They are changing what they are so they can be what they want to be(sexual orientation); and be with who they want to be with. I've explained my view on the subject a few times already.
I feel like I need to point out that @RedDragon is transgender herself. If you are correct and she is indeed creating a supposed shackle, then that would be extremely hypocritical and a slap to the face for everything she stands for.
Technically both right and wrong here. I've not heard of people being transgender for this reason, but it's possible for a transgender person to prostitute themselves and have that as a selling point. Would they still be a "sissy" at this point?RedDragon
This one really makes me uncomfortable. It just does. Being transgender is a thing facilitated by a wide variety of variables. Fetish appeal could be a contributor, both sexually and non-sexually. For example, someone could have a fantasy of being a housewife married to some well-off gentleman and be a guy to begin with. They'd facilitate the transition to further their goals of achieving this fetish/fantasy.
For the most part, we here are treating you as a person while trying to vet the issue as thoroughly as possible on both sides of it. It's unfortunate that you don't feel like we're treating you like a person - but you personally seem to be acting like a special snowflake, putting yourself over the rest of us with your manner of talking (I'd say talking down but that's a bit too harsh).
Second paragraph of this fits what I just said about your attitude towards us. You're throwing insults at us and talking with intense sarcasm. It's irritating just to read. First paragraph is just sarcasm as well from what I read.
Transgendered is a legitimate word. It's another form of the same adjective.
I know. It's weird to hear and that's probably why RedDragon got confused on the validity of the word.
Why are you bringing up cross dressers at all? The topic is and was people who have actually transitioned, and why some would draw a line between trans people with different motives - and call them "sissies", no less.
I get what you are trying to do, but there are all sorts of implications along for the ride with your attempt to show solidarity.
Then beautiful is meaningless when applied to human beings.
I just don't see calling someone beautiful a compliment if you just say it to everyone.
How long is this going to take? The question the whole time was about a trans person. @RedDragon just chose to sequester, based on transitional drive factor, and describe that example trans person as a "sissy" instead.
I think it's still ok to call someone pretty. For four years at least.
The people who have been doing the loud bigot calling have been thoroughly shut down too, though, so it's not as big a problem as you'd think.
It's interesting that you appear to see only two sides here. Even a broad stroke of the brush easily shows three different stances - 1) A lack of acceptance, 2) An acceptance limited by social conventions, and 3) An all-encompassing acceptance. The first group has been all but disregarded, with much of the focus being on the irony-filled assertions of the second group in addressing the third.
- I don't believe that anyone could "feel" like a man or a woman without societal reference points.
If we take the component concepts generally held under the transgender banner, but look at them in their purest form, I think it's quite easy to articulate what parents should and shouldn't be taken to task on. "Purest form" means things that the child would do/not do, or want to do/not do, regardless of societal reference points. So basically, anything that is an innate want or action.
