LGBT Activist Thinks Straight Men Need To Get Used To The Idea Of Dating Trans-Women

[ArgoEagle 1,773]

11 minutes ago, gr82be said:

Agree. God makes no mistakes. I was simply saying God does have a sense of humor. We do and we were made in His image. 

Yes, I agreed with you that he does, but I was pointing out this particular issue is not funny to him. We are on the same page here. thanks

[alexava 6,973]

10 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

Agree Alex. Had an old fishing truck years ago with " No Fat Chicks" painted on the back. Guess we would need to add to that today.

Well salty, I never was attracted to fat chicks but I certainly wouldn't shame them or make an a**hole out of myself by broadcasting it that way. I used to flirt with  heavier girls just to help their self esteem and work on my own game. 

[SaltyTiger 7,789]

1 minute ago, alexava said:

Well salty, I never was attracted to fat chicks but I certainly wouldn't shame them or make an a**hole out of myself by broadcasting it that way. I used to flirt with  heavier girls just to help their self esteem and work on my own game. 

Well Alex, should have expounded. We kept it in an old grass landing strip airplane hangar on the coast. Used it only when down to fish. I did not paint the words on it, bought it that way. Would never "shame fat chicks".  I would not flirt with fat chicks to "work on my game". Shame on you Alex.

[I_M4_AU 7,799]

11 hours ago, Strychnine said:

 

There is truth in that.  That said, let me give you an example from this very forum.  When it comes to social issues, Titan and I are generally polar opposites.  However, we can have a discussion because Titan makes his points logically.  He does not say silly things like "liberalism is a mental disorder" or assert Fox News is the bastion of truth, he supports his position with a well-reasoned argument.  I have the utmost respect for him, because I know we can have a debate or discussion and then have a laugh about something else later, or rejoice about something fortunate affecting Auburn football.  We are brothers.  We may not see eye to eye, but we are brothers nonetheless.  I may disagree with Titan from time to time, but he is the first person I will buy a beer if we ever meet.  That is the standard that should be practiced in these forums, but it is not.

There are a lot of snarky retorts and sex therapist remarked on this forum I have noticed.

[alexava 6,973]

So this guy has a golf game with his buddies. He's a competitive guy on the range well before his tee time. This very attractive lady golfer arrives on the range. They have a few casual short conversations as normal golfers who happen to be strangers do in this setting. He receives a call that the rest of his group had to cancel unexpectedly. He tells this nice lady he is now alone and invites her to play in with him. She graciously accepted. He finds she is a good golfer and over 18 holes they hit it off even though he is bothered by losing to a girl. They meet a couple days later after work for a twilight round after work. she is really playing well now easily out pacing him on the course but the attraction was growing from both sides. They can't play the last couple holes due to darkness but stay on the course lost in conversation that turns physical. She ends up performing a .....(Lewinsky) on him. They plan a real date for the coming Friday. At the end of the evening she tells him.... before we take this any further you have to know... I was born a man and a year ago started the process of physical conversion to the woman I was supposed to be. A couple more surgeries are needed to complete this. I hope you are not angry with me. .... His blood is boiling as he erupted and shoved her away and says  " you're damn right I'm angry you sorry, cheatin sumbich...you have been playing from the RED TEES the whole damn time.

[homersapien 11,366]

2 hours ago, gr82be said:

Agree. God makes no mistakes. I was simply saying God does have a sense of humor. We do and we were made in His image. 

From your and Argo's posts, it is clear that God was made in our image. 

[homersapien 11,366]

19 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

But within the framework of her logic, it's sound.  To them, trans women are "real" women, just as much as any cisgendered woman is.  So if a straight man refuses to date trans women, he's by definition a bigot.

How is their belief that a trans woman is a "real" woman any less legitimate than your belief that she isn't? 

How is the "framework" of your logic better than the "framework" of their logic?

How is their calling you a "bigot" any different from you insisting they are a sex they aren't?

[homersapien 11,366]

On 7/6/2017 at 9:52 AM, TitanTiger said:

http://www.chicksontheright.com/lgbt-activist-thinks-straight-men-need-get-used-idea-dating-trans-women/

Forgive the source, but it's mostly a reprint of messages from the subject's Twitter account with the expected snarky commentary.  I'm not really interested in hashing out the author's comments.

What bugs me is this idea that straight men are supposed to just "get over it" as to their reticence to date trans women.  

(For those who are understandably confused by the terms, a trans woman is someone who is biologically male but believes they are really female, has decided to identify as such, and now presents themselves to the world as female and expects you to acknowledge it as well.  And this is how you are to view them even if they haven't undergone any surgery and thus still have a penis.)

Just so we're clear, it's not enough to allow someone to let their freak flag fly.  It's not enough not to bother them, or not demand they wear men's clothes.  It's not even enough to acquiesce to their demand that you call them by their new female name and use female pronouns when speaking to or about them.  Now you need to date and have sex with them just like you would regular women and your inability to "work through that" is a problem to be fixed rather than a reasonable and normal reaction to, you know, being a straight man.

No Titan, one does not have to date or have sex with them.   So don't feel so threatened.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

How is their belief that a trans woman is a "real" woman any less legitimate than your belief that she isn't? 

How is the "framework" of your logic better than the framework of their logic?

For one, mine is based in anatomy, chromosomes, biology, not mere self-described feelings.  I could tell you I feel like a black man all day long but it doesn't change anything in reality.  I could be 6' 5" tall and weigh 110 lbs and tell you I feel fat, but is won't change the fact that I'm actually rail thin.  

But aside from that, I didn't really get into whose logic was better.  I simply said that within her logic, anyone who is skeptical or doesn't accept her feelings as proof is a bigot.

 

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

How is their calling you a "bigot" any different from you insisting they are a sex they aren't?

Because one is based in objective observation and reality while the other is merely someone declaring something to be true merely because they think it, then calling everyone who doesn't accept that as the final word on the nature of things a bigot.  You could sit there and tell me the moon is made of green cheese or the earth is flat.  I have various objective and observable reasons to be skeptical of such claims.  But within your 'logic' you could regard me as deceived and anti-truth or whatever.  But only one of us is right.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

6 minutes ago, homersapien said:

No Titan, one does not have to date or have sex with them.   So don't feel so threatened.

Homer, let's just stop this weak argumentation tactic before it starts.  You know, the one where instead of actually talking about what's being said, you try to steer it into some sort of personal thing and imply latent homo or transphobia or whatever.  It's a canard and you're a better debate partner than that.

Her argument is that straight men need to get over their hangups in dating trans women.  It is clear in her view that their desire not to date them is a problem to be corrected.

[homersapien 11,366]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

For one, mine is based in anatomy, chromosomes, biology, not mere self-described feelings.  I could tell you I feel like a black man all day long but it doesn't change anything in reality.  I could be 6' 5" tall and weigh 110 lbs and tell you I feel fat, but is won't change the fact that I'm actually rail thin.  

But aside from that, I didn't really get into whose logic was better.  I simply said that within her logic, anyone who is skeptical or doesn't accept her feelings as proof is a bigot.

 

Because one is based in objective observation and reality while the other is merely someone declaring something to be true merely because they think it, then calling everyone who doesn't accept that as the final word on the nature of things a bigot.  You could sit there and tell me the moon is made of green cheese or the earth is flat.  I have various objective and observable reasons to be skeptical of such claims.  But within your 'logic' you could regard me as deceived and anti-truth or whatever.  But only one of us is right.

Tell us more about the physiological basis of sexuality.  The field of psychology would love to know it.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

Tell us more about the physiological basis of sexuality.  The field of psychology would love to know it.

When did this become a discussion about who one is attracted to sexually?

[homersapien 11,366]

8 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Homer, let's just stop this weak argumentation tactic before it starts.  You know, the one where instead of actually talking about what's being said, you try to steer it into some sort of personal thing and imply latent homo or transphobia or whatever.  It's a canard and you're a better debate partner than that.

Her argument is that straight men need to get over their hangups in dating trans women.  It is clear in her view that their desire not to date them is a problem to be corrected.

Do you not see the irony of that statement?  A transgender person states their position and you react with an anti-position.

And it's clear that your view is that transgenderism is simply "wrong".  No doubt, to a transgender, you are just as threatening to them as you seem to think they are to you. 

 

[homersapien 11,366]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

When did this become a discussion about who one is attracted to sexually?

The OP and the whole thread is about that.

You claimed that sexuality is defined by genes and anatomy when it is obviously a lot more complicated than that.   You are using those objective manifestations as an argument that transgenderism does not exist.

[homersapien 11,366]

10 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Homer, let's just stop this weak argumentation tactic before it starts.  You know, the one where instead of actually talking about what's being said, you try to steer it into some sort of personal thing and imply latent homo or transphobia or whatever.  It's a canard and you're a better debate partner than that.

Her argument is that straight men need to get over their hangups in dating trans women.  It is clear in her view that their desire not to date them is a problem to be corrected.

You said:  

 

What bugs me is this idea that straight men are supposed to just "get over it" as to their reticence to date trans women.  

(For those who are understandably confused by the terms, a trans woman is someone who is biologically male but believes they are really female, has decided to identify as such, and now presents themselves to the world as female and expects you to acknowledge it as well.  And this is how you are to view them even if they haven't undergone any surgery and thus still have a penis.)

Just so we're clear, it's not enough to allow someone to let their freak flag fly.  It's not enough not to bother them, or not demand they wear men's clothes.  It's not even enough to acquiesce to their demand that you call them by their new female name and use female pronouns when speaking to or about them.  Now you need to date and have sex with them just like you would regular women and your inability to "work through that" is a problem to be fixed rather than a reasonable and normal reaction to, you know, being a straight man.

 

That clearly implies you feel "threatened" (attacked).  Why even mention it otherwise?

 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

17 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Do you not see the irony of that statement?  A transgender person states their position and you react with an anti-position.

The difference is, I'm not telling them they can't do their thing.  They can change their name, start dressing and doing their hair like a woman.  Wearing makeup.  They can convince all their friends and family to refer to them by their new female name.  I don't give a crap.  But when you start telling society that when they don't join in your thoughtlife with you that they are bigots, and they need to get over their hangups in not dating transwomen, then it becomes an issue. 

 

17 minutes ago, homersapien said:

And it's clear that your view is that transgenderism is simply "wrong".  No doubt, to a transgender, you are just as threatening to them as you seem to thing they are of you. \

There is nothing "simply" about my view on the matter.  Having feelings is neither right nor wrong.  The rub is always where we go from there.  And thus far, the only thing I've concerned myself with are the legal and social ramifications.  It's not even a moral/religious discussion.  I'm willing to live and let live.  I don't really care if Jim wants to be called Jenny and start wearing panties instead of boxers.  What he does in his own home...hell, what he does amongst his friends and family even - don't care.  Everyone is weird in some way or another.  But when you want to compel everyone else to bend to your whims and alter their lives, enforce legal and/or social sanctions based on that, I have a problem with it.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

23 minutes ago, homersapien said:

The OP and the whole thread is about that.

You claimed that sexuality is defined by genes and anatomy when it is obviously a lot more complicated than that.   You are using those objective manifestations as an argument that transgenderism does not exist.

I made no such claim.  We aren't discussing whether someone is homo, hetero or bisexual.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

18 minutes ago, homersapien said:

You said:  

 

What bugs me is this idea that straight men are supposed to just "get over it" as to their reticence to date trans women.  

(For those who are understandably confused by the terms, a trans woman is someone who is biologically male but believes they are really female, has decided to identify as such, and now presents themselves to the world as female and expects you to acknowledge it as well.  And this is how you are to view them even if they haven't undergone any surgery and thus still have a penis.)

Just so we're clear, it's not enough to allow someone to let their freak flag fly.  It's not enough not to bother them, or not demand they wear men's clothes.  It's not even enough to acquiesce to their demand that you call them by their new female name and use female pronouns when speaking to or about them.  Now you need to date and have sex with them just like you would regular women and your inability to "work through that" is a problem to be fixed rather than a reasonable and normal reaction to, you know, being a straight man.

 

That clearly implies you feel "threatened" (attacked).  Why even mention it otherwise?

 

No, it implies that I have a problem when people wish to take their personal piccadellos and feelings and expect everything and everyone else to conform to it.  

To use a more extreme example, there are people that call themselves "otherkin."  They literally believe - and therefore identify as - something other than human.  Some might say they identify as a wolf, or a tiger, or what have you.  Now, I'm not threatened by people having odd feelings.  I don't really care so long as it doesn't affect me.  You can believe you are a Japanese Maple and arrange for your sister to water you twice a week for all I care.  But don't expect me to accept that you're actually a plant, or a wolf, or a barn owl.  Don't expect me or any of the rest of society to change the way we operate publicly to accommodate your feelings on the matter.  What you do at home, amongst friends and family, on special retreats with others who share your feelings is your business and I have no desire to interfere.  But don't expect the rest of humanity to change legal or social mores to accommodate it, nor to sit idly by while you label us as spreading hate or being bigoted for not doing so.

That's it in a nutshell.  It's not feeling threatened, it's being justifiably annoyed and exasperated at ridiculousness being foisted on us.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

to each his on. Whatever cranks your tractor. For me there are enough natural women in the world I have no need for a male to woman convert. Maybe she should just hook up with a female to male convert and they can both live happily. I'm more curious what it has to do with politics.

We now have fake news and fake vaginas. Goodness, what's next?

[TitanTiger 20,472]

6 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

I'm more curious what it has to do with politics.

Unless you've been stranded on a desert island the past 18 months, you'd have to have seen how the transgender issue in society and in legal and political channels has been a thing.  We've had a state lose NCAA basketball tournament games due to their views on how these debates play out in things like restroom and locker room accommodations.

[ArgoEagle 1,773]

27 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Unless you've been stranded on a desert island the past 18 months, you'd have to have seen how the transgender issue in society and in legal and political channels has been a thing.  We've had a state lose NCAA basketball tournament games due to their views on how these debates play out in things like restroom and locker room accommodations.

If you'll move this topic to smacktalk I will chime in with my opinion on this. It seems to have headed in that direction anyway.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

10 minutes ago, ArgoEagle said:

If you'll move this topic to smacktalk I will chime in with my opinion on this. It seems to have headed in that direction anyway.

I'd prefer to keep it spirited, but civil.

[ArgoEagle 1,773]

44 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Unless you've been stranded on a desert island the past 18 months, you'd have to have seen how the transgender issue in society and in legal and political channels has been a thing.  We've had a state lose NCAA basketball tournament games due to their views on how these debates play out in things like restroom and locker room accommodations.

This is a real travesty!

[homersapien 11,366]

11 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

The difference is, I'm not telling them they can't do their thing.  They can change their name, start dressing and doing their hair like a woman.  Wearing makeup.  They can convince all their friends and family to refer to them by their new female name.  I don't give a crap.  But when you start telling society that when they don't join in your thoughtlife with you that they are bigots, and they need to get over their hangups in not dating transwomen, then it becomes an issue. 

And making in an "issue" is what reveals some sort of fear or antipathy.

Seriously, some "radical LGBT activist" posts some sort of nonsense and you take it as LGBT's "telling society....they are bigots"?  Or, if you say: "people wish to take their personal piccadellos and feelings and expect everything and everyone else to conform to it."  

It's as absurd as the activists statement itself to take it so seriously.  

Who cares? 

Obviously the only men who are going to have to "get over it" are the men who want to ask out or continue dating a transexual.  If you personally have an 'icky' factor and decide otherwise, that obviously doesn't necessarily make you a "bigot".  But then, it's not surprising to understand why a transexual might think so.

You are over reacting.  For whatever reason.

  

[TitanTiger 20,472]

18 minutes ago, homersapien said:

And making in an "issue" is what reveals some sort of fear or antipathy.

Do not mistake annoyance and frustration for fear or antipathy.

 

18 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Seriously, some "radical LGBT activist" posts some sort of nonsense and you take it as LGBT's "telling society....they are bigots"?  Or, if you say: "people wish to take their personal piccadellos and feelings and expect everything and everyone else to conform to it."  

It's as absurd as the activists statement or at least taking it so seriously.  

The headline was not mine.  But the fact is, it's not just one trans activist and though some may not go so far as to expect/demand that straight men "get over it" and see trans women as women in the same sense they see biological women, the mentality is widespread.  It is not enough to merely be left alone, all of society must bend it's laws and its social mores to conform to their way of thinking.

 

18 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Who cares? 

Obviously the only men who are going to have to "get over it" are the men who want to ask out or continue dating a transexual.  If you personally have an 'icky' factor and decide otherwise, that obviously doesn't necessarily make you a "bigot".  But then, it's not surprising to understand why a transexual might think so.

You are over reacting.  For whatever reason.

How could one who objects be anything other than a bigot under this view of reality?  The only reason you wouldn't date a trans woman is that you do not consider her an actual woman, merely a man who has some mental health problems and has altered their appearance and perhaps surgically altered their bodies to look like one.  The only possible exception to it would be that the straight man in question wishes to be with a woman who can bear children, and obviously a trans woman cannot.  Otherwise?  Bigot.