Political Ideology

[a bad post]

Sure it is, even liberals think y'all are being absurd. Just go to the bathroom that you look like you should go to. Like very few people would complain about Kate or Hina using the woman's room because they look convincing. 

 

And? I still think that, but I see no problem in a born-male who looks like a female using the woman's room. 

 

I can already see that none of y'all have learned the lesson from this election and are planning to charge further left. Please. Do it. 

 

But since you wanna bring is up, the problem I had in that thread was the slippery slope that was being created to accommodate trans-individuals. At first it was tampons in the men's room. Next it would be urinals in the women's room. If this spreads to public universities, I'm gonna have to be the one to pay for it. 

Except liberals are not the ones making a fuss about what bathroom people use lmao. Trans people have been using whatever bathroom the wanted for ages, it was only when conservative lawmakers started making a fuss about it did it become an issue.

 

Also, that's not the thread I was referencing, the thread I was referencing was the one where you posted that article by a doctor with a very openly transphobic background and tried to use it as a justification for thinly veiled transphobia.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

You're the first person to accuse me of being any type of veiled about my views

 

Don't wanna get too offtracked here, but Transphobia isn't the right word for my

Feelings

 

Transkeptical is more accurate. I neither hate nor fear your kind, I don't entirely agree with how you propose to respond to it is all

[Tentacruel]

I don't really think the bathroom thing is such a black and white issue.  Trans people have never really been known to cause problems, but there has to be some acknowledgement of the possibility of some non-trans jabroni like me walking into the woman's room and being all, "DID YOU JUST ASSUME MY GENDER."  Now in my case people would probably see through my bullshit, but where do you draw the line?

[a bad post]

You're the first person to accuse me of being any type of veiled about my views

 

Don't wanna get too offtracked here, but Transphobia isn't the right word for my

Feelings

 

Transkeptical is more accurate. I neither hate nor fear your kind, I don't entirely agree with how you propose to respond to it is all

I really don't understand what you mean here, I am very open about my views. Also, I really have no response the last part. That fact that you said "your kind" just makes my entire point.

 

I don't really think the bathroom thing is such a black and white issue.  Trans people have never really been known to cause problems, but there has to be some acknowledgement of the possibility of some non-trans a****** like me walking into the woman's room and being all, "DID YOU JUST ASSUME MY GENDER."  Now in my case people would probably see through my bullshit, but where do you draw the line? 

I see where people are coming from in this line of argument, but this assumes that people actually accept trans people in general, and ignores all the violence that trans people, especially trans women, face. If a bearded man walks into a woman's bathroom claiming to be trans he is very liable to beat if not straight murdered right then and there. People have never really shown acceptance towards trans people in general, and the support hasn't exactly been overwhelming after more attention was brought to us in the wake of the bathroom issue.

 

The opposite is also true if you force trans people to use the bathroom of their assigned sex either since a non-trans person can just say that they're a trans-man being forced to use the woman's restroom cause of these bathroom bills. No bill or lack thereof will stop pedophiles or make their "job" any easier. 

[vla1ne]

I really don't understand what you mean here, I am very open about my views. Also, I really have no response the last part. That fact that you said "your kind" just makes my entire point.

 

I see where people are coming from in this line of argument, but this assumes that people actually accept trans people in general, and ignores all the violence that trans people, especially trans women, face. If a bearded man walks into a woman's bathroom claiming to be trans he is very liable to beat if not straight murdered right then and there. People have never really shown acceptance towards trans people in general, and the support hasn't exactly been overwhelming after more attention was brought to us in the wake of the bathroom issue.

 

The opposite is also true if you force trans people to use the bathroom of their assigned sex either since a non-trans person can just say that they're a trans-man being forced to use the woman's restroom cause of these bathroom bills. No bill or lack thereof will stop pedophiles or make their "job" any easier. 

 

what he likely meant was that your views are simply foggy in form. it's possible to be 100% clear and still be misunderstood, the question then becomes how best to clarify said views though, so that's neither here nor there. also your kind is not in any way a bad saying, unless you deliberately take it as such. in this context, your kind is trans. nothing unclear there, so what point of yours is it proving?

 

well then, just remove all bills together and leave it up to the estate to decide how best to go about it. that way there's no standard legality loopholes, the odds of trolling lower, and you can prosecute as needed for actual cases with minimal red tape since the crimes people are worried about won't get mixed up with multiple interacting laws/rules. problem (pretty much) solved. although you are right, that the bills against trans appear to have come out first, and the bills supporting it are likely the backlash.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/11/26/look-steven-bannon-and-his-years-harvard-business-school/B2m0j85jh5jRKzKbMastzK/story.html#comments

 

Pretty good detail of Bannon's life

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442451/republican-party-industry-manufacturing

 

This on the other hand is the best discription of this New Right movement I can find

[Phantom Roxas]

Taxes?

 

^^

 

Public Universities Roxas, my tax payer money would go to it

 

And… how would that be any different from what you already do? Because the taxes you pay would increase? Would the increase be to an absurd amount? Why is it a bad thing that your taxes go to helping people receive fair and equal treatment?

 

Transkeptical is more accurate.

 

If you have to make up an entirely new word to explain your positions, it's just adding another veil, and I agree that your views are veiled. Given how we have to ask your to clarify contradictions in your arguments, it does make it harder when you obscure your real perspectives. Telling transgender people that they don't deserve to be included in the LGBT movement doesn't seem like "skepticism", and complaining about a "slippery slope" doesn't seem like that either.

 

To answer one of your earlier questions, what you think about transgender people does matter, because you were berating and condescending to us, blaming that for the reason we lost the election, and Potentate said you probably wouldn't care about Pence's opposition to transgender rights, which we were citing to point out that Mike Pence is still blatantly anti-LGBT. It's silly that you're going to mock us for our views of transgender rights because they matter, but then you guard yourself because you don't want to be challenged on your own views. Let me guess, our views matter when you can mock them, but your views don't matter when it means you'd be held to the same level of scrutiny?

[vla1ne]

 

And… how would that be any different from what you already do? Because the taxes you pay would increase? Would the increase be to an absurd amount? Why is it a bad thing that your taxes go to helping people receive fair and equal treatment?

 

 

If you have to make up an entirely new word to explain your positions, it's just adding another veil, and I agree that your views are veiled. Given how we have to ask your to clarify contradictions in your arguments, it does make it harder when you obscure your real perspectives. Telling transgender people that they don't deserve to be included in the LGBT movement doesn't seem like "skepticism", and complaining about a "slippery slope" doesn't seem like that either.

 

To answer one of your earlier questions, what you think about transgender people does matter, because you were berating and condescending to us, blaming that for the reason we lost the election, and Potentate said you probably wouldn't care about Pence's opposition to transgender rights, which we were citing to point out that Mike Pence is still blatantly anti-LGBT. It's silly that you're going to mock us for our views of transgender rights because they matter, but then you guard yourself because you don't want to be challenged on your own views. Let me guess, our views matter when you can mock them, but your views don't matter when it means you'd be held to the same level of scrutiny?

fair and equal is not paying for something that you will not need. i pay taxes for roads because i use roads, i pay taxes for education because i went to school, and would hope that my children can go to a nice school (there's issues with the school system that i could go into, but for now let's just skim that bit) i pay taxes for government jobs because it's assumed, and expected, that the government is operating in my best interests (arguable, but again, not right now.) i pay taxes on goods i buy because that money is going towards the things i use, have used, will use, or want to use. they are for the benefit of all of america, and they are things you cannot simply go out and get a job for. hell, even medicare and SS, there may be a chance that i have to use them, or somebody i love might need the program for a time, and i myself cannot support them under such conditions. anyone and everyone can use them, and at any point in time, anyone and everyone might need them. there is 0% chance of me using tampons, and it is not as if trans folk cannot afford them normally, while the same cannot be said of roads, schools, police, and the like. so why would i want to pay taxes on it? it's a matter of principle, if i had a trans friend, sister, daughter, or someone else, and i wanted to support them, i'd buy them tampons myself, or just give them the money out of pocket if they could not afford to do so for a period of time. because tampons are not something that are so hard to obtain and supply for the average man or woman who goes to the store on a regular basis. why would i want to pay extra money into university costs for that? what comes next? can trans suddenly not afford to pay for their own things? 

but with that said, there's an easy solution. place a tampon vending machine right outside the bathrooms. pretty sure maxipad or somebody would love the idea. that way no matter which one you enter, you can just buy one before you go in, no issues at all. 

 

unless i'm mistaken, homosexual and bisexual (LGB) are sexual preferences, they are only about who you want to have sex with. trans is not. to say that it varies greatly from the first three is not inaccurate. does that mean it doesn't deserve to be there? arguable, but there is no argument that the first three require absolutely no change in bodily structure, if you're gay, you still know you're a guy, if you're lesbian, you still know you're a chick, and if you're bi, it doesn't matter which gender you are. trans is the only one that the later steps (and even the early ones), can lead to literally wanting to change your gender. which i believe was winter's logic for saying it deviates from the LGB movement, and therefore can (and in his opinion should) be dropped. does that mean they deserve fewer rights? nope, but it doesn't mean special treatment either. calling himself trans skeptical conveys as much, without the need for long paragraphs of elaboration. he's simply more skeptical of the T being as closely related to the LGB than you all appear to be. but meh, it's a letter, no harm no foul right?

 

if what he thinks doesn't matter, then would you want him to pay taxes for trans tampons in such a place as a university? because if so, that seems like you want his money, but not his opinions that come with said money. to nitpick your next sentence, trans people voted trump too, you aren't a monolith. pences opposition only matters if he moves to enact laws relating to said rights, or to repeal laws affecting said rights. if he does either of those things, i'll be right next to you with a wooden stake, but until he does, it does not matter. rights are rights, what right do i as a straight man have that you as a trans person (ok, maybe not you, but trans people in general) do not? can you not get the same jobs? are there trans only fountains, is public education denied to the trans? is marriage affected(in this case it might be, and i'll be alongside you lobbying for rights if that's the case)? are you disqualified to run for office because of your trans background? what legal rights do you not have? your views matter both when i can and cannot mock them. and yes, i do mock them from time to time. so would you like to hold my statement up to scrutiny?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Vla1ne summarized it pretty well. I'll elaborate where I disagree with him after class
 

There is discrimination versus Trans people Vla1ne, but that's largely due to a vast majority of them not actually looking the part. It's hard to suspend disbelief in a non-entertainment setting 

 

There's a fine line between wantonly making someone's life miserable and expecting some level of dedication from their side

 

Roxas, it's only a fallacy till it happens, you've already seen a rise in unisex bathrooms all over campuses since this issue blew up. Calling reality a fallacy is...an interesting take. 

 

I don't want my tax payer money going towards something I view as wasteful. These aesthetic fixes don't do anything in my mind. I'd much rather 1) Find out what's different about the Trans Mind and correct that or 2) barring that, instead of have money wasted on bathroom designs just subsidize treatment from Trans people

 

(2) is complicated again because it's a thin line from Public Subsided cosmetics 

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

There is discrimination versus Trans people Vla1ne, but that's largely due to a vast majority of them not actually looking the part. It's hard to suspend disbelief in a non-entertainment setting

I mean probably in part but uh. "You don't look how you should look" is an extremely shitty reason to discriminate. I don't THINK you're justifying why there's discrimination but just to be clear.

 

Edit: I just realized how far off topic this all is oops

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Roxas, this sorta discourse is the reason why the left lost

 

Christian: I don't wana bake a cake for ur wedding

 

Left: Nazi bigot! Imma sue you for 200k

 

*Castro sends gays to forced labor camps*

 

Left: free healthcare tho

[senorchavez]

Edit: I just realized how far off topic this all is oops

Yeah, I didn't realize this was a debate about unisex bathrooms. Is there a point to these last few posts and, if there is one, how is it prevalent to the original topic?

[Phantom Roxas]

I don't want my tax payer money going towards something I view as wasteful. These aesthetic fixes don't do anything in my mind. I'd much rather 1) Find out what's different about the Trans Mind and correct that

Trying to "correct" their mindset is no better than the excuses behind conversion therapy.

 

Roxas, this sorta discourse is the reason why the left lost

 

Christian: I don't wana bake a cake for ur wedding

 

Left: Nazi bigot! Imma sue you for 200k

 

*Castro sends gays to forced labor camps*

 

Left: free healthcare tho

That is a strawman argument. The left lost because Trump appealed to an overwhelming sense of actual prejudice- oh right, I forgot. You refuse to own up to the right being guilty of discrimination, since you always, always just blame the left for overreacting, and not once have I seen you show sympathy towards why the left criticizes that discrimination. For example, you're leaving out why the Christian would refuse to back a cake for the wedding, since I suspect that baker in your example wants to spite gay people, and if that were the case, calling that baker a bigot is an appropriate way to describe their attitude. Through all your bragging and petty mockery, you conveniently ignore that the left is responding to discrimination, so don't lecture me about reality when your idea of it hinges on absolving the right of any and all guilty.

 

Yeah, I didn't realize this was a debate about unisex bathrooms.

Well, this thread is about political affiliations, so talking about the people harmed by those who overlap with those affiliations keeps on topic.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Not baking a cake is free speech. Not speech I agree with, but speech that I support. Just like people refusing to serve Trump voters in restaurants, it's a right

[Phantom Roxas]

You have the right to express yourself as a bigot, but you would still be a bigot, so hiding behind "BUT MY RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH" is cowardly.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Refusing to bake a wedding cake because it's a gay marriage is petty. The response of suing the baker for a six-digit figure is no less petty.

 

Castro reigned in a desperate time through desperate measures and in the wake of his death deserves neither to be sainted nor to have his grave spat on. 

 

Yeah, I didn't realize this was a debate about unisex bathrooms. Is there a point to these last few posts and, if there is one, how is it prevalent to the original topic?

 

Political issues tend to come up when discussing political factions.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

So how do you feel about a Jewish baker refusing to make a Neo Nazi a cake?

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

In theory, a bakery works like this: they bake the baked goods, the customer purchases the baked goods, the baker gets money, the customer gets the baked goods, everybody wins. It's not a particularly politically charged thing, and to make it one at expense of business is petty.

 

If I were the Jewish baker in said case, I would bake the cake and hopefully bake it well enough that the Neo-Nazi might change their mind about my people. If the Neo-Nazi caused any trouble/threatened me, I'd call the police. If they didn't, I'd perform in my capacity as baker. 

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

In theory, a bakery works like this: they bake the baked goods, the customer purchases the baked goods, the baker gets money, the customer gets the baked goods, everybody wins. It's not a particularly politically charged thing, and to make it one at expense of business is petty.

 

If I were the Jewish baker in said case, I would bake the cake and hopefully bake it well enough that the Neo-Nazi might change their mind about my people. If the Neo-Nazi caused any trouble/threatened me, I'd call the police. If they didn't, I'd perform in my capacity as baker. 

Bless this. But really that's the biggest thing. It's ridiculous to refuse service unless they're an actual threat or problem.

....Also that bolded part. That would be quite the sitcom episode.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

And if they believe promoting Homosexuality is sinful?

[IQuitDolphin]

So how do you feel about a Jewish baker refusing to make a Neo Nazi a cake?

 

I'm sorry, but are we talking about the right to do so in the first place or are we giving personal opinion on if the scenario did go down?

 

People make decisions based on their values all the time. If a baker does not believe in gay marriage and refuses to bake a cake for a gay couple, he/she holds his value above his business. If a Jewish baker refuses to bake a cake for a Neo Nazi, it follows the same principle. The same can be true in reverse (if a baker bakes a cake regardless of his values or beliefs). People can agree with the action, people can disagree, and conflict ensues. But just because the baker did something you don't believe in or disagree with doesn't mean it should be stifled unless the situation becomes dangerous. This might include hate speech in which people might become emotionally charged, but hate speech has become so broad nowadays I can't say.

[Tentacruel]

It's also worth noting that refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding is a bit different than refusing to sell something to a gay customer outright.

[Sunshine Jesse]

 

Roxas, this sorta discourse is the reason why the left lost

 

Christian: I don't wana bake a cake for ur wedding

 

Left: Nazi bigot! Imma sue you for 200k

 

*Castro sends gays to forced labor camps*

 

Left: free healthcare tho

 

You can peddle this narrative all you want but it doesn't make it any more true.

 

Trump winning doesn't validate literally everything you ever thought, Winter. You were wrong about everything up until him getting elected and you still continue to be wrong about why he was actually elected.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Right, as you might have guessed, I don't think it's "sinful" or "wrong" to bake a cake for a gay marriage

 

Do stand by the view that marriage in general is wasteful and awkward though

[IQuitDolphin]

We could get rid of marriage and everybody would be like "Let's be with who we love the most and spend our lives (or most) with that person, without any loopholes or red tape!"...which is basically marriage, only with less restrictions and direction which can obviously be disastrous for those with less willpower. Marriage is a tradition that has been followed for a long time, not because it's religious, but because it works. And it has worked for quite a while now. To get rid of it completely would mean coming up with something else to take its place, which is either going to be based off what we just got rid of or something completely new that is unstable.