America - The Official Thread

[Com Fox]

I mean, SHE was transitioning and was making the effort, so Milo was wrong there.

Well if the person is having improvements on the transitioning then I'd say that Milo was proven wrong. I only watched the Milo speech and read your sources which you admit were a bit bias so I am a bit earie on the aftermath.

Third, you are still trans and your gender even without medically transitioning, so even if she hadn't been in the process, Milo still would have been in the wrong to misgender her and out her

I definitely do think you can transition without any medical procedures but that isn't the case with what Milo thinks, think of that as you want, I'm not 100% certain. I'm not saying him misgendering is right, but I don't think it's dickish if Milo doesn't think the person is trans but again at the top, Milo has likely been proven wrong.

and I'll admit, one of the problems I have with Milo is that he hardly admits he's wrong after saying something.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

there is a difference between misgendering someone, which can still cause problems for them, and publicly outing them, putting up an old picture of them, calling them names and insulting them

Intentionally misgendering someone can be a pretty serious insult. The actor Adam Baldwin took a lot of heat for it when he deliberately misgendered Chelsea Manning on Twitter. It probably didn't help that he'd just been at the centre of a similar furore over gamergate.

I only know a small number of transgender people, but in the past they have been pretty up-front about their preferred gender to avoid unintentional misgendering and they're generally pretty forgiving of it when mistakes do happen. But deliberate misgendering is seen as a pretty serious insult.

 

[Com Fox]

Intentionally misgendering someone can be a pretty serious insult. The actor Adam Baldwin took a lot of heat for it when he deliberately misgendered Chelsea Manning on Twitter. It probably didn't help that he'd just been at the centre of a similar furore over gamergate.

I only know a small number of transgender people, but in the past they have been pretty up-front about their preferred gender to avoid unintentional misgendering and they're generally pretty forgiving of it when mistakes do happen. But deliberate misgendering is seen as a pretty serious insult.

To be fair, anything said that goes against a person believes and identity is seen as an insult.

If you're intentionally misgendering someone just because you despise them or want to offend them then I'd agree it's a dick move, however if you simply don't agree with what they identify for whatever reason, I don't think it's that bad, you can't change how they think.

Has, Donald Trump done anything else stupid yet so we can stop this thread from being Transgender thread 2.0 ?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

if you simply don't agree with what they identify for whatever reason,

That's not anybody's choice to make but the person who is transgender.

 

[Com Fox]

That's not anybody's choice to make but the person who is transgender.

I'm not saying it's the person choice but it's the persons view because there might be something about the Trans he doesn't agree with. The person is allowed to call anyone what they want just like how a trans is allowed to identify as any gender. You can't force 1 to do something to benefit the other, whether that be for the trans or the person who's misgendering.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

You can't force 1 to do something to benefit the other, whether that be for the trans or the person who's misgendering.

You can, however, expect that people act like human beings and treat each other with decency. Deliberately misgendering someone for the sake of it is humiliating, and in extreme cases you could make the case that it is hate speech.

 

[Com Fox]

You can, however, expect that people act like human beings and treat each other with decency. Deliberately misgendering someone for the sake of it is humiliating, and in extreme cases you could make the case that it is hate speech.

I don't think forcing someone to talk in a particular way to someone because of their feelings is decency. In my opinion this goes both way. You're telling someone to act in a certain way, robbing them of their free speech like how if a Trans was forced to not be Trans removing their freedom of expression. You shouldn't control how people should think, especially if they aren't doing it to intentionally be mean.

Calling someone by the wrong gender is "hate speech"? I thought hate speech was thought provoking stuff to encourage people to hate someone like saying "kill all *insert group here" and even still, they have every right to say no matter how bad it is just like you have every right to voice your opinion to disagree with it. You shouldn't try to force them to shut up with stuff like violence or encouraging safe spaces and laws which is a massive problem in American colleges right now.

I will never agree with any methods to silence people and force them to think a certain way or go against their beliefs. We all have a right to freely express ourselves, use it and even if you don;t want to, don't try to strip it off anyone who do use it.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Calling someone by the wrong gender is "hate speech"?

If you do it deliberately and for the purposes of belittling and humiliating them, yes.

 

[Com Fox]

If you do it deliberately and for the purposes of belittling and humiliating them, yes.

Ok, the context is nice

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

You can, however, expect that people act like human beings and treat each other with decency. Deliberately misgendering someone for the sake of it is humiliating, and in extreme cases you could make the case that it is hate speech.

I'd love to see how that would go over, could be the next landmark trial for the highest court in the land. If I don't believe that a person medically altering themselves and having to go through a daily source of hormones until their body is forced to recognize that they're a different gender, and such say they're still woman or man, so be it. That's not hate speech that's freedom of speech to say that from what you know and have learned outwardly they're still such and such. Now if this person is attacked, or malicious things are said that go far beyond claiming them one gender they're not to another. Then yes it's a hate crime.

Being humiliated or awkward in a situation while unpleasant doesn't leap to this new found idea that legal troubles should be faced to the person who made them feel awkward.

Also when others who self-identify with the group claim to be a moving gender or other impossible things but in a serious matter, undo that to those who are actually transitioning one way or the other. Yet we should make some "safe zone" where it just goes not talked about due to claimed insensitivity?

At this point I wonder how much intellectual growth some people would like to see in the world in regards to this, or perhaps it's just a first world problem with such tit for tat petty things.

On a side note I find it quite moving and someone opposite to what I've said, that a homosexual male can offend tran-genders, when both parties have quite similar struggles to face in a modern society.

 

[Com Fox]

On a side note I find it quite moving and someone opposite to what I've said, that a homosexual male can offend tran-genders, when both parties have quite similar struggles to face in a modern society

Well it appears that nowadays, all the minority groups are all in 1 batch regardless of ideals.

One of the women's march leaders also supported the Sharia Law which discriminates against women.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Well it appears that nowadays, all the minority groups are all in 1 batch regardless of ideals.

One of the women's march leaders also supported the Sharia Law which discriminates against women.

Stop pulling my leg, seriously?

 

[Com Fox]

Stop pulling my leg, seriously?

http://www.snopes.com/2017/01/25/womens-march-organizer-linda-sarsour/

 

[prisonermonkeys]

That reads more like "a ban on sharia law would result in a ban on sharia law".

 

[Com Fox]

That reads more like "a ban on sharia law would result in a ban on sharia law".

Judging how she used Sharia Law and Islamic law from courts. It reads more like she thinks a ban of sharia would mean islam is meaningless in courts and juridiction.

There's also the link I posted.

 

[BobK]

From Yahoo:

This Is Not Trump’s America: New Yorkers Come Together to Erase Swastikas on Subway

The left will stop at nothing to try to make Trump look bad.

 

[TheCracker]

From Yahoo:




The left will stop at nothing to try to make Trump look bad.

I don't think he needs the help.

 

[Pillo-san]

I'd love to see how that would go over, could be the next landmark trial for the highest court in the land. If I don't believe that a person medically altering themselves and having to go through a daily source of hormones until their body is forced to recognize that they're a different gender, and such say they're still woman or man, so be it. That's not hate speech that's freedom of speech to say that from what you know and have learned outwardly they're still such and such. Now if this person is attacked, or malicious things are said that go far beyond claiming them one gender they're not to another. Then yes it's a hate crime.

Being humiliated or awkward in a situation while unpleasant doesn't leap to this new found idea that legal troubles should be faced to the person who made them feel awkward.

Also when others who self-identify with the group claim to be a moving gender or other impossible things but in a serious matter, undo that to those who are actually transitioning one way or the other. Yet we should make some "safe zone" where it just goes not talked about due to claimed insensitivity?

At this point I wonder how much intellectual growth some people would like to see in the world in regards to this, or perhaps it's just a first world problem with such tit for tat petty things.

On a side note I find it quite moving and someone opposite to what I've said, that a homosexual male can offend tran-genders, when both parties have quite similar struggles to face in a modern society.

You do not want a "big government" that have strict legislation/regulations for companies(regulations are there for obvious reasons) and you dont want that the state should not have any say in how you live and you do not want to pay taxes because it "infringes" on your "freedom". But yet you want to have a say in how others are living or want to live their live as. Cant you see the flaw in your thinking here? It is not like the state in the future will force you to change gender, what do you have to do with this?
An example:
If you in middle school gang up on a kid to just tease him a bit, there will probably be someone in the gang that will overstep and hurt the kid, and you all have done harm to this kid.

So how is your view of "free speech" any different than that? If a grown up man goes up on a pedestal and starts to throw what he think is "free speech" around, you do not think some of those listening to his crap that are easily affected will act out? Of course this is hate speech. Free speech and hate speech is fundamentally different buy very easy to confuse...

On what ground should you forbid a person to transgender or what ever he wants that is not hurting you or anyone... You should not have any say about this at all, it is not like it is something that may effect the whole population including you as a whole. Free speech is not for inflicting harm in any way, rather to be able to criticise your country, government, companies, agancies and such with out any precipitation.

And then about
So what about Trump and the people on the right? You do a sketch and he want to sue.... Something about a snowflake comes to mind now...

The thing that "Leftys" understand and quite clearly is that your race/gender or what ever does not per automatic decide the political views of the person. Unlike race/gender identification a political standpoint is something you choose..

 

[Johnnypenso]

You do not want a "big government" that have strict legislation/regulations for companies(regulations are there for obvious reasons) and you dont want that the state should not have any say in how you live and you do not want to pay taxes because it "infringes" on your "freedom". But yet you want to have a say in how others are living or want to live their live as. Cant you see the flaw in your thinking here? It is not like the state in the future will force you to change gender, what do you have to do with this?
An example:
If you in middle school gang up on a kid to just tease him a bit, there will probably be someone in the gang that will overstep and hurt the kid, and you all have done harm to this kid.

So how is your view of "free speech" any different than that? If a grown up man goes up on a pedestal and starts to throw what he think is "free speech" around, you do not think some of those listening to his crap that are easily affected will act out? Of course this is hate speech. Free speech and hate speech is fundamentally different buy very easy to confuse...

On what ground should you forbid a person to transgender or what ever he wants that is not hurting you or anyone... You should not have any say about this at all, it is not like it is something that may effect the whole population including you as a whole. Free speech is not for inflicting harm in any way, rather to be able to criticise your country, government, companies, agancies and such with out any precipitation.

And then about
So what about Trump and the people on the right? You do a sketch and he want to sue.... Something about a snowflake comes to mind now...

The thing that "Leftys" understand and quite clearly is that your race/gender or what ever does not per automatic decide the political views of the person. Unlike race/gender identification a political standpoint is something you choose..

Free speech isn't just speech you like, that's not how it works.

 

[Pillo-san]

Free speech isn't just speech you like, that's not how it works.

Sure, it is not about liking it or not.But many should know the difference because this is thought in school by socialising with your fellow students through out the entire school life. But many especially those on the right wing are missusing the phrase "free speech".

 

[Johnnypenso]

Sure, it is not about liking it or not.But many should know the difference because this is thought in school by socialising with your fellow students through out the entire school life. But many especially those on the right wing are missusing the phrase "free speech".

Yes some are toeing the line between free speech and hate speech, on both sides. But you are implying that if people's feelings are hurt by speech and they act out, it's therefore not free speech and that's not how it works.

Unlike race/gender identification a political standpoint is something you choose..

Some people think otherwise...

 

[Pillo-san]

Yes some are toeing the line between free speech and hate speech, on both sides. But you are implying that if people's feelings are hurt by speech and they act out, it's therefore not free speech and that's not how it works.

Some people think otherwise...

...

Like I said, you should have learnt the difference when being in school...

Free speech is for being able to say what you want against the government and the like. It is not for to say that God hates Fags or that other races but your own are lesser or more dangerous or something. It has nothing to do about feelings per say, not for those that are on the "receiving end" It is about spreading skewed opinions rooted in hate/dislike(feelings) of that person to divide people against people and are harmful.

What do you think about KKK, do you think an organisations like that is ok to exist after all their crimes? Should they not be viewed as a terrorist organisation? It is not about the "opinions" by themselves, it is what they lead to.. If a person is not capable to function as a human being and is a behaving more like a psychopath, do you not agree he should have guidelines so that he will have an easier way/time to function in the society?

People in the Right wing are complaining that their way of life is restricted by the state yet they want to restrict the life of others? People on the right are biggest hypocrites I know of.. It is fine if they can do as they please but no one else is allowed to have the same rights as them.


And once again, do not confuse free speech with hate speech, and it is not about the feelings of those in the receiving end, as it has to do with the feelings of those the spew nonsensical ideas like that. Yet again, It is ok for mine feelings to be heard/known but those that are on the receiving end should shut up?

Placards with the text God hates Fags have only one purpose, and it is to spread hate, nothing about free speech here...

And why do you show pictures of minorities/sexual orientations. Did you not read my post before? Is it a shock for you that they too have free will and are voting as they please? You know they are firstly and mostly human beings with their own interests despite what colour or gender or what ever. How hard is it for you to understand this?

Ah you mean that the woman is actually white and the dude with the glasses it that too...

So what, what does it have to do with anything...

it is like saying that VW also makes luxory cars when someone has stated that VW is mostly known for making small cars. Totally unnecessary and an attempt to make a "straw man" .

 

[ryzno]

And why do you show pictures of minorities/sexual orientations.

Those pictures have nothing to do with sexual orientation or minorities. The lady is white and claims to be black and same with the guy on the left in the lower picture.

 

[Pillo-san]

Those pictures have nothing to do with sexual orientation or minorities. The lady is white and claims to be black and same with the guy on the left in the lower picture.

Yes I saw that too, I think I hear about the lady in some late night show or something, but when I wrote my response to him I actually though that he meant: -Look minorities and gays also are voting right...

It did take a moment before I understood he just posted a useless response...

 

[Johnnypenso]

Yes I saw that too, I think I hear about the lady in some late night show or something, but when I wrote my response to him I actually though that he meant: -Look minorities and gays also are voting right...

It did take a moment before I understood he just posted a useless response...

You said that people cannot choose their race. Those two people disagree with you. Now what? Should you have the right to continue to spout your hateful belief that people cannot change their race? What if their feelings are hurt by your opinion and then they go out and hurt someone? Should you be held accountable? Is your race determined by genetics or simply by how you feel? Should I be allowed to discuss whether race is determined by genetics or by feelings or should the government decide who is right and who is wrong and anyone who disagrees with the government's official position is breaking the law?

 

[Pillo-san]

You said that people cannot choose their race. Those two people disagree with you. Now what?

...
Do you not read my post at all?
Do you get to choose what race/gander or even species when you get born.
If you do not identify yourself as the gender or race you should be able to change it to what you want, but imagine what hell a transgender person must live through before he/she gets to make the change. Do you even think gays are making a choice one day: -Hmm being straight sucks, I never get to bring any ladies home from any party. What if I became gay, because I have seen that they always bring someone home from a party. Do you really think it is like that? Come on...

I see you have updated your post...

Should you have the right to continue to spout your hateful belief that people cannot change their race? What if their feelings are hurt by your opinion and then they go out and hurt someone? Should you be held accountable? Is your race determined by genetics or simply by how you feel? Should I be allowed to discuss whether race is determined by genetics or by feelings or should the government decide who is right and who is wrong and anyone who disagrees with the government's official position is breaking the law?

OMG, should I even respond to this childish argumentation? OMG

 

[TenEightyOne]

You said that people cannot choose their race. Those two people disagree with you. Now what?

Them being wrong doesn't make you right. Your race is biological, it's cultural attachment that's optional.

 

[mister dog]

Auch!

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

You do not want a "big government" that have strict legislation/regulations for companies(regulations are there for obvious reasons) and you dont want that the state should not have any say in how you live and you do not want to pay taxes because it "infringes" on your "freedom". But yet you want to have a say in how others are living or want to live their live as. Cant you see the flaw in your thinking here? It is not like the state in the future will force you to change gender, what do you have to do with this?
An example:
If you in middle school gang up on a kid to just tease him a bit, there will probably be someone in the gang that will overstep and hurt the kid, and you all have done harm to this kid.

Yeah I see the flaw of you jumping to a conclusion. There is a difference between me telling a person they can't be transgender and me not seeing them being a female, when they physically are a male. Now is it my call to deny them the medical desire to be something other than male? No! Did I say it in that way as you've painted it? Not even close. So the next part of you painting this ad hominem argument of how I fear some forced transgender whatever on the population is just outright inane because no where do I say that.

So how is your view of "free speech" any different than that? If a grown up man goes up on a pedestal and starts to throw what he think is "free speech" around, you do not think some of those listening to his crap that are easily affected will act out? Of course this is hate speech. Free speech and hate speech is fundamentally different buy very easy to confuse...

Free speech isn't that hard to understand. You not liking what they say doesn't change their ability to say it and right to do so. This isn't hate speech, me calling Kris Jenner a male during transition, doesn't show hate, it shows me perceiving a person on how the look outwardly.

On what ground should you forbid a person to transgender or what ever he wants that is not hurting you or anyone... You should not have any say about this at all, it is not like it is something that may effect the whole population including you as a whole. Free speech is not for inflicting harm in any way, rather to be able to criticise your country, government, companies, agancies and such with out any precipitation.

Wow you really just seemed to read a snippet and run with it, never did I say anything about forbidding, so please go back and read the entire thing.

And then about
So what about Trump and the people on the right? You do a sketch and he want to sue.... Something about a snowflake comes to mind now...

Maybe it's the language barrier thing, but I have no idea what you're talking about, and how you're so confused by the English in the post you supposedly read.

The thing that "Leftys" understand and quite clearly is that your race/gender or what ever does not per automatic decide the political views of the person. Unlike race/gender identification a political standpoint is something you choose..

What the heck does that have to do with my post? No where do I bring up right or left, so...

Some of you posting in here lately are really out of your depth.

Them being wrong doesn't make you right. Your race is biological, it's cultural attachment that's optional.

Which is the exact point I was making on Gender, I recognize what I can biologically see as a male or female. If I call them such but culturally or mentally they don't like that and see themselves as something else. I was in no way producing hate speech. If I personally still view them as such afterwards but respect their desire otherwise, it's still not hate. I agree with race on the same level, just cause you don't want to be labeled as something you biologically represent doesn't mean people are calling you it out of spite.

 

[Eh Team]

Maybe it's the language barrier thing, but I have no idea what you're talking about, and how you're so confused by the English in the post you supposedly read.

I think what he's meaning to say is if Trump gets made fun of in a political comic or on a late night show he gets really uptight and offended about it.