Transgender

Remove this Banner Ad

ShanDog

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 12, 2012
20,384
39,293
sv_cheats 1
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Edmonton Oilers
Please be aware that the tolerance of anti-trans language on BF is at an all-time low. Jokes and insults that are trans-related, as well as anti-trans and bigoted rhetoric will be met with infractions, threadbans etc as required. It's a sensitive (and important) topic, so behave like well-mannered adults when discussing it, PARTICULARLY when disagreeing. This equally applies across the whole site.
 
Last edited:

Suspense

AOC + 3
Mar 28, 2006
7,799
3,437
POLICE STATE
AFL Club
Collingwood
What do you think?

But if you find that when dating, you are writing off entire groups of people, like people of colour, fat people, disabled people or trans people, then it's worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions

If she's not suggesting it, then what is she saying?
She is asking people to reflect upon whether their aversion to dating transpeople is due to societal prejudices (transphobic) or whether it is due to your own personal sexual preferences (not transphobic). Nothing more to it than that.

There are many heterosexual men (including some well known footballers) who will fu** a transwoman on the sly - but won't publicly date a transwoman due to societal prejudices.
 

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,381
8,152
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
WHat I saw was "may" - is there another example where they've said they "must" be prejudiced?
Either either, whether she's saying may or must, doesn't matter. It's still a presumption of prejudice. Like I said there maybe some but they'd number so minuscule it's not worth tackling.

If the whole or majority of the lesbian movement was 'we refuse to have sex with transgender people who are biologically male because we're prejudiced - not because they have a penis' - then yeah fair enough, you'd have a right to accuse. It's not that, like me I don't engage in sexual activity with anyone who has a penis - has zero to with 'prejudice'

But we don't even know if there is one single example of a lesbian being deliberately discriminate against trans with a penis. Yet we have claims of lesbians being forced into sexual situations and are being maligned when they attempt to report it.
 

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,381
8,152
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
She is asking people to reflect upon whether their aversion to dating transpeople is due to societal prejudices (transphobic) or whether it is due to your own personal sexual preferences (not transphobic). Nothing more to it than that.
Why? What is the point when there is no evidence of lesbians (or anyone else for that matter) being intently prejudiced against biologically male trans?

Or such minuscule numbers that it barely raises attention.

Why does it need to be asked?

Not being prejudiced or transphobic to be more specific should not and does not need to asked of from lesbians, because overwhelmingly they're not. Personally I find lesbians (that I know) to be the most fair and practical people one could meet and I'd argue most people would agree with that.

Certainly looks like she's presuming unfairly, if not it is naively requesting what is not needed to be. I doubt she's that dumb.

There are many heterosexual men (including some well known footballers) who will fu** a transwoman on the sly - but won't publicly date a transwoman due to societal prejudices.
Well one would argue if that heterosexual man would knowingly have sex with another person that has a penis, then they're not heterosexual. In fact it would not be up for debate.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,381
8,152
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
It’s not the same at all.
The why say:

But if you find that when dating, you are writing off entire groups of people, like people of colour, fat people, disabled people or trans people, then it's worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions.

When there is little or no evidence of 'writing off entire groups or people' based on societal prejudices?

If that is not a presumption of prejudice then I don't know what it is.
 

Suspense

AOC + 3
Mar 28, 2006
7,799
3,437
POLICE STATE
AFL Club
Collingwood
And for some lesbians, same-sex attraction is immutable. But Stonewall doesn't seem to be on board with that.
There are plenty of lesbians who were once sexually attracted to men. Are you saying that they are not true lesbians?

That's your position. It's not a fact. It's not unanimous.

That's why there is growing backlash against Stonewall from gay and lesbian folks who argue same-sex attraction is indeed immutable.
It may be immutable for them - that are and have always been same-sex attracted - which is a perfectly valid experience. It does not, however, cover the entire spectrum of all human experiences - for which there are some people do experience changes in their sexual preferences.

What point do you think this makes?

It would be a reasonable response if I was claiming that folks who say it's "transphobic" to discriminate on the basis of "genital preference" represented a majority view. But I'm not claiming that.

I'm simply making the case that there are in fact radical trans activists who argue this line, despite your insistence that "nah, no one is saying that".

You might disagree with that line of argument but you should at least acknowledge it exists.
I never said that "no one is saying that" - I simply don't believe it is a commonly held view within the community.

There will always be radical views within all demographics - however, because transgender rights is a "hot-topic" that will generate plenty of clicks, it is more susceptible for journalists to cherry pick a few choice radical views - expressed by those deliberately courting attention/controversy/views - and misrepresent them as being part of the wider "trans-agenda".
 

Suspense

AOC + 3
Mar 28, 2006
7,799
3,437
POLICE STATE
AFL Club
Collingwood
Why? What is the point when there is no evidence of lesbians (or anyone else for that matter) being intently prejudiced against biologically male trans?

Or such minuscule numbers that it barely raises attention.

Why does it need to be asked?

Not being prejudiced or transphobic to be more specific should not and does not need to asked of from lesbians, because overwhelmingly they're not. Personally I find lesbians (that I know) to be the most fair and practical people one could meet and I'd argue most people would agree with that.

Certainly looks like she's presuming unfairly, if not it is naively requesting what is not needed to be. I doubt she's that dumb.
To me, I don't think that particular part of her statement is targeted directly at lesbians in relation to transwomen. The inclusion of other minority groups in her statement (people of colour, fat people, disabled people) makes it seem like a more generic comment about how we should all consider the impact that social prejudices can have upon who we choose or choose not to date.

Well one would argue if that heterosexual man would knowingly have sex with another person that has a penis, then they're not heterosexual. In fact it would not be up for debate.
Well I am very glad it's not up for debate - because I have zero desire to engage in one.
 

Sweet Jesus

The Lord of the Dance
Dec 20, 2014
26,333
21,434
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
There are plenty of lesbians who were once sexually attracted to men. Are you saying that they are not true lesbians?
That would depend on their individual circumstances.

It may be immutable for them - that are and have always been same-sex attracted - which is a perfectly valid experience. It does not, however, cover the entire spectrum of all human experiences - for which there are some people do experience changes in their sexual preferences.
The folks who claim their same-sex attraction is immutable might take issue with the Stonewall statement.

I never said that "no one is saying that" - I simply don't believe it is a commonly held view within the community.

There will always be radical views within all demographics - however, because transgender rights is a "hot-topic" that will generate plenty of clicks, it is more susceptible for journalists to cherry pick a few choice radical views - expressed by those deliberately courting attention/controversy/views - and misrepresent them as being part of the wider "trans-agenda".
That's fine. I didn't say it was "common" either.

My point is that some nutters are indeed saying this.

It's the radicals that I find objectionable. If your average trans person minds their own business and identifies as whatever, that's no one's concern and I couldn't care less. Good luck to them.
 

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,381
8,152
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
To me, I don't think that particular part of her statement is targeted directly at lesbians in relation to transwomen.
I didn't suggest it was just that.

What is clear, from that statement, she is either asking people not be prejudiced OR insinuating that people are. Doesn't need to be asked does it.

Seeing it was a comment in response to the topic of lesbians rejecting biologically male trans - then if you're above crayon eating intelligence then it's pretty clear it's an insinuation that (some) lesbians are prejudiced against trans and not unattracted because of anatomy.
 

Suspense

AOC + 3
Mar 28, 2006
7,799
3,437
POLICE STATE
AFL Club
Collingwood
My point is that some nutters are indeed saying this.

It's the radicals that I find objectionable. If your average trans person minds their own business and identifies as whatever, that's no one's concern and I couldn't care less. Good luck to them.
If you believe that radicals are saying dumb sh*t, call them out on their dumb sh*t and why it is dumb - rather than trans activists in general. You'll find that most transpeople (like those behind the letter to BBC) will agree.
 

Suspense

AOC + 3
Mar 28, 2006
7,799
3,437
POLICE STATE
AFL Club
Collingwood
I didn't suggest it was just that.

What is clear, from that statement, she is either asking people not be prejudiced OR insinuating that people are. Doesn't need to be asked does it.

Seeing it was a comment in response to the topic of lesbians rejecting biologically male trans - then if you're above crayon eating intelligence then it's pretty clear it's an insinuation that (some) lesbians are prejudiced against trans and not unattracted because of anatomy.
I didn't read it like that. To me, it's a bit of a generic woke motherhood statement - why else bring people of colour, fat people, disabled people into the discussion?

And unlike you, I'm not going to insult you and call you an idiot, if you happen to have a different interpretation.
 

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,381
8,152
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
I didn't read it like that. To me, it's a bit of a generic woke motherhood statement - why else bring people of colour, fat people, disabled people into the discussion?

And unlike you, I'm not going to insult you and call you an idiot, if you happen to have a different interpretation.
Yes why?

It's either alleging or asking what does not need to be, considering the comment was in direct response to the topic of lesbians intentionally / unintentionally / unconsciously discriminating against biologically male trans. The pub test would likely view it as alleging.
 

Sweet Jesus

The Lord of the Dance
Dec 20, 2014
26,333
21,434
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
If you believe that radicals are saying dumb sh*t, call them out on their dumb sh*t and why it is dumb - rather than trans activists in general. You'll find that most transpeople (like those behind the letter to BBC) will agree.
I never attributed it to trans people in general.

I'm merely identifying a disturbing line of radical bullshit.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Carringbush2010

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 6, 2016
13,381
8,152
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
“It’s worth considering if”.

How's that “you definitely are”? I’m listening.
Is this what you're talking about?

then it's worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions.

I'll ask again, why is it required to be considered. It's a captain obvious statement - 'if societal prejudices shape your attraction then societal prejudices shape your attraction'

What do you think it says? It's just short of blatantly saying 'societal prejudices shape your attraction'. Do tell us all how it is something else.

We'll wait.
 

Sweet Jesus

The Lord of the Dance
Dec 20, 2014
26,333
21,434
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
I just stumbled across this old clip on YouTube.

FMD this guy thinks he's so much smarter than Joe Rogan but he ends up looking like a peanut.

No one is "born anything"?

Look, we need to have words that divide the species generally along biological lines.

Even if we allow for the tiny percentage of folks born with intersex conditions, surely we need a name for the 99.9 per cent of people who generally divide into one of two groups biologically. As it turns out, we have in the past called them male and female.

This guy is like, "nah that's not a thing". Look at his little laugh when he thinks he's running rings around Rogan, even though he's saying a series of stupid things.

 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad