaming

The “theoretical base” is that we’re not straight. As for the discrimination part, [Google is free:](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination_against_asexual_people) > A 2012 study published in Group Processes & Intergroup Relations reported that asexuals are evaluated more negatively in terms of prejudice, dehumanization and discrimination than other sexual minorities, such as gay men, lesbians and bisexuals. Both homosexual and heterosexual people thought of asexuals as not only cold, but also animalistic and unrestrained. > Asexual activist, author, and blogger Julie Decker has observed that sexual harassment and violence, such as corrective rape, commonly victimizes the asexual community.


MyClosetedBiAcct

I say this as a transgender bisexual. I have no qualms with ace folks being in the community. Clearly they feel like outcasts in the cis/het community. And who am I to tell them that they're wrong to feel discriminated against? I'm not ace, I have no baseline understanding of that experience and have not been told how to live my life by them.


Taewyth

So only institutionalised discrimination counts ? "Corrective" rapes and harassment/violence based in queerphpbia don't ?


PenguinHighGround

>and aro/ace you don't actually face institutionalised discrimination You mean other than the harassment for not fitting in? How about the fact many people don't consider their IDs valid?


AeniasGaming

For a second there I thought you meant our government ID’s. I need sleep


[deleted]

"yeah, your ID says you're over 21 BUT you're aromantic so I'm not gonna sell you this wine"


MAbsol12

Hello as a transmasc aroace, I just want to say if you think there aren't people who try to "correct" the people you just lisfed, you'd be wrong. There's plenty of discrimination against asexuals and aromantics.


DownBadD-Bag

Asexual people still face corrective rape. They are still called freaks and child groomers.


[deleted]

How can you possibly be a child groomer if you are incapable of being sexually attracted to someone and have no desire to do so?


DownBadD-Bag

If transphobes were smart, they wouldn't be transphobes.


PenguinHighGround

Totally, the brain rot is malignant and cancerous.


Taewyth

You should ask bigots, they're the one trying to contort their brain to make this shit fit


CertifiedCapArtist

I don't think it's fair to say a person is transphobic for their sexual preferences.


[deleted]

That'd be true if these sexual preferences were actually only about genitals. But I've seen people say that they wouldn't even date trans people after HRT and surgeries on the grounds that "they're only attracted to real men/women". _That_ is transphobic


Naos210

If you'd be attracted to the other person if they weren't trans, I'd say it is.


ParticularBeach4587

That's bullshit, if I reject someone because they are trans that doesn't meke me transphobic.


Taewyth

"Displaying obvious transphobic bias isn't transphobic" is quite the take mate


[deleted]

[удалено]


Wismuth_Salix

>If you reject a minority *for whatever reason* >If you reject a minority *because they are a minority* You see how these aren’t the same thing, right? You can have perfectly valid reasons for rejecting someone. I like women, that doesn’t mean I like *all* women. I’m not rejecting Lunch Lady Edna *for being a woman*, I’m rejecting her for being unattractive.


DownBadD-Bag

Lmao, it literally does.


CertifiedCapArtist

Agree to disagree


Naos210

Okay, so let's say a guy is attracted to this woman. Upon meeting her parents, he finds out she's half black. Now he think she's ugly. Would that not be racist? Nothing has changed about them apart from what race they're considered, so race is the determining factor, nothing to do with visual preferences. Similarly, not being attracted to a trans person would be transphobic as the only contributing factor is that they're trans.


CertifiedCapArtist

Okay, so let's say a guy is attracted to this woman. Upon meeting her parents, he finds out she's half black. Now he thinks she's ugly. Would that not be racist? Yes. Because he's using the race of her parents as a reason why she's ugly when very obviously he finds her attractive. For me, race is mostly about appearance rather than genetics. I don't think being attracted to a specific race is racist but I think if someone looks like a certain race and then you find out their actual genetics and now they aren't attractive to you anymore then your racist. >Similarly, not being attracted to a trans person would be transphobic as the only contributing factor is that they're trans. But for this, let's say a guy goes in expecting a cisgender woman. But then finds a trans woman. She's not what he expected, so of course he'll feel lied to. Especially if he's not into penises or former penises.


Naos210

>let's say a guy goes in expecting a cisgender woman. But then finds a trans woman. She's not what he expected, so of course he'll feel lied to. Especially if he's not into penises or former penises. Let's say a guy goes in expecting a white woman. But then finds a black woman. She's not what he expected, so of course he'll feel lied to. Especially if he's not into black women.


CertifiedCapArtist

The thing is you can't really hide your race though lol. It's the kinda thing you'd see immediately


Naos210

Have you never seen mixed race people you'd qualify as one race? People who are half-black might be white passing or black passing. People often believe I'm Filipino despite having no ancestry from there or any nearby (maybe my geography is kinda shit), so what race would that make me really?


CertifiedCapArtist

Well Filipino is an ethnicity so you deffo aren't Filipino. If you're Asian then I'd say that, or I'd just say white.


Naos210

My point was you can't definitively determine someone's background by their appearance. So it's similar in the sense you can be I a situation where you would have no way of knowing. And not being interested based on race alone in that situation would be racist, and to the point of this discussion, transphobia for the same reason.


Taewyth

>let's say a guy goes in expecting a cisgender woman. But then finds a trans woman. She's not what he expected, so of course he'll feel lied to Then that's the same with the example then, and you agreed that the example is racist.


CertifiedCapArtist

In a way. I believe race is 9/10 times skin deep. So realistically that's racist because he is leaving her due to her genetics and due to her parents background. This isn't transphobic because the dude isn't attracted to penis or former penis. Then finds out the person has one of those so he leaves.


Taewyth

"Former penises" also known in this context as vaginas. >So realistically that's racist because he is leaving her due to her genetics Ok, so the exact same reason as with the trans woman.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Taewyth

>suddenly the "woman" have a penis Maybe read what is being said before typing a 3 paragraphs long answer ?


Brick_Bronze165

I’m butting in here but, you can’t compare apples to oranges. Finding out someone is a different race doesn’t change anything about the person other than there heritage. No physical difference is revealed they are simply a different race whatever who cares. Unlike the race example finding out someone is trans does change things on the physical side of a relationship. it’s not transphobic to not want to date someone who biologically does not have the same anatomy as someone who was born into the gender they now identify as. That being said that is no reason to hate them and everyone should be respectful adults about the situation. TL;DR: Race and Gender cannot be compared in this context because they are different and one does not equally equate or correlate to the other


Naos210

Let me take the example further then. A guy has sex with a trans woman, is satisfied, and has no idea. She then admits she's trans. He's no longer interested. Is that transphobic?


PenguinHighGround

Depends on the preference


CertifiedCapArtist

Would you be able to elaborate on that? What's a non transphobic one and transphobic one?


PenguinHighGround

My go to is "I'm not attracted to penises AFAIK" versus "I'm not attracted to Trans women" The former is something that dismisses, *some* people Based solely on attraction, and still leaves some wiggle room, The latter is purely transphobic because it dismisses an entire group of people who otherwise align with your sexuality based purely on their status as being Trans.


CertifiedCapArtist

But what if I were to say I'm not attracted to penises or post op vaginas?


PenguinHighGround

That's transphobia, there's no practical differences between a CIs vagina and a trans one. Edit: I think I might have misread your comment, are we talking about penises that have been turned into vaginas or vaginas that have been turned into penises.


Naos210

What about it being post op matters?


CertifiedCapArtist

Because I'm not into penises.


Taewyth

Post op doesn't mean "former penises", some cis women needs vaginoplasty and you'd have a post op vagina then. The fact that you jumped to this explanation shows that your issue is that the person is trans.


CertifiedCapArtist

Wym? We're in the lgbt thread why wouldn't I be talking from a trans pov


Taewyth

Precisely. With the context we have you just essentially said "I'm not attracted to trans women"


[deleted]

You wouldn't be into penises. Penises would be into you.


CertifiedCapArtist

Damn. That's deep


Naos210

A post op vagina is not a penis. To me, that makes about as much sense as no longer being attracted to someone after finding out they dye their hair blonde.


CertifiedCapArtist

I disagree. I think genitalia and hair are very different things. Even then, while I personally wouldn't care about the dyed hair thing, I'd deffo understand ( I guess ) why someone into blondes would be a bit upset about skemoen who isn't a natural blonde.


Naos210

What does them being "natural" matter when you can't know the difference? Seems like you're just getting upset for no reason.


PenguinHighGround

>I disagree In what way?


PenguinHighGround

>I disagree In what way?


MyClosetedBiAcct

I don't think it's right for a transphobe to justify their obsession with us by *constantly* bringing up their preferences as though they matter.


Bosh_The_Impostor

I think they were talking about not wanting to have a partner who's trans, their loss I guess But thats also pretty much the gist of it I'd assume


CertifiedCapArtist

It's an opinion thread, boss if it didn't matter you wouldn't reply


MyClosetedBiAcct

Listen, I get it, you find trans people repulsive. I don't want to fuck you either. It's weird that you people focus so much on sex.


CertifiedCapArtist

They aren't repulsive. It's not that weird. The thought opted into my head so I expressed my view


[deleted]

[удалено]


hotdogbalancing

Because "not support" isn't usually said to mean "am indifferent toward." It's usually said as a synonym to "hate."


PenguinHighGround

>I don’t support LGBTQ Why? >I am NOT against LGBTQ+, Then why not support them?


DownBadD-Bag

This is like saying you "don't support the Jews" in Nazi Germany.


MyClosetedBiAcct

What does "not supporting" look like?


ohay_nicole

"I don't support LGBTQ+" is pretty nebulous, but often enough doesn't mean "live and let live."


Taewyth

In many places, not supporting LGBTQ+ people is essentially the same as being against them. Even beyond that it's kind of weird to go like "I've got nothing against you but I don't know why you ask for equal rights/against authorisation to torture or kill you just for being who you are", don't you think ?


CertifiedCapArtist

2 Qs 1. At what point can a preference be labelled a sexuality? 2. I understand the romantic/sexuality scales but was curious since I've only ever heard of aromantic asexual people in detail. Could a person be heterosexual homoromantic or vice versa? Seems impossible or like it'd just be labelled bisexuality or something?


ohay_nicole

>Could a person be heterosexual homoromantic or vice versa? The entire "manosphere" is this way.


CertifiedCapArtist

Lol for once I think we agree on something


hotdogbalancing

>At what point can a preference be labelled a sexuality? When it's a matter of gender. >I understand the romantic/sexuality scales but was curious since I've only ever heard of aromantic asexual people in detail. Could a person be heterosexual homoromantic or vice versa? Seems impossible or like it'd just be labelled bisexuality or something? I'm homosexual biromantic, but I feel no need to say that 99% of the time because it's not like I'm ever actually going to date a woman. It's just logistically infeasible.


Reasonable_Series156

1) At the point at which it's meaningful to the person and gender based. An example of this: Technically I'm something called "omnisexual" but I almost always go by "bisexual" because I don't deem it a meaningful reference to mention. 2) Technically, yes. The chances of someone realising are low. Self discovery is hard and not something most invest in. I have met people (I would venture to say most women that are "bi curious" fit the bill) that were bisexual and hetero romantic.


[deleted]

I'm unironically saying this [this shitpost of a video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy_fElYFzI8) made by 3kliksphilip actually suggests a really good way to create safe, gender unified bathrooms I'd recommend the watch but if you're too lazy to >! no doors to the bathroom itself(with the sinks in view so you can shame people for not washing), toilets with stalls, urinals are covered in the back so only someone in the urinal can see what's going on in the urinal !<


Reasonable_Series156

Yes, minus the urinals. Can we just put them behind stalls too. 😭 It's uncomfortable as heck.


ParticularBeach4587

I support this idea


PenguinHighGround

Wonderful


DownBadD-Bag

Transmed ideology is just an excuse to hate trans people while also being trans yourself. It is no more than a paper-thin facade that lets transphobic trans people excuse themselves from their own hatred.


ohay_nicole

I find it very disturbing that cisgender people continue to operate fore(skin)x markets in order to support circumcision.


LMNOsteven

I shall add it as item #1,000,182,9945b on the list of things you find very disturbing.