Guest makapaka Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 So if a bloke you knew - let's call him Steve, had reassignment surgery and hormone treatment, the full works and decides to change his name to Susan, you'd still call her Steve? That doesn't sound very accepting to me. You know that wasn't the point they were making - they were saying they wouldn't be prejudiced towards them as a consequence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 So if a bloke you knew - let's call him Steve, had reassignment surgery and hormone treatment, the full works and decides to change his name to Susan, you'd still call her Steve? That doesn't sound very accepting to me. I would call him Susan if that is what his name was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 I would call him Susan if that is what his name was. And describe her as 'her' and 'she'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 Even anti trans people are trying to self declare https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/23/woman-wednesdays-transphobic-labour-trans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest makapaka Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 And describe her as 'her' and 'she'? Why not? What’s your problem with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 Why not? What’s your problem with that? Wise up slowcoach; I don't have a problem with it - it was Mr Considerate Alan Hartley who said ''I would call him Susan if that is what his name was.'' Which rather suggests Alan has trouble accepting the idea that Steve could become Susan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest makapaka Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 Wise up slowcoach; I don't have a problem with it - it was Mr Considerate Alan Hartley who said ''I would call him Susan if that is what his name was.'' Which rather suggests Alan has trouble accepting the idea that Steve could become Susan. Ok but the point being argued was whether they’ve actually become a female human being. Not in appearance or identity but physically female.I posted about the definitions earlier. So aside from other posters - I personally would have no problem with someone having a sex change, or calling them Susan, or calling them she or her and would hold no prejudice to them whatsoever - I would never say it to them but I still wouldn’t accept they had physically changed sex because as a species we are unable to do that. What’s wrong with holding that view? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted May 23, 2018 Share Posted May 23, 2018 Why? If you want to do it crack on, but don't force the rest of us to tolerate your behaviour. Is it me, or are the two halves of that sentence mutually exclusive? Essentially, "Do, but Don't." I can see why you might have trouble with non-binary gender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 Ok but the point being argued was whether they’ve actually become a female human being. Not in appearance or identity but physically female.I posted about the definitions earlier. I don't think that was the point at all, the point was that a few people claim that they respect someone's right to change gender, but then in the next breath go, but they've not really changed {insert inane argument about chromosomes or sex organs}. ---------- Post added 24-05-2018 at 08:50 ---------- I don't know what you're struggling with. If someone, even someone I know, was to suddenly decide that they identify as the opposite sex, I wouldn't think any less of them or treat them any differently, but that doesn't mean that I literally believe that they have actually changed sex's/genders. So whilst claiming to respect the right to change gender, you simultaneously deny that anyone can change gender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest makapaka Posted May 24, 2018 Share Posted May 24, 2018 I don't think that was the point at all, the point was that a few people claim that they respect someone's right to change gender, but then in the next breath go, but they've not really changed {insert inane argument about chromosomes or sex organs}. ---------- Post added 24-05-2018 at 08:50 ---------- So whilst claiming to respect the right to change gender, you simultaneously deny that anyone can change gender. No you’re misquoting there. People state they respect someone’s right to change gender but that doesn’t mean a human being can physically change from male to female. That’s not bigotry it’s fact. You denying that - under the guise that it’s bigoted is just plain wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now