Random Politics & Religion #22

The movie Gladiator killed it.

Marc Bolan pondering "if in 40yrs Nausi would accept or question his decision to be known as T Rex."

I mentioned that because in order to defend the position that it's a problem because it's wrapped up in political correctness you mentioned something that isn't even an issue... you know the whole someone getting fired because they got someone's gender incorrect... taking something that hasn't even been an issue and is extremely unlikely to become one and the whole you not mentioning it ever is more of a broad statement over your time here... that's why is stated it's not like you're against it you just never talk up about though you'll talk about something that isn't an issue to try and make a point for your stance against PC.

I can tell you I wouldn't be appeased with you writing a book like that... i don't really need to be appeased in any sense anyways...

Sounds personal... lol...

Whoa, Transgender is a totally different thing. I mean that ***is coming and honestly isn't bad for society. I was simply addressing the multiple meme genders that people want to identify as. That I see as a problem.

As society if we come to identify the Trans-gender as an actual gender it will resolve some pretty petty disputes and actually fix a real problem (That is people who are actually, in theory, trans-gender).

You haven't even proven that it is a problem.

It is illegal to fire anyone because they are a transsexual. You would think that anyone being fired because of that would make national news, and yet, it's not reported....

You are asserting an issue that doesn't exist. How about suggesting legislation or regulation for the constant impalement of singular-horned quadrupeds towards humans and the multiple lawsuits associated with it?

There's also a lot of legal issues associated with it too, especially since there are laws that specifically target one gender over another.

Add 57 additional genders on top of that, and all hell breaks loose.

Trump on being Transgend....eeerrr President.

It wasn't my intent to prove it was a problem... I only brought it up to say that it's more likely to be a problem than what Rav used as an example... its not like Rav put forth any proof that someone has been fired for getting someone's gender wrong... only that he wouldn't be surprised if it had happened somewhere...

Solid point.

We also need to consider that despite what some people think Gender is decided by Society, not by the individual. There has to be distinct features to classify a gender, otherwise we will always have an ambiguity towards it.

That being said, just to state again. I think we do need to identify Trans-Gender in some way or form, even if for posterity.

No one is really pushing for 57 genders to be added as legally recognizable... it's a self identifier... I don't think you guys really even understand what it's all about to be talking about it like this anyways... you seem to have a general misunderstanding about its function...

How does society go about deciding gender?

Haven't we done that already?

Then you really don't even understand Rav's point.

You were inferring a "problem" that doesn't exist into the conversation. The drought in Yemen does exist, however. Why don't you care about that and instead focus on a "problem" that doesn't exist.

More people are impaled by singular-horned quadrupeds than transgenders being fired because they are transgender. Why aren't you advocating for the regulation of the safety of humans against the singular-horned quadrupeds? Don't you care about the impaled victims?

....you really don't understand the law, nor do you even understand what they are even fighting for.

Just admit it, you are talking out your ***.

The ACLU transgender page? Ok?

Talking out of your *** it is.

If it was merely a self identifier, I don't think there would be much of an issue, but that simply isn't the case. People go out saying they are one of these obscure genders and want to be mentioned in a certain way. That is the issue we are talking about.


We aren't talking about the people who go to sleep saying "I think I'm a helicopter", we are talking about the people that go around telling everyone they are a helicopter, make whooshing noises, and demand that people refer to the as a heli, instead of he or she. The latter behavior is currently only prevalent on online forms(which is why is isn't much of an issue). We are all identifying the issues that would happen if such behavior took place in actual society. What if it becomes so big that people hold rallies to get helicopterkuns as a gender or start putting that their Gender is "heli" on their licenses.


I can hear the police report now:

"Police are looking for a suspect who robbed a bank, he is a middle-aged helicopterkun with a distinct whooshing sound."

You've quite literally shown nothing by providing a link to the ACLU page... you're entitled to your own opinion though...

I already found the culprit.



Where's my reward money?

Sorry let me correct this:

I can hear the police report now:

"Police are looking for a suspect who robbed a bank, heli* is a middle-aged helicopterkun with a distinct whooshing sound."



Please fill out this online forum. I need you to select your gender from our 5000 gender database. If you feel like your gender is represented please tell us what it is and include whatever pronouns are needed.

Phobia is an actual word with an actual definition (like racist and sexist). One is not phobic of trans people simply because they don't recognize them as their preferred sex. One cannot have the opinion of "I think you are a transphobe" because of that. That isn't phobia!

I guess you were just begging for a huff post article!

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6759862

Again I was only saying that it is more likely to happen that the non issue he brought up... he didn't prove it's an issue just said that he wouldn't be surprised if it'd happen...

As for rav's whole point about accusing people for things they haven't said I didn't accuse of him of anything... I simply brought up the point that he'd use something as ridiculous as he did to try and back up his original post on the matter... it's pretty obvious he hasn't brought up a defense for the other in the past and I even noted it's not like I think he's against it anyways only that he's not at all vocal about it...

Look, you are (very lazily) asserting that this is a self-identifying trait only.

You clearly do not understand the legal difficulties associated with adding just 1 gender to various laws (every single law would have to go straight back to various local, state, and federal legislation if that law even hints at targeting a specific gender. Over 50% of the cases ever made throughout US history has been about interpretation of law, which makes laws that are very clear about a gender who is targeted must be altered to include any additional genders if they are considered to exist. And every law must be changed by legislation, meaning it goes through the entire process to be created/amended, and every law must be individually amended meaning you can't write a bill that is a one-size-fits-all and amends them all, especially when we are talking about business/civil/criminal laws.

It was a pain in the *** for states who had to alter all the insurance regulations and laws just to add the ability for same-sex individuals to be covered as married. Also took years to get it done.

Do you honestly think this dramatic change will occur overnight or even in the same legislative session?

And that's just the legal side of it. There's also a bureaucratic side to it too, which runs slower than the legislative side.

Seriously, just drop it. You are inferring a problem that doesn't exist (transgenders being fired for being transgender) and now you are stating things you very clearly do not understand (law).

Are you being serious?

You bet your *** I am. You don't agree with my premise? What are a Nausiphobe?

That type of talk shows a cognitive dissonance and how unattached this person is from actual society. I have no problem with them undergoing whatever operation needs to be done to make them a woman, or even if they believe they had feminist aspect their whole life but simply using the word "assigned" as if they were given a number in a factory. No, you were born as male. You choose to be a female at one point in your life and use the correct means to get there, but you WERE born a male, not assigned that title.

I never said the process to add a gender wouldn't be difficult... I stated that no one is looking to legally add 57 more gender identifications... then you went off on a rant about how I don't understand things I wasn't even talking about or how I couldn't prove a problem that i wasn't trying to prove like you somehow made a point... idk what you're even doing anymore lol...

your premise that phobia is a real word with a real definition so that they can't use it as an opinion? I mean... are you using fake words with fake definitions in your opinions about them?

I am a Nausiphobe for sure...

Let's just snuff out human rights, it's too much paperwork.

You know I wouldn't be surprised if it happened? Because you can be fined up to $250,000 in New York for using the wrong pronoun. It's not a huge logical leap we're talking about.

Now, I want an apology for your insensitivity to drought victims in Yemen.

A phobia is an extreme and/or irrational fear of something. How does he argument go that "because you won't deem irrelevant Bruce Jenner's chromosomes, you must have an irrational fear of him"?

Enlighten me you nausiphobe.