I haven't read the whole thread so I'm just assuming that you don't believe that biological sex and gender identity aren't always directly correlated. While I disagree, what you've said that really bothers me is that you can tell a persons biological sex via their chromosomes. Genetics are a lot more complicated than that. I mean, what do you call someone with chromosomal abnormalities? Or what if a person has some disorder that makes their chromosomes irrelevant? There's androgen insensitivity syndrome that can make a chromosomal male(xy) appear female. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome#XY_karyotype You're using a shallow understanding of science to justify your opinion. Anyone with a greater understanding of biology/genetics would have a more nuanced view. At the very least they wouldn't dare to say that xx=female and xy=male; genotype does not always equal phenotype.

I've no doubt we could get down to the nitty gritty and find all sorts of instances of things that don't fit. I am speaking in general terms, that a human, born as a man, who goes through hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery to appear and sound like a woman, is still a man. Vice versa for humans born as women. I used the chromosome example of defining man vs. woman to eliminate the whole, "I was born a woman but in a man's body" argument.

Yes, there are examples such as the androgen insensitivity syndrome, and I'm sure there are others of which I am not familiar. I have no opinion on those specifically since I have no experience with them.

I'm sure my understanding of science is very shallow when compared to what some others understand. That's why this is opinion.

Imagine the prettiest, sexiest girl you know.
Now imagine the ugliest, manliest guy you know.

The girl has a dick, and the guy has a vagina. The girl still identifies as a girl and vice versa.

Lets say you're a straight man. You have to pick one of them to kiss and be intimate with.

According to your opinion, the straight man would choose the manly, unattractive man, who you say is a woman. It is pretty likely that a straight dude would rather make out with this person - http://s3.amazonaws.com/cw-thoughts/615664/original.jpg over this person - http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3290/2896335920_ed187efe15.jpg (these are both transpeople, just to clarify)

The classification of "man" and "woman" are not rooted in biology.

you could have saved yourself a lot of trouble by just saying you are bigoted rather than trying to pass off some sort of faux-rationality.

In the years since LBGT has entered mainstream discussion, at least since the 1980s(aids epidemic), the world population has steadily grown, and that is attributable to improvements in the availability of medicines, nutrition, and infrastructure. So I don't think you need to worry about the human race suddenly being ended by LBGT people, even a lot of them.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/World_population_history.svg

You have to keep in mind energy doesn't come from nowhere(I'm sure you knew it bust still :p) If you're sleep deprived at the very least you'll need more energy simply for the hours you're awake that a normal person is asleep, but more so if you don't get *close*(sleep patterns are absurdly individual specific, but still) you're going to have to make up the energy somewhere and that usually comes in the form of your standard diet(i'm actually curious about whether something like energy drinks can fill in, in terms of long term, short term they can kind of band aid fix it, but i wonder what happens in terms of long term sleep deprivation) And usually you make up with it by upping your calorie intake.

So the whole "office calisthenics" requires more than what's the recommended for someone who's getting the usual 7-8 hours and taking in your average male's 2500 calories or what have you(i think that's a bit unrealistic i mean assuming i sleep an average amount I'm suppose to take in 3,000)

I honestly don't know how much would be required to lose weight, i'm not a nutritionist or anything. Mostly i know what i know simply because our corporate overlords has us attend little seminar-esqe lectures/talks about attempting to keep your body relatively close to 100% because a good chunk of the employee's have to function during switzerland's work hours since that's where HQ is, and others have to keep up with various market opening and closings. So i'm curious exactly how much exercise you have to ingrain into your regular day(to be fair a quite a few people walk like 2-3 miles a day in between bus changes trains etc etc, but a lot of people also drive..)

EDIT: lol wow i'm way behind apparently this thread is now an argument/debate about transexuals.

You're really superficial waffleb. No wonder you told me to "get new clothes" as an insult in a mge match.

>taking anything I say in mge seriously

lol

rofl what does that even mean

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3u8xoyK7O1qks4j2o1_500.gif

It's important to note that the science doesn't do that. In fact there's some evidence that people who identify as gender dysphoric have brains more like people of the opposite biological sex rather than their own. It's an area of study only recently being explored, but it has implications. http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/85/5/2034.full

Woa, I am gonna peak my head into this shitstorm only to say that this example is completely bogus. No matter what you believe, it is just bogus. I am straight. Obviously the transgender M<F is more visually attractive. Things have been done to make him more visually appealing to a person who is attracted to women. This means very little, and does not somehow bump sexual relations with this person out of the homosexual category. The female to male is technically a heterosexual mate for a male, but it's not like any heterosexual male would say "you know what turns me on..."

This scenario is imaginary, and the theoretical "you have to choose" is a trap. No one has to choose. Those aren't the only two options, and you know that.

I don't see how what is physically attractive to look at, makes its way into the determining gender conversation. Either side of the argument ought to agree on that.

well blood, shes pointing out smaka's claim that gay is wrong because they dont make babies, so smaka would choose mr big buck angel because it would be correct for a normal male to have sex with with that person.

z

im sorry bloodsire but if we were in public and you called me a he/him etc people would probably think you were mentally retarded

Waffleb now implies people/society looks down on people who are mentally retarded. Smooth sailing dewd.

Out of curiosity, if the girl pictured was post-op, do you still consider "sexual relations with this person" to be "homosexual"?

Hmm, I guess that makes a bit more sense, remedy, but I still think the scenario is entirely bogus, and does the point injustice. For instance the M<F we agree identifies as female and is thus attracted to men and the F<M male and thus attracted to females, the frame of scenario implies they should both be attracted to eachother, and I seriously doubt that. I believe the scenario is just creating an artificial trap.

Also I kept up with the thread, and I wonder if with that reproduction argument, Smaka was not trying to say something more along the lines of a homosexual relationship not being intuitive. Meaning, while not "wrong" (smaka above mentioned he misused the word) a homosexual relationship seems, at a physical level, literally counter-producitve. Of course no one is saying being productive is necessary. I believe everyone should be able to live the lifestyle they want so long as it doesn't hurt me. This doesn't hurt me, so I'm peachy.

I do, however, see what smaka is trying to get at. We aren't allowed to talk like this because it might mean biggotry, judgement, and hurt, things we try so hard to move beyond and remove from the social discourse. So opinions deemed taboo begin being lopped in with ignorance and biggotry, but I think there is a founded point here: If you look at the human species, the male/female dichotomy, what is immediately understood is the importance of sexual reproduction. Not importance in necessity of the act to be performed, but importance in how the species is identified and how it typically operates. In that sense, non-hetero relations are...lets not say "not normal" (society has conflated the term normal) lets say "atypical" to the apparent function of the species.

This is probably a more sterile and reasonable way of stating the argument, but all we've done is confuse the language, in order to avoid buzz-words that often feed and cue a mindset we find intolerable. I reject the idea that Smaka is saying "gay people are wrong because they don't make babies." I think that is a hyperbolized and conflated statement of his opinion, even if it came off that way.

if u got a pp u a guy

if u got a giney u a girl

simple as dat

what if u have both

what if u had NEITHER

speak for yourself

ashleymuffinz

I wouldn't consider it homosexual. Note, I would not consider it heterosexual either. I don't know what I would consider it, but I know I wouldn't want to do it. I hope this doesn't make me some biggot. I find the idea of the operation unattractive, yet I am not attracted to pre-op so it's not something I would put myself up against. It's something that doesn't effect how I live my life, and I'm happy to keep it that way, happy to champion someones right to live their own life, and happy to have the conversation about what is and what isn't.

I didn't imply that at all, I'm just implying that bloodsire is stupid

I think where you and Smaka and this thread went awry is that you are (naturally) very enveloped in the issue, and take every statement (understandably) on a deep personal level, thereby (unfortunately) becoming angered, and telling everyone (wrongfully) their opinion is stupid.

The stupidity was the creation of this thread. The title "Fat Shaming" pushes the cold cruelty you seem so ready to deduct from other peoples words.

I don't blame you for being emotional, but I think this is a terribly misguided thread. I'll leave it at that.

I mean, its stupid to refer to girls as men, that's all im saying.

This is really interesting. Always do it myself but have never considered it before. Things you learn

I think that was a pretty harsh statement because I think a lot of people would be fooled by you and many other people who are transgender. It is not 100% clear what gender you are because you have altered your appearance to look different than the gender you were born in to naturally. To say someone is mentally handicapped or stupid for thinking you don't look like a female is silly in my opinion because you were born a male in the first place. How could could you not still look slightly male?

Just because you think you look female and identify yourself as a female doesn't mean that everyone else sees it that way.

To be clear I don't have a problem with it or you although it does confuse me, but I keep an open mind to it because you are doing no harm and it seems to make you more comfortable and happy, which is a good thing.

Prove me wrong with a picture because I don't actually know what you look like but I highly doubt you look 100% female.

Continuing on that, what if it was impossible for you to tell?

#239 http://teamfortress.tv/forum/thread/1217/39#post-178913

From 17-19 I lived in the house of a native chief. One night over a beer I found out he really disliked gay people so I gave him some harsh words, and really didn't concern myself with tact being a little more foolhardy back then. His wife later took me aside to kindly explain why her otherwise wonderful husband felt the way he did so strongly. Turns out he went to residential school, and at night his friends were taken just outside the room, and molested by priests. Even though it never happened to him, he could hear the whole damn thing. He still hired gay people because he knew it was wrong not to, but he could never kill the connection he drew between child molestation, and your average fun loving gay dude.

That whole scene made me realixe it's not the feelings of someone that matter, but their actions. He was doing the best he could to treat everyone equally in spite of one SERIOUS MUTHAFUCKIN disagreement with it, for reasons I can't even imagine.