A Person Uses Transgender Law To Expose Gender Discrimination

[Maze1125]

What you're arguing for is anti-scientific and anti-medicine, in the long run that will hurt more trans people than it could ever help.

Really?
What exactly is it that you think I'm arguing for?
Because you seem to be very angry about things I haven't said at all.

Well first off I'm not angry, nor was I angry, exasperated, yes, angry, not really... Your argument is one of one that we shouldn't hold people to any standards where they have to prove what they're saying, or at least that's what it sounds like to me... Although if I'm just misunderstanding and we've come to contention just on the sexual dimorphism of the brain... I still disagree that it's a factor we should avoid using, we shouldn't use it to the exclusion of other factors, but it's one that should be looked at. The more and better data we have on the subject, the better we can understand the subject after all.

I didn't say any of that.
What I said is that using brain structures to identify gender is exactly as problematic as using genitals to identify gender.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't be studied, but it does mean that it shouldn't be used as evidence to prove that someone isn't transgender.

Not really. The brain is...well, you. Your heart, blood, hands, feet, eyes, mouth, genitals, etc, can be replaced and you are still you. But your brain is you, and cannot be replaced.

I'm not saying there isn't potential for abuse or something, but understanding your brain is understanding you, and I bet it could be used to accurately determine a transgendered person. Not to say a person should be locked to the conclusion of such things, atleast not yet, but I do think it is a very possible and plausible method.

Your personality is more than just your brain. It is effected hugely by hormones throughout your body, which include from your genitals.

Currently gender identity correlates to a greater extent with genitals than it does with the identified brain structures and there is no reason to think that is going to change any time soon.

Why should someone who knows they are a female but has the "wrong" brain structure be considered less worthy of the title than someone who knows they are a female but has the "wrong" genitals? It's another form of discrimination, purely and simply.

 

[Saelune]

What you're arguing for is anti-scientific and anti-medicine, in the long run that will hurt more trans people than it could ever help.

Really?
What exactly is it that you think I'm arguing for?
Because you seem to be very angry about things I haven't said at all.

Well first off I'm not angry, nor was I angry, exasperated, yes, angry, not really... Your argument is one of one that we shouldn't hold people to any standards where they have to prove what they're saying, or at least that's what it sounds like to me... Although if I'm just misunderstanding and we've come to contention just on the sexual dimorphism of the brain... I still disagree that it's a factor we should avoid using, we shouldn't use it to the exclusion of other factors, but it's one that should be looked at. The more and better data we have on the subject, the better we can understand the subject after all.

I didn't say any of that.
What I said is that using brain structures to identify gender is exactly as problematic as using genitals to identify gender.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't be studied, but it does mean that it shouldn't be used as evidence to prove that someone isn't transgender.

Not really. The brain is...well, you. Your heart, blood, hands, feet, eyes, mouth, genitals, etc, can be replaced and you are still you. But your brain is you, and cannot be replaced.

I'm not saying there isn't potential for abuse or something, but understanding your brain is understanding you, and I bet it could be used to accurately determine a transgendered person. Not to say a person should be locked to the conclusion of such things, atleast not yet, but I do think it is a very possible and plausible method.

Your personality is more than just your brain. It is effected hugely by hormones throughout your body, which include from your genitals.

Currently gender identity correlates to a greater extent with genitals than it does with the identified brain structures and there is no reason to think that is going to change any time soon.

Why should someone who knows they are a female but has the "wrong" brain structure be considered less worthy of the title than someone who knows they are a female but has the "wrong" genitals? It's another form of discrimination, purely and simply.

As a trans person who was born male, then went on HRT, then stopped for reasons, I know firsthand the effects of both testosterone and estrogen on someone. And yes, it does greatly effect your brain, I wont contest that, but I don't think it changed who I was as a person. It changed my reactions and emotions, but not who the core of me was. When full of testosterone, Id react with anger to something that upsets me, while when full of estrogen, I still was upset, but I reacted differently (usually more prone to crying).

I'm not a brain doctor or scientist or whatever, (but I'm guessing neither are you, but I don't know) and there is a lot we probably cannot know, atleast currently, but Id imagine if you could take my brain and put it into different bodies, it would always be me. I would react differently to each body, but I think it has the same effect of putting any different people in the same situations. Id always pull towards identifying female or feminine, and would certainly have a more positive effect in a female body, than a male one, certainly a masculine one.

And even if I am wrong, I don't think its really another form of discrimination. Atleast not in any negative way. I don't think figuring out someone is autistic is discriminatory either. It just means you can now better deal with their situation than you could assuming nothing is wrong. Mental health is easier to deal with when you know the problem.

 

[ErrrorWayz]

Oh I bet he is an absolute delight to associate with I tell you what. (gags)

The guy sounds like a total scumbag or as he put it a total wacko. Giving discounts to people is perfectly legal. What is someone going to fight against senior and veteran discounts next? That's really what we need right now

So you'd obviously be fully behind "white night", where white people get to drink at 75% discount?

Discounts are perfectly legal after all.

 

[pookie101]

So everytime I bring up sexism towards women and get shut down, it turns out I should've been talking about how men are discriminated against for not saving money on drinks? That's where the real issue was? *Sigh*

Also this man is a ****. What's his next plan? Proving that white men get picked after black men when forming basketball teams by using blackface?

Oh. And the title shouldn't say "Used trangender law" it should say "Abuses transgender law." Because this man is a **** who's willing to abuse laws made to protect arguably the most persecuted minority in America to satisfy his misogynistic world view. Fuck him.

*clapping* i like you and totally agree with both what you said and sentiment

 

[Mr. Popplewick]

Oh I bet he is an absolute delight to associate with I tell you what. (gags)

The guy sounds like a total scumbag or as he put it a total wacko. Giving discounts to people is perfectly legal. What is someone going to fight against senior and veteran discounts next? That's really what we need right now

So you'd obviously be fully behind "white night", where white people get to drink at 75% discount?

Discounts are perfectly legal after all.

So you'd obviously be fully against "Senior Discouts" or "Children Free"?

lol

 

[Dizchu]

Why is it that whenever people like this try to point out the "injustices towards men", it's always the most trivial, irrelevant bullshit? "I can't get a discount at Ladies' Night", "Nice guys finish last", "Women have an easier time getting sexual partners".

This is coming from someone that does not believe that women have it tougher than men do, in the west at least. What I have found is that many of the more severe double-standards that men face are often excused and defended by... other men.

 

[The Lunatic]

Why is it that whenever people like this try to point out the "injustices towards men", it's always the most trivial, irrelevant bullshit? "I can't get a discount at Ladies' Night", "Nice guys finish last", "Women have an easier time getting sexual partners".

To be fair, most of the time people bring up "Injustices against woman" it's trivial irrelevant bullshit, or just straight up false.

Frankly, the whole thing is a bit of a farce on either side.

 

[Jux]

He probably isn't but.....

You know that person in high school who was very weird and nearly/fully homophobic, the one who kept calling everything "gay" and telling everyone how weirded out and possibly violent they would be if they got hit on by a homosexual? Then you see them 10 years later with their new partner and they are fully out. Not saying it is a definite but that level of behavior could be indicative of suppressed identity. He could just be a douchebag. Or both.

I'm going off the evidence presented without delving into armchair psychology. Even if this person is indeed trans and was just repressed for their whole life, it doesn't change the fact that this persons motivation for what they are doing is based on bullshit.

 

[Dizchu]

To be fair, most of the time people bring up "Injustices against woman" it's trivial irrelevant bullshit, or just straight up false.

Frankly, the whole thing is a bit of a farce on either side.

Perhaps, but at least things like reproductive rights and sexual assault are legitimate concerns. If this is supposed to be a trump card against feminism then I can't help but be disappointed.

 

[The Lunatic]

Perhaps, but at least things like reproductive rights and sexual assault are legitimate concerns. If this is supposed to be a trump card against feminism then I can't help but be disappointed.

There's legitimate concerns like domestic abuse, custody and suicide rate that men face too.


It's not a contest. People tend to just bring up inane crap rather than address the real issues.

Though, the crap does mostly seem to be brought up by MRAs and Feminists.

I guess they're just easy targets.

 

[Mr. Popplewick]

Why is it that whenever people like this try to point out the "injustices towards men", it's always the most trivial, irrelevant bullshit? "I can't get a discount at Ladies' Night", "Nice guys finish last", "Women have an easier time getting sexual partners".

This is coming from someone that does not believe that women have it tougher than men do, in the west at least. What I have found is that many of the more severe double-standards that men face are often excused and defended by... other men.

People complain about what they feel is hurting them personally in some way. That may or may not be a logical process, and it does tend to become more relatively trivial given the predominately 1st world membership of the conversation. There is after all, no "Starving African Child" argument in Africa. It's just, "The Argument."

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

Hey, if he says he's a woman then he's a woman. I thought that was the whole point. If it doesn't matter what your DNA says, what your biology says you are, or what you have lived your life as for decades, if you say you're suddenly a woman, you must be treated as such and anyone who says differently is transphobic, right? Besides, who are any of you to judge? You should all check your privilege.

If he actually identified as a woman, I would consider him a woman. Instead, he claimed to identify as a woman for a piss poor excuse of a "social experiment," and actually identifies as a man. Hope that clears it up.

 

[Maze1125]

Oh I bet he is an absolute delight to associate with I tell you what. (gags)

The guy sounds like a total scumbag or as he put it a total wacko. Giving discounts to people is perfectly legal. What is someone going to fight against senior and veteran discounts next? That's really what we need right now

So you'd obviously be fully behind "white night", where white people get to drink at 75% discount?

Discounts are perfectly legal after all.

So you'd obviously be fully against "Senior Discouts" or "Children Free"?

lol

Those are very different things.
We all start off young and (hope to) grow old. Hence, even if we don't benefit from them right now doesn't mean we won't ever or haven't ever.

On the other hand, very few of us start of as one sex and later become the other. Or one race and become another.

Discounts based on age or veterancy are not comparable to discounts based upon sex or race.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

-snipped to here-
Thank you for your apology.

No need to thank me, I'm just owning my crap attitude there. Still you're welcome.

On our contentions about using the brain for a form of verification... I agree with Saelune. I'm trans too and don't find it to be discriminatory. It's one factor and for validity you need three factors, anyone who fails that isn't going to be less a shit because we eliminate a factor.

 

[Achelexus]

I like these topics because it brings the bigoted feminists out of their caves, even if he's just a crazy old guy or is talking about trivial things, some people can't seem to identify the simplest forms of discrimination. sigh

Really, getting cheap drinks at bars is a privilege?

It doesn't matter that a woman is four times more likely to be raped than a man, or that an entire wing of American politics wants to use them as little more than breeding stock, the real injustice is that some bars give women a discount. Feminism defeated, we can all go home now.

Do you realize that nothing you've said is true?

 

[kaizen2468]

Ladies night is for the men, it's not for the ladies. It's to get women in the bar, and thus men will go. And what will they do once they're there? They will be buying full price drinks for women.

 

[viranimus]

Do you think this guy has a point or he is being an insensitive jerk?

There is a point being made and in all likelihood the guy is an insensitive jerk. Nothing precludes both from being true.

People want to look at trans as if it is the next layer of civil rights progression now that homosexuality has basically been accepted regardless if people agree with it or not. However what people fail to acknowledge is that the trans issue is both more simple and far more complex than people want to consider. That complexity means that it is no where near as cut and dry of an argument as homosexual rights issues were portrayed as being. So if this is the beginning of a discussion on trans acceptance, it will take a LOT longer for the individual issues revolving around it to be "resolved" in enough peoples minds to shift society in one direction or another when it gets around that same 50% acceptance mark that seems to be the modern barrier of acceptance.

This is not simply an issue of "its what people want to do, let them do it" because this is rooted in a mental health issue on the individual level. like it or not and the cases must be considered on a case by case situation to do them justice, which means it is not going to be right to simply pass blanket laws saying either yae or nae. Further it is a perfect example of "no man is an island unto himself" because like it or not what one individual does WILL have repercussions on not only themselves or those they interact with, but people they pass in proximity to, people they have never met and honestly society as a whole, because when you get right down to it this "question" is one that will either force society to fundamentally change, or stay the same because there is no possibility for middle ground because as stated, No one is an island unto themselves and this is a case where what ever answer will effect all, regardless if it is something that is personally relevant to them or not.

So my point? People need to realize this is not some simple situation of discrimination against a group of people. This is a question of do we as a species intend to fundamentally alter keystone concepts and adopt a completely divergent social philosophy. So even if this guy IS a jerk and by the sound of it, he probably is. The underlying question this poses is one that must be genuinely debated because these are legitimate questions that must be considered or else we either run the risk of neglecting groups of people if we do not properly consider all sides of the equation, regardless of which path society decides to slog its way through.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Do you think this guy has a point or he is being an insensitive jerk?

There is a point being made and in all likelihood the guy is an insensitive jerk. Nothing precludes both from being true.

People want to look at trans as if it is the next layer of civil rights progression now that homosexuality has basically been accepted regardless if people agree with it or not. However what people fail to acknowledge is that the trans issue is both more simple and far more complex than people want to consider. That complexity means that it is no where near as cut and dry of an argument as homosexual rights issues were portrayed as being. So if this is the beginning of a discussion on trans acceptance, it will take a LOT longer for the individual issues revolving around it to be "resolved" in enough peoples minds to shift society in one direction or another when it gets around that same 50% acceptance mark that seems to be the modern barrier of acceptance.

This is not simply an issue of "its what people want to do, let them do it" because this is rooted in a mental health issue on the individual level. like it or not and the cases must be considered on a case by case situation to do them justice, which means it is not going to be right to simply pass blanket laws saying either yae or nae. Further it is a perfect example of "no man is an island unto himself" because like it or not what one individual does WILL have repercussions on not only themselves or those they interact with, but people they pass in proximity to, people they have never met and honestly society as a whole, because when you get right down to it this "question" is one that will either force society to fundamentally change, or stay the same because there is no possibility for middle ground because as stated, No one is an island unto themselves and this is a case where what ever answer will effect all, regardless if it is something that is personally relevant to them or not.

So my point? People need to realize this is not some simple situation of discrimination against a group of people. This is a question of do we as a species intend to fundamentally alter keystone concepts and adopt a completely divergent social philosophy. So even if this guy IS a jerk and by the sound of it, he probably is. The underlying question this poses is one that must be genuinely debated because these are legitimate questions that must be considered or else we either run the risk of neglecting groups of people if we do not properly consider all sides of the equation, regardless of which path society decides to slog its way through.

Yeah, no... As a trans person who reads the polls and the laws, you're full of crap. It's the same discrimination, it comes from the same place, and it's done for the same reasons... In fact the only reason they started targeting trans people is because of the legalization of same sex marriage in the US. All of the leaders of the anti-trans BS currently explicitly admitted that even.

That's beside the fact that over 60% of the general public supports our equal rights, over 60 percent... It hit 76% approval before same sex marriage was legalized.

The guy in the article didn't present as female, then proceeded to prove he as a misogynist shit who doesn't understand transgenderism even the slightest. Your backing his argument... You just prove you don't understand the facts either.

I bet by case by case basis you mean weather, or not someone passes. Which as someone who passes flawlessly I can authoritatively say is bullshit, because I personally know non-trans crossdressers who and that don't ask for trans centric protections.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

So my point? People need to realize this is not some simple situation of discrimination against a group of people. This is a question of do we as a species intend to fundamentally alter keystone concepts and adopt a completely divergent social philosophy. So even if this guy IS a jerk and by the sound of it, he probably is. The underlying question this poses is one that must be genuinely debated because these are legitimate questions that must be considered or else we either run the risk of neglecting groups of people if we do not properly consider all sides of the equation, regardless of which path society decides to slog its way through.

Why? I don't understand why we should pander to infantile actions and make a fuss at all. Nor should society be an arbiter for the individual for no reason. If the guy wants to act like a dickhead, let him act like a dickhead, and most people who realise that ladies night is merely a way to get women into bars when they face a realistic (though variable) risk of being roofied or some other misfortune. It's a sleazy business tactic, but the majority of male patrons whn they think about it ... nod their heads ... and see why it works in their favour if they just so happen to want to get drunk and hook up with equally drunk women and have a likely pitiful performance because copious alcohol has that affect.

I fail to see what legitimate questions people doing this can raise. We know why bars do this.

More over, why exactly does this need extension into transgender identity? Why does it have to go that route? Nothing good will come from pretending this dickhead represents a 'viewpoint' of which should be entertained on the issue. It's like hearing a 7 year old call Trump a poopy-head and then pretend it's a valid topic of discussion just how much fecal matter might be between his ears. The discussion doesn't need to go there, because nothing of value can come from it and no enlightened opinion can be maintained with this as a platform.

 

[Jadak]

Hey, if he says he's a woman then he's a woman. I thought that was the whole point. If it doesn't matter what your DNA says, what your biology says you are, or what you have lived your life as for decades, if you say you're suddenly a woman, you must be treated as such and anyone who says differently is transphobic, right? Besides, who are any of you to judge? You should all check your privilege.

If he actually identified as a woman, I would consider him a woman. Instead, he claimed to identify as a woman for a piss poor excuse of a "social experiment," and actually identifies as a man. Hope that clears it up.

What you're talking about is more about whether he's an asshole or not. Of course he is. But how do you argue that he's the wrong? Short of actually having a doctor diagnosed mental illness and carrying around something that proves it, what the difference between an actual trans-gendered person and an asshole? Who is in a position at your average club to judge how 'serious' they are?

Point being, asshole has a point and you're left with a couple options.

1) Fuck trans laws and only acknowledge birth sex
2) Formalize gender identification and only acknowledge people as something if they have the legal documents to support it
3) Abolish anything and everything that gives a shit about what gender a person is.

This guy seems to be going for 3, and that's fair enough.

Overall, still a moot point. Things like 'ladies night', if anything, aren't discriminatory enough. They don't need to be fair, they need to generate a demographic the club desires to result in their guests having a good time and making them more money. Male or female, it should have nothing to do with gender, just the current club ratio and how fuckable you are.