I always find it depressing that MTFs date loser virgins who have no idea how women work. Guys mind is going to be blown after he first meekly dents a real puss one day.
The thing is he's one of the most caring guys I've ever dated, the question was just out of left field for me and I've never had a dude ask this before...
Some background because I wonder what you think with these details.
Growing up his Mom was the bread winner (this is in India) and she was ob/gyn. So he's hyper aware of feminine things.
He's also curious about my fertility and how we can responsibly avoid babies together and he wants to know when things are happening.
So at first I felt like you... then thinking about it a bit more I felt like he was just being very thoughtful, which made me die a little inside.
I think regardless he has to know I can't have periods, babies, etc.
Inevitably he's going to ask Why ("because I'm trans, handsome lover") and I feel like how can I not tell him?
I'm stuck π
Imagine being so hyper aware of feminine things yet having no idea how a vagina should function.
Lets give this guy benefit of the doubt and suppose hes figured something is wrong with her since she never has periods so hes asking why to expose the tranny ruse.
I can't even fucking imagine what goes through these people's heads where they think this isn't a topic that they should talk about with people they are in relationships with. Then they freak out on anyone that points out that they build relationships by lying their ways into it and showering people with guilt and insults if they dare to have a problem with it.
OMG you sound like a fascist, white supremacist, homophobic, transphobic reactionary who is wholly ignorant of the interlocking despotic systems of persecution that combine to produce the lethal conditions under which oppressed peoples are forced to live....
Reddit Transgenders are off their fucking rocker. Every transgender I've met outside of Reddit has been a fairly normal person, and very against shit like this.
But there's a specific brand of Reddit crazy that literally do not believe biological sex exists and see no problems with doing insane stuff like this.
These people are straight from the depths of tumblr.
Wouldn't you have to have an experience in fucking one to know? Because in pictures the new fake vaginas look like actual vaginas...at least to my gay eyes. Illuminate me please, my brother.
Oh, you are gay. It isn't about appearance. It is about the fact that they are essentially self healing wounds from the surgery that need to be maintained and stretched out. Obviously there is more involved since there is the appearance and nerve endings through the use of their previous sexual organs to configure the whole transition. Also they can't self lubricate. The internals are going to be obviously different too, like there won't be a cervix, ovaries, etc. but that goes without saying.
So let's put to one side the internal organs thing, which I would assume even a complete fucking idiot would realise is beyond modern medicine at this point, how on earth do you know if the woman you are fucking has a uterus? Ovaries? A cervix? I've heard of well endowed men banging against the cervix, but can your penis tell the difference? ( maybe post a photo of your penis, so we can try to ascertain its tranny sensing qualities)
Also, women use lube, quite regularly if lube sales are a thing to go by.
Why would you ever drugs recreationally instead of only in absolutely necessary medical uses? This is getting pedantic and tedious at this point answering your questions.
Wait, isn't lube just for lubrication? If you are using it on a real vagina, is that a medical necessity or recreational?
You are the one basing your whole argument about the magical qualities of self lubrication vs lube. It reads like you've had sex maybe once or twice, and are now an "expert"
You're the autist with your "finer points of lube" nonsense. Please go outside and ask a stranger to define the difference between needing lube and wanting lube. I'll wait.
Yes but there's a difference between a girl being wet and needing some extra lube for various reasons and a girl needing lube cause she's home dry every single time you fool around.
Full disclosure: I've never seen a post-op vagina in front of me nor do I particularly want to. I don't know what you're referring to that would be so completely impossible to hide though
I'm not trying to bash any trans people here, but it is just impossible to create a female through surgery. The organs don't match up. The fake vagina doesn't lube and tries to close up on itself. We are asking for miracles with the surgeries.
Right but how much of this cant be hidden from a guy? Can't she just tell him she has a problem with dryness? It's not like he's gonna give her a gyno exam to look inside for the other stuff
I suppose, but now we have even more lying by the person and just doubling down after the guy is asking questions. I would be even more furious after getting deeper into the lies.
If you aren't weireded out by the question, I'd tell him that you were born without a uterus and leave it at that.
True. That's always an option. What if things progress and we end up months and months into this relationshipβtelling him so late(that I'm trans) may really break his heart.
Trans people on Reddit are so fucking creepy. They couldn't get with someone if anyone knew they were trans so every relationship is built on a foundation of deception.
I can see people arguing all kind of things, because reddit is full of crazies. But I don't see this as justifiable. It's rape by deception in most states.
Why are you guys arguing about things that never happen? Has there ever been a case in recorded history where a sighted man "accidentally" had sex with a trans woman because he confused her with an "actual cis woman"?
I have read dozens and dozens of "stories" from trans women about how they "tricked/fooled" a straight guy into believing she was a cis woman. I've never read a story from the other side of the equation, and let's face it, very few can pass.
Has there ever been a case in recorded history where a sighted man "accidentally" had sex with a trans woman because he confused her with an "actual cis woman"?
There actually is case law that refers to trannies in this regard! It involves a trans man who was actually a biological woman and they ended up getting 3 years in a young offenders institution and the victim was given a 3 year restraining order against the trans person. It's fairly recent, by legal standards, and we'll certainly see more cases like this as trans people keep trying to argue they don't have to disclose.
The TL;DR of the whole case is "If you're a trans person, you have an obligation to inform your partner before sex if they're under the impression you're a biological sex other than what you are".
They couldn't get with someone if anyone knew they were trans so every relationship is built on a foundation of deception.
It's sort of surreal how people can become so liberal that they argue that informed consent is not important for sex. The only reason you'd hide being trans to your partner is if you realized that they wouldn't have sex with you if they knew. If you are hiding something that would result in consent being revoked if it was known at the very least you are a scumbag.
That's not the argument liberals make, it's that it doesn't fall under something that would matter for informed consent. Its also not necessarily that they know they wouldn't have sex with them, but they might not have sex with them
I didn't mean to say that this represents all Liberals, just the ones that think consent isn't important when it comes to trannies having sex. NERFs are pretty liberal and wouldn't agree that trannies can lie.
it's that it doesn't fall under something that would matter for informed consent
Oh, so you get to decide what matters for informed consent now? Face it, the only reason to hide it is that you worry that they would revoke consent and not want to be with you. If you are hiding something because you know that consent would be revoked if they knew the truth, then it's pretty damn relevant. You can't really justify lying when you realize that the reason you're lying is that you wouldn't get consent if the truth was known.
but they might not have sex with them
So a tranny having sex is more important that another persons sexual preferences and them having accurate information right? No one owes you sex and you don't get to lie and deceive in order to try and get it.
Again that's not the argument they are making, just that it's not relevant to consent
Oh, so you get to decide what matters for informed consent now?
Obviously informed consent can't apply to every single possible detail about you, other wise you'd have to tell everyone your life story before you sleep with them
What DOES matter for informed consent? Make an argument instead of REEEE'ing
I could just slightly change the words of your post slightly and it could be an outraged rant about how trump supporters should divulge that fact before they sleep with anybody. Pretty funny
Things that, if revealed, would make another party revoke/not give the consent. It's pretty straight-forward.
That's absurd reasoning. Going with the example above, Lots of girls right now probably wouldn't sleep with trump supporters. Are you saying a person should divulge their political affiliations everytime they sleep with someone, otherwise it's not informed consent?
to be clear, I was more referring to the standards of consenting to sex. Someone who is infertile for any reason should disclose that to their partner if they are dating them, that has nothing to do with trans status.
Well no. Because you can look at that situation and say its obviously wrong because it puts you at risk of getting a disease. What disease are you gonna get by fucking a trans person? Afraid u will catch the gay?
Lots of girls right now probably wouldn't sleep with avid trump supporters.
Then if it comes up I'd tell them I voted for Trump and move on to a women who either doesn't care or supports that vote (and when 62% of white women without a college education and 45% of white women with a degree voted for Trump I think my odds are pretty good). You shouldn't lie to people just so you can fuck them. That's shady as hell.
Then if it comes up I'd tell them I voted for Trump
What if it never comes up? What if you didn't even know for sure that she wouldn't sleep with a trump supporter? Are you guilty of lying by omission? That's basically the argument people are making here
Then they're making a stupid argument. Who I vote for isn't even on the same level with "by the way I used to be a man," unless the person I voted for was David Duke. There are some things you just have to tell people up front, like "I used to be a dude," "I'm a preachy vegan," and/or "I believe the holocaust was a Zionist conspiracy." I'm sure there's a boatload of things I'm leaving out, but you get the gist. When you are that far outside the mainstream you have an obligation to tell potential partners about whatever your particular issue is.
A preachy vegan is going to ruin my day because I like to eat meat, and i don't care about however they are killing animals just let me eat my damn burger.
Holocaust Zionist conspiracy? Obviously a crazy person, don't stick ur dick in crazy
Hows a trans person gonna affect you if you can't even tell they are trans? You think you might catch the gay?
Hows a trans person gonna affect you if you can't even tell they are trans?
It's not my place to tell other people who they should or shouldn't fuck. If they don't want to fuck a tranny, that's their business, and since it's their business they deserve to know. That's the whole point of informed consent, isn't it?
It's not my place to tell other people who they should or shouldn't fuck. If they don't want to fuck a tranny, that's their business, and since it's their business they deserve to know. That's the whole point of informed consent, isn't it?
I'm not telling anyone who they should fuck either. If you don't want to fuck trans people, that's fine with me. I just think that since it is a preference that is completely abstract and not based on any observable physical characteristic, and there's no other ethical issues like cheating or stds where there is actual risk, then it should be on the person with that preference to make that known, instead of trans people having to disclose to everyone.
I just think that since it is a preference that is completely abstract and not based on any observable physical characteristic,
It's not "completely abstract." It's very solidly defined, and it is very much based on physical characteristics. It's delusional to believe otherwise.
If its based on an observable physical characteristic, then why do they have to disclose it? Just like an ugly person, just look at them and observe that they are ugly. Don't get mad after the fact that that they didn't disclose that they are ugly, it should be noticeable.
If its based on an observable physical characteristic, then why do they have to disclose it?
It doesn't matter if it's observable or not. We expect people with herpes to tell people they have herpes before they have sex even if they're not having an observable outbreak, don't we?
which goes back to my previous post, which had an and clause which said that things with obvious ethical issues should be disclosed, like herpes or cheating
I mean, to some people having sex with a transsexual means they're going to go to hell. That's a pretty big risk for them, isn't it? I'm saying this as a bi atheist btw.
If they think someone is of the gender that won't send them to the bad place, they have no reason to be super up front with their religion about it. Hence the informed consent part.
If they think someone is of the gender that won't send them to the bad place, they have no reason to be super up front with their religion about it.
Why not?
That concept could be applied to any trait that you make could possibly assumptions about.
If the religious standard is "don't sleep with people who are Mexican or you will go to hell", you can usually assume people who don't look Mexican aren't Mexican.
If you think someone isn't Mexican, then you have no reason to be super up front with your religion about it. But if your assumption was wrong, how is that the Mexicans fault?
Being a trump supporter and being a man are two entirely different spectrums. A lot of men may support progressive movements, but would never have sex with a biological man if they knew. And it is their right to know and choose accordingly.
Seems the same to me. A lot of women would not have sex with a trump supporter if they knew. Therefore, it is their right to know and choose accordingly. That is why trump supporters should divulge that fact every time they sleep with women.
Lol. As a woman, that's bullshit. I hate trump, and I have slept with trump supporters. But being a man vs being a woman are extreme biological differences. If they aren't ashamed, they should tell the truth! Everyone who knows me, knows I hate trump. It's not a secret and I'm not ashamed of it and I'm not worried someone won't like me anymore because of it.
Not all women. I would argue that at least 70% of men would not have sex with a biological man. I don't have any stats to back that up, but I wouldn't doubt the percentage would actually be higher. And I know good people on both sides of the political spectrum. I'm sure you're trying to insult me by referring it to "good dicking", but no, Trump is not going to ruin my sex life. Haha
Lol. Banned five times is starting to make sense. You sound like a horrible person. Seriously. I would never tell you to kill your self though, because depression and suicide is a very serious thing, and your life is more important then being an asshole on the internet.
The way you put it makes it sound very promiscuous, but whatevs.
Yes, if most women wouldn't sleep with a trump supporter, you should disclose it. But most women don't care. With all the talk of consent and rape culture and blah, blah, blah, for a general rule, don't lie to people or trick people or get them drunk in order for them to sleep with you. That makes you extremely pathetic. It's going to happen though, it happens all the time because people tend to suck, but maybe people should try to suck less as much.
Like I said, people lie all the time. Maybe try to not suck as much. If I found out a guy/ or girl, consistently lied to people to get laid, I would disassociate myself with them. Better be a good liar if you want to go down that path.
Haha. You are delusional and the reason Trump was voted as president in the first place. Go to your safe place and leave logical reasoning to the adults.
"Yes, you understand I'm an idiot. No need to make it more obvious." Congratulations. I studied Spanish for 5 years. Maybe try something a little more complex.
Sorry, I can't translate it all into emoji. I can only speak real languages. Maybe when you grow up more, from whatever age you claim to be you'll learn how to behave and to communicate.
Don't even get me started with the Sanskrit! I can't even think about how to come up with the insults I'd like to hurl with my newly evolving but soon to be good ways I use that!
Oh yeah, I had even forgotten what the hell I was even arguing with you about.
That was really hyperbolic, ya know? I wasn't suggesting that you actually raped a person on that account. But...... close. Do you really like having sex with idiots?
Let me guess, because you predict I'm using an apple device, I must be on the apple bandwagon, therefore undermining my entire argument that you're a pretentious asshole.
You just proved my point that you can't even come up with an original argument.
So, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that you were just given the device or it was a hand-me-down from someone else. You can't afford better or don't know that there are way better options available.
How's that for pretentious?
Furthermore, you're the one with silly statement that you were proud that you were a woman and had slept with trump supporters (and I guess that was supposed to be some kind of point or impressive? to anyone) and I made a counterpoint.
I never said I was proud that I slept with a person who supported trump. I said that I know good people on both ends of the political spectrum and I have had relationships with men who support Donald trump. You equalized them to mentally retarded people. That is a fucked up mentality to have. If someone disagree with you, they're mentally challenged?
If someone disagree with you, they're mentally challenged?
Emphatically no.
But I also have known who Trump was for all of my so-called adult life, and anyone who didn't/doesn't know that he is not qualified to be a world leader is ...." mentally challenged". Maybe I should change the terms of the conversation, maybe it should be "educationally challenged"?
Look, lets just end this here. We are in r/drama, alright? Look at the sidebar rules, it's meant to be about arguments and bullshit and most of the posters can't even type more than a 3 word misspelled statement. I'm not mad at you, I don't want you to be mad at me.
Don't feel bad about having made mistakes in the past. Just, maybe you might want to have a little discretion about who you sleep with in the future, how quickly you jump into bed with someone, how you vet them, and how you use it in discussion. Cheers, and be well.
Are you seriously trying to tell me who I should sleep with? and who the fuck ever said I made a mistake or I regret my past? Seriously? You are a complete ignorant jack ass. Maybe try getting laid for once. It might chill you out.
I'm curious; why do you act like I've done something wrong? Are you prejudice towards republicans? But if that was the case, you would have to be liberal. But you are slut shaming me for dating/ having sex with someone who is republican. You're the worst of both parties! Ahhhhhh
In the future, know that we will always be here for you. In the past, we have all said very insightful words of advice that go over everyone's heads. People think we're judgmental and hypocritical, but we're not. God came to me and testified that Trump is the antichrist. So to show that I'm totally different than Trump, I'm going to insult, act condescending, and be a complete selfish asshole, and act like Trump. That totally makes sense. So much chocolate cake. The best chocolate cake ever. And I told them to send those missiles to iraq. Yeah, to Syria. I totally just said that. Did I mention that chocolate cake?
When you talk to him, tell him not to send the carrier group the wrong way next time. In the meantime watch this, and don't get your panties in a bunch.
I imagine that if someone was so hung up on politics to the extent that they actively avoid sleeping with someone who voted for someone they don't like, they would probably ask what they voted before jumping into bed with someone. But those are the unseen things, if something seems obvious, you would not think to ask it, for example: it is not natural to ask someone who looks like a woman to ask if they've ever been a man.
But those are the unseen things, if something seems obvious, you would not think to ask it, for example: it is not natural to ask someone who looks like a woman to ask if they've ever been a man.
If something seems obvious, you would not think to ask it, sure. Is that necessarily the other person's fault? Continuing the analogy above, the person hung up on politics usually asks the person they sleep with, but this time they spot a "I'm with her" pin on the bedstand, so the reasonable assumption is that the other person is a Hillary supporter. If it turns out that pin that was just a relatives, and the other person was actually a trump supporter, does that mean the person was maliciously trying to deceive?
Again that's not the argument they are making, just that it's not relevant to consent
But it is relevant to consent because they're hiding the fact they're trans because they fear consent would be revoked if the other person knew they were trans. It's not like their partner expressed enthusiasm for banging a trans person and they though "Oh I better keep the fact I'm trans a secret". They know that most likely the other person wouldn't want to be with them if they realized they're trans, so they purposefully conceal the fact they're trans in order to make sure they don't break up with them.
How is this a hard concept to grasp. If you know someone wouldn't have sex with you if they knew that you're a biological male then that is a very relevant fact. Any fact that would revoke consent is important.
Obviously informed consent can't apply to every single possible detail about you, other wise you'd have to tell everyone your life story before you sleep with them
You being born the opposite sex isn't a little detail about you. Me being the designated heavy hitter on my baseball team is a little detail. Being a biological male with an inverted penis and taking some hormones isn't a minor detail. You don't need to tell them your entire life story but considering that heterosexuals are defined by their desire to only have sex with people of the opposite sex, if you are the same biological sex as them then it becomes relevant.
I really don't know why you people seem to think that hiding your biological sex is no more important than not disclosing your breakfast.
What DOES matter for informed consent? Make an argument instead of REEEE'ing
I have but apparently you're too stupid to get it. If you know that there is something about you that if known to the other person would result in consent being revoked, you have a moral imperative to disclose it. You don't get to hide that fact because it means you wouldn't get to have sex. You are not owed sex and if you can't get it with honesty then you shouldn't get it at all.
I could just slightly change the words of your post slightly and it could be an outraged rant about how trump supporters should divulge that fact before they sleep with anybody, otherwise it's not really consent. Pretty funny
Yeah this isn't even comparable, people who are heterosexual and homosexual are heterosexual and homosexual because they only want to have sex with people of the opposite or same biological sex. Bisexuals will fuck either but by definition, heterosexuals and homosexuals won't. You're hiding the fact you are a different biological sex than you appear because you realize that they wouldn't have sex with you if they knew.
It's so weird that you're going to such great lengths to try and prove that consent doesn't matter and that it's perfectly okay to deceive someone in order to have sex.
As for the idiocy that you spewed about political affiliations, if a Trump supporter makes it clear they think you're a Trump supporter and that they wouldn't fuck anyone who voted Hillary, you don't get to hide shit just so you get your rocks off. Do you know what lying by omission is? It's when you leave out important facts to create a misconception, and not correcting that misconception. A tranny not telling their partner they're a tranny is actively lying through omission.
Can consent be truly attained through lies when the truth would revoke it? Is a relationship that is founded in a lie going to last? The answer to both is no.
heterosexuals are defined by their desire to only have sex with people of the opposite biological sex,
Is it the chromosomes that you are attracted to, or looks and functionality? If you look at pictures of a trans man with facial hair and abs, and a picture of a trans woman with boobs and butt, which one are you attracted to? Are you attracted to the hairy abs man more? Because he was a bio girl right? Seems ridiculous to me but okay, that's apparently "straight"
If it looks like a girl, fucks like a girl, and you apparently can't tell, then what's the problem?
If you know that there is something about you that if known to the other person would result in consent being revoked, you have a moral imperative to disclose it.
Where does that trans person know that the other person will revoke it? That's just an assumption you've made based on poor logic (she doesn't want to tell him, therefore he must not wanna fuck trans people, incredible) Of course, if the person was like "I don't wanna fuck trans woman, so don't be trans" then yea that kinda changes the situation. But right now we only have a "maybe" situation, which is why I made the other analogy
if a Trump supporter makes it clear they think you're a Trump supporter and that they wouldn't fuck anyone who voted Hillary
That's not the situation I described lmao. What if they don't make it clear? What if they don't make an indication any way that they care? Do I still have to disclose?
Please tell me, this is fascinating, put more outrage into the next post too please
Is a relationship that is founded in a lie going to last? The answer to both is no.
Talking about sex not a relationship bby, I do advocate not hiding important stuff in a long term relationship
Is it the chromosomes that you are attracted to, or looks and functionality?
It's a combination of all really. If you spend 20 years as a man and then get surgery and take a bunch of pills, well you just ain't going to be a woman. At best you're just LARPing. There are physical differences in male and female brains, along with unique chemical mixes. Popping some pills and having a couple surgeries doesn't make you exactly the same as the sex you want to be. People who aren't shut in virgins can tell the difference really easily.
If you look at pictures of a trans man with facial hair and abs, and a picture of a trans woman with boobs and butt, which one are you attracted to?
Not the trans person, so neither. In the same way I'm not attracted to some dude dressed up as a fox, I'm not attracted to some dude with implants or some chick who got hairy.
Are you attracted to the hairy abs man more? Because he was a bio girl right? Seems ridiculous to me but okay, that's apparently "straight"
By definition it wouldn't be straight because if you're heterosexual you aren't attracted to or wanting to have sex with the same biological sex as you. It would mean you're bisexual but that's not really here or there.
All of the nonsense you wrote just doesn't matter though. Find someone who will want to do you while knowing the truth. Don't lie and then try and justify it by claiming that you're close enogh to the real thing (even though you're not). If I order a Coke I'm not cool with you giving me an RC Cola and claiming that it's Coke. It's not, it's just a poor imitation you're trying to scam me with.
If it looks like a girl, fucks like a girl, and you apparently can't tell, then what's the problem?
So as long as you think they're close enough then you apparently don't have to tell people the truth. It's so funny how you keep trying to find a way to make it okay for people to lie to others in order to get sex. You keep trying to prove that consent isn't important for sex and you still don't get how fucked up that is to say. You seem to think that turning your dick inside out and getting implants means you can hide your condition in order to trick someone into giving consent (even though you're fully aware it would be revoked if you told the truth). I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is no reason to lie if you know that the truth wouldn't change anything. You only lie if you know it would.
Where does that trans person know that the other person will revoke it? That's just an assumption you've made based on poor logic (she doesn't want to tell him, therefore he must not wanna fuck trans people, incredible)
"Its also not necessarily that they know they wouldn't have sex with them, but they might not have sex with them". You literally admitted to this earlier, and considering that there is no reason not to tell someone if you knew it wouldn't matter for consent we can tell why they're lying. You only lie or hide things when you know there won't be good consequences for you if the truth was known. You've been told by multiple people that they wouldn't willingly bang a tranny, and you keep trying to justify hiding it so that the tranny could have sex.
Of course, if the person was like "I don't wanna fuck trans woman, so don't be trans" then yea that kinda changes the situation. But right now we only have a "maybe" situation, which is why I made the other analogy
If you're hitting on a homosexual, heterosexual, or even bisexual person and you're a tranny, you need to tell them that you're a tranny because it will matter to them. You know it matters because they're hetero or homo and if they're bisexual they still should know so they can actually consent to sex. You don't get to avoid consent by deluding yourself into thinking a Costco sized application of lube and an inverted penis is close enough to a vagina.
What if they don't make an indication any way that they care? Do I still have to disclose?
The vast majority of people on this planet wouldn't bang a tranny, so yeah you always have to disclose. Your desire for sex doesn't supersede their right to consent. People like you are the exact reason why we need laws to make sure trannies disclose their condition. Clearly you cannot be trusted to behave in the moral, or even sensible way. You lie and you keep trying to justify deception while admitting that you do so in order to have sex.
Talking about sex not a relationship bby, I do advocate being more open in a long term relationship
Okay, lets use an analogy and see just how rapey your ideas are:
Jane is a 20 year old black woman who does not want to have sex with a white guy. She only wants to have sex with black guys. Dylan is a 22 year old white guy who wants to bang Jane. Dylan knows that Jane wants to hook up with Malik at a costume party so Dylan dresses up in the same costume Malik does and hits on Jane at the party. Jane is smashed, thinks Dylan is Malik and starts to have sex with him in a dark room. Jane quickly realizes that Dylan is Dylan. Jane freaks out and calls the police. When the police come will they say;
A) "Lol, Dylan looks close enough to Malik and he has a dick so whats your problem Jane? It doesn't matter that he knows that if you knew he was Dylan you wouldn't have sex with him because a dick is a dick."
or will they
B) Arrest Dylan for rape, toss him in jail, and let Jane know she can press charges.
Jesus you're a rapey fuck aren't you? Trying so, so hard to find ways to justify lying to people in order to have sex with them.
Please tell me, this is fascinating, put more outrage into the next post too please
Thanks u delivered, well not really you ignored the analogy but the rest is fun
People who aren't shut in virgins can tell the difference really easily.
Then theres no problem right? Just don't have sex with people you aren't attracted to since you can easily tell the difference. I have no idea where you are going with the arguments about physical desire and attractiveness, but they are hilarious, and also defeats your own argument. If transgender status is so obvious, why do they have to disclose it in the first place? Just use your damn eyes.
"Its also not necessarily that they know they wouldn't have sex with them, but they might not have sex with them". You literally admitted to this earlier,
Lmao, you really are dense, there's a difference between might not wanna fuck trans people and know they wont wanna fuck trans people, the whole point of that sentence was to point out that difference
So as long as you think they're close enough then you apparently don't have to tell people the truth.
I haven't seen you come up with a good reason why they need to say it either, the best you've come up with is being afraid of accidentally being gay, so yea, they don't. If that's the best argument you got this:
People like you are the exact reason why we need laws to make sure trannies disclose their condition.
...is certainly is never gonna happen. Yea, I'd say lying to land sex is bad. Being trans isn't lying though. Omission can be as bad as lying, but generally people omit tons of information that people might not like on one night stands, and if it doesn't have any concrete effect on anyone I don't really see the problem. In the end, it has never been a problem to misrepresent your physical attractiveness. Makeup, deodorant, hair plugs, cosmetic surgery, whatever.
A) "Lol, Dylan looks close enough to Malik and he has a dick so whats your problem Jane? It doesn't matter that he knows that if you knew he was Dylan you wouldn't have sex with him because a dick is a dick."
or will they
B) Arrest Dylan for rape, toss him in jail, and let Jane know she can press charges.
aww, adorable try, but this is an actual case of deception. In that case there was no consent given to Dylan, only to Malik. It's really fascinating that you think this situation is in any way equivalent though.
Boy you must be all kinds of retarded to still argue that trannies get to lie about their status as mistakes of God.
If transgender status is so obvious, why do they have to disclose it in the first place? Just use your damn eyes.
Purely hypothetical. Like how you argue that trannies get to lie for sex. They don't, but at least we should spare the virgins the horrors of realizing their "GF" is a dude with a mutilated penis.
Being trans isn't lying though.
A dude LARPing as a woman is lying. That's not really a controversial stance.
generally people omit tons of information that people might not like on one night
Yeah, like the fact they're a 2nd Lieutenant and not a Lieutenant, not that they're a biological male who mutilated themselves to appear like a woman.
but this is an actual case of deception.
Just like trannies who don't disclose their "status". See what I did there?
In that case there was no consent given to Dylan, only to Malik.
Like how consent was given to a biological female and not a dude with an inside out dick?
but at least we should spare the virgins the horrors of realizing their "GF" is a dude with a mutilated penis.
lmao, how noble of u
A dude LARPing as a woman is lying. That's not really a controversial stance.
Really? Walk into any leftist sub and watch it become controversial. Unless you meant only right wing spaces then sure, "thing is not controversial among people who agree with me"
See what I did there?
Insist that they are the same? I counter-insist that they are not the same. Quality banter.
Like how consent was given to a biological female and not a dude with an inside out dick?
No, consent was given to having a sex with a woman. If consent only extends to biological women, then that should be made clear. She can't read minds. Which is the main difference between this situation and the above one, in the above one its apparent that the person is impersonating another person to deceive. that is an actual uncontroversial stance, and would be agreed with in both left wing and right wing subs.
Really? Walk into any leftist sub and watch it become controversial.
It's not controversial. You don't get to turn your dick inside out and suddenly become a woman. I don't like NERFs but we do agree on this on fact.
Insist that they are the same? I counter-insist that they are not the same. Quality banter.
If is is the same. You said that as long as the genitals have a passing resemblance they're okay. I pointed out what this entails and now you're backtracking. Maybe get your handler to explain this to you.
No, consent was given to having a sex with a woman. If consent only extends to biological women, then that should be made clear.
It is made clear if they are appear to be a normal heterosexual. Trannies don't get to lie because they might not get sex if they told the truth.
TBH this is absolutely hilarious how you're trying to say that deceit it okay for sex when it involves a tranny.
She can't read minds.
He can't read minds, get it right. Turning your dick inside out doesn't make you a woman.
in the above one its apparent that the person is impersonating another person to deceive
Like what trannies do everyday. They try their hardest to impersonate the opposite sex. How are you this retarded to not know this?
that is an actual uncontroversial stance, and would be agreed with in both left wing and right wing subs.
The fact trannies are LARPing is agreed upon with both sides that recognize them. Again, you're apparently too retarded to figure this out.
It's not controversial. You don't get to turn your dick inside out and suddenly become a woman.
Wow you are actually unable to recognize that there are a sizeable amount people that disagree with you. neat
If is is the same. You said that as long as the genitals have a passing resemblance they're okay. I pointed out what this entails and now you're backtracking. Maybe get your handler to explain this to you
Lmao, I said that in reference to how physical attraction works in relation to being straight or gay, dummy. I was trying to get you to present some coherent reasoning to why having sex with a trans person was so scary, which you failed to do. How you interpreted that to mean "if you consent with one pair of genitals, you consent with any that looks like them" is beyond me. Consent is specific to the person and interaction. If you explicitly don't consent to sex with trans people, then it would be wrong for them to sleep with you. duh. Key word explicit, if you can't make it a point to voice ur fear of trans people if you accidentally sleep with one that's on you.
He can't read minds, get it right. Turning your dick inside out doesn't make you a woman.
she
Like what trannies do everyday.They try their hardest to impersonate the opposite sex. How are you this retarded to not know this?
No, they truthfully present as their gender. The fact that you are too dumb to know that gender doesn't always equal biological sex isn't their fault, its yours. Ignorance isn't an excuse
The fact trannies are LARPing is agreed upon with both sides that recognize them
Im not sure where you found it necessary for your argument to assert that people who disagree with you don't even exist, but keep it up! its gold <3
Wow you are actually unable to recognize that there are a sizeable amount people that disagree with you. neat
Go ahead. Empirically prove to me that the structural differences in the brain don't matter after a surgery.
I was trying to get you to present some coherent reasoning to why having sex with a trans person was so scary
Which you failed at abysmally, and which you realized after everyone else told you they weren't cool with trannies yes.
Consent is specific to the person and interaction. If you explicitly don't consent to sex with trans people, then it would be wrong for them to sleep with you.
Which is why they need to identify themselves as the mistakes of God that they call trannies.
No, they truthfully present as their gender.
Which is different from their biological sex, which is what matter for most of the human race.
Fun how you still try and argue that consent doesn't matter tho. It's really cute how you are not a rape apologist for trannies.
Go ahead. Empirically prove to me that the structural differences in the brain don't matter after a surgery.
lmao what does that have to do with you denying that people who disagree with u exist? I'm not even saying that they are right or not, just that they exist. I think you've left this plane of the conversation, possibly ascended to a nonsensical realm of thought
Ur a dummy dum dum mega seeds in ur bum
I was trying to get you to present some coherent reasoning to why having sex with a trans person was so scary
Which you failed at abysmally
Yes, I did fail at getting you to provide coherent reasoning for your stances. I did my best though, and I really tried. Thanks for helping insult urself, it gets tiring doing it alone
Which is why they need to identify themselves as the mistakes of God that they call trannies.
god isnt real
what matter for most of the human race.
the human race will eventually ascend and cast off the shackles of biological sex and other physical characteristics
I get it, you disagree that trannies should tell people they're trannies because they wouldn't get to have sex with straight people if they told the truth. You're still arguing that consent doesn't matter for sex and really aren't being that coherent about it.
Consent does matter for sex. If you don't want to have sex with trans people, then say so and don't give consent.
Your argument is that every persons lack of consent should be assumed, based on a series of assumptions that not everyone agrees with.
I disagree with that particular argument that's based on those particular assumptions. You could twist that into me not caring about consent for sex, but I don't really see the point in doing so
Awwww, it's so cute seeing you trying to hard to claim that consent doesn't matter but also does. You're literally advocating rape by deception while claiming that you care about consent.
If you've turned your dick inside out, popped some horomone pills, and got implants it's to appear as a woman. It's not reasonable for 99.9999% of humanity to have to question if the person who appears to be one biological sex is actually another.
Trannies who don't identify themselves as trannies are keeping that secret because they realize that the other person is under a false impression and would revoke consent if the truth was known. You're still trying to frame this as not actually important.
Your argument is that every persons lack of consent should be assumed
If someone is clearly a heterosexual (hitting on the opposite sex) or homosexual (hitting on the same sex) it can be safely assumed that they wouldn't consent to sex with someone who is a different biological sex than what they appear. How are you this retarded?
based on a series of assumptions that not everyone agrees with.
You've had multiple people here tell you the same thing I've told you, that they wouldn't knowingly fuck a tranny yet you still think this is controversial? Head over to your local mall and ask people if they would knowingly fuck a tranny. You'll see that I'm right and the vast majority of people wouldn't want to fuck a tranny.
You yourself admit this with your earlier "we hide it because if we told the truth they might not have sex with us." Normal people not wanting to fuck trannies is no more controversial than water being wet. I know some super liberal subreddits may disagree, but go ahead and ask people IRL. I'll wait.
I disagree with that particular argument that's based on those particular assumptions.
Because you're retarded, yes we already get that. If a guy is hitting on a M-to-F tranny, it's clearly because he thinks the tranny is a biological woman. The tranny has a moral imperative to disclose they're a biological male because, judging by the guy's actions, he's consenting to sex with a woman and not a man with an inside out dick and implants. If you don't disclose your condition, it's because you know that he wouldn't have sex with you if he knew. The guy consented to sex with a woman, not to sex with a mutilated man. These are hardly abstract assumptions you mong.
You've had multiple people here tell you the same thing I've told you, that they wouldn't knowingly fuck a tranny yet you still think this is controversial?
I know some super liberal subreddits may disagree, but go ahead and ask people IRL.
This is mostly an anti-trans space, duh. I actually know way, way, way more people that would fuck trans people (provided they are passable and they look cis) than that wouldn't. Yes, I've asked, I've had a lot of discussions on trans people. That is because most of my associates are leftist and pretty open with gender.
This also applies to IRL, people tend to hang out with people who agree with them. You will find far more yes answers in liberal cities, almost guaranteed. It also depends how you frame the question of course.
Would the majority not sleep with them? Sure. There's enough who would to make it controversial though.
Trans issues in general are controversial. There are multiple changemyview threads on this very topic, usually with hundreds to thousands of comments.
How am I misinformed that it's not okay to lie to someone who thinks you're a biological sex that your not because you know that they'd not consent to sex with you if they knew the truth? I notice you gave up trying to defend that and devolved into the "but me and my friends would bang trannies so we represent all people and trannies don't need to get consent".
Trans issues aren't really that controversial. Use whatever bathroom but don't lie to get sex. Easy peasy.
No amount of introspection will justify hiding a fact that you know would revoke consent. It's really hard for me to imagine being so delusional that you can on one hand openly admit most people wouldn't want to fuck a tranny, but then say that trannies can lie to these people because they probably wouldn't have sex with them if they knew the truth.
Some people will fuck trannies, so find those people and don't try and trick people into having sex with you. How hard is this for you to grasp?
notice you gave up trying to defend that and devolved into the "but me and my friends would bang trannies so we represent all people and trannies don't need to get consent".
Lmao, no. I'm merely pointing out that the disagreement exists, which you continue to deny.
I'm not given up defending anything. The significant disagreement in the topic shows that what you think is universal, isn't.
You said "You've had multiple people here tell you the same thing I've told you," which apparently means a stance is definitely not controversial. Fucking lol, what reasoning is that? I simply pointed out that I've had more people tell me the opposite. But they don't count because of your feeeeeeeeelinnnnngs
Trans issues aren't really that controversial
Like how stupid do you have to be to ignore all the controversy around trans issues. Especially with bathrooms lmao, that was a big controversial issue
Maybe you don't understand what the word controversial means?
There is no reasonable disagreement when it comes to consent in sex. You keep trying to say there is but the fact is you need consent in order to have sex. Sex without consent is central to the concept of rape "Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration carried out against a person without that person's consent."
In the story that kicked all of this off the tranny didn't disclose that they're a tranny and their boyfriend had clearly consented to having sex with a biological woman. That's known because he was asking about fertility and periods. They didn't disclose they're a tranny because they knew that the boyfriend wanted to be in a relationship with a woman, and not a dude. You tried to say that informed consent isn't important because it would mean the tranny doesn't get laid, but it very clearly is especially since the guy is under the impression he is having sex with a woman, and not a man.
As you've said, there are plenty of people who willingly would have sex with a tranny, so there is less than zero reasons to lie about being a tranny. What the tranny did in the story is rape by deception, he deceived the boyfriend into believing he was a woman, and now is trying to find ways to keep the deception up. If trannies cannot accept that they need to inform people they're trans, then we really need laws to ensure that they do.
You are not entitled to sex, and if you cannot have sex while being truthful about things like your biological sex, then you shouldn't be having sex at all. It's so weird seeing someone who is so liberal that they're now a rape apologist.
There is no reasonable disagreement when it comes to consent in sex.
There is no reasonable disagreement that consent is required. There are reasonable disagreements to what is necessary for consent in sex.
In the story that kicked all of this off the tranny didn't disclose that they're a tranny and their boyfriend had clearly consented to having sex with a biological woman. That's known because he was asking about fertility and periods
In that particular situation, yes she is being misleading. Not good in a relationship certainly.
They didn't disclose they're a tranny because they knew that the boyfriend wanted to be in a relationship with a woman, and not a dude
They are a woman. What you meant to say is that he wanted a cis women. This is projection on your part, and also an assumption on your part. Just because he assumed she is cis doesn't mean he is against sleeping with trans people. You also assume she knows he is against sleeping with trans people
She said nothing to indicate that. Just withholding personal information is not a sufficient to indicate that. There are many reasons to hide trans status that don't have to do with tricking people into sex.
What the tranny did in the story is rape by deception,
No it's not
he deceived the boyfriend into believing he was a woman
She is a woman
then we really need laws to ensure that they do
Terrible idea for sure
You are not entitled to sex
Correct
and if you cannot have sex while being truthful about things like your biological sex,
If you need to know biological sex, then ask. A person presenting as another gender is not lying about their biological sex.
It's so weird seeing someone who is so liberal that they're now a rape apologist.
I'ts so wierd seeing right wing people try and argue that things that aren't rape actually are. It's a fun exchange of roles
Actually appearing as something you're not is incredibly relevant to consent when it's clear the other person believes that you are a different biological sex.
Trannies are not men or women, they're trannies. Until the day comes where we can print new bodies and transfer our consciousness into them, they'll always be a tranny. Ultimately that are their biology, and nothing aside from a new body will change that. You don't get to invert your penis, take some pills, and dress differently and suddenly become a woman.
It literally is the definition of rape by deception. Jesus Christ you're thick.
If you need to know biological sex, then ask. A person presenting as another gender is not lying about their biological sex.
They are, they absolutely are. If I dress as a doctor and wander around an ER is it up to the patients to ask me if I'm really a doctor? Am I not lying about being a doctor. Yes trannies are trying to seem like the sex they feel closer too, but the fact they're biologically different is something that matters.
If you want to have sex as a tranny, disclose your condition. If you can't do that, then like I've said we need laws to ensure this happens.
I'ts so wierd seeing right wing people try and argue that things that aren't rape actually are. It's a fun exchange of roles
Fun, I'm actually a member of the Liberal Party of Canada. So I'm not right wing, I'm just not so liberal that I start denying rape and claiming trannies get a pass on it.
Trannies are not the men or women they present themselves as, they're trannies. Until the day comes where we can print new bodies and transfer our consciousness into them, they'll always be a tranny. Ultimately that are their biology, and nothing aside from a new body will change that. You don't get to invert your penis, take some pills, and dress differently and suddenly become a woman.
So I'm not right wing, I'm just not so liberal that I start denying rape and claiming trannies get a pass on it.
Your stance on trans issues is undeniably right wing, so the fact that you are liberal on weed or whatever i could care less.
Rape by deception is a crime in which the perpetrator has the victim's agreement and compliance, but gains it through deception or fraudulent statements or actions.
It literally is the definition of rape by deception. Jesus Christ you're thick.
Yet how many examples on that page used letter by letter that description, and how many instead used a much narrower definition? Use in the US is pretty much only restricted to impersonating someone, because it's absurd to use a description like that. I'm the thick one? Use your brain cells then Einstein, and think about the consequences of treating that exact definition like that as meaning rape.
~ Have you cheated on your wife? Congratulations, you are a rapist. Enjoy years of prison in jail.
~ Exaggerated what you do at work to land a girl? RAPE! jail time for you
but no wait, YOU ARE EVEN MORE RETARDED! IT GETS BETTER!
You are seriously arguing that if someone makes a reasonable assumption about you based on your appearance, then that's also rape
~ Did you buy a nice suit and do you have a nice car, and used them to pick up a lady, but you aren't actually rich? YOU FUCKING RAPIST. GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL. WHY ARE YOU DECEIVING PEOPLE INTO THINKING YOU ARE RICH?
~Are you racially black but don't look it? That racist wouldn't have fucked you if they knew that, you fucking morally inept heathen. TO THE JAIL WE GO
This pretty much makes any lie told in a relationship means that they could claim rape. It also makes like 90% of the population rapists. I can't wait for your backtrack when you tell me that those don't count for reasons not stated in your literal definition
Apparently not wanting to trivialize an actual, traumatic and often violent crime makes me a rape apologist tho
Your stance on trans issues is undeniably right wing, so the fact that you are liberal on weed or whatever i could care less.
Actually I haven't smoked weed in a few years. I'm just a huge fan of state capitalism and stricter controls for the financial industry along with more oversight for the police. Trannies don't get to avoid the truth because they're trannies. As far as I'm concerned they only need to out themselves when dating/trying to hookup and when receiving medical treatment. Aside from that I'm 100% okay treating them like the sex they want to be considered.
Yet how many examples on that page used letter by letter that description, and how many instead used a much narrower definition? Use in the US is pretty much only restricted to impersonating someone, because it's absurd to use a description like that. I'm the thick one? Use your brain cells then Einstein, and think about the consequences of treating that exact definition like that as meaning rape.
~ Have you cheated on your wife? Congratulations, you are a rapist. Enjoy years of prison in jail.
~ Exaggerated what you do at work to land a girl? RAPE! jail time for you
but no wait, YOU ARE EVEN MORE RETARDED! IT GETS BETTER!
You are seriously arguing that if someone makes a reasonable assumption about you based on your appearance, then that's also rape (that wouldn't necessarily be considered "deception" by any reasonable person but you are a particular brand of stupid)
~ Did you buy a nice suit and do you have a nice car, and used them to pick up a lady, but you aren't actually rich? YOU FUCKING RAPIST. GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL. WHY ARE YOU DECEIVING PEOPLE INTO THINKING YOU ARE RICH?
~Are you racially black but don't look it? That racist wouldn't have fucked you if they knew that, you fucking morally inept heathen. TO THE JAIL WE GO
Holy shit you're exactly as retarded as you are triggered. Rape by deception covers severe deception, not puffery. Also, trannies are impersonating the other biological sex so it works very well. Cases where you fuck your friend with a dildo while you're pretending to be her crush mean you're raping someone. All your examples are window licking retarded. Buying a nice car and suit isn't rape, impersonating your brother to fuck his wife is. Do you not know that puffery is you inbred?
You actually have to have been in the special needs class to believe that rape by deception includes cheating and general puffery. What it does include is that Arab guy who told a Jewish woman he was Jewish in order to have sex with her. You have to substantively lie to someone in order for it to be considered rape. Go ahead and send your examples to the Judge Roger Dutton and see if he agrees with you. Spoiler alert, he'll just think you're as retarded as I do.
"Rape by deception is a crime in which the perpetrator has the victim's agreement and compliance, but gains it through deception or fraudulent statements or actions."
Remember my example of Jane and Dylan, this covers it because consent was gained through deception or fraudulent statements. If it was obtained through deceit, it's because it wouldn't have been given otherwise. Like when you're a tranny that lies to some Indian kid so you can fuck him. That's rape, and you trying to twist it because he's a tranny won't change that. Think that boy won't be feeling violated, think he won't have to go to therapy after? And why? Because some tranny decided that their need for sex was greater than that kids right to the truth, and to have sexual preferences.
Man, you are just trying so, so hard to justify deceit, the lack of importance to consent, and rape all in the name of being liberal. If being a tranny didn't matter then there would be no, as you call it, controversy. There is though, because it does matter to people. You're literally putting your own feelings and desire for sex above peoples right to sexual choice and somehow you think I'm the retarded one.
You better fucking hope Pence doesn't catch wind of these retarded arguments that you make.
I can't wait for your backtrack when you tell me that those don't count for reasons not stated in your literal definition
Exactly as I predicted, what a coinciiidence
Rape by deception covers severe deception, not puffery
but you said that link was literally is the definition of rape by deception
now is it not the literal definition anymore?
Which is it? It's nothing other than what you want to believe in the moment of course, because your logic has no concrete basis other than feeeelings. You define rape a certain way to attempt to include trans people in it, then get mad when your poor definition allows retarded examples. Not my fault bby, but it is hilarious.
Also, trannies are impersonating the other biological sex so it works very well.
Lmaooo, if "looking like another biological sex" is impersonation, so is looking like you are rich (you are impersonating a rich person!!) or looking like another race (you are impersonating a black person!!!). There's no internal logic here, other than "How can i say trans people are rapists while pretending I have reasons that make sense while doing so?"
Of course looking like another sex isn't pretending to be a different person, therefore it isn't impersonation, so we have no problem. The trans person's identity is never in question. Only irrelevant characteristics that you personally are triggered by
All your examples are window licking retarded.
Good. Its your goddamn logic :) I'm glad you can recognize your own brand of retarded when the word "trans" isn't in the mix. I know you can't recognize that that's literally your own logic, but you don't have a good grasp on your own logic in the first place so thats okay
Go ahead and send your examples to the Judge Roger Dutton and see if he agrees with you. Spoiler alert, he'll just think you're as retarded as I do.
Go ahead and ask THE MAJORITY OF THE JUDGES IN THE US if merely a trans person not disclosing their birth sex would be rape and see if they agree with you. Spoiler alert, they all will think you are retarded. Just like the above examples, again, which were only a demonstration of your own dumbass logic.
You're literally putting your own feelings and desire for sex above peoples right to sexual choice and somehow you think I'm the retarded one.
Is this a literally like the above not really literally or is this a real literally this time
Please, more outrage, tell me how trans people you can't even tell are trans are literally traumatizing all our youth
No, because consent attained through massive deception still isn't actually consent. See, you're so stupid you're confusing minor reasons to have sex with someone with a basis for consent that is fundamental. If you're lying about being rich to pick up girls, not being rich isn't as big of a deal as being not a biological man. After all the girls who want rich guys just want to be with someone with money to spend. As long as you have that money to spend then you're giving them 100% what they wanted. As long as they get the nice dinners, jewelry, and rides in the Ferrari, that's already exactly what they were after. Presenting yourself as a biological male when you're a biological female isn't giving a woman exactly what she wanted. That's deceiving someone in order to get sex. Just like that Arab did when he lied to the Jewish woman. This isn't hard unless you're as stupid as you are.
There's no internal logic here
The logic of "If you know someone wouldn't have sex with you if they knew you weren't the same biological sex you're presenting yourself as then you need to tell them" logic is far more sane than "Well if I think a bottle of lube and an inside out penis are a vagina then no one can disagree!".
Lmaooo, if "looking like another biological sex" is impersonation, so is looking like you are rich (you are impersonating a rich person!!)
Not even comparable, and you'd have to be retarded to think that it is. I notice you don't address the doctor analogy and whether it is the patients responsibility to check to see if the guy in a lab coat and telling people he is a doctor in an ER is a doctor. Skipped over that one nicely because it's clear that it's not up to a patient in a hospital to check if the guy presenting himself as a doctor is actually a doctor. Just like how it's not up to normal people to have to check if the person who appears to be a woman is actually a woman.
Of course looking like another sex isn't pretending to be a different person, therefore it isn't impersonation
A biological man turning his penis inside out, getting implants, and dressing like a woman isn't pretending to be a woman? Okay then. They literally are pretending to be a biological female when they're a biological male. Fun how this doesn't seem to fall under the category of "pretending". It's LARPing plain and simple. If I dress up as a Roman Centurion am I not pretending to be a Roman Centurion?
Is this a literally like the above not really literally or is this a real literally this time
Did you have a stroke? It's still fun how you have stopped trying to show that deception about biological sex is irrelevant.
Go ahead and ask THE MAJORITY OF THE JUDGES IN THE US if merely a trans person not disclosing their birth sex would be rape by fraud and see if they agree with you.
Representative Peter Koutoujian already would agree with that, as would People vs. Morales. Think before talking next time.
tell me how trans people you can't even tell are trans
Like I said, normal people can tell, innocent and naive kids like that Indian kid can't. I again notice you're all hush-hush about that case.
You're trying to divert the conversation because you can't address my main points about the morality knowingly deceiving someone into having sex with you. By your own logic there is zero problem in giving someone an STD if you don't think it's a big deal to disclose it and if it isn't that bad anyways.
I want to see you explain how that tranny didn't rape that Indian boy. Especially considering that he made it abundantly clear she was a biological female and that he wanted to be with a biological female. Go ahead, show how the tranny isn't a piece of shit for doing that.
No, because consent attained through massive deception still isn't actually consent.
Where did the definition say "Massive"? It just said deception. Yes, you did backtrack on your statement.
See, you're so stupid you're confusing minor reasons to have sex with someone with a basis for consent that is fundamental
I'm not confusing anything at all. That's literally what your definition said. If you wanted to say there's a distinction between "big and tiny reasons", you should have considered that in your definition of what rape by fraud is. That's how definitions work. If you need to amend your definition on the fly to consider cases that you haven't considered, then it shows that you don't really know what you are talking about. You've failed to establish any reasoning for why you think this should be considered fundamental compared to other things. All you can do is state conclusions you've arrived at, not the reasoning you've taken to arrive to those conclusions. That's because your conclusions were not arrived to by reason in the first place.
The logic of "If you know someone wouldn't have sex with you if they knew you weren't the same biological sex you're presenting yourself as then you need to tell them" logic is far more sane than "Well if I think a bottle of lube and an inside out penis are a vagina then no one can disagree!".
It's only sane to you because you consider your faulty assumptions to be undeniable truths. You are unable to evaluate that those assumptions were not arrived by logic but by feeeeeeling.
I notice you don't address the doctor analogy and whether it is the patients responsibility to check to see if the guy in a lab coat and telling people he is a doctor in an ER is a doctor. Skipped over that one nicely because it's clear that it's not up to a patient in a hospital to check if the guy presenting himself as a doctor is actually a doctor. Just like how it's not up to normal people to have to check if the person who appears to be a woman is actually a woman.
That's wrong because there are obvious ethical consequences that you can point to from impersonating a doctor in a hospital. Namely because you could deliver an incorrect medical diagnoses and cause someone serious harm. That's why that is already illegal, obviously
just because I didn't address that particular stupid comparison before doesn't make it any less stupid honey
A biological man turning his penis inside out, getting implants, and dressing like a woman isn't pretending to be a woman? Okay then. They literally are pretending to be a biological female when they're a biological male.
No, they are accurately expressing their-selves as a woman, which is a description of gender. Gender is accepted by the modern scientific community as not equivalent to biological sex. Read a book.
Representative Peter Koutoujian already would agree with that, as would People vs. Morales.
a handful of judges represent and a case with a dissenting opinion represents the majority of US judges? lmao. Regardless, none of those have expressed an opinion on whether trans people not disclosing their gender is rape by fraud as far as I know. They have expressed statements on what is rape by fraud, but it is your opinion that trans people not disclosing falls under that. Trying to assert that they support your opinion is a fun bit of begging the question. You can't comprehend that because you are an idiot.
The fact that currently, there is no legal basis to prosecute the thing you are claiming is rape by fraud should suggest to you that our legal system does not consider that be the case.
Did you have a stroke? It's still fun how you have stopped trying to show that deception about biological sex is irrelevant.
I've already shown that conclusively. You were unable to show exactly how deception occurred, you just continued to insist that it happened. I'm only having fun now pointing out how stupid you are in various ways.
You're trying to divert the conversation because you can't address my main points about the morality knowingly deceiving someone into having sex with you.
I've already addressed that in a multitude of ways, you just seriously aren't capable of grasping the logic. It is very simple, but clearly out of your grasp. Look, you just proved you don't get it in the very next sentence.
By your own logic there is zero problem in giving someone an STD if you don't think it's a big deal to disclose it and if it isn't that bad anyways.
Obviously, STDs should be disclosed because there is a concrete, physical risk of harm from STD's. Exact same reasoning as the "impersonating a doctor" logic above. In contrast, there are no physical risks from having sex with a transgender person. This is very simple logic, that has already been explained to you, and yet you can't comprehend it. A child could understand it, really
I want to see you explain how that tranny didn't rape that Indian boy. Especially considering that he made it abundantly clear she was a biological female and that he wanted to be with a biological female.
I already covered this too, but sure
The second part of your sentence doesn't logically follow. That is an assumption you've made.
Before you REEEEE, think very carefully.
Just because you are dating a biological female doesn't mean that you only want to be with biological females. Your second premise doesn't follow. Observe a simple hypothetical example:
I date women. My personal preferences is that I do not care if they are trans or not, nor do I ask. I am dating a woman, and I assume that she is a biological woman, because most woman are biological women, and she never tells me otherwise. It turns out she is trans.
In this case, the second premise doesn't follow from the first. Yet you insist that is has to. This is a symptom of you being an idiot.
According to you, I definitely was raped, which I find hilarious. That's pretty much the very definition of being offended on other people's behalf, which is something only tumblr feminists are supposed to do.
We're beating around the bush, but I'm just going to go after your foundational view on consent and what you're really arguing because this is getting tiring. You're out here, trying to show that when it comes to sexual intimacy the right not to associate no longer is more important than the right to associate. For you a trannies right to associate is now more important that the other persons right to not associate when it comes to sexual intimacy. However, each person gets to make their own judgement on whether or not the other person counts as a man or a woman, you don't get to decide that for them. You're perfectly free to educate people as much as you want, you aren't free to make choices for others when it comes to their sexual freedom. Go ahead and make claims and show to the best of your ability that you're functionally exactly the same as a real woman, but don't put your right to associate above others right to no associate. All people have a bodily integrity right to say βnoβ to sex, no matter how ugly,offensive, or nonsensical their reasons for doing so might be to you. You can't bypass that.
The sex of a persons partner clearly matters a great deal to an overwhelming majority of people. After all, there are not many people, including heterosexuals, gay men, and lesbians, would be indifferent to the sex of a potential partner. Just think about when people go on a blind date, most of us would want to ensure that the other person on the date is of a particular sex, people generally don't just leave it up to the matchmaker and say βsurprise me.β Tinder doesn't have a mystery option. You choose the sex you're interested in because it matters to you. We see this in blind dates, and on dating websites. If only appearances truly mattered, then dating websites wouldn't even bother mentioning sex.
Being heterosexual or homosexual is part of a personβs own identity and is not rightly subject to invalidation or dismissal. Yet you just don't seem to understand this, or more likely you refuse to admit it because it means trannies would be under a moral imperative to disclose. Each person is completely right to have sexual preferences, and you don't get to override that because you might be omitted from consideration as a sexual partner. In the same way that a person has the right to refuse consent to sex for any reason at all, no matter how offensive, a person similarly has the right to the disclosure of the facts that wouldβif knownβtrigger that refusal, if the potential partner can anticipate what facts would matter to this person. A possible partner appearing to be a heterosexual or a homosexual certainly fits the bill to be someone who would consider biological sex to be a relevant fact and therefore a tranny has an obligation to disclose. You can tell the truth and maybe you'll get lucky, but as I've said before you don't get to hide that fact because you've told yourself it's not relevant. Best case scenario the partner is you and you're cool with trannies, worst case they say no. Either way, you don't end up in a situation like what happened to that Indian kid. My argument towards disclosure would prevent things from happening like what happened to that Indian kid, your way would result in many more situations like that, which very clearly are morally reprehensible. Even you admit that that situation is fucked up, but apparently still don't understand that it's a logical consequence of validating hiding your biological sex.
Your position creates problems like the Indian kid, and while mine may strike you wrong because I'm prioritizing the partnerβs conception of the transgender personβs gender identity (for example, as a man, because she was assigned male at birth) over the transgender personβs own conception of his or her gender identity (for instance, as a woman) which does sting, this is necessary and indispensable for proper sexual choices and informed consent. A persons conception of what a man is and what a woman is may be debatable for you, but this doesn't change the fact that every person is completely right to have their own sexual preferences, and that you don't get to try and work around that because you don't agree with them. You're free to debate and to try and educate, you're not free to use deception and purposeful omission in order to bypass their sexual preferences. If the person appears to be heterosexual or homosexual, then you need to be under the assumption they are only interested in sex with their respective biological preferences. I know plenty of lesbians who would not want to have sex with a man at all, and the fact that you're had surgeries to appear as a woman wouldn't matter to them.
So go ahead and tell me oh how unreasonable I am, and how the only reasonable stance is yours which denies sexual preferences, and which encourages deception.
Oh I look forward to you trying to prove that sexual autonomy is not more important that a trannies desire for sex. You're literally going to have to make a case against informed consent and against people's right to sexual choices. It'll be a shitshow of delusion.
That's the glorious thing. You can't make an honest case for a tranny hiding their condition without claiming that a persons own sexual preferences are not relevant. I'm excited now.
Also stop lying, saving nothing. You've talked out of your ass and now you're stuck. More time won't help you claim that consent isn't important for sex.
Lmao, I do love hearing ur fantasies, they are adorable.
The best thing is, you completely disregarded the perfectly good arguments I made in my previous post, which was easily just as long as yours. Yet, I didn't whine about you ignoring the arguments and assume it was because you are totally stumped, did I? I mean, I did just now, but you started it :c
I digress, let me dive in:
We're beating around the bush, but I'm just going to go after your foundational view on consent and what you're really arguing because this is getting tiring
Right from the bat, this was promising. I was under the impression that you would be actually attempting to work on the foundations of your argument. Sadly, you didn't really do that. Instead you attacked strawmans of what you believe my foundational view of consent is.
You're out here, trying to show that when it comes to sexual intimacy the right not to associate no longer is more important than the right to associate. For you a trannies right to associate is now more important that the other persons right to not associate when it comes to sexual intimacy.
These are both strawmans. Seriously, step away from the outrage, and consider your logic in an abstract sense. In a basic form, you are trying to say that I am trying to argue that a transgender persons right to have sex overides someone elses right to say no. This logic is based on an underlying assumption that the trans person needs to always volunteer the information that they are trans, so you can make the decision to say no. The problem is that the assumption IS the thing we are arguing here. You assume that you are right. BUT it is also the thing you are trying to argue in the first place. So you can't use a conclusion based on the premise that "trans should always disclose", to argue the point that "trans should always disclose". That's circular logic.
I know you probably don't get it, but let's try an analogy that puts you in my shoes.
Person A believes that rich people should always disclose they are rich, no matter what, so that people who hate sleeping with rich people can avoid them.
Person B believes that disclosing financial status is not necessary for consent.
Now, we both can agree that Person A is wrong right?
So is A correct to say that B is arguing that "rich peoples right to associate is more important than everyone elses right to not associate", just because B says they shouldn't need to disclose it? No, because that argument is based on his belief of the premise.
In the same way,
EVEN IF YOU ARE 100% RIGHT, and trans people SHOULD have to disclose no matter what, thus making the point "trans people shouldn't put their right to associate over other people's right to not associate" 100% right, stating that isn't an argument, for the reasons above.
Many of your arguments fall into this pattern, this is why most of your "arguments" fail to pursuade. They aren't arguments any more than shouting "trans people should disclose" is.
for a light addressal of the rest of the topics in your post, (this post is long as fuck just to get principles of logic and argument across to you, so forgive me for not going in depth. I could possible delve into them more, but its getting impractical and really if you end up rejecting basic argument construction then theres no point)
The sex of a persons partner clearly matters a great deal to an overwhelming majority of people. After all, there are not many people, including heterosexuals, gay men, and lesbians, would be indifferent to the sex of a potential partner. Just think about when people go on a blind date, most of us would want to ensure that the other person on the date is of a particular sex, people generally don't just leave it up to the matchmaker and say βsurprise me.β Tinder doesn't have a mystery option. You choose the sex you're interested in because it matters to you. We see this in blind dates, and on dating websites. If only appearances truly mattered, then dating websites wouldn't even bother mentioning sex.
Replace the word sex with gender and I'll agree. Id argue that are much more people comfortable having sex with a trans people of their desired gender (as long as the basic element of visual attraction is fulfilled) than you think.
Being heterosexual or homosexual is part of a personβs own identity and is not rightly subject to invalidation or dismissal. Yet you just don't seem to understand this, or more likely you refuse to admit it because it means trannies would be under a moral imperative to disclose. Each person is completely right to have sexual preferences, and you don't get to override that because you might be omitted from consideration as a sexual partner.
It also doesn't invalidate homosexual or heterosexual identity if they are interested in the same gender, not sex. That's why modern definitions of the terms usually use attraction to the same or opposite gender or sex. The key is the individual person and how they define themselves. The rest of this is suffering from the same logical flaw as above
In the same way that a person has the right to refuse consent to sex for any reason at all, no matter how offensive, a person similarly has the right to the disclosure of the facts that wouldβif knownβtrigger that refusal, if the potential partner can anticipate what facts would matter to this person. A possible partner appearing to be a heterosexual or a homosexual certainly fits the bill to be someone who would consider biological sex to be a relevant fact and therefore a tranny has an obligation to disclose
That was an interesting chain of logic. You basically said "pretty much everyone cares about biological sex, so trans people should disclose." I dispute that above.
Either way, you don't end up in a situation like what happened to that Indian kid. My argument towards disclosure would prevent things from happening like what happened to that Indian kid, your way would result in many more situations like that, which very clearly are morally reprehensible. Even you admit that that situation is fucked up, but apparently still don't understand that it's a logical consequence of validating hiding your biological sex.
Your position creates problems like the Indian kid, and while mine may strike you wrong because I'm prioritizing the partnerβs conception of the transgender personβs gender identity (for example, as a man, because she was assigned male at birth) over the transgender personβs own conception of his or her gender identity (for instance, as a woman) which does sting, this is necessary and indispensable for proper sexual choices and informed consent
Not really, It is not necessary and indispensable for proper sexual choices and informed consent. There is another option, which is to inform any partner you take that trans status is a deal breaker. To say that that is the only way that situation could be avoided is factually wrong.
This solves both sexual choice and informed consent, while also not prioritizing your conception of gender identity over your partners.
A persons conception of what a man is and what a woman is may be debatable for you, but this doesn't change the fact that every person is completely right to have their own sexual preferences, and that you don't get to try and work around that because you don't agree with them. You're free to debate and to try and educate, you're not free to use deception and purposeful omission in order to bypass their sexual preferences. If the person appears to be heterosexual or homosexual, then you need to be under the assumption they are only interested in sex with their respective biological preferences. I know plenty of lesbians who would not want to have sex with a man at all, and the fact that you're had surgeries to appear as a woman wouldn't matter to them.
mostly arguments with the above logical issue
So go ahead and tell me oh how unreasonable I am, and how the only reasonable stance is yours which denies sexual preferences, and which encourages deception.
You are the one accusing me of having an unreasonable position of wanting trans people raping everyone and the condition of consent to collapse and blah blah blah
I don't think your stance is that unreasonable, just wrong. I think the logic you use to defend that stance, along with most people, is pretty unreasonable, as well as your characterization of trans people, as long as your refusal to understand their position.
Sadly, you didn't really do that. Instead you attacked strawmans of what you believe my foundational view of consent is.
Your foundation is that trans people are under no obligation to disclose. You support this by saying that it's not important because they look "close enough" and the genitals "work the same". I told you that functionality takes a backseat for biological sex for most people. You can't address this so you claim it's a strawman. Fun.
consider your logic in an abstract sense.
Which is a hilarious claim for you to make because your "logic" taken to it's conclusion has resulted in condemned behaviour, like with the Indian kid, and even illegal behaviour that has been punished with prison time, like with the British tranny. My logic has been codified into law, yours has been successfully prosecuted. That should tell you something about the strength of your supposed logic. Especially since yours is grounded in justifying deceit, and mine is about disclosing the truth. You're the one saying that the truth isn't important, but me saying it is is somehow unreasonable? You yourself condemn the people who take your logic of non-disclosure into a relationship. Seriously, you can't even accept the far reaching results of justifying tranny non-disclosure.
you can't use a conclusion based on the premise that "trans should always disclose", to argue the point that "trans should always disclose". That's circular logic.
Okay you clearly don't know that a premise is so I'll write my argument out into premise-conclusion form because you're apparently too fucking stupid to actually successfully identify a premise.
P1: Trannies are not the biological sex they present themselves as
P2: People care about biological sex
P3: People have an inalienable right to sexual preferences and an inalienable right to informed consent
C: Trannies should identify that they're trannies before any intimacy with hetero or homosexual people.
This is absolutely fantastic. Your dumbass has failed to identify my premises correctly and now you're trying to call me out on it? Holy fuck this is hilarious, especially considering that you're keep squealing about logic.
Here's your arguement for comparison;
P1: Trannies want to be treated as the gender they identify as
P2: They're close enough physically to the gender their partner wants
P3: People have no right to informed consent or the truth(This is implied)
C: Trannies are under no obligation to disclose
Many of your arguments fall into this pattern, this is why most of your "arguments" fail to pursuade. They aren't arguments any more than shouting "trans people should disclose" is.
I keep mentioning that trannies should disclose because that's my conclusion you mongoloid. People tend to keep mentioning their conclusion. I've shown you, and explained to you, that peoples right to consent and sexual choices are inalienable. Their conception of sex and gender is what is most important to them. You're saying that a partners conception of gender and their sexual choices are not as relevant as a trannies are.
As for your insane counterexample about wealth; I bet you thought you got me here. However, it turns out though that being rich doesn't really matter to the vast majority of people, so there is not substantial reason to disclose that. Far, far less people actually and honestly care about wealth, than they care if their partner really is a tranny. However, in the cases of the people who did honestly care about long term wealth, they would make that clear, which would mean you have a duty to disclose that. If you actually read that case I used you'd see they also mentioned that there. Apparently you didn't read it because you're trying to make an argument they already dismissed.
Id argue that are much more people comfortable having sex with a trans people of their desired gender (as long as the basic element of visual attraction is fulfilled) than you think.
You argue, but you don't support it with anything. You just make empty claims with less than zero evidence behind it. Seriously, you pulled a claim out of your ass and now are treating it like some absolute fact that means you get to hide the fact you're a tranny. Yet you're still bitching about my logic being faulty. Fantastic.
It bullshit claim also does nothing to disprove the my point that the majority would not want to fuck a tranny. Even if the number is 1 in 10, that still isn't high enough to assume that it just won't matter to a partner. Maybe if it was empirically 9/10 then you'd have something here, but that's just not the case now is it?
This claim also does not manage to make a reasonable case as to why you as a tranny get to override others sexual preferences and choices, because it would ruins the immersion of LARPing to disclose.
The key is the individual person and how they define themselves.
So you agree then the trannies need to disclose so the person can reconcile sex with a tranny with their own beliefs. Good, you finally stopped listening to those rapey trannies you've been talking to. Now stop trying to both say that informed consent matters, but that it also doesn't and relevant facts can be hidden because it would make the tranny sad to disclose them.
If the key is how a person defines themselves, then what gives trannies a special privilege to not disclose they're a tranny to people who appear to be be either heterosexual, or homosexual? If a hetro or homosexual person defines themselves as someone who fucks someone of the opposite or same biological sex, that still doesn't mean a tranny gets to avoid that because it would ruin LARPing.
That was an interesting chain of logic. You basically said "pretty much everyone cares about biological sex, so trans people should disclose." I dispute that above.
You disputed that but never gave good reasons to do so. You're still dead set in the belief that you're the logical one, but you're the one trying to argue that consent is not necessary, but somehow it is. You recognize that people may have specific sexual preferences that exclude trannies, but you keep trying to avoid this by making random, vague, and baseless claims that most people would be okay with trannies. Your "dispute" was a vague and unsupported claim that "more people than you think would be okay to fuck a tranny".
It is not necessary and indispensable for proper sexual choices and informed consent.
So heterosexual and homosexual people don't exist, alright. How about you tell the NERFs that not knowing the sex of your partner is not important for consent, see how much they agree with you. You've been told multiple times by multiple people that they do believe that knowledge of the sex is important, but you deny it because it doesn't agree with your tranny sexual assault justifications.
There is another option, which is to inform any partner you take that trans status is a deal breaker.
Why is the burden on the vast majority of society who can honestly and without issue have sex with each other, and not the very, very minor population of trannies that most people would object to? Again, this is like saying that it is up to the patient in the hospital to make sure that the person treating them is really a doctor, and that the person pretending to be a doctor is under no obligation to admit they aren't. It's just as unreasonable to double check the doctor in your hospital is really a doctor as it is to check if the woman you're hitting on really is a woman.
To say that that is the only way that situation could be avoided is factually wrong.
Your solution is to put the burden on the vast majority of the population, and not the very tiny population of trannies. Let's see exactly how nonsensical that is.
1.4 million people in the US identified as trannies in 2016, in 2016 the total US population was 324,118,787. That means as of 2016 0.0043194% of the US population were trannies. Now, do you want to explain how it is reasonable for 99.996% of the US population to continually ask their possible partners if they're trannies, while trannies who represent less than half of a percent of the US population don't have to? You keep claiming my logic is bad but this is straight up bonkers. This is like putting a breathalizer in every car because it would make the DUI convict sad if only they had to blow into one. Is this not an undue burden on the 324,105,822 other Americans who can actually have honest informed consent with each other?
The thing is, trannies are such a small minority, and so many people wouldn't want to have sex with them that the burden falls on the group that represents less than half of a percent of the population. After all, when 99.996% of people can have honest informed consent, and 0.0043% can't, the burden is on that teeny-tiny minority to make sure they're the ones getting consent.
while also not prioritizing your conception of gender identity over your partners.
We're talking about sex. You can LARP as a woman all you want, but people care about your biology. You can conceive of your gender however you want, but the vast majority of people care about the sex of their partner. That's why people put it into their dating profiles! Your conception of yourself as a woman doesn't change the fact you got an inside out penis and scraped adams apple.
I think the logic you use to defend that stance, along with most people, is pretty unreasonable, as well as your characterization of trans people, as long as your refusal to understand their position.
What's reasonable is to shift the burden onto 99.996% of people? Go ahead and explain why that is actually the reasonable choice rather than making the group that represents less than half a %, and who try to be physically misleading, disclose.
Your foundation is that trans people are under no obligation to disclose. You support this by saying that it's not important because they look "close enough" and the genitals "work the same". I told you that functionality takes a backseat for biological sex for most people. You can't address this so you claim it's a strawman. Fun.
No, I support this because my default stance is privacy. That is, you do not need to offer any information you do not want to for the bare minimum standards of consent. For particular types of information, I have seen compelling arguments that they should be disclosed, therefore for those particular types of information I support disclosure. For example, the fact that you currently have an STD should be disclosed because the potential harm of a disease is real and measurable. I have not seen a compelling argument that trans status should be disclosed.
My posts about how trans people have form and functionality were a response to some other claim you made on a tangent and doesn't really have anything to do with that.
Which is a hilarious claim for you to make because your "logic" taken to it's conclusion has resulted in condemned behaviour, like with the Indian kid, and even illegal behaviour that has been punished with prison time, like with the British tranny. My logic has been codified into law, yours has been successfully prosecuted. That should tell you something about the strength of your supposed logic.
That is actually still in dispute. Just because i haven't had the time to teach you both logic and how to read and interpret case law doesn't mean you are correct. I can only make so much long ass posts in one day
You yourself condemn the people who take your logic of non-disclosure into a relationship. Seriously, you can't even accept the far reaching results of justifying tranny non-disclosure.
Obviously you should disclose more information about yourself in a long term relationship then the minimum needed for casual sex.
Okay you clearly don't know that a premise is so I'll write my argument out into premise-conclusion form because you're apparently too fucking stupid to actually successfully identify a premise.
P1: Trannies are not the biological sex they present themselves as
P2: People care about biological sex
P3: People have an inalienable right to sexual preferences and an inalienable right to informed consent
C: Trannies should identify that they're trannies before any intimacy with hetero or homosexual people.
This is absolutely fantastic. Your dumbass has failed to identify my premises correctly and now you're trying to call me out on it? Holy fuck this is hilarious, especially considering that you're keep squealing about logic.
The argument you previously were making, that "You're out here, trying to show that when it comes to sexual intimacy the right not to associate no longer is more important than the right to associate" was absolutely based on what I correctly identified as premise for that particular argument.
Likewise with similar claims about "my foundational view of consent".
What you are describing here is a different argument with different premises. This may be your general argument, then you should focus on it, and stop beating around the bush like you promised to.
I'll admit, I totally didn't forsee you claiming that you didn't even make that argument, when I made sure to quote it directly. But that's part of the fun of discovering just how poorly your logic works. You really don't disappoint.
Here's your arguement for comparison;
That's not my argument. Explanation already above.
As for your insane counterexample about wealth; I bet you thought you got me here. However, it turns out though that being rich doesn't really matter to the vast majority of people, so there is not substantial reason to disclose that. Far, far less people actually and honestly care about wealth, than they care if their partner really is a tranny. However, in the cases of the people who did honestly care about long term wealth, they would make that clear, which would mean you have a duty to disclose that. If you actually read that case I used you'd see they also mentioned that there. Apparently you didn't read it because you're trying to make an argument they already dismissed.
The primary point of that was to illustrate that the premise you are claiming wasn't a premise actually was a premise for that argument, since if you swap the premise for a different one the argument becomes not true (thus illustrating the argument depended on the premise). That was a continuation of the point above.
but funny you should mention the case, because he actually specifically says that deceptions based on wealth are okay, you can flat out lie about that and it doesn't violate consent. Read 23-25. "In reality, some deceptions (such as, for example, in relation to wealth) will obviously not be sufficient to vitiate consent. "
I keep mentioning that trannies should disclose because that's my conclusion you mongoloid. People tend to keep mentioning their conclusion
Yea, im pointing out the things you think are arguments use your conclusion as a premise, which make them pointless.
As an example, the general conclusion of my argument is that trans people don't have to disclose. I can use that statement, assume it is true, and then build additional arguments on top of it, and use the conclusion as a premise. So lets say, I say you are wrong because you are trying to violate the right to privacy trans people have. That argument requires the premise that trans people don't need to disclose. You would not find that to be compelling argument, since you don't believe the required premise is true. The same is true when you make arguments trying to claim I'm wrong because I am trying to allow trans people to violate standards of consent. I'm not, and that's not a compelling argument because I don't believe the required premise of that argument is true.
So heterosexual and homosexual people don't exist, alright. How about you tell the NERFs that not knowing the sex of your partner is not important for consent, see how much they agree with you.
Are you referring to TERFs? I'm not really sure what NERFs are, but TERF's believe in some pretty retarded things that you probably wouldn't agree with. There have been a few posts here mocking them very recently actually. You probably shouldn't look to them for ideology guidance.
It's also a bit silly to ask them even if they were semi sane, because they are anti-trans, so of course they would agree with you. You are basically saying "ask people who agree with me, and see how much they agree with you". At which point I could just say the same back, as there are plenty of pro trans places that would agree with me.
If by NERFS you are talking about something else, I sincerely don't know lmao, googling NERF's just gives me NERF, the toy gun brand, and I'm not sure if they would answer to questions about sexual consent.
No, I support this because my default stance is privacy.
Because you believe that a persons right to privacy is greater than the right to informed consent.
I have not seen a compelling argument that trans status should be disclosed.
Because they're not the biological sex they pretend to be, they have mutilated genitals, and most people aren't cool with that. How is most people not being cool with trannies not compelling?
Just because i haven't had the time to teach you both logic
You don't know what a premise is and you think that 99.996% of people have to take an extra step rather than 0.004%. That's the definition of illogical.
the minimum needed for casual sex.
The bare minimum for casual sex is that your appearance matches your biology. Which is why 99.996% of the people don't have to disclose their biological sex.
You're out here, trying to show that when it comes to sexual intimacy the right not to associate no longer is more important than the right to associate
You literally are arguing that in response to P3 you mong.
part of the fun of discovering just how poorly your logic works.
Like when your "logic" has girls feeling violated and dragging trannies to court? Please, tell me how that's good logic. That tranny didn't disclose because "muh privacy" but look what happened. Holy shit you're like a pigeon playing chess. You shit all over the board and think you won.
The primary point of that was to illustrate that the premise you are claiming wasn't a premise actually was a premise
Because you don't understand what a premise is, right we all understand you don't understand premises unless they're in premise-conclusion form. You don't need to rehash that.
Yea, im pointing out the things you think are arguments use your conclusion as a premise,
Again, you thought this because you can't identify premises outside of premise-conclusion form. You're just showing how bad you are at this. It's embarrassing TBH.
I can use that statement, assume it is true, and then build additional arguments on top of it
Premises lead to a conclusion, conclusions aren't established and then premises created to support them.
I say you are wrong because you are trying to violate the right to privacy trans people have.
Their right to privacy ends when it comes to another persons body and their bodily autonomy. See? Again you're trying to argue that a tranny getting sex is more important than informed consent. You're literally saying here that a trannies right to privacy is greater than all other humans right to informed consent. It's not.
You probably shouldn't look to them for ideology guidance
I did mean TERF, all I really remember about them is they believe that gender is a social construct (which is retarded) and that trannies aren't women. I agree with that second belief.
You are basically saying "ask people who agree with me, and see how much they agree with you".
I'm saying ask people who care about biological sex why they care about biological sex.
there are plenty of pro trans places that would agree with me.
Yeah the rapey trans in/r/TransgenderReality who think their right to privacy overrides peoples right to not sexually associate.
I am disputing your claims that YOU are treating as absolute fact with an equivalent level of antecodal evidence.
Claims like the right to not associate sexually are greater than the right to associate sexually? Or the claim that each person is allowed to have their own conception of gender and to want to only have sex with certain biological sexes. If we take your "if it looks like a woman and has the similar genitals as a woman" to mean they are a woman, then all sex dolls are now women.
If you apply the same logic to anything else that most people would find a turn off, then they wouldn't be usually considered rape either. For example, I'd imagine that most people wouldn't want to sleep with a convicted murderer. Likewise, you wouldn't assume your partner is a convicted murderer, nor would you think to ask. Does that mean the convicted murderer is raping everyone he sleeps with if he doesn't disclose his criminal history before hand? I'd think not. If so, where does it end? Felonies? Misdemeanors?
As much as you REEEEE about your logic you love to bring up false equivalences. When a dude hits on a woman, he's clearly under the impression she is a biological female. That's why he is hitting on her. This is immediate and known. What isn't immediate and known would be his feelings about criminal conviction. This is a big part why I'm saying that disclosing biological sex matters. It's the primary reason people get hit on and is the foundation for why they're hitting on them. You really still think that these arrangements work and that's because you're stupid.
And lastly, in ethical discussions, should things always be decided by the majority? I would also say no.
We're talking about the reasonableness of your suggestion that 99.996% of people need to always say "Hey I don't want to fuck a tranny" on a date rather than 0.004% to have to say "Just so you know, I really like you but I was born a man. I really hope you're okay with this.".
For example, if the majority of people don't want to sleep with jews, then by this logic a jew should always disclose the fact that they are jews, otherwise they are raping people.
Having sex with a different faith really isn't the same as having sex with a different biological sex. However if we knew most people wouldn't want to have sex with Jews, and Jews made up 0.004% of the population then yes they would have to disclose.
arguably the burden of revealing that "you aren't into trans people" is much lighter per individual than the burden of having to disclose trans status
Tell that to the British girl. Please though, tell me why hundreds of millions need to constantly mention this because it would make less than 2 million sad to have to mention it? Is the harm in saying "So I really do like you and we have been getting along really well. But I just want you to know that I was born as a male but have all the functional parts of a woman." worse than all the rest of society having to constantly mention this when they would have had a 99.996% of being correct that their partner was the right sex?
which currently can result in much worse consequences, both social and physical.
I hope you can see the flaw in using the percentage of people who are not transgender as the amount of people who would not sleep with them.
Yes, that vague number that you're mentioned but are assured are the majority. Spoiler alert, I can't see it being higher than 1 in 10 at very best. Still doesn't mean you don't disclose because it would make you sad.
Again, you thought this because you can't identify premises outside of premise-conclusion form. You're just showing how bad you are at this. It's embarrassing TBH.
I did correctly identify that as a premise. The problem is you can't identify your arguments on top of failing to identify premises for your arguments. You imagine you have just one general coherent argument, what you really have is a splattering of additional statements, that are also arguments in addition to that argument.
Those additional arguments are based on assuming the conclusion to your general argument is true, and yet at the same time you attempt to use these additional arguments to support your general argument. Hence circular reasoning.
Because you believe that a persons right to privacy is greater than the right to informed consent.
Its like I measure a spheres diameter, and you measure the same spheres diameter, and get a different result. Then we both use the equation "(4/3) Γ pi Γ r3" to calculate the volume. Then you disagree with the measurement of the diameter I did, but you spend your time saying that I don't know the equation to calculate the volume of a sphere, I don't know how to do math, I don't know what pi is, instead of actually addressing my how my original measurement is wrong. You may be right in saying my measurement is wrong, but all the arguments to why my original measurement is wrong are flawed. In the same way my equation of consent is the same as yours, and I do believe that right to consent is greater than right to privacy.
This is basically why this argument will never end if I keep going, so this will maybe be my last post, or the next one. Who knows, self control in walking away from internet arguments was never my forte
As much as you REEEEE about your logic you love to bring up false equivalences. When a dude hits on a woman, he's clearly under the impression she is a biological female. That's why he is hitting on her. This is immediate and known. What isn't immediate and known would be his feelings about criminal conviction.
...
However if we knew most people wouldn't want to have sex with Jews, and Jews made up 0.004% of the population then yes they would have to disclose.
Really this pretty much settles this argument to me. The same logic applies to convicted murderers. Most people wouldn't want to sleep with one, and they are an equivalently small amount of the population. Likewise, someones feelings about sleeping with jews wouldn't be immediately known.
Yet you said that hypothetical jews should disclose, and not the murderers, even though the situations are the same. As far as I'm concerned, that's because your logic isn't really consistent at all.
Personally, I don't think either needs to disclose.
If you honestly think that the jews in that hypothetical situation are raping other people simply by not disclosing their ethnicity, I am glad that I don't adhere to your moral standards. I view that as absurd.
(I honestly think if you were asked that hypothetical question out of the blue, without the context of this conversation, you would have thought that idea is absurd too. Of course that's just speculation. It's been fun)
(also trans people make up 0.4% of the population btw, to express things as a percent you have to move the decimal point to the right twice after the division)
I did correctly identify that as a premise. The problem is you can't identify your arguments on top of failing to identify premises for your arguments.
No you didn't which is why I had to give you premise-conclusion form. It's okay champ, everyone makes mistakes, like God when he made trannies.
You imagine you have just one general coherent argument, what you really have is a splattering of additional statements, that are also arguments in addition to that general argument.
AKA "REEEEEEEE I can't defeat either P1, P2, or P3 so I'm just going to say you're incoherent!"
Nice try.
Those additional arguments are based on assuming the conclusion to your general argument is true, and yet at the same time you attempt to use these additional arguments to support your general argument. Hence circular reasoning.
Either fucking address the premises I outlined in my premise-conclusion form of shut the fuck up. You're literally just throwing a tantrum right now because you can't make a reasonable case for why a trannies right to privacy is greater than 99.996% of the populations right to sexual choices and bodily autonomy.
This is basically why this argument will never end if I keep going
It keeps going because you refuse to admit that you're trying to prove that a trannies right to privacy is greater than 99.996% of the populations right to sexual choices and informed consent. You can't say why that is, nor can you reconcile the fact that the deceit that you advocate results in both violence against trannies, and a great deal of emotional harm in the other partners. You freely admit that they're are plenty of people who would gladly bang a tranny, but then refuse to just have trannies tell the truth and get enthusiastic consent. You prefer the trannies get uninformed consent because it would make them sad to tell the truth.
Tell me more about how the examples of that Indian kid or the British girl are good. They're both the logical results of your argument that "Trannies have a right to privacy greater than humanity has the right to informed consent REEEEEE! We can't tell the truth because it would make us sad REEEEEE!" You yourself can't stand the logical results of your argument, so you try and backtrack and say "well for hookups it's okay to lie but for relationships it's not" ignoring the fact that by doing so you're admitting that being a tranny is a relevant detail.
This is really fun seeing you squirm and try and contort yourself into being the "reasonable" one. You've freely admitted multiple times that being a tranny is relevant, but then you try and twist it so somehow it's not.
Who knows, self control in walking away from internet argumentstelling the truth and being consistent was never my forte
Most people wouldn't want to sleep with one, and they are an equivalently small amount of the population. Likewise, someones feelings about sleeping with jews wouldn't be immediately known.
Which is true but you're still ignoring my point that we immediately know what biological sex is important to someone when they hit on another person. If a woman starts hitting on another woman, it's because she thinks that a woman in both sex and gender. We now know that for this woman, she's a lesbian who wants to sleep with women. We can talk to her and find out if she is bisexual or purely a lesbian, but what we can know for sure is that she's interested in women. You keep trying to equivocate things that are immediately known with things that you only find out through talking to them. Again, you're thicker than pig shit and just squirming to try and find a way to justify purposeful deceit in order to get around bodily autonomy.
Personally, I don't think either needs to disclose.
Unless they want to be in a relationship right? That's the standard you put for trannies. Funny how you even mention that they should disclose. Maybe it's because you yourself realize that it's a very relevant detail.
I am glad that I don't adhere to your moral standards. I view that as absurd.
Yes, being truthful and getting actual informed consent is so horrific. God, I even claim theft is wrong. I'm a monster.
(also trans people make up 0.4% of the population btw, to express things as a percent you have to move the decimal point to the right twice after the division)
Ah yes, 0.43% I messed up here, my bad. Shows what happens when you rush things. Good you caught it though, accuracy is always important. Especially when you're not the biological sex you present yourself as and people don't realize that.
It's okay champ, everyone makes mistakes, like God when he made trannies.
I agree! Luckily we have now have the medical technology to fix God's mistakes. It totally sucked when God made them be born the wrong sex, but now we can fix that =)
Hopefully medical technology will progress till we can fix God's other mistakes, like letting you be born without the ability to reason. I really tried, but nothing I can do to fix it.
Which is true but you're still ignoring my point that we immediately know what biological sex is important to someone when they hit on another person. If a woman starts hitting on another woman, it's because she thinks that a woman in both sex and gender. We now know that for this woman, she's a lesbian who wants to sleep with women. We can talk to her and find out if she is bisexual or purely a lesbian, but what we can know for sure is that she's interested in women. You keep trying to equivocate things that are immediately known with things that you only find out through talking to them.
False, you only know that the majority of people are interested in biological sex. I know plenty of people who don't care about biological sex and only care about gender. Therefore, when they hit on a women, if you were to draw the conclusion they are only interested in biological women, you would absolutely be incorrect. Fact. The only way you would "know for sure" would be to ask them.
The imaginary distinction you've made between "immediately knowing" and "having to ask them" is quite amazing. In all of these situations all you are doing is making reasonable assumptions based how the majority would act.
Unless they want to be in a relationship right
The idea that a healthy long term relationship should involve more disclosure than the minimum needed for casual sex is such a crazy idea, I know rite
Luckily we have now have the medical technology to fix God's mistakes.
Hold on there coyboy. I would agree with you as soon as they can be transferred into new bodies. Turning your dick inside out and getting implants isn't even close to becoming a woman.
like letting you be born without the ability to reason.
Says the guy who is saying that being trans is a relevant fact but also is not because trannies getting laid is more important than informed consent. Fantastic.
I know plenty of people who don't care about biological sex and only care about gender.
/r/TotallyTrans is not representative of the population as a whole. Again, you have zero numbers to back this up. They actually wrote an article about you too <3. Either way, 4% at best doesn't mean trannies get to lie about the fact their a biological man LARPing as a woman or a biological woman LARPing as a man.
Fact. The only way you would "know for sure" would be to ask them.
So trannies need to disclose. You admit it! Fucking finally! It's been a long road but you're finally here.
The imaginary distinction you've made between "immediately knowing" and "having to ask them" is quite amazing.
I have a cousin who served in Afghanistan. He met a woman about a year and a half after he left the Army. She was pretty hippy and new age but they got along really well and ended up dating. Then one day she said she would never want to be a soldier in response to a story about a Marine throwing a dog off a cliff. He told her that he had served and never did anything like that. He showed her his military ID and told her which province he served in. She did some soul searching and ended up realizing that he was still a good person and wouldn't have been the worst of the Army. They're married now but this is an example of shit people don't know right away. The fact she assumed that he was a biological male was immediate and a correct assumption. In the case of trannies, it's not a correct assumption so they need to disclose it. Yeah she was a hippy but that doesn't mean she would never want to be with a soldier, which is why you disclose that shit the second it becomes relevant.
In all of these situations all you are doing is making reasonable assumptions based how the majority would act.
Yes, as is tradition.
The idea that a healthy long term relationship should involve more disclosure than the minimum needed for casual sex is such a crazy idea, I know rite
And why should the tranny disclose? Because it could change the other persons consent towards the relationship, something you recognize and accept. Knowing that the truth could change consent is just as relevant for a fling as it is for a relationship you mong.
Just admit it that a trannies right to privacy is not greater than the right to informed consent and sexual autonomy. You've yet to show why people have less of a right to informed choices and to associate sexually in accordance with their beliefs than a tranny has to being "private" even though you recognize the shitty situations that come from non-disclosure.
This is what, the 4th time you've linked that subreddit? I don't even know what it's about lmao, its a private subreddit.
I am talking about a variety of people I know, from various places that are pro LGBT, both online and in person. I'm also not making any statements about the general population, nor did I estimate any statistics.
So trannies need to disclose. You admit it! Fucking finally!
Lmao omg, no, the point I made was literally the opposite of whatever you are imagining. You said someone who is interested in a woman is only interested in biological sex. I was saying that you don't know for a fact that someone who is interested in a woman is only interested in biological sex. I was responding to a statement you made. That said the opposite. I'm just, wow. How do you even get these conclusions? Its absolutely astonishing
I have a cousin who served in Afghanistan. He met a woman about a year and a half after he left the Army. She was pretty hippy and new age but they got along really well and ended up dating. Then one day she said she would never want to be a soldier in response to a story about a Marine throwing a dog off a cliff. He told her that he had served and never did anything like that. He showed her his military ID and told her which province he served in. She did some soul searching and ended up realizing that he was still a good person and wouldn't have been the worst of the Army. They're married now but this is an example of shit people don't know right away. The fact she assumed that he was a biological male was immediate and a correct assumption. In the case of trannies, it's not a correct assumption so they need to disclose it. Yeah she was a hippy but that doesn't mean she would never want to be with a soldier, which is why you disclose that shit the second it becomes relevant.
You've lost the point and ended up in Afghanistan. It's a beautiful story, don't get me wrong.
Yes, as is tradition.
So you admit all of those hypothetical situations are identical
Please, stay on topic. You can do it. I'm really only still in this conversation to see you attempt to justify why convicted murderers don't have to disclose while the hypothetical jews and trans people do. They all satisfy the supposed reasoning for why trans people should disclose.
Most people don't want to sleep with trans people, most people don't want to sleep with convicted murderers, Check.
You usually immediately assume that your partner isn't trans, you usually assume immediately that your partner isn't a convicted murderer. Check.
Consent could be revoked if they knew their partner was a murderer, Consent could be revoked if they knew their partner was trans. Check.
The amount of trans people in the US is really small, the amount of convicted murderers walking around the US is really small. Check.
Knowing that the truth could change consent is just as relevant for a fling as it is for a relationship you mong.
Things that should be in a good relationship:
deep knowledge of you partners past, plans for the future, interests and hobbies , whether you want to have children
Things that are needed in a healthy relationship doesn't mean they are needed for casual flings. Any of those things could end consent towards the relationship and for sex too. The fact that I said something belongs in the category of "Things you should talk about in a relationship" doesn't mean it also belongs in the category of "things you HAVE to talk about to get consent for sex"
I don't even know what it's about lmao, its a private subreddit.
Yet you're a very active participant in it. In fact you've made exactly 48 posts to it. Probably to justify non-consent but still, 48 rapey posts. Don't bullshit a bullshitter son. Are you going to tell me you don't own an android device next?
I am talking about a variety of people I know, from various places that are pro LGBT, both online and in person.
Fucking kek. The "I don't have any objective truth bombs to drops so I'll drag my degenerate friends into this" argument.
You've lost the point and ended up in Afghanistan. It's a beautiful story, don't get me wrong.
Hoooo boy now this is pod racing!
You were rambling on about how most people wouldn't want to date a murderer or criminal. So I told you the story of my veteran cousin and his now wife. She was a hippy, hippies usually don't like soldiers but she didn't know he served because of his long hair and beard. When she mentioned she wouldn't fuck a soldier he told her he had been one. These sort of things aren't as self-evident as people have a preference for biological sex. If there was any doubt you weren't retarded before it's been erased now.
I'm really only still in this conversation to see you attempt to justify why convicted murderers don't have to disclose while the hypothetical jews and trans people do.
No you're not. You're still here because you're a rapey tranny who thinks that both trannies should disclose because its a relevant fact, and that they shouldn't because its an irrelevant fact. This is seen in your argument that trannies in relationships should disclose while trannies looking to fuck NEETs shouldn't. You can't prove that so you've just REEEEEEEing because you don't know how to handle the fact you've been beaten like a rented mule.
Most people don't want to sleep with trans people, most people don't want to sleep with convicted murderers, Check.
Yet you're saying that trannies have more of a right to sex than every other human has to consent. Yes it may make trannies sad but that goes with the territory of everyone else pretending they're the gender they identify with and not constantly ripping on them. IMO there are only 2 times a tranny needs to disclose, #1 before medical treatment, #2 before sexual relations.
Things that should be in a good relationship: deep knowledge of you partners past, plans for the future, interests and hobbies , whether you want to have children
Also the fact they have an inside out dick. Hell, thats relevant for all relationships with the mistakes of God.
Things that are needed in a healthy relationship doesn't mean they are needed for casual flings.
So consent is important as long as it doesn't keep a tranny from getting laid. Yes I've brought this up but you keep denying saying it while you say it. Fantastic, absolutely fantastic.
"Things you should talk about in a relationship" doesn't mean it also belongs in the category of "things you HAVE to talk about to get consent for sex"
When you're LARPing as the sex you aren't yes it is. Fuck, you're twice as thick as pig shit and twice as offensive.
Yet you're a very active participant in it. In fact you've made exactly 48 posts to it. Probably to justify non-consent but still, 48 rapey posts. Don't bullshit a bullshitter son. Are you going to tell me you don't own an android device next?
OMG you are right lol, I remember.
Transgenderreality is an ANTI TRANS subreddit in which I had a big old argument with a anti-trans person almost a year ago (that had nothing to do with consent and sex, but the bathroom issue), just like I'm having one with you. Heck I've made as much posts in r/drama, doesn't mean I agree with all of them, does it?
If anything, that subreddit is your people, not my friends ahahaha
its okay tho, just one more in a long line of assumptions presumed as fact from a bullshitter
You were rambling on about how most people wouldn't want to date a murderer
Yes exactly
When she mentioned she wouldn't fuck a soldier he told her he had been one. These sort of things aren't as self-evident as people have a preference for biological sex.
A soldier isn't even close the same as a convicted murderer. Some people don't like soldiers. Some people in our society LOVES soldiers. We shower them with honors.
In comparison, almost everyone does not like convicted murderers. That's why society has them spend decades in jail.
You've made a cute anecdote about a topic that doesn't compare. it's cute, but irrelevant
The idea that people wouldn't want to sleep with a convicted murderer is at least as convincing as your idea that they wouldn't want to sleep with trans people. They are both reasonably large majorities.
No you're not. You're still here because you're a rapey tranny who thinks that both trannies should disclose because its a relevant fact, and that they shouldn't because its an irrelevant fact. This is seen in your argument that trannies in relationships should disclose while trannies looking to fuck NEETs shouldn't. You can't prove that so you've just REEEEEEEing because you don't know how to handle the fact you've been beaten like a rented mule.
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
note that none of that is actually giving a straight answer on the convicted murderer thing
Yet you're saying that trannies have more of a right to sex
No, I'm saying justify your contradictory logic in regards to convicted murders. Do it. Do iit.
I really want to see how many things you would think a person would need to disclose under the same logic, we already have ethnicity, what else?
So consent is important as long as it doesn't keep a tranny from getting laid. Yes I've brought this up but you keep denying saying it while you say it. Fantastic, absolutely fantastic.
Nope, thats not what i said. Look, here are the words I said
"Things that are needed in a healthy relationship doesn't mean they are needed for casual flings."
logic, u aint got it because -
When you're LARPing as the sex you aren't yes it is
this is u failing at arguments again
it keeps happening
your first argument "You said that disclosing matters for relationships, GOTCHYU! That means it should matter for consent"
my response "something mattering for a relationship doesn't necessary matter for consent"
your response "yes but THIS ONE DOES"
You are so focused on being right that you can't realise that you throw out fallacious argument after fallacious argument, then pivot pack to your original argument when I call you out on it (and pretend you didn't make a fallacious argument). My response was a perfectly valid response to your original fallacious argument, regardless if you are right about the overall topic of disclosure.
admit ur argument was fallacious and i might gain like 1% of respect for your intellect
Fuck, you're twice as thick as pig shit and twice as offensive.
just one more in a long line of assumptions presumed as fact from a bullshitter
Says the guy who literally is trying to make the claim that everyone would be okay with having sex with a tranny, so they don't have to disclose. Why do trannies have a greater right to privacy than the rest of humanity have to informed consent champ? You're still not addressing this in any meaningful way aside for "But me and my friends would bang trannies so they don't have to disclose".
Ironically you bringing up your friends being cool with fucking trannies makes far more of a case for disclosure rather than non-disclosure.
A soldier isn't even close the same as a convicted murderer. Some people don't like soldiers. Some people in our society LOVE soldiers. We shower them with honors. I would strongly disagree that a majority wouldnt sleep with soldiers.
You missed the point completely showing once again that you're literally mentally retarded. The point was that as soon as you realize that someone might revoke consent when a fact was known, you have a moral duty to disclose that fact. For him it was when she mentioned her aversion to the armed forces, for trannies it's when a heterosexual or homosexual person hits on them, for murders it would be the fact they're murderers (especially if they committed murder against a spouse or child).
Do you really need everything spoonfed to you?
No, I'm saying justify your contradictory logic in regards to convicted murders. Do it. Do iit.
I already have you literally retarded mong. I've said repeatedly that **as soon as you realize that a fact about you might revoke consent, you have a moral duty to disclose that". That covers murderers too, especially if they've committed violence against a spouse or child. Guys like this really should mention that they're a murderer, however like trannies murderers tend to want to hide relevant facts that might revoke consent.
I really want to see how many things you would think a person would need to disclose under the same logic
For fuck sakes. If a person who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual hits on a person who appears to be the relevant sex, it's because they think that person it actually the relevant sex. No one fucks a gender, they fuck a biological sex. So trannies should disclose that they're trannies so the person who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual can make an informed choice if they want to continue.
You can bring up other examples until the cows come home but it doesn't change the fact that trannies immediately know that consent is given to the sex they appear as, not the sex they are. Hence the need to disclose. Maybe they'll get lucky and the person will be okay with that, but you don't get to assume when simply telling the truth you let you know for sure.
You've still not been able to explain exactly why in a world where there are people who would give full consent to sex with a tranny, they need to lie about being a tranny. You avoid trying to explain why exactly you keep claiming that trannies have more of a right to privacy than the rest of humanity has to informed consent and bodily autonomy.
"Things that are needed in a healthy relationship doesn't mean they are needed for casual flings."
AKA "I know and accept that a tranny being a tranny is relevant, but I think that a tranny getting laid is more important than informed consent."
What's needed for casual flings is consent. When a person clearly gave consent to a sex you aren't, you need to make sure they are aware you are not the sex you're trying to appear as. Whats the word again for sex without consent again...
You are so focused on being right that you can't realise that you throw out fallacious argument after fallacious argument
Holy shit that is fucking rich coming from a guy trying to hard to justify deception and argue that informed consent is not relevant for sexual relations. You're out here both saying that being a tranny is a relevant detail, but it's not when it comes to sex, something that very much
admit ur argument was fallacious and i might gain like 1% of respect for your intellect
Says the guy who forgets to capitalize the start of sentences and "I". Fantastic, absolutely fantastic. You're out here still trying to justify deception in order to get consent because you're saying that a trannies right to privacy is more important that everyone elses right to informed consent and bodily autonomy. You keep trying to deny this but this is central for you. You're falling back on the "oh it's no big deal if you don't disclose" in order to try and make it seem that being a biological male who has to actively keep his body from trying to heal his inside out dick is no more important or relevant than your breakfast.
How exactly is lying and hiding facts in order to get sex moral? After all if the person appears heterosexual or homosexual, and they're hitting on someone who appears to be the right sex, then they've consented to that sex, not the one they don't realize. You're saying that this doesn't matter because they might be okay with trannies, but can't provide a convincing argument for why they shouldn't just tell them so they can get informed consent. You'd consent to bang a tranny, and a TERF wouldn't. So why is it that you have decided that the bodily autonomy and right to not sexually associate of the TERF is less important than the trannies right to privacy?
My response was a perfectly valid response to your original fallacious argument, regardless if you are right about the overall topic of disclosure.
If disclosure is important, it's always important you absolute retard. Why is being a tranny relevant in a relationship? Because you need to be honest with your partner and make sure they're fully aware of who you are.
Says the guy who was wrong. Fact. Want to tell me more about my "friends" at transgenderreality? Shhhhh you won't respond, that you require to acknowledge that you can be wrong in your assumptions, which is a self introspective skill you do not have
for murders it would be the fact they're murderers (especially if they committed murder against a spouse or child).
Oh, so murders are actually the same now and they have to disclose? Wow interesting, don't you remember this:
As much as you REEEEE about your logic you love to bring up false equivalences. When a dude hits on a woman, he's clearly under the impression she is a biological female. That's why he is hitting on her. This is immediate and known. What isn't immediate and known would be his feelings about criminal conviction.
What a wacky change from your previous position, where you said it was a false equivalence and that it's a completely different type of situation. I guess "I already have" means pretending you didn't say things in the first place.
This really isn't surprising, when a person is shown that their positions contradict, they sometimes pretend they didn't even have the position instead of confronting the fact that their logic for their positions is contradictory
If disclosure is important, it's always important you absolute retard.
"disclosure of future plans to go to university is important in a relationship. That is not important for casual sex."
Boom, I just showed something can be important for relationships and not for sex. Since a single counter example is all you need to prove an "always" statement wrong, your reasoning was wrong.
Your next step is to completely miss the point that I'm talking about your reasoning being fallacious and instead make a whiny response that will likely involve the words "tranny, disclose, consent" thrown together
You clearly don't like what happened
Well ya, that's because I realize that the definition of rape isn't "Gee I don't like what happened in that situation"
That's because I use logic to determine positions, not feelings
Fact. Want to tell me more about my "friends" at transgenderreality? Shhhhh you won't respond, that you require to acknowledge that you can be wrong in your assumptions, which is a self introspective skill you do not have
I assumed it was a support sub for trannies like you who want to try and avoid consent by lying. My bad there.
Oh, so murders are actually the same now and they have to disclose? Wow interesting, don't you remember this:
Holy fuck you're so retarded you must have a tard wrangler. I told you that as soon as you're aware that there is something about you that might revoke consent you should disclose it. You're saying that if you know there is something about you that might revoke consent you should hide it because it might make you sad to tell the truth. Fucking kek.
I guess "I already have" means pretending you didn't say things in the first place.
You're still not answering how lying and purposeful deception are moral and should be followed. Especially when doing exactly what you advocate results in situations you yourself don't like. But please, post more bullshit.
This really isn't surprising, when a person is shown that their positions contradict,
"Trannies should disclose, also trannies shouldn't disclose" - /u/Ls777
Please. Tell me more how the examples of British girl and Indian guy are good. Especially since they are what happens when you say "99.6% of the population has to ask if they're a tranny because it would make 0.4% sad to disclose that." Go ahead Mr. Logical.
"disclosure of future plans to go to university is important in a relationship. That is not important for casual sex."
Hahahahaha holy shit you literally are this retarded. This is nowhere near the same thing as not being the biological sex you present yourself as. "Someone might go to University in the future so I better lie about being a woman while being a dude" You honestly must have been kicked in the head by a donkey in order to be this retarded.
This really isn't surprising, when a person is shown that their positions contradict
My position that if someone who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual hits on someone who appears to be a relevant sex then the tranny must disclose? Yeah, you really showed how informed consent isn't important.
Since a single counter example is all you need to prove an "always" statement wrong, your reasoning was wrong.
Except when multiple people tell you that they aren't cool with fucking trannies and then you claim everyone would be because you and your friends would be okay with it. This is absolutely fantastic. You can't prove how it moral to lie to get sex so you make up bullshit and then pretend to be the logical one. You're exactly like the pigeon who shits all over the board and thinks he won.
Please though, explain exactly to me how lying and fostering deception in order to get sex is moral. Because unless you can do that, you're advocating for an immoral stance, and when is the right thing ever an immoral action?
That's because I use logic to determine positions, not feelings
"I'm okay with fucking trannies and I feel it's no big deal so they don't have to disclose". This literally has been your argument, that you don't feel they need to disclose because you don't feel that it's important". You also feel that more people than I would think would like to fuck a tranny but offer no supporting proof. The highest number I can find is 11% (the amount of people who have some attraction to the same sex), which is absolutely not high enough to just avoid consent.
You haven't be able to show that P1, P2, or P3 of my argument is false, but you keep squealing about logic. It's lovely really. You're trying so, so hard to justify deception in order to get sex while completely ignoring the results you don't like.
You said that if 99.6% of the population doesn't want to fuck a tranny then they should say that right away. Ignoring the fact that this 99.6% could have honest informed consent regarding their partners sex in 99.6% of cases you're still stuck with examples like that tranny dating that Indian kid and the one in England. You clearly don't like those results but they come with your stance of "You don't have to disclose". That's why you don't address them while squealing about logic, it's because you know that you've been beat but you have too much pride to just admit that trannies should tell the truth. You're trying to make a case against the truth for fuck sake and thinking you're in the right. You're trying to have them justify a lie and trying to prevent people from getting informed consent because they would feel bad.
So how is not disclosing not valuing your privacy over informed consent? You still avoid addressing this because you know that you can't make a case for avoiding consent in good faith. You just value getting laid over morality and telling the truth. Please though, try and explain how hiding your status is more moral that telling the truth and getting informed consent Mr. "Logical". I'll wait while you avoid this again.
I told you that as soon as you're aware that there is something about you that might revoke consent you should disclose it.
A convicted murderer is always aware that most people would not want to sleep with a murderer. Therefore they must always disclose their criminal history to a sexual partner. This is a direct reading of your stated logic. If true, why does that contradict your earlier conclusion that the analogy is completely different and they don't have to disclose.
Like I said before, the only reason I am in this conversation is for you to justify this contradiction and BOY IS IT GETTING GOOD, your posts just get longer and more rambling
"Trannies should disclose, also trannies shouldn't disclose" - /u/Ls777
Hahahahaha holy shit you literally are this retarded. This is nowhere near the same thing as not being the biological sex you present yourself as. "Someone might go to University in the future so I better lie about being a woman while being a dude" You honestly must have been kicked in the head by a donkey in order to be this retarded.
You missed the point exactly like I said you would, it's almost scary how I can perfectly I can predict your thought process now. If you believe they aren't the same, then your statement "If disclosure is important, it's always important you absolute retard" is wrong. The point of that analogy was to disprove your statement, not say the situations are the same. I never said they were the same.
A convicted murderer is always aware that most people would not want to sleep with a murderer. Therefore they must always disclose their criminal history to a sexual partner. This is a direct reading of your stated logic. If true, why does that contradict your earlier conclusion that the analogy is completely different and they don't have to disclose.
You really are this stupid huh? For the vast majority of society, gender = sex and they act under that belief. So when a hetero guy is hitting on a woman, or a gay man is hitting on another man, the belief will almost certainly be that the other person is the sex that usually is associated with that gender. So when someone who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual is hitting on a trans person who has the gender that heterosexuals or homosexuals have an interest in, then the tranny has a moral imperative to make it clear that they're a tranny. You've still not been able to show that the majority of heterosexuals or homosexuals would be okay with a tranny aside from you and your friends.
So let's take a look at a study that focused on trans people being accepted into gendered spaces at Universities. After all most students are rather liberal these days and you certainly can't make the case that more people would have sex with a tranny than would share a bathroom with one. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10538720.2016.1261749
So let's see how trannies are generally accepted into gendered spaces.
Huh. It doesn't seem to be the case that most University students are okay with trannies. That's not a good sign for you especially since University students tend to be far more liberal than wider society. Fun fact is that this study omitted everyone over 30 from it so it focused entirely on younger people raised in an age where LGBT people have been more accepted than ever. I guess your feeling that most people would be okay with fucking a tranny isn't quite right.
You said though that as long as they have the "right equipment" guys would fuck them right? We'll when it comes to something as inconsequential as a bathroom...
Uh oh. Looks like you and your friends aren't exactly representative of society as a whole. That's what I told you but you still seem to think that you are. Trans-women are less accepted than trans-men. Gee, it seems like that's what everyone else has told you too.
How about gay people though? Surely gay people would be far more accepting of trans people right?
Looks like a rather large amount of people actually care if their partner is a tranny. That doesn't work so well for your "Most people wouldn't care as long as they have a 'vagina'!" Turns out gay men really aren't a fan of transgendered people. Seems to be that the facts are in my corner, while the feelings are solidly in yours.
Now you did say that heterosexual men really wouldn't generally care if the other person is the same biological sex as them as long as they looked right, right?
Oh goodness me! Most guys wouldn't even want to live with a trans person! Gosh that must mean they'll all be totally okay with fucking one right? After all you feel that they would because you would want to fuck a tranny.
If we know that a very significant number of people don't want trannies into certain gendered spaces, then how is it more reasonable and "logical" to assume that a significant number of people would have sex with them instead?
It's well known that trannies are not exactly accepted, which is a big part for why they have to disclose that they're not the sex they're trying to appear as. Again, it's not more reasonable to assume that people wouldn't want them in their bathrooms but would be okay with fucking them. When it comes to disclosure they might get lucky and the person will be like you and will enthusiastically consent, or they may not and the other person won't be okay with them being a tranny. I don't agree with berating or acting aggressively against trannies who disclose because they did the right thing.
Spoken like a tranny who tries to put their right to privacy above others right to bodily autonomy. It's always fun seeing how you can't prove why Buck Angel was wrong about disclosure though. Buck does have a good point about how it's very disrespectful to not allow the other person to make their own boldly choices with full informed consent. Dude's a porn star and is advocating disclosure in order to get true consent for simple sex. You're a weird internet tard trying to claim that deception in order to get sex is moral. I think the pornstar has a much more informed view regarding consent towards sex since he deals with it so much.
You missed the point exactly like I said you would, it's almost scary how I can perfectly I can predict your thought process (if you can call it that) now.
You mean your thought process of "I know that most people don't like trannies in gendered bathrooms but I feel most people would fuck them because they try and appear as the other sex."? "Logic" like that?
If you believe they aren't the same, then your statement "If disclosure is important, it's always important you absolute retard" is wrong.
If disclosure is relevant towards consent in sex you need to disclose it you fucking mong. Someone going to university in the future is not nearly as relevant to sex as you not being the biological sex that you present yourself as, especially for simple sex.
Yes, I'm sooooo wrong that when a heterosexual or homosexual person hits on someone they believe to be the relevant sex then they're consenting to sex with that biological sex. Since the tranny isn't that biological sex then they need to disclose that in order to actually get consent.
But being a tranny isn't relevant right? I mean, so many people accept them for being trans right?
Oh, looks like they don't. Looks like a very large number of people don't want anything to do with a tranny. Kinda means that they wouldn't knowingly consent to sex with a tranny right?
The point of that analogy was to disprove your statement, not say the situations are the same. I never said they were the same.
You did say that informed consent is only important for relationships and not sex. You're somehow trying to prove that non-disclosure of your status as a tranny isn't important for sex, but is for a relationship while ignoring the fact that trannies have a very low level of acceptance overall, and most people wouldn't willingly consent to sex with one. Hell, a very large number of people don't consent to them sharing a bathroom with them, so how can you honestly try and claim that most would consent to sex with a tranny.
How about you explain to me how hiding your biological sex to someone who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual is more moral than just disclosing it and possibly getting actual informed consent? You're still trying to say that deceptions and purposeful omission is moral, mainly because you're saying that it doesn't matter, but you just have to look at all the anti-trans laws people are trying to pass to see how few people actually would want to be with a tranny. You know damn well that most people wouldn't consent to sex with a tranny, so you try and argue that actual informed consent isn't as important to everyone else's right to sexual choice and bodily autonomy.
You really are this stupid huh? For the vast majority of society, gender = sex and they act under that belief. So when a hetero guy is hitting on a woman, or a gay man is hitting on another man, the belief will almost certainly be that the other person is the sex that usually is associated with that gender. So when someone who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual is hitting on a trans person who has the gender that heterosexuals or homosexuals have an interest in, then the tranny has a moral imperative to make it clear that they're a tranny. You've still not been able to show that the majority of heterosexuals or homosexuals would be okay with a tranny aside from you and your friends.
So let's take a look at a study that focused on trans people being accepted into gendered spaces at Universities. After all most students are rather liberal these days and you certainly can't make the case that more people would have sex with a tranny than would share a bathroom with one. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10538720.2016.1261749
So let's see how trannies are generally accepted into gendered spaces.
"In addition, they reported that their experiences on campus were often negative when they attempted to access a gendered space consistent with their gender identity. Seelmanβs (2014) research indicated that about one-third of transgender college students reported not being allowed to live in housing that matched their gender identity and/or use the appropriate restrooms or other gendered spaces. Of the students who reported having access to housing and other facilities, they were subjected to harassment and intrusive questioning by residents and staff. Sometimes, preoperative transsexual individuals are required to live in gendered residence halls on college campuses that are consistent with their legal sex."
Huh. It doesn't seem to be the case that most University students are okay with trannies. That's not a good sign for you especially since University students tend to be far more liberal than wider society. Fun fact is that this study omitted everyone over 30 from it so it focused entirely on younger people raised in an age where LGBT people have been more accepted than ever. I guess your feeling that most people would be okay with fucking a tranny isn't quite right.
You said though that as long as they have the "right equipment" guys would fuck them right? We'll when it comes to something as inconsequential as a bathroom...
"Although past research, using a measure created to assess specific evaluations of trans women and trans men, did not find significant differences in an evaluation of trans women and trans men (Gerhardstein & Anderson, 2010), the current study, using a validated measure of transacceptance, found that trans women were less accepted than trans men."
Uh oh. Looks like you and your friends aren't exactly representative of society as a whole. That's what I told you but you still seem to think that you are. Trans-women are less accepted than trans-men. Gee, it seems like that's what everyone else has told you too.
How about gay people though? Surely gay people would be far more accepting of trans people right?
"Weiss (2003) made the argument that prejudice toward transgender people exists within the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community. One study suggested that gay men have a greater struggle with transgender inclusion than lesbians (Stone, 2009)."
Looks like a rather large amount of people actually care if their partner is a tranny. That doesn't work so well for your "Most people wouldn't care as long as they have a 'vagina'!" Turns out gay men really aren't a fan of transgendered people. Seems to be that the facts are in my corner, while the feelings are solidly in yours.
Now you did say that heterosexual men really wouldn't generally care if the other person is the same biological sex as them as long as they looked right, right?
"Results appear to suggest that while college men would be appropriately nice toward the trans woman as a roommate, they would still disapprove, feel uncomfortable, and perhaps attempt to avoid the situation altogether by asking for a new roommate.".
Oh goodness me! Most guys wouldn't even want to live with a trans person! Gosh that must mean they'll all be totally okay with fucking one right? After all you feel that they would because you would want to fuck a tranny.
If we know that a very significant number of people don't want trannies into certain gendered spaces, then how is it more reasonable and "logical" to assume that a significant number of people would have sex with them instead?
It's well known that trannies are not exactly accepted, which is a big part for why they have to disclose that they're not the sex they're trying to appear as. Again, it's not more reasonable to assume that people wouldn't want them in their bathrooms but would be okay with fucking them. When it comes to disclosure they might get lucky and the person will be like you and will enthusiastically consent, or they may not and the other person won't be okay with them being a tranny. I don't agree with berating or acting aggressively against trannies who disclose because they did the right thing.
Spoken like a tranny who tries to put their right to privacy above others right to bodily autonomy. It's always fun seeing how you can't prove why Buck Angel was wrong about disclosure though. Buck does have a good point about how it's very disrespectful to not allow the other person to make their own boldly choices with full informed consent. Dude's a porn star and is advocating disclosure in order to get true consent for simple sex. You're a weird internet tard trying to claim that deception in order to get sex is moral. I think the pornstar has a much more informed view regarding consent towards sex since he deals with it so much.
You mean your thought process of "I know that most people don't like trannies in gendered bathrooms but I feel most people would fuck them because they try and appear as the other sex."? "Logic" like that?
This is an amazing amount of text to show the concept 'most people wouldn't want to sleep with a trans person' is true, which is something I've said I agree with multiple times, explicitly. This is because you really don't have a grasp on the arguments I'm making at all.
This is pretty much how its gone down for thousands of words:
You say that everybody would not be okay with it
to dispute that, I point out that some people would be okay with it.
You interpret that to be me arguing that most people would be okay with it.
You said though that as long as they have the "right equipment" guys would fuck them right? We'll when it comes to something as inconsequential as a bathroom...
Now you did say that heterosexual men really wouldn't generally care if the other person is the same biological sex as them as long as they looked right, right?
nope did not say that, just that some people wouldn't care
Overall tho, that section again missed the point yet again. I'm not sure how I can simplify the wording anymore, so I will just repeat the paragraph you read but did not comprehend
A convicted murderer is always aware that most people would not want to sleep with a murderer. Therefore they must always disclose their criminal history to a sexual partner, This is a direct reading of your stated logic. If true, why does that contradict your earlier conclusion that the analogy is completely different and they don't have to disclose.
Like I said before, the only reason I am in this conversation is for you to justify this contradiction and BOY IS IT GETTING GOOD, your posts just get longer and more rambling
You did say that informed consent is only important for relationships and not sex. You're somehow trying to prove that non-disclosure of your status as a tranny isn't important for sex, but is for a relationship while ignoring the fact that trannies have a very low level of acceptance overall, and most people wouldn't willingly consent to sex with one. Hell, a very large number of people don't consent to them sharing a bathroom with them, so how can you honestly try and claim that most would consent to sex with a tranny.
How about you explain to me how hiding your biological sex to someone who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual is more moral than just disclosing it and possibly getting actual informed consent? You're still trying to say that deceptions and purposeful omission is moral, mainly because you're saying that it doesn't matter, but you just have to look at all the anti-trans laws people are trying to pass to see how few people actually would want to be with a tranny. You know damn well that most people wouldn't consent to sex with a tranny, so you try and argue that actual informed consent isn't as important to everyone else's right to sexual choice and bodily autonomy.
Same here. So much rambling on and on about bla bla bla when all I'm addressing is specifically the argument "If something is important to disclose in a relationship, then that means you have to disclose it for sex" which is the reasoning you were using to make your argument.
You are actually incapable of focusing and realizing that line of argument was flawed, and it is spectacular to see
This is an amazing amount of text to show the concept 'most people wouldn't want to sleep with a trans person' is true, which is something I've said I agree with multiple times, explicitly.
Really? You agree with this? Then why are you arguing that not disclosing trans status is not important? Especially when you're talking about how it wouldn't matter to you or your friends? Seems like if most people wouldn't want to fuck a tranny then trannies should disclose that they're a tranny. After all if 99.6% of the population doesn't have to correct any misconception about their biological sex because there is no misconception then why is it their responsibility and not the 0.4% that actually has this issue? You can't address this aside from "But it would make the trannies sad" while ignoring the violence that happens to trannies that don't disclose. Something Buck Angle himself mentions.
You say that everybody would not be okay with it to dispute that
I literally said in the post you're replying to that some people would be okay with fucking a tranny. I explicitly said that this is another reason that trannies should disclose, in order to ensure they're actually getting consent. Go back and ctrl-f "enthusiastic consent" champ.
You interpret that to be me arguing that most people would be okay with it.
Because word for word you said this when you were going on about how and inside out dick is the same as a vagina. You even tried to justify it by saying that "more people than you think would be okay with it" and how you and your friends are okay with it. You're just flailing now. You're refusing to accept that being trans is relevant for sex while admitting that most people wouldn't want to fuck a tranny.
nope did not say that, just that some people wouldn't care
You literally said "more people than you think" would want to fuck a tranny. You tried to make it seem like the majority wouldn't care about the other person being a tranny. I said you need to disclose so you could make sure you're getting consent. Most people care, some don't, so check to make sure they'll be cool with it. You got mad and said that it would be more of a burden for the tranny to disclose even though it would keep people from finding out the next morning and freaking out.. Your argument that they shouldn't disclose they're trans puts them at far more risk of violence than disclosing in a public place, most likely with bouncers.
A convicted murderer is always aware that most people would not want to sleep with a murderer. Therefore they must always disclose their criminal history to a sexual partner, This is a direct reading of your stated logic. If true, why does that contradict your earlier conclusion that the analogy is completely different and they don't have to disclose
Holy fuck you really still don't understand do you? Being a convicted murderer is not at all the same thing as trying to appear as a sex that your not. In the case of trannies, when it comes to people who appear as heterosexual or homosexual, they're clearly consenting to sex with the appropriate biological sex which they believe the tranny to be. So when the tranny isn't the biological sex they try and appear as, they need to disclose that in order to make sure they're actually getting consent. You're trying to make this seem to be the same thing as not wanting to be with a murderer, which is immediately known.
Now go ahead and make the case for why hiding being trans is more moral than disclosing it and getting consent? You can't so you keep trying to say that the exact same number of people wouldn't want to be with a criminal as wouldn't want to be a tranny. See if you can find proof of the same numbers of people, preferably from a peer reviewed journal.
Like I said before, the only reason I am in this conversation is for you to justify this contradiction and BOY IS IT GETTING GOOD, your posts just get longer and more rambling
No, the only reason that you're still here is you have a really hard time admitting that trannies should disclose for sex. You've stopped trying to make any decent points and are just too prideful to give up. Fucking trans pornstars are even saying that being trans is relevant for sex, but you refuse to accept that because you can't accept that you're wrong. You can't say how it's more moral to not disclose than to disclose and to get informed consent, so you just squeal about murderers with literally no actual proof for it. You keep going on about "logical contradictions" when just now you've admitted that most people wouldn't want to fuck a tranny, but in the past said "more people than you'd realize" and "me and all my friends wouldn't care" in order to try and make it seem like most people would want to fuck a tranny.
You're admitting that most people wouldn't want to have sex with a tranny, then try claiming that most people don't care, then backtracking and trying to say that you never said that. Go look back to when you were trying to say that as long as the tranny has functionality of the other biological sex it doesn't matter. I'll wait.
I'm addressing is specifically the argument "If something is important to disclose in a relationship, then that means you have to disclose it for sex" which is the reasoning you were using to make your argument.
Holy fuck you're really this stupid. I said that IF YOU REALIZE THAT THERE IS SOMETHING ABOUT YOU THAT MIGHT REVOKE CONSENT, YOU HAVE A MORAL DUTY TO DISCLOSE THAT. It applies to casual sex just like with a relationship. You're trying to twist this into me saying "You need to disclose everything you would for a relationship for casual sex." I didn't say that, I said that if someone thinks a tranny is a biological sex they aren't, the tranny needs to disclose they're a tranny so they can get informed consent. Being a biological male when you're trying to appear as a biological female is incredibly relevant to both casual sex and a relationship.
If a dude hits on another dude, it's more than reasonable to assume he wants to fuck a dude. For the vast majority of society their gender=sex so this isn't an issue if both these people are biological men. They don't need to disclose shit about their biological sex because there is no mistaken assumption.
If a woman hits on someone who appears to be a woman, it's more than reasonable to assume she wants to fuck a woman. For the vast majority of society their gender=sex but if the other "woman" is actually a biological male, then the tranny needs to disclose because it's more than likely that the woman is consenting to sex with a woman. Best case scenario it doesn't matter to the woman and they can progress with informed consent, worst case she doesn't realize until later and beats the tranny for lying to her.
A trans pornstar, someone whose livelihood revolves around sex and not relationships, is saying that trannies need to disclose for sex. You, a random person on the internet who has never sourced a single claim about consent is saying that being trans doesn't matter while also saying 'most people wouldn't want to sleep with a trans person'.
You are actually incapable of focusing and realizing that line of argument was flawed, and it is spectacular to see
You said that being trans is not an important thing to dislcose for sex, but it is in a relationship. Yet you've also said " 'most people wouldn't want to sleep with a trans person' is true, which is something I've said I agree with multiple times, explicitly." just now. So how exactly is it that being trans is not a relevant detail for sex when you yourself admit that it is?
This is great. You honestly believe that non-disclosure in order to get casual sex is moral, but you can't explain why that is. Watch that video of the Irish tranny in this post and tell me exactly how this is a fantastic and good consequence of a tranny not disclosing. You can't explain this anymore than you can admit that you're wrong and being trans matters for sex.
This is an amazing amount of text to show the concept 'most people wouldn't want to sleep with a trans person' is true
Really? You agree with this?
I only said so multiple times
Then why are you arguing that not disclosing trans status is not important
because i don't agree with the logic that "most people wouldn't sleep with people who are or have X, so they must disclose X everytime, otherwise they are raping people."
If you don't agree that convicted murders should disclose everytime, then you don't agree that that statement alone is enough to prove rape, because convicted murders fit directly into that statement.
So when you say to me "you agree that most wouldn't sleep with a trans person, that means you should agree that trans people should always disclose otherwise it's rape", you are making the same argument as above. This is why I keep on referring to the convicted murders thing as a contradiction, because you keep making that specific argument.
If you don't agree with that logic, then you need to stop making that argument lmao.
I also refer to it as a contradiction because you originally agreed that jews should disclose according to the same hypothetical situation that "most people wouldn't want to sleep with Jews".
You literally said "more people than you think" would want to fuck a tranny. You tried to make it seem like the majority wouldn't care about the other person being a tranny.
Okay, let's revisit that quote.
First you said
The sex of a persons partner clearly matters a great deal to an overwhelming majority of people.
Then I said
Id argue that are much more people comfortable having sex with a trans people of their desired gender (as long as the basic element of visual attraction is fulfilled) than you think.
I was simply contesting the idea that it was an overwhelming majority who wouldn't. I wasn't saying there was a majority of people who would be comfortable with it. Just that there were more you than think they are, since you continue to imply the amount is vanishingly small. To be fair, I can see how it could seem that I was saying it was a majority who are comfortable with it. This is why in my next post, I said....
"I actually don't disagree with the claim that most wouldn't sleep with a transgender person, I just disagree with your rhetoric that implies nearly all wouldn't. "
...to make sure I clarified my point.
A trans pornstar, someone whose livelihood revolves around sex and not relationships, is saying that trannies need to disclose for sex.
That's not what buck angel is saying. He is saying that they should disclose it for sex. This is why he described not disclosing as "disrespectful", not "sexual assault" or "rape".
You say that everybody would not be okay with it to dispute that
I literally said in the post you're replying to that some people would be okay with fucking a tranny. I explicitly said that this is another reason that trannies should disclose, in order to ensure they're actually getting consent
Right, you have said that before, but if you deconstruct your current argument you are saying everybody.
In the case of trannies, when it comes to people who appear as heterosexual or homosexual, they're clearly consenting to sex with the appropriate biological sex which they believe the tranny to be
No one fucks a gender, they fuck a biological sex.
Simply just because someone is heterosexual or homosexual, that does not mean they are only consenting to a particular sex. Most homosexuals, or heterosexuals, are only consenting to a particular sex, yes. But some people are not, and are only consenting to a particular gender. Furthermore, you can't 100% accurately judge sexual orientation by appearances either. That is another assumption based on the idea of "most"
Thefore, this argument is just a really convoluted version of the one I posted above, restated.
You're trying to twist this into me saying "You need to disclose everything you would for a relationship for casual sex
I originally, a long time ago, said that trans people should disclose in relationships.
You have consistently been bringing it up, and saying that that means that I should conclude that trans people should disclose for sex.
If you disagree with the statement that "You need to disclose everything you would for a relationship for casual sex", then you there is no point to continually bring up the fact that I said trans people should disclose in relationships, since that you agree that the same disclosure standards for relationships are not the same for casual sex.
Yet you've also said " 'most people wouldn't want to sleep with a trans person' is true, which is something I've said I agree with multiple times, explicitly." just now. So how exactly is it that being trans is not a relevant detail for sex when you yourself admit that it is?
because i don't agree with the logic that "most people wouldn't sleep with people who are or have X, so they must disclose X everytime, otherwise they are raping people."
So you understand that most people wouldn't sleep with a tranny but you then say that they don't need to disclose. Fantastic.
If you don't agree that convicted murders should disclose everytime
Again with the murderer shit? Wew lad you're really stretching. If they have a reason to believe it would revoke consent they do. Just like trannies who are hit on for appearing as a sex they aren't.
"you agree that most wouldn't sleep with a trans person, that means you should agree that trans people should always disclose otherwise it's rape", you are making the same argument as above.
No I'm not because the tranny will immediately know that the other person consented to a sex other than what they are. Christ you're as retarded as you're stubborn.
I was simply contesting the idea that it was an overwhelming majority who wouldn't
Then I showed you that an overwhelming majority wouldn't even share a bathroom with a trannie let alone sleep with them. Either way, this doesn't avoid the fact that a tranny needs to get informed consent.
That's not what buck angel is saying. He is saying that they should disclose it for sex. This is why he described not disclosing as "disrespectful", not "sexual assault" or "rape".
What the word we have for sex without consent again?
Right, you have said that before, but if you deconstruct your current argument you are saying everybody.
I'm saying that we 99.6% of people don't have this problem the burden is on the 0.4% to make sure they get informed consent. What's the word for sex without consent again? Please, what is it? Frape? Grape?
I originally, a long time ago, said that trans people should disclose in relationships. You have consistently been bringing it up, and saying that that means that I should conclude that trans people should disclose for sex.
Because they need to because most wouldn't fuck a tranny and the trannies right to privacy is not greater than everyone else's right to informed consent.
"You need to disclose everything you would for a relationship for casual sex", then you there is no point to continually bring up the fact that I said trans people should disclose in relationships, since that you agree that the same disclosure standards for relationships are not the same for casual sex.
Being a tranny is just as relevant for casual sex as it is for a relationship. Especially since you yourself admitted most people wouldn't fuck a tranny. God you just don't know when you're beat. First clue should have been when you avoided answering how it is moral to deceive in order to get sex.
See the second line in this post
You're still saying that being a tranny is only relevant in relationships but not for sex, even though literal trans pornstars have told you otherwise and you yourself freely admit that most wouldn't fuck a tranny. When 99.6% of people don't have to correct mistakes as to their biology, it's up to the 0.4% to disclose they're not as they appear.
Please though, tell me more how trannies hiding this fact is moral, because you've repeatedly avoided answering this. You don't purposefully avoid answering how it's moral to lie to get sex when you're coming from the morally correct position.
Again with the murderer shit? Wew lad you're really stretching.
"So you understand that most people wouldn't sleep with a tranny convicted murderer but you then say that they don't need to disclose. Fantastic. "
one second you say that's not your argument
then the next second you make the argument again
then its not ur argument
then is
If they have a reason to believe it would revoke consent they do. Just like trannies who are hit on for appearing as a sex they aren't.
No I'm not because the tranny will immediately know that the other person consented to a sex other than what they are.
No, they wont. They do not immediately know anything, they assume. An assumption is not knowing. It is an assumption exactly like assuming most people won't sleep with a convicted murderer. The situations are the same.
Then I showed you that an overwhelming majority wouldn't even share a bathroom with a tranny let alone sleep with them
This is you misunderstanding the conclusion. 2/3 were allowed to use housing and restrooms. Most of them were harassed and questioned, but that doesn't tell you anything at all about the percentage of people who harassed them. You can think that through by realizing that each trans person will use the bathroom many times throughout the year, but they only need to be harrassed once or twice a year to report that they experienced harassment.
This is based purely on the information you've posted, I don't have access to the full study, but I am fully confident in your ability to misinterpret data
What the word we have for sex without consent again?
Nowhere does Buck Angel say that people who don't disclose are having sex without consent. This is something you imagined since you found someone trans saying something critical about the concept. It's actually hilarious you are clinging to this guy (who doesnt even agree with you) so hard, since I can go out and easily find plenty of trans people who support my position
Again, when people think something is rape, they usually call it that. They wouldn't call it "being very disrespectful". That would be a comical understatement. You really have piss poor reading comprehension btw, you literally imagine statements in the text that aren't there lol
I wonder, I could probably get him to clarify on that actually. If I do, would you admit that you have piss poor reading comprehension if it turns out you are wrong? And poor reasoning skills too?
I'm saying that we 99.6% of people don't have this problem the burden is on the 0.4% to make sure they get informed consent. What's the word for sex without consent again? Please, what is it? Frape? Grape?
You mean like how 99% of people aren't convicted murderers but you think the burden is on them to ask every one they sleep with if they are a murderer? Or you admit that according to your logic they should also disclose all the time?
Being a tranny is just as relevant for casual sex as it is for a relationship. Especially since you yourself admitted most people wouldn't fuck a tranny. God you just don't know when you're beat. First clue should have been when you avoided answering how it is moral to deceive in order to get sex.
Note that you avoid the flawed argument that got you in this mess. Instead you pretend that you never made it.
No, they wont. They do not immediately know anything, they assume. An assumption is not knowing. It is an assumption exactly like assuming most people won't sleep with a convicted murderer. The situations are the same.
Hooo boy you really are fully retarded if you think this is the same. You're honestly trying to say that it's unrealistic to assume a guy who is hitting on another man is gay and that he believes that the other guy is a biological man because of his appearance because most people don't like murderers. If the other person is actually a biological female, it is absolutely reasonable to assume that the guy may not want to be with a biological woman.
Let's dissect your stupid "you don't have to disclose for sex but do for a relationship" 'logic' again. How many times does sex turn into a relationship? It's definitely not unheard of and I've had a past girlfriend where we had started by just hooking up. So say the tranny is going to disclose when the other person wants to make it official, do you really think they always will? With that Indian kid the tranny kept hiding their status because she was afraid that the Indian kid would break up with her when he found out. If you like someone enough that you want to date them, you usually don't want to risk the whole thing by disclosing, so you end up in situations where the tranny just keeps it secret until they can't anymore, just like with that Indian kid. You think that somehow by saying "disclosure isn't important for sex but is for relationships" that no relationship will ever grow out of sex.
Furthermore how do you think the other person will react to the news that their partner both isn't what they thought they were, and that they've been deceiving you? A lot of times it doesn't go well and has many times ended up with the tranny being murdered. By starting with a foundation of a misconception, you easily risk everything built on it when people realize you aren't what you seem.
My argument that trannies need to disclose for sex would avoids all of these problems. If that British tranny had disclosed, she would have ended up actually having the relationship she wanted. Remember how the victim said "If you had told me things would have been different"? As for the Indian kid he probably would have not been with the tranny since biological kids seems to be something important to him but she could have found someone else who would accurately love her for who she was.
How on earth is it more moral to foster a misconception and practice active deception in order to get sex, than it is to just disclose fully? Seriously, answer this question because if you can't, that means you've realized you're advocating an immoral stance.
Also please contact Buck Angel, I would love to see that email. "Hey Buck Angel, so I know you said trannies need to disclose for sex because it's both truthful and prevents physical violence, but I'm so retarded I think you're actually saying that you don't need to disclose for sex. Please tell me that I'm right because I want to be right."
FYI, please tell me what the English word for sex without consent is again. I seem to have completely forgotten it. God, what is that word we have for sex without consent.
Being a murderer is nowhere close to being a tranny and you're super desperate to keep clinging to it while not explaining how fostering a misconception and actively deceiving someone is moral.
Really though, this is getting tiring because you're dead set on trying to prove that informed consent isn't necessary, and how it's unreasonable to assume that a dude hitting on a dude is homosexual. Also, access that article through your university library. This isn't rocket science.
Hooo boy you really are fully retarded if you think this is the same. You're honestly trying to say that it's unrealistic to assume a guy who is hitting on another man is gay and that he believes that the other guy is a biological man because of his appearance because most people don't like murderers. If the other person is actually a biological female, it is absolutely reasonable to assume that the guy may not want to be with a biological woman.
No, i didn't say it is an unrealistic assumption. It is a reasonable assumption. Just like it is absolutely reasonable to assume the guy does not want to be with a convicted murderer. The logic you use to say that trans people should disclose applies to convicted murderers too, no matter how you slice and dice it. You also had no problem saying that jews have to disclose too, in the hypothetical situation where most people don't want to sleep with jews and jews comprise a very small amount of the population.
Let's dissect your stupid "you don't have to disclose for sex but do for a relationship" 'logic' again. How many times does sex turn into a relationship? So say the tranny is going to disclose when the other person wants to make it official, do you really think they always will? With that Indian kid the tranny kept hiding their status because she was afraid that the Indian kid would break up with her when he found out. If you like someone enough that you want to date them, you usually don't want to risk the whole thing by disclosing, so you end up in situations where the tranny just keeps it secret until they can't anymore
no, you don't HAVE to disclose it for a relationship either, it's just that you probably should
Also please contact Buck Angel
okey, will wait for response
Also, access that article through your university library
You argue, but you don't support it with anything. You just make empty claims with less than zero evidence behind it. Seriously, you pulled a claim out of your ass and now are treating it like some absolute fact that means you get to hide the fact you're a tranny. Yet you're still bitching about my logic being faulty. Fantastic.
It bullshit claim also does nothing to disprove the my point that the majority would not want to fuck a tranny. Even if the number is 1 in 10, that still isn't high enough to assume that it just won't matter to a partner. Maybe if it was empirically 9/10 then you'd have something here, but that's just not the case now is it?
You disputed that but never gave good reasons to do so. You're still dead set in the belief that you're the logical one, but you're the one trying to argue that consent is not necessary, but somehow it is. You recognize that people may have specific sexual preferences that exclude trannies, but you keep trying to avoid this by making random, vague, and baseless claims that most people would be okay with trannies. Your "dispute" was a vague and unsupported claim that "more people than you think would be okay to fuck a tranny".
My claim was unsupported in the same exact way that your claim was unsupported. I don't think that my claim is absolute fact, I am disputing your claims that YOU are treating as absolute fact with an equivalent level of antecodal evidence. I actually don't disagree with the claim that most wouldn't sleep with a transgender person, I just disagree with your rhetoric that implies nearly all wouldn't.
So lets use the fact that most wouldn't sleep with a trans person.
Does the logic that "most people wouldn't want to sleep with people with that characteristic, therefore that person should disclose that characteristic to every person beforehand" hold up?
I don't really think so. If you apply the same logic to anything else that most people would find a turn off, then they wouldn't be usually considered rape either. For example, I'd imagine that most people wouldn't want to sleep with a convicted murderer. Likewise, you wouldn't assume your partner is a convicted murderer, nor would you think to ask. Does that mean the convicted murderer is raping everyone he sleeps with if he doesn't disclose his criminal history before hand? I'd think not. If so, where does it end? Felonies? Misdemeanors?
Secondly, "Most" is a descriptor of a percentage of a larger group. The thing is, individuals of a group are not always distributed evenly - for example, there are more LGBT folks located in highly liberal cities then in rural, conservative areas. A definition of consent and rape that involves "Most" means that the meaning of consent could change from location to location, and depending on how the group is defined. Admittedly this wouldn't matter in the particular instance of sleeping with trans people since i doubt there's currently any group where theres a majority that wan't to sleep with trans people, but if you want to use that logic I could imagine issues that could, and consent standards changing per location and group makes determining if consent was violated even messier
And lastly, in ethical discussions, should things always be decided by the majority? I would also say no.
For example, if the majority of people don't want to sleep with jews, then by this logic a jew should always disclose the fact that they are jews, otherwise they are raping people. Now, in this situation everybody, of course, has the right to "not to associate" for any reason, including anti-semitism. So the majority of people expressing their sexual preference is not wrong, nor a violation of consent. Yet you would essentially legislating anti-semitism into law by requiring jews to disclose simply because the majority does not like sleeping with jews. I would not consider the jews to be raping other people in this situation.
Why is the burden on the vast majority of society who can honestly and without issue have sex with each other, and not the very, very minor population of trannies that most people would object to?
arguably the burden of revealing that "you aren't into trans people" is much lighter per individual than the burden of having to disclose trans status, which currently can result in much worse consequences, both social and physical. There are a lot more people who would have to, so the overall burden would be much higher, but a healthy discussion of sexual preferences are something that people should do with partners anyways. I understand the annoyance, but the burden amounts to "I don't want to ask my partner a simple, if awkward, question".
Now, do you want to explain how it is reasonable for 99.996% of the US population to continually ask their possible partners if they're trannies,
While I appreciate your attempt to use statistics, I hope you can see the flaw in using the percentage of people who are not transgender as the amount of people who would not sleep with them.
Now either defeat my First, Second, or Third premise in order to prove my conclusion false, or stop trying to justify lying in a relationship because it would make 0.004% of people sad.
If you look at pictures of a trans man with facial hair and abs, and a picture of a trans woman with boobs and butt, which one are you attracted to? Are you attracted to the hairy abs man more? Because he was a bio girl right? Seems ridiculous to me but okay, that's apparently "straight"
FALSE DILEMMA
A
L
S
E
D
I
L
E
M
M
A
I'll take the third, "neither," on account of not being a 'mo.
You are right that is a false dilemma, but somewhere, there is certainly a trans girl that you will probably find attractive, absent the knowledge that they are trans to color your opinion.
that's the whole point, you wouldn't know they were trans
sadly, ur dick can't detect chromosomes, all you'd see is a hot girl.
There are so many trans girls that are 100% feminine and have attractive features indistinguishable from cis girls. It's pretty much impossible to say you wouldn't be attracted to a single trans girl, at least from a purely superficial visual glance.
anyone who says otherwise is just lying to themselves, or actually has no idea what decades of hormones from a young age actually accomplishes
Apparently, hormones early on accomplish genital shrinkage to the point where bottom surgery isn't possible.
Is that so? I didn't know that. Doesn't really change my point tho, you can find people attractive before you see their genitals. There are also people who are 100% feminine and have had bottom surgery, so it's also not a given thing
And don't tell me what my dick can't do.
I can state facts about ur dick, ya
You can disagree with them, doesn't make them not facts
I didn't know that either. But apparently it's a thing that came up in that TLC show about a transgender teen named Jazz. I just heard about it, I have no idea how I'd search for it without popping up on some list and tbh I don't really give a fuck. I'm sure it's not a 100% thing, but it's gotta be horrifying to find out for all parties involved.
I honestly don't even know where this goes from here, but I'm running low on effort and I just want to repeat that you're a homosexual who gets turned on by feminine men and for that you'll burn in hell. ""You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." Leviticus 18:22
If it looks like a girl, fucks like a girl, and you apparently can't tell, then what's the problem?
The problem is that most people are transphobes. You can argue with them using Logic and Reason that it shouldn't matter to them, but it does, and you know in advance that it probably would.
So the only reasonable way to solve that problem is with coercive rape. Read up on it, it's a has a rich and extensive history in combating various forms of degeneration and bigotry. The best part is that it literally can't go wrong, the only people who end up feeling that they were raped are the exact people who deserved to be raped. It's like a freaking heat-seeking missile, only it homes on bigotry!
So you are saying trans people should rape most people till they stop being transphobes? A bit extreme, but reasonable. I'll put it up for discussion when we decide the next item on the Trans Agenda
who knew that left wing sjws would be the only one fighting against people defining things as rape when it isn't. A fun exchange of roles, I'm not sure the MAGA hat works on me but you look great with the colored hair =3
If you are hiding something because you know that consent would be revoked if they knew the truth, then it's pretty damn relevant. You can't really justify lying when you realize that the reason you're lying is that you wouldn't get consent if the truth was known.
Okay, but this can be extended to . . . just about anything. Like that case in Israel several years ago where the Arab man was prosecuted for sexual assault when he lied to his date that he was Jewish. It's easy to think of other examples along those lines, and hard to come up with a good bright-line rule for what is merely a white lie and what transforms otherwise kosher sex into rape.
Personally, I think this focus on sexual consent as an esoteric subspecies of contract law is an unfortunate development and logical dead end.
Yeah it only really extends to situations where any reasonable person would know that consent would be revoked if the truth was known. In the Arab guy's case he lied because he knew she wouldn't have sex with him if she knew the truth. Yeah puffery exists but it's a fairly clear line between what's an overly flattering claim, and what's purposeful deceit meant to attain consent that you know you wouldn't get if the truth was known.
If I brag about my skill at baseball or in hockey, that's not nearly the same thing as lying about your biological sex in order to have sex with someone who thinks you're the opposite biological sex. In the same way most guys wouldn't have sex with another guy, most people wouldn't have sex with a tranny if they knew. That's really the only reason to lie about it. It's not hard to be truthful and find someone who likes you for being you. You don't get to lie to someone like that in order to have sex. No one owes you sex and it's really weird to try and argue that it's okay to lie about something that big.
consent that you know you wouldn't get if the truth was known
is essentially assuming mind-reading powers on the part of the defendant. How would Random Person A "know" what was or was not decisive to Random Person B's choice whether or not to go to bed with someone?
Biological sex at birth is an "easy case" -- transgender status is probably material for a majority of people -- as is stuff like "went to state finals my senior year" which is an "easy case" as well since it almost certainly isn't. But there's a lot of stuff in the middle.
Income? Ethnicity? Religious affiliation (or lack thereof)? Marital status? Desire for kids? Educational background? Criminal history? Kids from previous relationships?
People lie about these things all the time. If Alice and Bob meet at a hotel bar and the married Alice lies and tells Bob that she's single, and they go to bed with Bob thinking there's a long-term potential there, has Alice "raped" Bob? One would think not, but I can't see any obvious, non-ad-hoc limiting principle in the way you're conceptualizing this that would rule-out this case.
Fun, yes I see your point but mine is that as long as there is a reasonable expectation that what you see is what you get it is a violation to lie.
Picking up a chick in a bar isn't the same as expecting the thing that looks like a woman is in fact a woman. Bar hookups are for fun and the assumption is that they are the biological sex that they look like. I know what you're going for but my point is that the trannies/Alice knows that Bob/Normal people wouldn't have sex with them if they knew the truth. As long as you know you aren't what you represent, and that if the truth was known then consent was revoked, then you need to tell the truth. If bob was looking for a new life partner, and Alice reasonably knew this but still lied then she did rape him. After all, the definition of rape is sex without consent. If you know that consent would be revoked if you told the truth and lied to obtain it then it never was consent.
Witholding information relative to sex in the fear that someone will revoke consent is fucked up and absolutely is a betrayal of informed consent. You might as well be one of those wierdos that dont inform people you have stds because you arent having a outbreak at that minute. Sick af.
No it's not. In my other post for instance I cited HIV which can be made entirely undetectable by medication. So, if the pussy or dick in question is like any healthy dick why are you being a bigot all the sudden?
So, if the pussy or dick in question is like any healthy dick
Its not because it has an STD. Regardless of any treatment, there is always a incredibly low chance of transmission. A better analogy would be if you were cured completely. If you were cured completely, then I wouldn't say you need to disclose.
So, if the pussy or dick in question is like any healthy dick
Its not because it has an STD.
As I said HIV can be made effectively dead by medication. Thus there is no STD basically. It cant be transmitted. However, you would still want to bee told yes? Much like every mtf tranny being infertile could be a issue yes?
Regardless of any treatment, there is always a incredibly low chance of transmission.
So you feel a .1% chance of transmission is a need to know, but knowing that thereis a 100% of being with someone who is a infertile hormone addict with a mental disorder isnt important?
A better analogy would be if you were cured completely. If you were cured completely, then I wouldn't say you need to disclose.
So you feel a .1% chance of transmission is a need to know,
definitely
Kay, my point still stands.
infertile
Why does that matter if you are just sleeping with them? We arent talking about dating
Uh, we are. You are defending people who lie about a very specific physical and mental deviation from the norm and certain in this instance its a long term relationship. Most people want kids, the vast majority of women have fertile wombs. Get over it.
hormone addict
You are on the same amount of hormones too, dumbass. They just take them externally
I didn't have to get a optional surgery to get my penis and testes which naturally provide my hormones. If a mtf transgender person ever stops taking hormones there are serious medical consequences due to their elective choices.
mental disorder
not according to relevant medical literature
Really? Because I don't recall transgenderism being diagnosed by any medical doctors lately. In fact, even with the small scale quackstudies available there has never been a blind study wherein a medical expert could accurately determine determined gender by physical observation. It's diagnosed by psychologists for a reason dip shit. Lol
Inb4 theu fuuund female like brain perts in muh tranny study.
Uh, we are. You are defending people who lie about a very specific physical and mental deviation from the norm and certain in this instance its a long term relationship. Most people want kids, the vast majority of women have fertile wombs. Get over it.
Talking about whats needed to disclose to have consent for sex.
Infertility should be disclosed in a long term relationship whether trans or not.
which naturally provide my hormones. If a mtf transgender person ever stops taking hormones there are serious medical consequences due to their elective choices.
Who cares? They are the same hormones. Home grown or store bought. Are you one of those hippies that loves the nature fallacy? You should disclose that before you have any sex
It's diagnosed by psychologists for a reason dip shit. Lol
The psychologists said its not a mental disorder dip shit
Uh, we are. You are defending people who lie about a very specific physical and mental deviation from the norm and certain in this instance its a long term relationship. Most people want kids, the vast majority of women have fertile wombs. Get over it.
Talking about whats needed to disclose to have consent for sex.
Infertility should be disclosed in a long term relationship whether trans or not.
So if you know almost 100 that if you disclose you are trans that could endanger you tricking someone into sex, so you dont tell them and they have sex with you when they probably wouldn't, you dont feel that is at least super shit behavior? I mean, I'm not calling it rape, but it is definitely on a the same fucked up level as not disclosing herpes. The vast majority of guys dont want to fuck guys, no matter how much surgery they get or drugs they take to play pretend.
which naturally provide my hormones. If a mtf transgender person ever stops taking hormones there are serious medical consequences due to their elective choices.
Who cares? They are the same hormones. Home grown or store bought. Are you one of those hippies that loves the nature fallacy? You should disclose that before you have any sex
They are absolutely not the same substances, chemically. Nature fallacy ? Lol Listen dipshit, your body properly producing hormones until old age IS something we do naturally. Getting your dick sliced off, havibg your adams apple trimmed, and getting breasts implants and cosmetic surgery us not natural. Also, trans people develope medical issues that normal women dont when they drop hormones. It's in no way the aame.
It's diagnosed by psychologists for a reason dip shit. Lol
The psychologists said its not a mental disorder dip shit
What possible "danger" is there? STD's you can point to a real world risk. Do you think the trans vagina is gonna bite ur dick off? They are tricking you into sex? No, they consider themselves actual women and thus think there is no problem with them having sex with guys without having to disclose their medical history. If you have preferences for cis girls maybe you should disclose that, that would solve the problem.
Nature fallacy ? Lol Listen dipshit, your body properly producing hormones until old age IS something we do naturally. Getting your dick sliced off, havibg your adams apple trimmed, and getting breasts implants and cosmetic surgery us not natural
Yep, thats the nature fallacy
Side effects are side effects, true of any medical treatment
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Wew mental gymnastics. Still diagnosed by psychologists, dosent require any physical diagnosis
"The American Psychiatric Association, publisher of the DSM-5, states that "gender nonconformity is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition."
It looks, sounds, and walks exactly like a duck.
maybe try reading instead of trying to decipher how the words walk
its funny how a trans girl can look, sound, and walk exactly as a girl but then suddenly the details matter, right ;)
trannic rape logic says it's completely fine cause the gf doesn't realize she's having sex with someone else.
trannic rape logic says it's justified to lie to her, because if she knew the truth she might not sleep with me.
Pretending to be someone else is lying. You are not your brother. A trans person presenting as their gender is not lying. They are that gender.
Assuming that their gender is the same as their biological gender is a reasonable assumption statistics wise, but you don't get to call it rape just because you made an assumption about somebody and they turned out to be the exception.
That logic is stupid, because you could claim any trait that someone has that is uncommon and unfavorable means that they are raping you if they don't disclose it. If this was posed from a leftist perspective, about something other than trans people, people here would have no problem ripping apart that logic.
Continuing my previous point, if a leftist was reduced to saying "Ya well it's rape because it IS" after ignoring a large post debunking that you would be mercilessly mocking them
It's time to get some colored hair, you are the Tumblr feminist now
you try to pretend being trans or cis doesn't matter for consent to sex. it does for 99% of people.
just like it matters for 99% of people for consent to sex whether i'm my twin brother or myself.
you're no different from any other rapist, they all make excuses why they should have the right to do it without informed consent.
"refugee" gang rapists talk about "muh culture" and "sexual emergency", frat boy rapists talk about "she's a slut, she wanted it", rat king trannies say "he had no right to refuse sex with me, because i deserve sex more than he deserves informed consent."
if the twin brother thing is rape, then so is the secret tranny thing.
not an argument, just like your earlier incredible rebuttal, where you said "rape is rape".
less than 0.2% of the population are trans. identical twins are more common than that!
Yep, it's definitely less than ideal. ideally, I think trans people should be open about it.
I just think it's their right to not have to offer that information if they don't want to. This applies to anybody with information that is private and potentially deal breaking, but otherwise does not affect the other person in any way.
That situation has additional context that makes it wrong. Just the fact that the information is private and potentially deal breaking doesn't make it wrong to be withheld. Remove all the context of the twin being her boyfriend and impersonating him then there's nothing wrong with not disclosing the fact that you have a twin.
Why not actually try an argument instead of attempting poorly thought out gotchyas? Use those brain cells!
"Pretending to be someone else is lying. You are not your brother. A trans person presenting as their gender is not lying. They are that gender.
Assuming that their gender is the same as their biological sex is a reasonable assumption statistics wise," but it doesn't qualify as rape just because you made an assumption that turned out to be untrue. Even if it is usually a safe assumption.
"That logic is stupid, because you could claim any trait that someone has that is uncommon and unfavorable means that they are raping you if they don't disclose it. If this was posed from a leftist perspective, about something other than trans people, people here would have no problem ripping apart that logic. "
Pretending to be someone else is lying. You are not your brother.
I never said I'm my brother, I'm not actively lying in that scenario. I just come inside, say "how was your day", give her a kiss and say "let's have sex before dinner".
At no point did I say "I am your boyfriend."
It's not my fault that she assumes I am, just because I look like her bf.
And sure, statistically she might not consent to sex if she knew I'm the twin brother, but I didn't lie.
Clearly it's her job to ask "are you my boyfriend or his twin?"
But you are clearly pretending to be someone else. The fact that you are not verbally doing it is irrelevant. It is an intentional attempt to mislead.
The consent was given to the boyfriend, not you.
This is implicit and understood by all parties involved.
A basic standard of consent - it only applies to the person you give it to.
For trans people, again, Trans people aren't lying. From their perspective, and mine, they are accurately living life as women (gender). That involves looking just like cis women, because that's what women look like. They aren't trying to maliciously trick you into thinking they are cis women, they want to be indistinguishable from women because they consider themselves women. You may reject this, but there are plenty of others that accept that perspective. Hence the controversy.
The same standards of consent are not implicitly agreed on by everybody here. Plenty of people consider knowledge of birth sex not necessary here. Not a majority, but enough to be significant. The standards of consent are in dispute here. So just the fact that the standards are in dispute makes the situation not equivalent, even if your side is the correct one. Acting according to standards of consent that you believe in isn't as bad as intentionally violating consent like the twin scenario
translady is accurately presenting as a woman. The fact that you think that means they are pretending to be cis is because ur dum, not any fault of theirs
70% of men find are repulsed by the idea of having sex with a trans woman. another 20% would be okay with it, but still want to know whether the person they're sleeping with is trans.
it's really simple: if you're pretending to be cis in order ensure sex with someone, that's the exact same situation as me pretending to be my twin.
I wonder ... I guess ...
you KNOW that you wont get consent if you're honest. That's Why You Lie, aka Rape by Deception.
70% of men are repulsed by the idea of having sex with a trans woman.
another 20% are fine with that, but they still want to know whether the person they're sleeping with is trans.
So then they should make sure they don't sleep with trans woman by asking potential partners if it is that important to them
It's really simple: if you're pretending to be cis in order ensure sex with someone, that's the exact same situation as me pretending to be my twin.
Luckily, we've already established trans woman arent pretending to be cis. Therefore, you admit the situation isn't the same.
you KNOW that you wont get consent if you're honest. That's Why You Lie, aka Rape by Deception.
No, this is you wondering and guessing. You think this is equivalent to knowing something because your brain is located in your ass, just like the statistics you pulled from there
Pretending to be someone else is lying. You are not your brother. A trans person presenting as their gender is not lying. They are that gender.
You will go to jail under rape by fraud laws if you try the twin brother thing. Trans people won't for not disclosing, because it's not rape by fraud.
they want sex, but not with men who want it with trans women.
they want sex with men who only like cis women.
The fact that they don't immediately offer private information to everyone is not enough to justify those conclusions.
You can't comprehend that cuz ur dum
If a man says he only likes sex with cis women, then they won't have sex with them.
Pretending to be someone else is lying. You are not your brother.
I don't pretend anything.
I present as my brother, by merely being myself.
I am a passing trans-my-brother, aka I look like my brother, I could fool people.
Trans people won't for not disclosing,
they should.
The fact that they don't offer that info [to sexual partners or even long term partners] is not enough to justify those conclusions.
Really? Then explain:
why do you want to have sex with men without their informed consent?
IMHO it's for the same reason why so many trans women online are "rat kings." you're a manipulative sociopath who gets off on that. but maybe you have another explanation.
there's 500 times more men who are into trans women than there are trans women, it wouldn't be hard to find one who wants to be with you consensually. but you don't want that.
If a woman says she only likes with her boyfriend not his twin, then I won't have sex with her.
Nonsense. The only thing that you can justify as "being yourself" is merely looking like your brother.
To bed your girlfriends brother you'd have to knowingly deceive her about your identity. Possibly just by omission. Likewise, to be clear, I agree that the trans girl in the link above is being deceptive, I just don't think every trans person who doesn't disclose is being deceptive. Which brings us to the next point:
The second thing is: just being deceptive, and even outright lying about something, isn't enough to qualify as rape. For example, men routinely lie about income, their work, personal accomplishments, etc to pick up girls for sex. To make "lying about something to get tail is rape" a thing has far more reaching consequences then you think. It'd probably make about 90% of the country considered rapists. That is why rape by fraud, in the US, usually only applies to people lying about their identity. Because consent is undeniably always implicitly tied to who you are consenting with. Lying about anything else is common, and I don't see why lying about birth sex should be treated differently.
why do you want to have sex with men without their informed consent
Begging the question, the correct question is why trans people generally want to avoid disclosing their birth sex. There are many reasons outside of tricking people into sex.
I'm not really sure why you think making your retarded analogy justified with equally retarded logic is a valid argumentative strategy, but it's amazing to watch.
Obviously you somehow think my logic is the same as the one you used there, but it's not.
I mean, If you get rid of the whole analogy and just have a random person who is "twins phobic", then my logic Is that it is their job to avoid people who may happen to be twins. The twin does not need to say before they sleep with anybody that "oh by the way, just a random unrelated piece of information, but I happen to be one in a pair of twins"
What makes the original analogy wrong is that it involves impersonating another person. The twin aspect is irrelevant. Duh
That person explicitly lied about their gender, not just about their sex.
No straight woman would want to have sex with the woman gender, so consent is much more explicitly denied.
A straight woman could want to have sex with a trans man that was born a woman.
And finally, as usual, a trans person is not lying about their gender. This person did. This case does not necessarily mean that UK would treat a trans person who did not disclose in the same way. At the very least, there would have to be explicit lying, not just failure to disclose
The appellant kept talking about wanting a sex change and M said the appellant had lied to her for four years and all that time she had been calling her Scott.
They were trans, they just didn't have the surgery to make a penis out of a vagina.
This case does not necessarily mean that UK would treat a trans person who did not disclose in the same way.
It is already case law, and if you know what case law is then you'd realize they would. This is now a legal precedent to be followed by lower courts. AKA, trannies who don't disclose are legally culpable and will now face jail time over non-disclosure in the UK.
No straight woman would want to have sex with the woman gender
"M felt physically sick. She told the appellant if she had told her from the start she wouldn't have judged her and things might have been different, but she was mainly in shock and asked lots of questions."
Again, if the tranny just outed herself, then she wouldn't have ended up in prison and would have had the relationship she wanted. The tranny was lying about her sex, that's why the other girl bought condoms and why she wore a dildo. This isn't a gender issue, this is an issue with trannies not disclosing their condition in order to try and get consent, and you encouraging it.
The consent issue is way more ambiguous.
No it's not.. Your right to sexual association doesn't trump another persons right to not sexually associate. Every person is king when it comes to their own sexual preferences, and you can't just invalidate the sexual preferences of a heterosexual or homosexual because you want to get laid. Each person gets to make their own judgement on whether or not the other person counts as a man or a woman, you don't get to decide that for them. All people have a bodily integrity right to say βnoβ to sex, no matter how ugly, offensive, or nonsensical their reasons for doing so might be to you. You can't bypass that because you're a tranny.
"When cross examined before us, she agreed that she did not want to tell M the truth. She said that in a way, if she told M the truth, she might have ended the relationship and the appellant did not want it to end; therefore she did not tell her."
Isn't this what I've been going on about? You only lie when you worry the truth would have negative consequences for you. Even basing hookups on false consent and purposefully ensuring that informed consent was never achieved it at very best, morally reprehensible and disgusting behaviour.
Please though. Explain why consent isn't necessary and how the bodily autonomy of a person is not nearly as important as a tranny lying to get sex.
The appellant kept talking about wanting a sex change and M said the appellant had lied to her for four years and all that time she had been calling her Scott.
She never made a defense as being trans, and the courts didn't recognize her as trans. Therefore they did not evaluate her case as a trans person.
In order to legally change your gender in the UK you need to submit a request for a gender recognition certificate. Once you get your certificate, then you are considered by your chosen gender for legal purposes. Look:
"Under the laws of the United Kingdom, individuals are considered by the State to be of the
gender β either male or female β that is registered on their birth certificates. The Gender
Recognition Act 2004 enables transsexual people to apply to the Gender Recognition Panel
to receive a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC). If you are granted a full GRC you will,
from the date of issue, be considered in the eyes of the law to be of your acquired gender.
You will be entitled to all the rights appropriate to a person of your acquired gender. "
If the law had seen her as male, then she would have not been convicted of lying about her gender. Because she wouldn't have been lying about her gender.
FURTHERMORE (and this is the good stuff here)
The UK actually provides guidelines on how to handle precedent from case law. I would like to direct you to this segment here, under the heading " transgender subjects"
"When considering the issue of consent as part of the evidential stage of the Full Code Test prosecutors should be aware that the Court of Appeal in Justine McNally v R [2013] EWCA Crim 1051 determined that deception as to gender can vitiate consent (paragraph 27).
Whether there has been deception as to gender will require very careful consideration of all the surrounding circumstances including:
How the suspect perceives his/her gender;
What steps, if any, he/she has taken to live as his/her chosen identity; and
What steps, if any, he/she has taken to acquire a new gender status."
Please tell me oh wise one, why any of that would matter if a transwoman saying she is a woman is always "deception of gender that vitiates consent"
Fun how you're still refusing to address how your claims are all based in the fact that you consider bodily autonomy and informed consent to not be as important as the trannies feelings. Seriously, prove me wrong here because if you can't, then you have no justifiable argument. So far you've been avoiding this like the plague because you know damn well that you can't muster a reasonable defense that states that a trannies right to sexual association is greater that any other persons right to not sexually associate.
If the law had seen her as male, then she would have not been convicted of lying about her gender. Because she wouldn't have been lying about her gender.
She was convicted under that Sexual Offences Act 2003 for assault by penetration, specifically Section 2, and in relation to Subsection 2 "Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents." Section 74 is where the tranny really got burned because "For the purposes of this Part, a person consents if he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice."
That tranny didn't get consent because they lied about their sex. That's why it was relevant in the case that the victim had purchased condoms. Regardless of gender, you don't buy condoms unless you're under the impression they were a specific sex.
"When cross examined before us, she agreed that she did not want to tell M the truth. She said that in a way, if she told M the truth, she might have ended the relationship and the appellant did not want it to end; therefore she did not tell her."
Remember this? This is a major reason she got convicted, because she did not reasonably determine if she had consent. She lied about her sex in order to have penetrative sex, and that's why she got convicted. Her being considered a male gender wouldn't have mattered if the sex of the person wasn't clearly the problem here.
Are you seriously so stupid that you could read that case and take away from it that if she had changed her gender it wouldn't have mattered? Her sex is what mattered, as was her lying, which is coincidentally something you gladly and enthusiastically advocate for. Funny to see someone who shares the same views as you getting convicted for a sex crime isn't it? I guess that's why you try so hard to make it seem like it's okay to not get consent. Guilty conscience and all.
You know what, even if she had changed her gender, it wouldn't have mattered and it would still have been in violation of the Sexual Offenses Act because, as I've mentioned before, each person gets to make their own judgement on whether or not the other person counts as a man or a woman, and non-disclosure of your biological sex is a breach of the freedom and capacity of a partner to consent to sexual activity. If the partner is consenting to having sex with a biological man, and not a woman with either a dildo or a penis made out of a vagina, then if you're either wearing a dildo or have a penis made out of a vagina you never actually did get consent. This is not hard but I guess it is hard for you to admit that you're arguing in favour or recognized sex-crimes.
Please tell me oh wise one, why any of that would matter if a transwoman saying she is a woman is always "deception of gender that vitiates consent"
Couple things; 1) A moderately intelligent rooster with a mild understanding of the English language wouldn't be as much of a sexual assault advocate as you are, 2) Vitiate means to make something faulty, that woman who got charged clearly considered herself to be a man, maybe didn't fill out the paperwork, but the crux of the matter is that she is still a she. The victim consented to sex with a man, not a legal definition man but an actual biological man, which is exactly why she bought condoms. You don't buy condoms to have sex with the gender man, you buy them because you're having sex with a biological man. As such, the consent given was based on the sex of the other person, and their gender status is irrelevant in this case.
Sex still matters to the vast majority of people! That's why sex matters to lesbians, gays, heterosexuals, and anyone going on a blind date or using a dating website will select the sex they're interested in.
I notice again you refuse to address the fact that the victim clearly stated that things would have been okay if the tranny had told them the truth. The convicted woman was the very definition transgender. You don't dress as a man, LARP as a man, and wear dildos under your pants to meet a woman you spent the last few years telling you were a man if you're not transgendered. So yes, this is case law that applies to all UK, and even Commonwealth trannies that feel that their right to sex is greater that all other humans right to bodily autonomy.
Seriously, prove me wrong here because if you can't, then you have no justifiable argument. So far you've been avoiding this like the plague because you know damn well that you can't muster a reasonable defense that states that a trannies right to sexual association is greater that any other persons right to not sexually associate.
Don't worry, I was saving that one (and now this one) for when I get home from work, because that one is juicy. I've replied to pretty much every post in this thread that has replied to me, you think that one scares me? Pfft
Oh I look forward to you trying to prove that sexual autonomy is not more important that a trannies desire for sex. You're literally going to have to make a case against informed consent and against people's right to sexual choices. It'll be a shitshow of delusion.
That's the glorious thing. You can't make an honest case for a tranny hiding their condition without claiming that a persons own sexual preferences are not relevant. I'm excited now.
Also stop lying, saving nothing. You've talked out of your ass and now you're stuck. More time won't help you claim that consent isn't important for sex. Honestly though, you need to spend a hell of a lot less time on /r/TransgenderReality with those other rape trannies. Your argument was tried in a court and it resulted in a 3 year prison sentence.
She was convicted under that Sexual Offences Act 2003 for assault by penetration, specifically Section 2, and in relation to Subsection 2 "Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents." Section 74 is where the >tranny really got burned because "For the purposes of this Part, a person consents if he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice."
Right. They determined that she broke that law, because she lied about her gender.
"It follows from the foregoing analysis that we conclude that, depending on the circumstances, deception as to gender can vitiate consent"
That tranny didn't get consent because they lied about their sex. That's why it was relevant in the case that the victim had purchased condoms. Regardless of gender, you don't buy condoms unless you're under the impression they were a specific sex.
According the court, her gender and her sex were the same. While you are right that she lied about her sex, she also lied about her gender, because the court treated her gender and sex as one and the same. Therefore, the court did not address biological sex and determined that the reason that she violated the consent was because she lied about her gender.
If the court had treated her as transgender, then its possible that the court would have ruled that non-disclosure of biological sex violates consent. But that is not what the court ruled on in this instance.
"When cross examined before us, she agreed that she did not want to tell M the truth. She said that in a way, if she told M the truth, she might have ended the relationship and the appellant did not want it to end; therefore she did not tell her."
Nothing here contradicts with what I am saying. She did not tell the truth about her gender as determined by the court.
Remember this? This is a major reason she got convicted, because she did not reasonably determine if she had consent. She lied about her sex in order to have penetrative sex, and that's why she got convicted
This is incorrect. She was convicted because she lied about her gender.
"It follows from the foregoing analysis that we conclude that, depending on the circumstances, deception as to gender can vitiate consent"
Couple things; 1) A moderately intelligent rooster with a mild understanding of the English language wouldn't be as much of a sexual assault advocate as you are, 2) Vitiate means to make something faulty,
The legal definition of vitiate means to
"To impair or make void; to destroy or annul, either completely or partially, the force and effect of an act or instrument."
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/vitiate
Since this word precedes consent, then that means that this is a description of things to take into account before it can be determined that deception about gender vitiated (voided) consent.
and their gender status is irrelevant in this case.
The page which provides guidelines about how law is interpreted in relation to consent, literally says gender status is relevant, with a direct reference to that case.
The convicted woman was the very definition transgender
Not according to the court, which is the only thing that matters in your argument that this case sets precedent for transgender non-disclosure.
So yes, this is case law that applies to all UK, and even Commonwealth trannies that feel that their right to sex is greater that all other humans right to bodily autonomy.
Okay, so now you know what happens when you lie about your sex/gender, good. Still care to argue that disclosure isn't necessary? This whole case is the exact result of your argument that a tranny doesn't have to disclose. Funny how this is what happens when you lie like you encourage trannies to lie.
Here is the thing you're missing, if she had been legally the gender of a "man", that still wouldn't have kept her mother from confronting her, same as the victim. She lied about her sex, and just having a bit of paper that says "X now claims to be a man" doesn't change the fact that she was a she. Her pretending to be a man when she was actually a woman means that she didn't get consent from the victim who wanted to have sex with a biological man. Hence the condoms purchased.
Yes they nailed her for not being legally a "man" because that was the obvious route to go, but she still would have been dragged into court over her deceit anyways regardless of her piece of paper where she says she thinks she is a man. Personally I would have preferred her to have legally declared herself a man so that they could have addressed her tranny deception completely and not have had the easy way out where she missed the piece of paper. Just because they took the obvious route to prosecution doesn't mean that this absolves trannies of lying for sex. What it should show you is that trannies lying about their sex is something people feel strongly enough to take to court. Their self declared gender doesn't override their actual sex.
None of this however changes the fact that the victim consented to sex with a biological man and not a biological woman. You really, really, really want to justify trannies lying to get sex yet still refuse to believe how immoral it is to use deceptions to get sex.
All of this really is purely theoretical because people can spot a tranny a mile away. Still doesn't mean they don't have to identify to people thick enough not to realize that's clearly a man.
Yes they nailed her for not being legally a "man" because that was the obvious route to go, but she still would have been dragged into court over her deceit anyways regardless of her piece of paper where she says she thinks she is a man.
The court case would have happened regardless, but
Personally I would have preferred her to have legally declared herself a man so that they could have addressed her tranny deception completely
I would have preferred that too so the question could have been put to bed.
Regardless of whether outright lying about biological sex would have been ruled to violate consent(a pointless debate to have, our posts are already long enough), I am reasonably sure that simply failing to disclose biological sex would not have been ruled to violate consent. After all, you don't have to disclose HIV+ status in the UK as far as i can see. You can get prosecuted if you actually transmit it to someone, but just not disclosing it doesn't violate consent. And I consider that a much more unethical piece of information to withhold when sleeping with somebody.
Just because they took the obvious route to prosecution doesn't mean that this absolves trannies of lying for sex.
It does establish that what you thought is precedent, is actually not precedent. Which was really the only point here.
All of this really is purely theoretical because people can spot a tranny a mile away.
Ive seen far, far more pictures of trans people, as well as interacted with them in real life, than you have honey. The fact that those particular people aren't passable doesn't mean they all are. There are people that would fool you.
I am reasonably sure that simply failing to disclose biological sex would not have been ruled to violate consent
How? Especially since that girl clearly consented to sex with a biologicial man and not a woman. Hence the condoms. You don't buy condoms if you just consented to a gender.
It does establish that what you thought is precedent, is actually not precedent. Which was really the only point here.
Oh I promise the next time a tranny doesn't disclose and gets hauled into court this case will be cited. I absolutely promise that.
Ive seen far, far more pictures of trans people, as well as interacted with them in real life, than you have honey.
They look like that too. You can miss a lighthouse at night easier than you can miss a tranny.
There are people that would fool you.
Oh I promise you they wouldn't. Y'all always think that you're some 4Chan trap fantasy but even Jenner, will all that money can't be passing.
How? Especially since that girl clearly consented to sex with a biologicial man and not a woman. Hence the condoms. You don't buy condoms if you just consented to a gender.
That only maybe shows that that particular example would be engaging in deception in regards to sex. Even if they were to rule that was the case, you would be hard pressed to get the legal system to agree to the idea that all trans are engaging in deception in regards to sex simply by presenting as the gender that they are legally recognized as. Again, their decision on not disclosing HIV+ status illustrates that they are less likely to deem failure to disclose things to violate consent than you think.
Oh I promise the next time a tranny doesn't disclose and gets hauled into court this case will be cited. I absolutely promise that.
It will certainly be cited since it's a similar case. That doesn't mean it is set as precedent. In the same way that the HIV+ case was cited in this case, but it was determined it was not the same situation and thus the HIV+ case didn't set precedent for this one.
You steadily ignore this, but again this page:
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/rape_and_sexual_offences/consent/
pretty straightforwardly describes how this case should be interpreted in respect to trans people, and it specifically says to take their own self perception of their identity into account, not ignore it. While you may make your promises, I am much more convinced by the link above and so I won't worry too much.
Oh I promise you they wouldn't. Y'all always think that you're some 4Chan trap fantasy but even Jenner, will all that money can't be passing.
Money really isn't an important factor in passing, its more age of transition and genes among other things. Your insistence that you can identify every single trans person as trans gets funnier every time tho. Trust me, many stealth trans people have stories of people saying similiar things to them without even realizing they are trans, lmao. It seems to be common fantasy, like the people who believe they have an innate "gaydar".
That only maybe shows that that particular example would be engaging in deception in regards to sex
Which you very strongly advocate for, yes we know.
you would be hard pressed to get the legal system to agree to the idea that all trans are engaging in deception in regards to sex simply by presenting as the gender that they are legally recognized as.
Except for this case. Yes they nailed her for not legally changing her gender but she was dragged into court because she lied about her sex. Boy you're thicker than pig shit.
That doesn't mean it is set as precedent.
Considering that the whole thing was started because she lied about her sex yes it will. Yes they nailed her with the obvious case of her not changing her gender but that doesn't change the fact that the victim was traumatized by the very "logic" that you advocate for. The "but muh privacy" doesn't extend into the bedroom.
No I already addressed that but apparently you're just trying to be difficult. Yes they take their gender perception into account, but that doesn't change the deceit as to their sex. The victim consented to sex with a biological male, and not a biological female. It wouldn't have changed anything in terms of the violation that the victim felt, nor the fact that she did consented to sex with a biological male, and not the gender male. You don't buy condoms to have sex with a gender male you tard.
Your insistence that you can identify every single trans person as trans gets funnier every time tho.
So Kaitlyn Jenner totally passes even with all the surgery though. FYI things like narrow hips on a "woman" and wide hips on a "man" are dead give aways. As are the other much more subtle social cues and responses.
Trust me, many stealth trans people have stories of people saying similiar things to them without even realizing they are trans, lmao.
Yeah when the person is Irish drunk or a super inexperienced Indian kid.
It seems to be common fantasy, like the people who believe they have an innate "gaydar".
The mother of the victim clearly realized that the girl was LARPing.
What possible "danger" is there? STD's you can point to a real world risk. Do you think the trans vagina is gonna bite ur dick off? They are tricking you into sex? No, they consider themselves actual women and thus think there is no problem with them having sex with guys without having to disclose their medical history. If you have preferences for cis girls maybe you should disclose that, that would solve the problem.
Are you fucking thick? I said endanger you in reference to the colloquial you feeling your ability to get laid would be endangered by telling people you arent a real woman and you have serious mental and physical issues. Frankly, you need to bring a better argument, not telling someone is completely shitty behavior any way you slice it. As I said, men dont want to fuck men generally, the surgery isnt going to change their mind, and tricking therm puts trans people rightfully in danger.
Nature fallacy ? Lol Listen dipshit, your body properly producing hormones until old age IS something we do naturally. Getting your dick sliced off, havibg your adams apple trimmed, and getting breasts implants and cosmetic surgery us not natural
Yep, thats the nature fallacy
Side effects are side effects, true of any medical treatment
Having your dick removed isnt a medical treatment, it is considered a elective medical procedure. Most trans people never get the surgery you dolt. Also, how is it a nature fallacy? A constructed vagina is in no way even closeto the same in form or function as the real thing.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Wew mental gymnastics. Still diagnosed by psychologists, dosent require any physical diagnosis
"The American Psychiatric Association, publisher of the DSM-5, states that "gender nonconformity is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition."
It looks, sounds, and walks exactly like a duck.
maybe try reading instead of trying to decipher how the words walk
Funny how they just clarified how gender non conformance isnt a mental disorder. Extreme dysphoria ie wanting to cut of your dick, is still considered a mental disorder. Read harder.
its funny how a trans girl can look, sound, and walk exactly as a girl but then suddenly the details matter, right ;)
Funny how you can put lipstick on a pig and call it Adele. Funny how no trans women can do anything most natural women can expert except play dress up to pretend. Funny how their so called vaginas need to be dialated so they dont close like a open wound lol U r insane.
A constructed vagina is in no way even closeto the same in form or function as the real thing.
You can pee out of it and you can fuck it, and it looks like the real thing (assuming the surgeon was competent) . Form and function. It doesn't self lube as well, but so does some cis women. Their vaginas are still considered vaginas. They can't give birth, but same with some cis women. Their vaginas are still considered vaginas. Sorry if this is triggering for you. It's the miracle of modern medicine.
Funny how they just clarified how gender non conformance isnt a mental disorder. Extreme dysphoria ie wanting to cut of your dick, is still considered a mental disorder. Read harder
Nope, the dysphoria is only the distress caused by being in the incorrect body. It's literally what the word dysphoria means. You are too stupid to know that, so no worries.
The surgery is actually one of the recommended treatments of gender dysphoria by the dsm 5. Since a trans person being treated successfully suffers no distress, then they no longer have dysphoria. Since a trans person can exist without dysphoria, then you can't say that being trans is a mental issue. Just like chronic pain can cause dysphoria, but you wouldnt say that the pain is a mental disorder if it is being caused by a physical issue.
I've always wondered how it feels to wake up in the morning, with such self confidence that you can state such things easily debunked things as true in an argument without even wondering if you could be wrong. You obviously have read any of the relevant material at all, nor bothered to research it at all. You can't be faking your stupidity because there's no point this deep in this comment thread, it makes no sense to do so.
Funny how you can put lipstick on a pig and call it Adele. Funny how no trans women can do anything most natural women can expert except play dress up to pretend. Funny how their so called vaginas need to be dialated so they dont close like a open wound lol U r insane
Funny how there are certainly trans woman you would find hot and bang and if they didn't tell you they wete trans you wouldn't know. Oh there's no way I can convince you of that or get you to admit that because it would shatter your worldview, but it does make this conversation immensely entertaining from my side
There's just something unsettling about the whole affair. I feel like the whole mechanism could just break apart. I don't know how to put someone's intestines back in and I don't want to know.
It should be in their fucking tinder bio. If I found out the date I was trying to bone was a tranny, I would politely excuse myself from that date pretty fucking quick.
I mean i would tell him why I'm leaving so they don't run to the internet and say, "Oh my god this transphobic shitlord just left me with the bill". And hope they understand why they were in the wrong. But after that, I'd be out the door real quick.
Spoiler alert: they're gonna do that anyway. Some leftist rag will pick it up as a story, you'll get doxxed and swatted and some cop will shoot your dog.
There was a woman who was 'presenting' as a guy, and got a girlfriend, used a dildo during sex and didn't allow her to see/touch and she genuinely thought she was 'he'.
She got eight years for sexual assault, but last i heard there was an appeal and re-trial.
/u/magicslave you're fucking delusional and should feel ashamed of yourself. No one will love you not because you're a tranny but because you're a lying cunt.
Oh, buddy... It's much more than that. Now I don't know if OP is a Hijra (her partner would probably know, unless he's white?) or secular, but;
Hijras are a social group, part religious cult and part caste, who live mainly in north India. They are culturally defined either as "neither men nor women" or as men who become women by adopting women's dress and behavior. Hijras are devotees of Buhuchara Mata, a version of the Indian mother goddess. Through their identification with the goddess, ratified by an emasculation ritual, hijras are believed to be vehicles of the goddess's power.
However, the Hijras I've met have been really cool. As long as you give them money. Very sexually overt considering they don't have any balls... How does that work?
If they were it was a fucking long and complicated con involving half a dozen close friends and her father doing an amazing impression of a guy who disowns a child
I would laugh, but it's not as funny when you see someone have their arm broken by their own dad just for being themselves. Hell imagine our lives if we got beaten for shitposting!
Idk man, it just doesn't sit well with me that our young boys who went out specifically to fuck a transwoman were tricked into putting their penises into natural vaginas.
OP is delusional, he's going to leave you the moment you tell him the truth and why? Because you built your relationship on a lie. Her boyfriend sounds like a dumbass so her best option is to have him bang your puss, pretend to be pregnant and adopt a baby.
I'm imagining her strapping on a fake paunch that gets bigger and bigger until the day of the "delivery". Then she steals a baby from a nursery while out lube shopping. This could be hilarious on the right sitcom
Why did it have to be this specific, I'm laughing so much.
I totally picture her talking to a friend who says something like "you can't keep this situation going on, it's surreal and he'll eventually find out your pregnancy is fake. It's time to do something about it". She replies with "yeah, I guess you're right" while the camera slowly zooms in on her sad face. Then the scene suddenly cuts to a clip of her running while holding a baby and being chased by the nurses.
I honestly thought you were just referencing AD at the start, that's how close your description was. It's a great show. Hard to think of a more sharply written one.
I've only seen Steinfeld, so I can't compare, but it was pretty jewey.
Tracking a woman's period is weird no matter who he is dating. Sounds like a scumbag to me
Not really. You date someone long enough and you just sort of know. Besides, if you're having sex there's a certain point at where you want to make sure she's having her period, even if you are using protection...
I had an ex that would openly talk about it with me, just like out of the blue. Like "Sorry if I'm acting bitchy tomorrow" and it's like yeah, alright. We had a very jovial relationship.
Like you said, it just happens. Did I know when hers was? Sure. These people are the same ones who want menstruation to stop being "Taboo" and seen as "disgusting/gross" then REEEEE and complain like children who didn't get a toy, if a guy even knows it exists.
I've never had a guy ask me about my period... I didn't know this was a common thing. And the BC I'm on now stops my periods anyways. Best invention ever.
Tracking a woman's period is weird no matter who he is dating. Sounds like a scumbag to me
Not really. You date someone long enough and you just sort of know.
Shit like this is great, because crazy posts about normal topics reminds me if reddit is insane and I know not to trust a goddamn thing said here when I'm doubtful of something.
Who the shit doesn't know exactly when their girlfriend is on her period? I even know when my roommate is on hers because we've know eachother for a few years and talk about our lives like adults.
It's disturbing that they are discussing it like it's just a fact of life. Not a single person brought up that she is lying. This is completely normal to them.
So I will presume that there is a huge difference between real and manmade vagina ( having the privilege of only seeing and interacting with the rea onesl) . That said, if ,,the dude" does not know the difference she is probably his first girlfriend/ person he had sex with. And that is tge scariest part of this story. She is lying and her ,,community" applauds her for that. Now in the she or her family ( or friends) will spill the beans. Could you imagine the reaction of that man? And to said transwoman: ,,You are a disgusting liar and a user, LET'S NOT MEET YOU HORRIBLE INDIVIDUAL"
I'm assuming a difference, but vaginas vary so much in size, shape and formation, that it's no viable to expect someone to be sure it's 'fake' if it looks even slightly passably real.
I often get the feeling that the people here have either never had sex, or have a very limited experience with it.
That may be lol , but I'm not talking about shape, size or formation. To my limited knowledge (from quara lol) transwomen need to prepare before sex (aka lube) so that might be a giveaway (maybe)? So I was talking about that.
I'll assume you live in a real shitty third world country because of the amount of unnecessary commas in your comments. And if that's the case, it's even more necessary for trans people to be in stealth.
Because in my language we use them like that in certain occasions and hell everybody around me is appropriating something, so appropriating english by inserting grammar rules of my own language into english.
but vaginas vary so much in size, shape and formation
I often get the feeling that the people here have either never had sex, or have a very limited experience with it.
Vaginas don't vary much in size, shape and formation in my experience, because I only ever had sex with 17-22 year old, petite, fair-skinned Polish girls.
So if you're trying to shame for not knowing how a 50 year old crackwhore's beef curtains or 400 lbs sheboon's fupa crack feel like, I'm afraid you're not going to succeed.
Hiding something because you know the person you're seeing would revoke sexual consent afterwards is fucked. Lying and deceiving someone like that is awful.
Honestly, you should disclose things like this before getting into an intimate relationship. This goes for both involved parties, you can't build a lasting and healthy relationship without being open with each other.
I thought the rhythm method came out of Vatican II?
Also, what if a woman said to you "we can have sex, but I don't like cum, it smells gross and makes me feel sick" which is like, not extraordinary considering semen contains Putrescine and Cadaverine, both found in rotting corpses: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semen
Or if they actually had bleeding genitals they would know how they feel every month. Some girls are into that, most i know aren't because it is uncomfortable as hell.
I'm really stunned at that thread. No one says anything about the fact that her bf has no idea she was born a man. In fact, some comments even suggest new lies to help keep the deception going for longer. I feel so badly for the boyfriend. He's in love right now with someone that has basically conned him into a relationship.
I know this is posted late but just tell him a hormone disorder you were born with has left you sterile. It's what I tell people. Technically not wrong so not lying.
If you consider this to be rape, you'd also have to say that they're obsessed with women too, since I've seen some grumpy lesbians who aren't particularly fond of pre-op transwomen genitalwise. And they've complained in a similar manner.
I don't consider it rape, but it is a huge violation of trust and a terrible way to behave with someone who you supposedly love.
And of course it feels bad when someone you like doesn't feel the same way in return, or wouldn't if they knew the facts. But lying and dancing around the truth makes it a selfish act, instead of a loving one, which is the basis of a healthy relationship.
I've said that about some gay men. Just try the pussy I've said, and it will make you happy like magic.
But they obviously want to be like that. So if we can just tell them that their choice is wrong enough times, it will eventually make them want to have sex with vaginas.
He's pretty ignorant if he thinks tracking cycles is a reliable way of preventing pregnancy. This is a guy who does NOT know how to do safe sex at the very least.
.... uhm, that's actually a fairly good way of preventing it. It is not foolproof, and is probably best used in conjunction with another method. But ... well, fertility happens in a rather small window every month.
Only a bunch of trannies would think a boyfriend asking about a gfs period timing was weird. They not being women wouldn't understand that they are inconvenient at best and terrifying when late.
I'm afraid you are past the point of saving. Lost cause. When you compare rape (like actually traumatic rape) to having sex with a trump supporter, you are an embarrassment to the American people, and mocking people who actually have experienced trauma. Go fuck yourself.
Let me guess, because you predict I'm using an apple device, I must be on the apple bandwagon, therefore undermining my entire argument that you're a pretentious asshole.
You just proved my point that you can't even come up with an original argument.
448 comments
n/a SnapshillBot 2017-04-24
Neat.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
n/a Neon_needles 2017-04-24
I always find it depressing that MTFs date loser virgins who have no idea how women work. Guys mind is going to be blown after he first meekly dents a real puss one day.
n/a DudeCat 2017-04-24
That's assuming that he will leave her at some point, rather than getting steamrolled/gaslit when she reveals her trans status.
n/a Awayfone 2017-04-24
Sure I lied but that was for my safety. After a couple dates I still thought you were a violent monster who would kill me for deceiving them
n/a Works_of_memercy 2017-04-24
And if you get angry or upset with me, that would prove that I was right all along!
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
Imagine being so hyper aware of feminine things yet having no idea how a vagina should function.
n/a I_DRINK_TO_FORGET 2017-04-24
Lets give this guy benefit of the doubt and suppose hes figured something is wrong with her since she never has periods so hes asking why to expose the tranny ruse.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
I can't even fucking imagine what goes through these people's heads where they think this isn't a topic that they should talk about with people they are in relationships with. Then they freak out on anyone that points out that they build relationships by lying their ways into it and showering people with guilt and insults if they dare to have a problem with it.
n/a I_DRINK_TO_FORGET 2017-04-24
Mental illness.
n/a SkekEkt 2017-04-24
OMG you sound like a fascist, white supremacist, homophobic, transphobic reactionary who is wholly ignorant of the interlocking despotic systems of persecution that combine to produce the lethal conditions under which oppressed peoples are forced to live....
... and it's kinda turning me on tbh.
So, are you, um - are you doing anything later?
n/a Sigakoer 2017-04-24
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2KsZHRrFpU
n/a pizzashill 2017-04-24
Reddit Transgenders are off their fucking rocker. Every transgender I've met outside of Reddit has been a fairly normal person, and very against shit like this.
But there's a specific brand of Reddit crazy that literally do not believe biological sex exists and see no problems with doing insane stuff like this.
These people are straight from the depths of tumblr.
n/a ricardogce 2017-04-24
Yeah, it seems pretty obvious that's what he's doing.
n/a jotdog1 2017-04-24
This. He's baiting her
n/a ThatDamnedImp 2017-04-24
Most women don't even have an idea how vagina's function. I guarantee that most men have no idea how their dick gets hard.
You don't actually get an instruction manual. You get that, right?
n/a CucksLoveTrump 2017-04-24
Pretty sure it's like a balloon filled with cummies
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
+1
n/a Kazruw 2017-04-24
Haven't you ever watched porn? They always start with blowjobs, because you have to blow the dick full of air in order to get it hard.
n/a DannyLee90 2017-04-24
wait so how the fuck do i masturbate then
has this just been a wet dream all this time?
n/a Will0saurus 2017-04-24
You can also inflate it by repeatedly squeezing the testicals, thus pumping air into your dick.
n/a you_cant_banme 2017-04-24
Funnily enough, that's exactly how surgically implanted erection devices work.
n/a Works_of_memercy 2017-04-24
Obviously; /u/Will0saurus wasn't joking when they described the way they think it works.
n/a Will0saurus 2017-04-24
I mean if it works for trannies it works for me right
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
I am pretty sure a person should be able to tell a real vagina versus one faked through surgery. We aren't talking super complicated shit here.
n/a Somenakedguy 2017-04-24
Srsly? I know this sub circlejerks about trannies more than almost any other topic but it's not like it would look unrecognizable from a normal vagina
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
It literally doesn't work like one. We aren't talking some random picture on the internet versus a person in front of you.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
Wouldn't you have to have an experience in fucking one to know? Because in pictures the new fake vaginas look like actual vaginas...at least to my gay eyes. Illuminate me please, my brother.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
Oh, you are gay. It isn't about appearance. It is about the fact that they are essentially self healing wounds from the surgery that need to be maintained and stretched out. Obviously there is more involved since there is the appearance and nerve endings through the use of their previous sexual organs to configure the whole transition. Also they can't self lubricate. The internals are going to be obviously different too, like there won't be a cervix, ovaries, etc. but that goes without saying.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
So let's put to one side the internal organs thing, which I would assume even a complete fucking idiot would realise is beyond modern medicine at this point, how on earth do you know if the woman you are fucking has a uterus? Ovaries? A cervix? I've heard of well endowed men banging against the cervix, but can your penis tell the difference? ( maybe post a photo of your penis, so we can try to ascertain its tranny sensing qualities)
Also, women use lube, quite regularly if lube sales are a thing to go by.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
There is a difference between using lube and needing lube.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
If you use lube don't you need it? Really struggling with the finer details of your comment....
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
No, I've used lube when someone is already wet on their own.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
That one time...
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
Why would you ever drugs recreationally instead of only in absolutely necessary medical uses? This is getting pedantic and tedious at this point answering your questions.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
Wait, isn't lube just for lubrication? If you are using it on a real vagina, is that a medical necessity or recreational?
You are the one basing your whole argument about the magical qualities of self lubrication vs lube. It reads like you've had sex maybe once or twice, and are now an "expert"
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
Ok. Actually, it reads like I'm talking to an autist that is desperately trying to pin me into some pedantic nonsense so you can go A-HA at the end.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
You're the autist with your "finer points of lube" nonsense. Please go outside and ask a stranger to define the difference between needing lube and wanting lube. I'll wait.
n/a Zappert 2017-04-24
Wow, quality /r/Drama debate. Ily all <3
n/a salami_inferno 2017-04-24
Yes but there's a difference between a girl being wet and needing some extra lube for various reasons and a girl needing lube cause she's home dry every single time you fool around.
n/a Somenakedguy 2017-04-24
Full disclosure: I've never seen a post-op vagina in front of me nor do I particularly want to. I don't know what you're referring to that would be so completely impossible to hide though
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
I'm not trying to bash any trans people here, but it is just impossible to create a female through surgery. The organs don't match up. The fake vagina doesn't lube and tries to close up on itself. We are asking for miracles with the surgeries.
n/a Somenakedguy 2017-04-24
Right but how much of this cant be hidden from a guy? Can't she just tell him she has a problem with dryness? It's not like he's gonna give her a gyno exam to look inside for the other stuff
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
I suppose, but now we have even more lying by the person and just doubling down after the guy is asking questions. I would be even more furious after getting deeper into the lies.
n/a SuchSpookySkeltal 2017-04-24
yes it would, because it's a gaping fistula and not an actual vagina
n/a Zachums 2017-04-24
user reports:
1: Why does every queer retarded autist in this sub think they're an expert on pussy
lol
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
Haha, thanks, I might have missed the memo on that one.
n/a PM_ME_HAIRLESS_CATS 2017-04-24
The corpora cavernosa fills with blood, and the tissue hardens?
n/a salami_inferno 2017-04-24
My country has excellent sex ed in public schools. So Yes, we do sort of get an operating manual.
n/a ThatDamnedImp 2017-04-24
This is reddit. Best to assume that all people here are virgin losers.
n/a DesignRed 2017-04-24
This sounds like a John Flynt fanfic
n/a mydramaaccount 2017-04-24
Trans people on Reddit are so fucking creepy. They couldn't get with someone if anyone knew they were trans so every relationship is built on a foundation of deception.
n/a registered2LOLatU 2017-04-24
Well, they are dating trannies, which is pretty weird.
n/a Michaelphelpsisquick 2017-04-24
But he doesn't know.
n/a I_DRINK_TO_FORGET 2017-04-24
Meanwhile /u/ComedicSans wonders why everyone accuses women of being trannies on the internet. Shameful.
n/a wokeaspie 2017-04-24
Using an entire bottle of lube every time they have sex should have been his first clue.
n/a DeadTrumps 2017-04-24
Honey why is your vagina coarse and dry all the time
n/a BlackPeopleEmoji 2017-04-24
Why does your pussy have literal shit coming out of it.
n/a theRagingEwok 2017-04-24
I hate sand
n/a CaliggyJack 2017-04-24
The fact I got this reference is fucking sad.
n/a Will0saurus 2017-04-24
A surprise to be sure
n/a Awayfone 2017-04-24
Sounds like rape
n/a riemann1413 2017-04-24
n/a registered2LOLatU 2017-04-24
I'm not saying traps are gay, the jury is still out on that one. I'm just saying dating traps is weird.
n/a riemann1413 2017-04-24
kys
n/a theRagingEwok 2017-04-24
n/a registered2LOLatU 2017-04-24
Luv u 2 fam
n/a Somenakedguy 2017-04-24
If traps are gay then I don't wanna be straight
n/a kabutoredde 2017-04-24
fucking THIS
n/a riemann1413 2017-04-24
n/a Ironicstemlord 2017-04-24
riemann do you see how serious this thread got
honestly you guys should just close threads when people start posting multiple-paragraph arguments
n/a CaliggyJack 2017-04-24
But that's when it gets good.
n/a riemann1413 2017-04-24
no
n/a TheCodexx 2017-04-24
Well they've got you there.
n/a DeadTrumps 2017-04-24
Yeah. It's pretty fucked up imo. If it's a one night stand I can maybe see you arguing that there's no need to tell, but a fuckin ltr?
n/a ThatDamnedImp 2017-04-24
I can see people arguing all kind of things, because reddit is full of crazies. But I don't see this as justifiable. It's rape by deception in most states.
n/a pastryarchy 2017-04-24
Why are you guys arguing about things that never happen? Has there ever been a case in recorded history where a sighted man "accidentally" had sex with a trans woman because he confused her with an "actual cis woman"?
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
The one mentionedi n the linked thread?
n/a pastryarchy 2017-04-24
I have read dozens and dozens of "stories" from trans women about how they "tricked/fooled" a straight guy into believing she was a cis woman. I've never read a story from the other side of the equation, and let's face it, very few can pass.
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
You mean transwoman's side of the story or story about transman tricking women?
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
There actually is case law that refers to trannies in this regard! It involves a trans man who was actually a biological woman and they ended up getting 3 years in a young offenders institution and the victim was given a 3 year restraining order against the trans person. It's fairly recent, by legal standards, and we'll certainly see more cases like this as trans people keep trying to argue they don't have to disclose.
The TL;DR of the whole case is "If you're a trans person, you have an obligation to inform your partner before sex if they're under the impression you're a biological sex other than what you are".
n/a pastryarchy 2017-04-24
Actually, I was just pointing out in a round about way that transwomen rarely manage to pass for cis women. Transmen on the other hand....
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
It's sort of surreal how people can become so liberal that they argue that informed consent is not important for sex. The only reason you'd hide being trans to your partner is if you realized that they wouldn't have sex with you if they knew. If you are hiding something that would result in consent being revoked if it was known at the very least you are a scumbag.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
That's not the argument liberals make, it's that it doesn't fall under something that would matter for informed consent. Its also not necessarily that they know they wouldn't have sex with them, but they might not have sex with them
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
I didn't mean to say that this represents all Liberals, just the ones that think consent isn't important when it comes to trannies having sex. NERFs are pretty liberal and wouldn't agree that trannies can lie.
Oh, so you get to decide what matters for informed consent now? Face it, the only reason to hide it is that you worry that they would revoke consent and not want to be with you. If you are hiding something because you know that consent would be revoked if they knew the truth, then it's pretty damn relevant. You can't really justify lying when you realize that the reason you're lying is that you wouldn't get consent if the truth was known.
So a tranny having sex is more important that another persons sexual preferences and them having accurate information right? No one owes you sex and you don't get to lie and deceive in order to try and get it.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Again that's not the argument they are making, just that it's not relevant to consent
Obviously informed consent can't apply to every single possible detail about you, other wise you'd have to tell everyone your life story before you sleep with them
What DOES matter for informed consent? Make an argument instead of REEEE'ing
I could just slightly change the words of your post slightly and it could be an outraged rant about how trump supporters should divulge that fact before they sleep with anybody. Pretty funny
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
Things that, if revealed, would make another party revoke/not give the consent. It's pretty straight-forward.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
That's absurd reasoning. Going with the example above, Lots of girls right now probably wouldn't sleep with trump supporters. Are you saying a person should divulge their political affiliations everytime they sleep with someone, otherwise it's not informed consent?
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
No, every time they want to engage in long-term relationship.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
I think long term relationships are a different thing, I'd call that an unhealthy relationship, not lack of consent
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
Well, as long we agree that's bad thing to do.
n/a theRagingEwok 2017-04-24
Political support does not have the same relevancy to sex as performing surgery on your genitals to change your gender from male to female.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Okay, so what makes things relevant? Do you need to divulge all medical history relating to your genitals? That's gonna make dating fun
"Hi, nice to meet you, I suffer from erectile dysfunction sometimes, let's bang"
n/a theRagingEwok 2017-04-24
Major sexual history, yes. ED can be solved by a pill, but having a man made bussi from an operation is pretty major.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
If it works and looks just like a vagina, don't see a problem. In that case the issue was "solved" just like the ED was
n/a ItsSugar 2017-04-24
It doesn't, though. Can it birth a child?
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
So you only have sex with women if they can give you a baby? Usually it's the opposite but more power to you wanting children every time you bang
n/a jubbergun 2017-04-24
Believe it or not some people want to continue their family line. A lot of people actually date for reasons aside from having a hole to plug.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
to be clear, I was more referring to the standards of consenting to sex. Someone who is infertile for any reason should disclose that to their partner if they are dating them, that has nothing to do with trans status.
n/a lvl99SkrubRekker 2017-04-24
So if you were dating someone and they waited until years later to tell you they have HIV thats aokay? Lol
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Well no. Because you can look at that situation and say its obviously wrong because it puts you at risk of getting a disease. What disease are you gonna get by fucking a trans person? Afraid u will catch the gay?
n/a tyuijvhvhcfcjf 2017-04-24
You can't catch the gay, faget.
The gay catches you.
n/a Will0saurus 2017-04-24
If the person I'm in a relationship with is actually a man with his dick cut off, I'd like to know tbh
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
If they just cut it off she wouldn't have a vagina so you should be able to tell, no worries
n/a jubbergun 2017-04-24
Then if it comes up I'd tell them I voted for Trump and move on to a women who either doesn't care or supports that vote (and when 62% of white women without a college education and 45% of white women with a degree voted for Trump I think my odds are pretty good). You shouldn't lie to people just so you can fuck them. That's shady as hell.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
What if it never comes up? What if you didn't even know for sure that she wouldn't sleep with a trump supporter? Are you guilty of lying by omission? That's basically the argument people are making here
n/a jubbergun 2017-04-24
Then they're making a stupid argument. Who I vote for isn't even on the same level with "by the way I used to be a man," unless the person I voted for was David Duke. There are some things you just have to tell people up front, like "I used to be a dude," "I'm a preachy vegan," and/or "I believe the holocaust was a Zionist conspiracy." I'm sure there's a boatload of things I'm leaving out, but you get the gist. When you are that far outside the mainstream you have an obligation to tell potential partners about whatever your particular issue is.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
A preachy vegan is going to ruin my day because I like to eat meat, and i don't care about however they are killing animals just let me eat my damn burger.
Holocaust Zionist conspiracy? Obviously a crazy person, don't stick ur dick in crazy
Hows a trans person gonna affect you if you can't even tell they are trans? You think you might catch the gay?
n/a jubbergun 2017-04-24
It's not my place to tell other people who they should or shouldn't fuck. If they don't want to fuck a tranny, that's their business, and since it's their business they deserve to know. That's the whole point of informed consent, isn't it?
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
I'm not telling anyone who they should fuck either. If you don't want to fuck trans people, that's fine with me. I just think that since it is a preference that is completely abstract and not based on any observable physical characteristic, and there's no other ethical issues like cheating or stds where there is actual risk, then it should be on the person with that preference to make that known, instead of trans people having to disclose to everyone.
n/a jubbergun 2017-04-24
It's not "completely abstract." It's very solidly defined, and it is very much based on physical characteristics. It's delusional to believe otherwise.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
If its based on an observable physical characteristic, then why do they have to disclose it? Just like an ugly person, just look at them and observe that they are ugly. Don't get mad after the fact that that they didn't disclose that they are ugly, it should be noticeable.
n/a jubbergun 2017-04-24
It doesn't matter if it's observable or not. We expect people with herpes to tell people they have herpes before they have sex even if they're not having an observable outbreak, don't we?
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
which goes back to my previous post, which had an and clause which said that things with obvious ethical issues should be disclosed, like herpes or cheating
n/a cole1114 2017-04-24
I mean, to some people having sex with a transsexual means they're going to go to hell. That's a pretty big risk for them, isn't it? I'm saying this as a bi atheist btw.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Sure, but then they should be the one making clear their religious beliefs. I'm not sure why it should fall to the non-believer to make sure of that.
n/a cole1114 2017-04-24
If they think someone is of the gender that won't send them to the bad place, they have no reason to be super up front with their religion about it. Hence the informed consent part.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Why not?
That concept could be applied to any trait that you make could possibly assumptions about.
If the religious standard is "don't sleep with people who are Mexican or you will go to hell", you can usually assume people who don't look Mexican aren't Mexican.
If you think someone isn't Mexican, then you have no reason to be super up front with your religion about it. But if your assumption was wrong, how is that the Mexicans fault?
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
Would you still sleep with someone if they told you they eat their own boogers?
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
Only if they shared the snack
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
Only if they shared the snack
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Being a trump supporter and being a man are two entirely different spectrums. A lot of men may support progressive movements, but would never have sex with a biological man if they knew. And it is their right to know and choose accordingly.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Seems the same to me. A lot of women would not have sex with a trump supporter if they knew. Therefore, it is their right to know and choose accordingly. That is why trump supporters should divulge that fact every time they sleep with women.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Lol. As a woman, that's bullshit. I hate trump, and I have slept with trump supporters. But being a man vs being a woman are extreme biological differences. If they aren't ashamed, they should tell the truth! Everyone who knows me, knows I hate trump. It's not a secret and I'm not ashamed of it and I'm not worried someone won't like me anymore because of it.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
https://www.google.com/search?q=won%27t+sleep+with+trump+supporters&oq=won%27t+sleep+with+trump+supporters
I didn't say all women, or even most. But they are out there. Good for you that you don't let political ideology get in the way of a good dicking
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Not all women. I would argue that at least 70% of men would not have sex with a biological man. I don't have any stats to back that up, but I wouldn't doubt the percentage would actually be higher. And I know good people on both sides of the political spectrum. I'm sure you're trying to insult me by referring it to "good dicking", but no, Trump is not going to ruin my sex life. Haha
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Nope I genuinely wish you success in all the dicks you pursue
Because I agree, there's good people on both sides, (Altho percentages can be argued)
notalltrumpsupporters
n/a BANNED_FIVE_TIMES 2017-04-24
trannies should kill themselves
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
No u
n/a BANNED_FIVE_TIMES 2017-04-24
No. All trannies should take a gun and shoot themselves in the head.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Lol. Banned five times is starting to make sense. You sound like a horrible person. Seriously. I would never tell you to kill your self though, because depression and suicide is a very serious thing, and your life is more important then being an asshole on the internet.
You need to reconsider your life decisions.
n/a BANNED_FIVE_TIMES 2017-04-24
No. You need to kill yourself.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Naw, I'm good πππ
n/a BANNED_FIVE_TIMES 2017-04-24
youre not
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
You're*
n/a BANNED_FIVE_TIMES 2017-04-24
thanks
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
It's called a 3rd grade education. You'll get there someday.
You'll = you will
There: not to be confused with they're, or their. They're = they are Their: possessive; ex: their mom, their car, or their school.
School: a place to learn and be educated about reading, writing, history, math, social skills, etc.
n/a BANNED_FIVE_TIMES 2017-04-24
im in college actually
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
I'm*
Sure you are sweetie.
n/a BANNED_FIVE_TIMES 2017-04-24
jk 2nd grade still
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
You're dad left you and your mom wishes you were never born.
n/a BANNED_FIVE_TIMES 2017-04-24
let it all out
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
I love and support trannys of all kinds, from manual to automatic and all the wierd ass hybrids in between. Your hate can't defeat me.
n/a BANNED_FIVE_TIMES 2017-04-24
yes it can
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
The way you put it makes it sound very promiscuous, but whatevs.
Yes, if most women wouldn't sleep with a trump supporter, you should disclose it. But most women don't care. With all the talk of consent and rape culture and blah, blah, blah, for a general rule, don't lie to people or trick people or get them drunk in order for them to sleep with you. That makes you extremely pathetic. It's going to happen though, it happens all the time because people tend to suck, but maybe people should try to suck less as much.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
I disagree, but at least you are consistent
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Like I said, people lie all the time. Maybe try to not suck as much. If I found out a guy/ or girl, consistently lied to people to get laid, I would disassociate myself with them. Better be a good liar if you want to go down that path.
n/a Nomadlads 2017-04-24
I think this good advice for all /r/drama users.
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
How pathetically desperate does one have to be not to know enough about a potential partner to do that?
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Haha. You are delusional and the reason Trump was voted as president in the first place. Go to your safe place and leave logical reasoning to the adults.
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
Oh geez, I need an adult and a safe place to protect me from the children on reddit! Can someone help!!!!
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
π©
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
Sorry, I don't read emoji. If you'd like to respond to an adult, then type in proper English. Or at least somewhat proper English.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
πΊπΈππΆππππππππ·π₯ππ©β€οΈππβ€οΈππππππ·ππππ‘ππππππ
Idiot.
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
Si, entiendo que eres un idiota.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Bueno. Chupar una polla Gorda
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
"Yes, you understand I'm an idiot. No need to make it more obvious." Congratulations. I studied Spanish for 5 years. Maybe try something a little more complex.
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
Sorry, I can't translate it all into emoji. I can only speak real languages. Maybe when you grow up more, from whatever age you claim to be you'll learn how to behave and to communicate.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Hmm. I think someone lost. Because I wasn't communicating with emojis, I understood your Spanish, and your acting like a little bitch.
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
I think you should reconΕΏider your opinion. I diΕΏagree with you completely, but I accept your thoughts on the matter bid you adieu.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
More French. You are so smart.
/s
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
Don't even get me started with the Sanskrit! I can't even think about how to come up with the insults I'd like to hurl with my newly evolving but soon to be good ways I use that!
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Do your worst.
I find you completely embarrassing.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Oh God. You're the jack ass who thinks I raped someone because I had sex with a Trump supporter. Hahahaha. ππππ
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
Oh yeah, I had even forgotten what the hell I was even arguing with you about.
That was really hyperbolic, ya know? I wasn't suggesting that you actually raped a person on that account. But...... close. Do you really like having sex with idiots?
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
I think you're an idiot.
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
I'm gonna guess that you are using an apple device. Right?
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Let me guess, because you predict I'm using an apple device, I must be on the apple bandwagon, therefore undermining my entire argument that you're a pretentious asshole.
You just proved my point that you can't even come up with an original argument.
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
So, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that you were just given the device or it was a hand-me-down from someone else. You can't afford better or don't know that there are way better options available.
How's that for pretentious?
Furthermore, you're the one with silly statement that you were proud that you were a woman and had slept with trump supporters (and I guess that was supposed to be some kind of point or impressive? to anyone) and I made a counterpoint.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
I never said I was proud that I slept with a person who supported trump. I said that I know good people on both ends of the political spectrum and I have had relationships with men who support Donald trump. You equalized them to mentally retarded people. That is a fucked up mentality to have. If someone disagree with you, they're mentally challenged?
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
Emphatically no.
But I also have known who Trump was for all of my so-called adult life, and anyone who didn't/doesn't know that he is not qualified to be a world leader is ...." mentally challenged". Maybe I should change the terms of the conversation, maybe it should be "educationally challenged"?
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Fuck off. I hate trump, but you are being way to general in your "opinion".
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
Look, lets just end this here. We are in r/drama, alright? Look at the sidebar rules, it's meant to be about arguments and bullshit and most of the posters can't even type more than a 3 word misspelled statement. I'm not mad at you, I don't want you to be mad at me.
Don't feel bad about having made mistakes in the past. Just, maybe you might want to have a little discretion about who you sleep with in the future, how quickly you jump into bed with someone, how you vet them, and how you use it in discussion. Cheers, and be well.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Are you seriously trying to tell me who I should sleep with? and who the fuck ever said I made a mistake or I regret my past? Seriously? You are a complete ignorant jack ass. Maybe try getting laid for once. It might chill you out.
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
Thank you for your advice.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
I'm curious; why do you act like I've done something wrong? Are you prejudice towards republicans? But if that was the case, you would have to be liberal. But you are slut shaming me for dating/ having sex with someone who is republican. You're the worst of both parties! Ahhhhhh
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
In the future, know that we will always be here for you. In the past, we have all said very insightful words of advice that go over everyone's heads. People think we're judgmental and hypocritical, but we're not. God came to me and testified that Trump is the antichrist. So to show that I'm totally different than Trump, I'm going to insult, act condescending, and be a complete selfish asshole, and act like Trump. That totally makes sense. So much chocolate cake. The best chocolate cake ever. And I told them to send those missiles to iraq. Yeah, to Syria. I totally just said that. Did I mention that chocolate cake?
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
Yeah, yeah yeah.
When you talk to him, tell him not to send the carrier group the wrong way next time. In the meantime watch this, and don't get your panties in a bunch.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Naw. I'm a commando sort of chick.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
False, false, false... for someone taking shit about Donald trump, you sure seem to know how to argue like a republican.
n/a Maga_Brahmin 2017-04-24
And don't forget, ΠΠ΅ΡΠΆΠΈ ΡΠ΅Π±Ρ Π² Π±Π΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ
n/a ifoelge 2017-04-24
I imagine that if someone was so hung up on politics to the extent that they actively avoid sleeping with someone who voted for someone they don't like, they would probably ask what they voted before jumping into bed with someone. But those are the unseen things, if something seems obvious, you would not think to ask it, for example: it is not natural to ask someone who looks like a woman to ask if they've ever been a man.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
If something seems obvious, you would not think to ask it, sure. Is that necessarily the other person's fault? Continuing the analogy above, the person hung up on politics usually asks the person they sleep with, but this time they spot a "I'm with her" pin on the bedstand, so the reasonable assumption is that the other person is a Hillary supporter. If it turns out that pin that was just a relatives, and the other person was actually a trump supporter, does that mean the person was maliciously trying to deceive?
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
But it is relevant to consent because they're hiding the fact they're trans because they fear consent would be revoked if the other person knew they were trans. It's not like their partner expressed enthusiasm for banging a trans person and they though "Oh I better keep the fact I'm trans a secret". They know that most likely the other person wouldn't want to be with them if they realized they're trans, so they purposefully conceal the fact they're trans in order to make sure they don't break up with them.
How is this a hard concept to grasp. If you know someone wouldn't have sex with you if they knew that you're a biological male then that is a very relevant fact. Any fact that would revoke consent is important.
You being born the opposite sex isn't a little detail about you. Me being the designated heavy hitter on my baseball team is a little detail. Being a biological male with an inverted penis and taking some hormones isn't a minor detail. You don't need to tell them your entire life story but considering that heterosexuals are defined by their desire to only have sex with people of the opposite sex, if you are the same biological sex as them then it becomes relevant.
I really don't know why you people seem to think that hiding your biological sex is no more important than not disclosing your breakfast.
I have but apparently you're too stupid to get it. If you know that there is something about you that if known to the other person would result in consent being revoked, you have a moral imperative to disclose it. You don't get to hide that fact because it means you wouldn't get to have sex. You are not owed sex and if you can't get it with honesty then you shouldn't get it at all.
Yeah this isn't even comparable, people who are heterosexual and homosexual are heterosexual and homosexual because they only want to have sex with people of the opposite or same biological sex. Bisexuals will fuck either but by definition, heterosexuals and homosexuals won't. You're hiding the fact you are a different biological sex than you appear because you realize that they wouldn't have sex with you if they knew.
It's so weird that you're going to such great lengths to try and prove that consent doesn't matter and that it's perfectly okay to deceive someone in order to have sex.
As for the idiocy that you spewed about political affiliations, if a Trump supporter makes it clear they think you're a Trump supporter and that they wouldn't fuck anyone who voted Hillary, you don't get to hide shit just so you get your rocks off. Do you know what lying by omission is? It's when you leave out important facts to create a misconception, and not correcting that misconception. A tranny not telling their partner they're a tranny is actively lying through omission.
Can consent be truly attained through lies when the truth would revoke it? Is a relationship that is founded in a lie going to last? The answer to both is no.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Wew lad that is quite the wall of text
Is it the chromosomes that you are attracted to, or looks and functionality? If you look at pictures of a trans man with facial hair and abs, and a picture of a trans woman with boobs and butt, which one are you attracted to? Are you attracted to the hairy abs man more? Because he was a bio girl right? Seems ridiculous to me but okay, that's apparently "straight"
If it looks like a girl, fucks like a girl, and you apparently can't tell, then what's the problem?
Where does that trans person know that the other person will revoke it? That's just an assumption you've made based on poor logic (she doesn't want to tell him, therefore he must not wanna fuck trans people, incredible) Of course, if the person was like "I don't wanna fuck trans woman, so don't be trans" then yea that kinda changes the situation. But right now we only have a "maybe" situation, which is why I made the other analogy
That's not the situation I described lmao. What if they don't make it clear? What if they don't make an indication any way that they care? Do I still have to disclose?
Please tell me, this is fascinating, put more outrage into the next post too please
Talking about sex not a relationship bby, I do advocate not hiding important stuff in a long term relationship
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
It's a combination of all really. If you spend 20 years as a man and then get surgery and take a bunch of pills, well you just ain't going to be a woman. At best you're just LARPing. There are physical differences in male and female brains, along with unique chemical mixes. Popping some pills and having a couple surgeries doesn't make you exactly the same as the sex you want to be. People who aren't shut in virgins can tell the difference really easily.
By definition it wouldn't be straight because if you're heterosexual you aren't attracted to or wanting to have sex with the same biological sex as you. It would mean you're bisexual but that's not really here or there.
All of the nonsense you wrote just doesn't matter though. Find someone who will want to do you while knowing the truth. Don't lie and then try and justify it by claiming that you're close enogh to the real thing (even though you're not). If I order a Coke I'm not cool with you giving me an RC Cola and claiming that it's Coke. It's not, it's just a poor imitation you're trying to scam me with.
So as long as you think they're close enough then you apparently don't have to tell people the truth. It's so funny how you keep trying to find a way to make it okay for people to lie to others in order to get sex. You keep trying to prove that consent isn't important for sex and you still don't get how fucked up that is to say. You seem to think that turning your dick inside out and getting implants means you can hide your condition in order to trick someone into giving consent (even though you're fully aware it would be revoked if you told the truth). I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is no reason to lie if you know that the truth wouldn't change anything. You only lie if you know it would.
"Its also not necessarily that they know they wouldn't have sex with them, but they might not have sex with them". You literally admitted to this earlier, and considering that there is no reason not to tell someone if you knew it wouldn't matter for consent we can tell why they're lying. You only lie or hide things when you know there won't be good consequences for you if the truth was known. You've been told by multiple people that they wouldn't willingly bang a tranny, and you keep trying to justify hiding it so that the tranny could have sex.
If you're hitting on a homosexual, heterosexual, or even bisexual person and you're a tranny, you need to tell them that you're a tranny because it will matter to them. You know it matters because they're hetero or homo and if they're bisexual they still should know so they can actually consent to sex. You don't get to avoid consent by deluding yourself into thinking a Costco sized application of lube and an inverted penis is close enough to a vagina.
The vast majority of people on this planet wouldn't bang a tranny, so yeah you always have to disclose. Your desire for sex doesn't supersede their right to consent. People like you are the exact reason why we need laws to make sure trannies disclose their condition. Clearly you cannot be trusted to behave in the moral, or even sensible way. You lie and you keep trying to justify deception while admitting that you do so in order to have sex.
Okay, lets use an analogy and see just how rapey your ideas are:
Jane is a 20 year old black woman who does not want to have sex with a white guy. She only wants to have sex with black guys. Dylan is a 22 year old white guy who wants to bang Jane. Dylan knows that Jane wants to hook up with Malik at a costume party so Dylan dresses up in the same costume Malik does and hits on Jane at the party. Jane is smashed, thinks Dylan is Malik and starts to have sex with him in a dark room. Jane quickly realizes that Dylan is Dylan. Jane freaks out and calls the police. When the police come will they say;
A) "Lol, Dylan looks close enough to Malik and he has a dick so whats your problem Jane? It doesn't matter that he knows that if you knew he was Dylan you wouldn't have sex with him because a dick is a dick."
or will they
B) Arrest Dylan for rape, toss him in jail, and let Jane know she can press charges.
Jesus you're a rapey fuck aren't you? Trying so, so hard to find ways to justify lying to people in order to have sex with them.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Thanks u delivered, well not really you ignored the analogy but the rest is fun
Then theres no problem right? Just don't have sex with people you aren't attracted to since you can easily tell the difference. I have no idea where you are going with the arguments about physical desire and attractiveness, but they are hilarious, and also defeats your own argument. If transgender status is so obvious, why do they have to disclose it in the first place? Just use your damn eyes.
Lmao, you really are dense, there's a difference between might not wanna fuck trans people and know they wont wanna fuck trans people, the whole point of that sentence was to point out that difference
I haven't seen you come up with a good reason why they need to say it either, the best you've come up with is being afraid of accidentally being gay, so yea, they don't. If that's the best argument you got this:
...is certainly is never gonna happen. Yea, I'd say lying to land sex is bad. Being trans isn't lying though. Omission can be as bad as lying, but generally people omit tons of information that people might not like on one night stands, and if it doesn't have any concrete effect on anyone I don't really see the problem. In the end, it has never been a problem to misrepresent your physical attractiveness. Makeup, deodorant, hair plugs, cosmetic surgery, whatever.
aww, adorable try, but this is an actual case of deception. In that case there was no consent given to Dylan, only to Malik. It's really fascinating that you think this situation is in any way equivalent though.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Boy you must be all kinds of retarded to still argue that trannies get to lie about their status as mistakes of God.
Purely hypothetical. Like how you argue that trannies get to lie for sex. They don't, but at least we should spare the virgins the horrors of realizing their "GF" is a dude with a mutilated penis.
A dude LARPing as a woman is lying. That's not really a controversial stance.
Yeah, like the fact they're a 2nd Lieutenant and not a Lieutenant, not that they're a biological male who mutilated themselves to appear like a woman.
Just like trannies who don't disclose their "status". See what I did there?
Like how consent was given to a biological female and not a dude with an inside out dick?
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
lmao, how noble of u
Really? Walk into any leftist sub and watch it become controversial. Unless you meant only right wing spaces then sure, "thing is not controversial among people who agree with me"
Insist that they are the same? I counter-insist that they are not the same. Quality banter.
No, consent was given to having a sex with a woman. If consent only extends to biological women, then that should be made clear. She can't read minds. Which is the main difference between this situation and the above one, in the above one its apparent that the person is impersonating another person to deceive. that is an actual uncontroversial stance, and would be agreed with in both left wing and right wing subs.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
It's not controversial. You don't get to turn your dick inside out and suddenly become a woman. I don't like NERFs but we do agree on this on fact.
If is is the same. You said that as long as the genitals have a passing resemblance they're okay. I pointed out what this entails and now you're backtracking. Maybe get your handler to explain this to you.
It is made clear if they are appear to be a normal heterosexual. Trannies don't get to lie because they might not get sex if they told the truth.
TBH this is absolutely hilarious how you're trying to say that deceit it okay for sex when it involves a tranny.
He can't read minds, get it right. Turning your dick inside out doesn't make you a woman.
Like what trannies do everyday. They try their hardest to impersonate the opposite sex. How are you this retarded to not know this?
The fact trannies are LARPing is agreed upon with both sides that recognize them. Again, you're apparently too retarded to figure this out.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Wow you are actually unable to recognize that there are a sizeable amount people that disagree with you. neat
Lmao, I said that in reference to how physical attraction works in relation to being straight or gay, dummy. I was trying to get you to present some coherent reasoning to why having sex with a trans person was so scary, which you failed to do. How you interpreted that to mean "if you consent with one pair of genitals, you consent with any that looks like them" is beyond me. Consent is specific to the person and interaction. If you explicitly don't consent to sex with trans people, then it would be wrong for them to sleep with you. duh. Key word explicit, if you can't make it a point to voice ur fear of trans people if you accidentally sleep with one that's on you.
she
No, they truthfully present as their gender. The fact that you are too dumb to know that gender doesn't always equal biological sex isn't their fault, its yours. Ignorance isn't an excuse
Im not sure where you found it necessary for your argument to assert that people who disagree with you don't even exist, but keep it up! its gold <3
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Go ahead. Empirically prove to me that the structural differences in the brain don't matter after a surgery.
Which you failed at abysmally, and which you realized after everyone else told you they weren't cool with trannies yes.
Which is why they need to identify themselves as the mistakes of God that they call trannies.
Which is different from their biological sex, which is what matter for most of the human race.
Fun how you still try and argue that consent doesn't matter tho. It's really cute how you are not a rape apologist for trannies.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
lmao what does that have to do with you denying that people who disagree with u exist? I'm not even saying that they are right or not, just that they exist. I think you've left this plane of the conversation, possibly ascended to a nonsensical realm of thought
Ur a dummy dum dum mega seeds in ur bum
Yes, I did fail at getting you to provide coherent reasoning for your stances. I did my best though, and I really tried. Thanks for helping insult urself, it gets tiring doing it alone
god isnt real
the human race will eventually ascend and cast off the shackles of biological sex and other physical characteristics
quake in fear at the new godless world
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
I get it, you disagree that trannies should tell people they're trannies because they wouldn't get to have sex with straight people if they told the truth. You're still arguing that consent doesn't matter for sex and really aren't being that coherent about it.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Consent does matter for sex. If you don't want to have sex with trans people, then say so and don't give consent.
Your argument is that every persons lack of consent should be assumed, based on a series of assumptions that not everyone agrees with.
I disagree with that particular argument that's based on those particular assumptions. You could twist that into me not caring about consent for sex, but I don't really see the point in doing so
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Awwww, it's so cute seeing you trying to hard to claim that consent doesn't matter but also does. You're literally advocating rape by deception while claiming that you care about consent.
If you've turned your dick inside out, popped some horomone pills, and got implants it's to appear as a woman. It's not reasonable for 99.9999% of humanity to have to question if the person who appears to be one biological sex is actually another.
Trannies who don't identify themselves as trannies are keeping that secret because they realize that the other person is under a false impression and would revoke consent if the truth was known. You're still trying to frame this as not actually important.
If someone is clearly a heterosexual (hitting on the opposite sex) or homosexual (hitting on the same sex) it can be safely assumed that they wouldn't consent to sex with someone who is a different biological sex than what they appear. How are you this retarded?
You've had multiple people here tell you the same thing I've told you, that they wouldn't knowingly fuck a tranny yet you still think this is controversial? Head over to your local mall and ask people if they would knowingly fuck a tranny. You'll see that I'm right and the vast majority of people wouldn't want to fuck a tranny.
You yourself admit this with your earlier "we hide it because if we told the truth they might not have sex with us." Normal people not wanting to fuck trannies is no more controversial than water being wet. I know some super liberal subreddits may disagree, but go ahead and ask people IRL. I'll wait.
Because you're retarded, yes we already get that. If a guy is hitting on a M-to-F tranny, it's clearly because he thinks the tranny is a biological woman. The tranny has a moral imperative to disclose they're a biological male because, judging by the guy's actions, he's consenting to sex with a woman and not a man with an inside out dick and implants. If you don't disclose your condition, it's because you know that he wouldn't have sex with you if he knew. The guy consented to sex with a woman, not to sex with a mutilated man. These are hardly abstract assumptions you mong.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
This is mostly an anti-trans space, duh. I actually know way, way, way more people that would fuck trans people (provided they are passable and they look cis) than that wouldn't. Yes, I've asked, I've had a lot of discussions on trans people. That is because most of my associates are leftist and pretty open with gender.
This also applies to IRL, people tend to hang out with people who agree with them. You will find far more yes answers in liberal cities, almost guaranteed. It also depends how you frame the question of course.
Would the majority not sleep with them? Sure. There's enough who would to make it controversial though.
Trans issues in general are controversial. There are multiple changemyview threads on this very topic, usually with hundreds to thousands of comments.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
How am I misinformed that it's not okay to lie to someone who thinks you're a biological sex that your not because you know that they'd not consent to sex with you if they knew the truth? I notice you gave up trying to defend that and devolved into the "but me and my friends would bang trannies so we represent all people and trannies don't need to get consent".
Trans issues aren't really that controversial. Use whatever bathroom but don't lie to get sex. Easy peasy.
No amount of introspection will justify hiding a fact that you know would revoke consent. It's really hard for me to imagine being so delusional that you can on one hand openly admit most people wouldn't want to fuck a tranny, but then say that trannies can lie to these people because they probably wouldn't have sex with them if they knew the truth.
Some people will fuck trannies, so find those people and don't try and trick people into having sex with you. How hard is this for you to grasp?
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Lmao, no. I'm merely pointing out that the disagreement exists, which you continue to deny. I'm not given up defending anything. The significant disagreement in the topic shows that what you think is universal, isn't.
You said "You've had multiple people here tell you the same thing I've told you," which apparently means a stance is definitely not controversial. Fucking lol, what reasoning is that? I simply pointed out that I've had more people tell me the opposite. But they don't count because of your feeeeeeeeelinnnnngs
Like how stupid do you have to be to ignore all the controversy around trans issues. Especially with bathrooms lmao, that was a big controversial issue
Maybe you don't understand what the word controversial means?
conΒ·troΒ·verΒ·sial
ΛkΓ€ntrΙΛvΙrSHΙl,ΛkΓ€ntrΙΛvΙrsΔΙl adjective
giving rise or likely to give rise to public disagreement
There was much public disagreement with the trans bathroom issue. Therefore, it was controversial.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
There is no reasonable disagreement when it comes to consent in sex. You keep trying to say there is but the fact is you need consent in order to have sex. Sex without consent is central to the concept of rape "Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration carried out against a person without that person's consent."
In the story that kicked all of this off the tranny didn't disclose that they're a tranny and their boyfriend had clearly consented to having sex with a biological woman. That's known because he was asking about fertility and periods. They didn't disclose they're a tranny because they knew that the boyfriend wanted to be in a relationship with a woman, and not a dude. You tried to say that informed consent isn't important because it would mean the tranny doesn't get laid, but it very clearly is especially since the guy is under the impression he is having sex with a woman, and not a man.
As you've said, there are plenty of people who willingly would have sex with a tranny, so there is less than zero reasons to lie about being a tranny. What the tranny did in the story is rape by deception, he deceived the boyfriend into believing he was a woman, and now is trying to find ways to keep the deception up. If trannies cannot accept that they need to inform people they're trans, then we really need laws to ensure that they do.
You are not entitled to sex, and if you cannot have sex while being truthful about things like your biological sex, then you shouldn't be having sex at all. It's so weird seeing someone who is so liberal that they're now a rape apologist.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
There is no reasonable disagreement that consent is required. There are reasonable disagreements to what is necessary for consent in sex.
In that particular situation, yes she is being misleading. Not good in a relationship certainly.
They are a woman. What you meant to say is that he wanted a cis women. This is projection on your part, and also an assumption on your part. Just because he assumed she is cis doesn't mean he is against sleeping with trans people. You also assume she knows he is against sleeping with trans people She said nothing to indicate that. Just withholding personal information is not a sufficient to indicate that. There are many reasons to hide trans status that don't have to do with tricking people into sex.
No it's not
She is a woman
Terrible idea for sure
Correct
If you need to know biological sex, then ask. A person presenting as another gender is not lying about their biological sex.
I'ts so wierd seeing right wing people try and argue that things that aren't rape actually are. It's a fun exchange of roles
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Actually appearing as something you're not is incredibly relevant to consent when it's clear the other person believes that you are a different biological sex.
Trannies are not men or women, they're trannies. Until the day comes where we can print new bodies and transfer our consciousness into them, they'll always be a tranny. Ultimately that are their biology, and nothing aside from a new body will change that. You don't get to invert your penis, take some pills, and dress differently and suddenly become a woman.
Rape by deception is a crime in which the perpetrator has the victim's agreement and compliance, but gains it through deception or fraudulent statements or actions.
It literally is the definition of rape by deception. Jesus Christ you're thick.
They are, they absolutely are. If I dress as a doctor and wander around an ER is it up to the patients to ask me if I'm really a doctor? Am I not lying about being a doctor. Yes trannies are trying to seem like the sex they feel closer too, but the fact they're biologically different is something that matters.
If you want to have sex as a tranny, disclose your condition. If you can't do that, then like I've said we need laws to ensure this happens.
Fun, I'm actually a member of the Liberal Party of Canada. So I'm not right wing, I'm just not so liberal that I start denying rape and claiming trannies get a pass on it.
n/a HelperBot_ 2017-04-24
Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deception
HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 60792
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Your stance on trans issues is undeniably right wing, so the fact that you are liberal on weed or whatever i could care less.
Yet how many examples on that page used letter by letter that description, and how many instead used a much narrower definition? Use in the US is pretty much only restricted to impersonating someone, because it's absurd to use a description like that. I'm the thick one? Use your brain cells then Einstein, and think about the consequences of treating that exact definition like that as meaning rape.
~ Have you cheated on your wife? Congratulations, you are a rapist. Enjoy years of prison in jail.
~ Exaggerated what you do at work to land a girl? RAPE! jail time for you
but no wait, YOU ARE EVEN MORE RETARDED! IT GETS BETTER!
You are seriously arguing that if someone makes a reasonable assumption about you based on your appearance, then that's also rape
~ Did you buy a nice suit and do you have a nice car, and used them to pick up a lady, but you aren't actually rich? YOU FUCKING RAPIST. GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL. WHY ARE YOU DECEIVING PEOPLE INTO THINKING YOU ARE RICH?
~Are you racially black but don't look it? That racist wouldn't have fucked you if they knew that, you fucking morally inept heathen. TO THE JAIL WE GO
This pretty much makes any lie told in a relationship means that they could claim rape. It also makes like 90% of the population rapists. I can't wait for your backtrack when you tell me that those don't count for reasons not stated in your literal definition
Apparently not wanting to trivialize an actual, traumatic and often violent crime makes me a rape apologist tho
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Actually I haven't smoked weed in a few years. I'm just a huge fan of state capitalism and stricter controls for the financial industry along with more oversight for the police. Trannies don't get to avoid the truth because they're trannies. As far as I'm concerned they only need to out themselves when dating/trying to hookup and when receiving medical treatment. Aside from that I'm 100% okay treating them like the sex they want to be considered.
Holy shit you're exactly as retarded as you are triggered. Rape by deception covers severe deception, not puffery. Also, trannies are impersonating the other biological sex so it works very well. Cases where you fuck your friend with a dildo while you're pretending to be her crush mean you're raping someone. All your examples are window licking retarded. Buying a nice car and suit isn't rape, impersonating your brother to fuck his wife is. Do you not know that puffery is you inbred?
You actually have to have been in the special needs class to believe that rape by deception includes cheating and general puffery. What it does include is that Arab guy who told a Jewish woman he was Jewish in order to have sex with her. You have to substantively lie to someone in order for it to be considered rape. Go ahead and send your examples to the Judge Roger Dutton and see if he agrees with you. Spoiler alert, he'll just think you're as retarded as I do.
"Rape by deception is a crime in which the perpetrator has the victim's agreement and compliance, but gains it through deception or fraudulent statements or actions."
Remember my example of Jane and Dylan, this covers it because consent was gained through deception or fraudulent statements. If it was obtained through deceit, it's because it wouldn't have been given otherwise. Like when you're a tranny that lies to some Indian kid so you can fuck him. That's rape, and you trying to twist it because he's a tranny won't change that. Think that boy won't be feeling violated, think he won't have to go to therapy after? And why? Because some tranny decided that their need for sex was greater than that kids right to the truth, and to have sexual preferences.
Man, you are just trying so, so hard to justify deceit, the lack of importance to consent, and rape all in the name of being liberal. If being a tranny didn't matter then there would be no, as you call it, controversy. There is though, because it does matter to people. You're literally putting your own feelings and desire for sex above peoples right to sexual choice and somehow you think I'm the retarded one.
You better fucking hope Pence doesn't catch wind of these retarded arguments that you make.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Exactly as I predicted, what a coinciiidence
but you said that link was literally is the definition of rape by deception
now is it not the literal definition anymore?
Which is it? It's nothing other than what you want to believe in the moment of course, because your logic has no concrete basis other than feeeelings. You define rape a certain way to attempt to include trans people in it, then get mad when your poor definition allows retarded examples. Not my fault bby, but it is hilarious.
Lmaooo, if "looking like another biological sex" is impersonation, so is looking like you are rich (you are impersonating a rich person!!) or looking like another race (you are impersonating a black person!!!). There's no internal logic here, other than "How can i say trans people are rapists while pretending I have reasons that make sense while doing so?"
Of course looking like another sex isn't pretending to be a different person, therefore it isn't impersonation, so we have no problem. The trans person's identity is never in question. Only irrelevant characteristics that you personally are triggered by
Good. Its your goddamn logic :) I'm glad you can recognize your own brand of retarded when the word "trans" isn't in the mix. I know you can't recognize that that's literally your own logic, but you don't have a good grasp on your own logic in the first place so thats okay
Go ahead and ask THE MAJORITY OF THE JUDGES IN THE US if merely a trans person not disclosing their birth sex would be rape and see if they agree with you. Spoiler alert, they all will think you are retarded. Just like the above examples, again, which were only a demonstration of your own dumbass logic.
Is this a literally like the above not really literally or is this a real literally this time
Please, more outrage, tell me how trans people you can't even tell are trans are literally traumatizing all our youth
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
No, because consent attained through massive deception still isn't actually consent. See, you're so stupid you're confusing minor reasons to have sex with someone with a basis for consent that is fundamental. If you're lying about being rich to pick up girls, not being rich isn't as big of a deal as being not a biological man. After all the girls who want rich guys just want to be with someone with money to spend. As long as you have that money to spend then you're giving them 100% what they wanted. As long as they get the nice dinners, jewelry, and rides in the Ferrari, that's already exactly what they were after. Presenting yourself as a biological male when you're a biological female isn't giving a woman exactly what she wanted. That's deceiving someone in order to get sex. Just like that Arab did when he lied to the Jewish woman. This isn't hard unless you're as stupid as you are.
The logic of "If you know someone wouldn't have sex with you if they knew you weren't the same biological sex you're presenting yourself as then you need to tell them" logic is far more sane than "Well if I think a bottle of lube and an inside out penis are a vagina then no one can disagree!".
Not even comparable, and you'd have to be retarded to think that it is. I notice you don't address the doctor analogy and whether it is the patients responsibility to check to see if the guy in a lab coat and telling people he is a doctor in an ER is a doctor. Skipped over that one nicely because it's clear that it's not up to a patient in a hospital to check if the guy presenting himself as a doctor is actually a doctor. Just like how it's not up to normal people to have to check if the person who appears to be a woman is actually a woman.
A biological man turning his penis inside out, getting implants, and dressing like a woman isn't pretending to be a woman? Okay then. They literally are pretending to be a biological female when they're a biological male. Fun how this doesn't seem to fall under the category of "pretending". It's LARPing plain and simple. If I dress up as a Roman Centurion am I not pretending to be a Roman Centurion?
Did you have a stroke? It's still fun how you have stopped trying to show that deception about biological sex is irrelevant.
Representative Peter Koutoujian already would agree with that, as would People vs. Morales. Think before talking next time.
Like I said, normal people can tell, innocent and naive kids like that Indian kid can't. I again notice you're all hush-hush about that case.
You're trying to divert the conversation because you can't address my main points about the morality knowingly deceiving someone into having sex with you. By your own logic there is zero problem in giving someone an STD if you don't think it's a big deal to disclose it and if it isn't that bad anyways.
I want to see you explain how that tranny didn't rape that Indian boy. Especially considering that he made it abundantly clear she was a biological female and that he wanted to be with a biological female. Go ahead, show how the tranny isn't a piece of shit for doing that.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Where did the definition say "Massive"? It just said deception. Yes, you did backtrack on your statement.
I'm not confusing anything at all. That's literally what your definition said. If you wanted to say there's a distinction between "big and tiny reasons", you should have considered that in your definition of what rape by fraud is. That's how definitions work. If you need to amend your definition on the fly to consider cases that you haven't considered, then it shows that you don't really know what you are talking about. You've failed to establish any reasoning for why you think this should be considered fundamental compared to other things. All you can do is state conclusions you've arrived at, not the reasoning you've taken to arrive to those conclusions. That's because your conclusions were not arrived to by reason in the first place.
It's only sane to you because you consider your faulty assumptions to be undeniable truths. You are unable to evaluate that those assumptions were not arrived by logic but by feeeeeeling.
That's wrong because there are obvious ethical consequences that you can point to from impersonating a doctor in a hospital. Namely because you could deliver an incorrect medical diagnoses and cause someone serious harm. That's why that is already illegal, obviously
just because I didn't address that particular stupid comparison before doesn't make it any less stupid honey
No, they are accurately expressing their-selves as a woman, which is a description of gender. Gender is accepted by the modern scientific community as not equivalent to biological sex. Read a book.
a handful of judges represent and a case with a dissenting opinion represents the majority of US judges? lmao. Regardless, none of those have expressed an opinion on whether trans people not disclosing their gender is rape by fraud as far as I know. They have expressed statements on what is rape by fraud, but it is your opinion that trans people not disclosing falls under that. Trying to assert that they support your opinion is a fun bit of begging the question. You can't comprehend that because you are an idiot.
The fact that currently, there is no legal basis to prosecute the thing you are claiming is rape by fraud should suggest to you that our legal system does not consider that be the case.
I've already shown that conclusively. You were unable to show exactly how deception occurred, you just continued to insist that it happened. I'm only having fun now pointing out how stupid you are in various ways.
I've already addressed that in a multitude of ways, you just seriously aren't capable of grasping the logic. It is very simple, but clearly out of your grasp. Look, you just proved you don't get it in the very next sentence.
Obviously, STDs should be disclosed because there is a concrete, physical risk of harm from STD's. Exact same reasoning as the "impersonating a doctor" logic above. In contrast, there are no physical risks from having sex with a transgender person. This is very simple logic, that has already been explained to you, and yet you can't comprehend it. A child could understand it, really
I already covered this too, but sure
The second part of your sentence doesn't logically follow. That is an assumption you've made.
Before you REEEEE, think very carefully.
Just because you are dating a biological female doesn't mean that you only want to be with biological females. Your second premise doesn't follow. Observe a simple hypothetical example:
I date women. My personal preferences is that I do not care if they are trans or not, nor do I ask. I am dating a woman, and I assume that she is a biological woman, because most woman are biological women, and she never tells me otherwise. It turns out she is trans.
In this case, the second premise doesn't follow from the first. Yet you insist that is has to. This is a symptom of you being an idiot.
According to you, I definitely was raped, which I find hilarious. That's pretty much the very definition of being offended on other people's behalf, which is something only tumblr feminists are supposed to do.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
We're beating around the bush, but I'm just going to go after your foundational view on consent and what you're really arguing because this is getting tiring. You're out here, trying to show that when it comes to sexual intimacy the right not to associate no longer is more important than the right to associate. For you a trannies right to associate is now more important that the other persons right to not associate when it comes to sexual intimacy. However, each person gets to make their own judgement on whether or not the other person counts as a man or a woman, you don't get to decide that for them. You're perfectly free to educate people as much as you want, you aren't free to make choices for others when it comes to their sexual freedom. Go ahead and make claims and show to the best of your ability that you're functionally exactly the same as a real woman, but don't put your right to associate above others right to no associate. All people have a bodily integrity right to say βnoβ to sex, no matter how ugly,offensive, or nonsensical their reasons for doing so might be to you. You can't bypass that.
The sex of a persons partner clearly matters a great deal to an overwhelming majority of people. After all, there are not many people, including heterosexuals, gay men, and lesbians, would be indifferent to the sex of a potential partner. Just think about when people go on a blind date, most of us would want to ensure that the other person on the date is of a particular sex, people generally don't just leave it up to the matchmaker and say βsurprise me.β Tinder doesn't have a mystery option. You choose the sex you're interested in because it matters to you. We see this in blind dates, and on dating websites. If only appearances truly mattered, then dating websites wouldn't even bother mentioning sex.
Being heterosexual or homosexual is part of a personβs own identity and is not rightly subject to invalidation or dismissal. Yet you just don't seem to understand this, or more likely you refuse to admit it because it means trannies would be under a moral imperative to disclose. Each person is completely right to have sexual preferences, and you don't get to override that because you might be omitted from consideration as a sexual partner. In the same way that a person has the right to refuse consent to sex for any reason at all, no matter how offensive, a person similarly has the right to the disclosure of the facts that wouldβif knownβtrigger that refusal, if the potential partner can anticipate what facts would matter to this person. A possible partner appearing to be a heterosexual or a homosexual certainly fits the bill to be someone who would consider biological sex to be a relevant fact and therefore a tranny has an obligation to disclose. You can tell the truth and maybe you'll get lucky, but as I've said before you don't get to hide that fact because you've told yourself it's not relevant. Best case scenario the partner is you and you're cool with trannies, worst case they say no. Either way, you don't end up in a situation like what happened to that Indian kid. My argument towards disclosure would prevent things from happening like what happened to that Indian kid, your way would result in many more situations like that, which very clearly are morally reprehensible. Even you admit that that situation is fucked up, but apparently still don't understand that it's a logical consequence of validating hiding your biological sex.
Your position creates problems like the Indian kid, and while mine may strike you wrong because I'm prioritizing the partnerβs conception of the transgender personβs gender identity (for example, as a man, because she was assigned male at birth) over the transgender personβs own conception of his or her gender identity (for instance, as a woman) which does sting, this is necessary and indispensable for proper sexual choices and informed consent. A persons conception of what a man is and what a woman is may be debatable for you, but this doesn't change the fact that every person is completely right to have their own sexual preferences, and that you don't get to try and work around that because you don't agree with them. You're free to debate and to try and educate, you're not free to use deception and purposeful omission in order to bypass their sexual preferences. If the person appears to be heterosexual or homosexual, then you need to be under the assumption they are only interested in sex with their respective biological preferences. I know plenty of lesbians who would not want to have sex with a man at all, and the fact that you're had surgeries to appear as a woman wouldn't matter to them.
So go ahead and tell me oh how unreasonable I am, and how the only reasonable stance is yours which denies sexual preferences, and which encourages deception.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Lmao, I do love hearing ur fantasies, they are adorable.
The best thing is, you completely disregarded the perfectly good arguments I made in my previous post, which was easily just as long as yours. Yet, I didn't whine about you ignoring the arguments and assume it was because you are totally stumped, did I? I mean, I did just now, but you started it :c
I digress, let me dive in:
Right from the bat, this was promising. I was under the impression that you would be actually attempting to work on the foundations of your argument. Sadly, you didn't really do that. Instead you attacked strawmans of what you believe my foundational view of consent is.
These are both strawmans. Seriously, step away from the outrage, and consider your logic in an abstract sense. In a basic form, you are trying to say that I am trying to argue that a transgender persons right to have sex overides someone elses right to say no. This logic is based on an underlying assumption that the trans person needs to always volunteer the information that they are trans, so you can make the decision to say no. The problem is that the assumption IS the thing we are arguing here. You assume that you are right. BUT it is also the thing you are trying to argue in the first place. So you can't use a conclusion based on the premise that "trans should always disclose", to argue the point that "trans should always disclose". That's circular logic.
I know you probably don't get it, but let's try an analogy that puts you in my shoes.
Person A believes that rich people should always disclose they are rich, no matter what, so that people who hate sleeping with rich people can avoid them.
Person B believes that disclosing financial status is not necessary for consent.
Now, we both can agree that Person A is wrong right?
So is A correct to say that B is arguing that "rich peoples right to associate is more important than everyone elses right to not associate", just because B says they shouldn't need to disclose it? No, because that argument is based on his belief of the premise.
In the same way, EVEN IF YOU ARE 100% RIGHT, and trans people SHOULD have to disclose no matter what, thus making the point "trans people shouldn't put their right to associate over other people's right to not associate" 100% right, stating that isn't an argument, for the reasons above.
Many of your arguments fall into this pattern, this is why most of your "arguments" fail to pursuade. They aren't arguments any more than shouting "trans people should disclose" is.
for a light addressal of the rest of the topics in your post, (this post is long as fuck just to get principles of logic and argument across to you, so forgive me for not going in depth. I could possible delve into them more, but its getting impractical and really if you end up rejecting basic argument construction then theres no point)
Replace the word sex with gender and I'll agree. Id argue that are much more people comfortable having sex with a trans people of their desired gender (as long as the basic element of visual attraction is fulfilled) than you think.
It also doesn't invalidate homosexual or heterosexual identity if they are interested in the same gender, not sex. That's why modern definitions of the terms usually use attraction to the same or opposite gender or sex. The key is the individual person and how they define themselves. The rest of this is suffering from the same logical flaw as above
That was an interesting chain of logic. You basically said "pretty much everyone cares about biological sex, so trans people should disclose." I dispute that above.
Not really, It is not necessary and indispensable for proper sexual choices and informed consent. There is another option, which is to inform any partner you take that trans status is a deal breaker. To say that that is the only way that situation could be avoided is factually wrong.
This solves both sexual choice and informed consent, while also not prioritizing your conception of gender identity over your partners.
mostly arguments with the above logical issue
You are the one accusing me of having an unreasonable position of wanting trans people raping everyone and the condition of consent to collapse and blah blah blah
I don't think your stance is that unreasonable, just wrong. I think the logic you use to defend that stance, along with most people, is pretty unreasonable, as well as your characterization of trans people, as long as your refusal to understand their position.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Your foundation is that trans people are under no obligation to disclose. You support this by saying that it's not important because they look "close enough" and the genitals "work the same". I told you that functionality takes a backseat for biological sex for most people. You can't address this so you claim it's a strawman. Fun.
Which is a hilarious claim for you to make because your "logic" taken to it's conclusion has resulted in condemned behaviour, like with the Indian kid, and even illegal behaviour that has been punished with prison time, like with the British tranny. My logic has been codified into law, yours has been successfully prosecuted. That should tell you something about the strength of your supposed logic. Especially since yours is grounded in justifying deceit, and mine is about disclosing the truth. You're the one saying that the truth isn't important, but me saying it is is somehow unreasonable? You yourself condemn the people who take your logic of non-disclosure into a relationship. Seriously, you can't even accept the far reaching results of justifying tranny non-disclosure.
Okay you clearly don't know that a premise is so I'll write my argument out into premise-conclusion form because you're apparently too fucking stupid to actually successfully identify a premise.
P1: Trannies are not the biological sex they present themselves as
P2: People care about biological sex
P3: People have an inalienable right to sexual preferences and an inalienable right to informed consent
C: Trannies should identify that they're trannies before any intimacy with hetero or homosexual people.
This is absolutely fantastic. Your dumbass has failed to identify my premises correctly and now you're trying to call me out on it? Holy fuck this is hilarious, especially considering that you're keep squealing about logic.
Here's your arguement for comparison;
P1: Trannies want to be treated as the gender they identify as
P2: They're close enough physically to the gender their partner wants
P3: People have no right to informed consent or the truth(This is implied)
C: Trannies are under no obligation to disclose
I keep mentioning that trannies should disclose because that's my conclusion you mongoloid. People tend to keep mentioning their conclusion. I've shown you, and explained to you, that peoples right to consent and sexual choices are inalienable. Their conception of sex and gender is what is most important to them. You're saying that a partners conception of gender and their sexual choices are not as relevant as a trannies are.
As for your insane counterexample about wealth; I bet you thought you got me here. However, it turns out though that being rich doesn't really matter to the vast majority of people, so there is not substantial reason to disclose that. Far, far less people actually and honestly care about wealth, than they care if their partner really is a tranny. However, in the cases of the people who did honestly care about long term wealth, they would make that clear, which would mean you have a duty to disclose that. If you actually read that case I used you'd see they also mentioned that there. Apparently you didn't read it because you're trying to make an argument they already dismissed.
You argue, but you don't support it with anything. You just make empty claims with less than zero evidence behind it. Seriously, you pulled a claim out of your ass and now are treating it like some absolute fact that means you get to hide the fact you're a tranny. Yet you're still bitching about my logic being faulty. Fantastic.
It bullshit claim also does nothing to disprove the my point that the majority would not want to fuck a tranny. Even if the number is 1 in 10, that still isn't high enough to assume that it just won't matter to a partner. Maybe if it was empirically 9/10 then you'd have something here, but that's just not the case now is it?
This claim also does not manage to make a reasonable case as to why you as a tranny get to override others sexual preferences and choices, because it would ruins the immersion of LARPing to disclose.
So you agree then the trannies need to disclose so the person can reconcile sex with a tranny with their own beliefs. Good, you finally stopped listening to those rapey trannies you've been talking to. Now stop trying to both say that informed consent matters, but that it also doesn't and relevant facts can be hidden because it would make the tranny sad to disclose them.
If the key is how a person defines themselves, then what gives trannies a special privilege to not disclose they're a tranny to people who appear to be be either heterosexual, or homosexual? If a hetro or homosexual person defines themselves as someone who fucks someone of the opposite or same biological sex, that still doesn't mean a tranny gets to avoid that because it would ruin LARPing.
You disputed that but never gave good reasons to do so. You're still dead set in the belief that you're the logical one, but you're the one trying to argue that consent is not necessary, but somehow it is. You recognize that people may have specific sexual preferences that exclude trannies, but you keep trying to avoid this by making random, vague, and baseless claims that most people would be okay with trannies. Your "dispute" was a vague and unsupported claim that "more people than you think would be okay to fuck a tranny".
So heterosexual and homosexual people don't exist, alright. How about you tell the NERFs that not knowing the sex of your partner is not important for consent, see how much they agree with you. You've been told multiple times by multiple people that they do believe that knowledge of the sex is important, but you deny it because it doesn't agree with your tranny sexual assault justifications.
Why is the burden on the vast majority of society who can honestly and without issue have sex with each other, and not the very, very minor population of trannies that most people would object to? Again, this is like saying that it is up to the patient in the hospital to make sure that the person treating them is really a doctor, and that the person pretending to be a doctor is under no obligation to admit they aren't. It's just as unreasonable to double check the doctor in your hospital is really a doctor as it is to check if the woman you're hitting on really is a woman.
Your solution is to put the burden on the vast majority of the population, and not the very tiny population of trannies. Let's see exactly how nonsensical that is.
1.4 million people in the US identified as trannies in 2016, in 2016 the total US population was 324,118,787. That means as of 2016 0.0043194% of the US population were trannies. Now, do you want to explain how it is reasonable for 99.996% of the US population to continually ask their possible partners if they're trannies, while trannies who represent less than half of a percent of the US population don't have to? You keep claiming my logic is bad but this is straight up bonkers. This is like putting a breathalizer in every car because it would make the DUI convict sad if only they had to blow into one. Is this not an undue burden on the 324,105,822 other Americans who can actually have honest informed consent with each other?
The thing is, trannies are such a small minority, and so many people wouldn't want to have sex with them that the burden falls on the group that represents less than half of a percent of the population. After all, when 99.996% of people can have honest informed consent, and 0.0043% can't, the burden is on that teeny-tiny minority to make sure they're the ones getting consent.
We're talking about sex. You can LARP as a woman all you want, but people care about your biology. You can conceive of your gender however you want, but the vast majority of people care about the sex of their partner. That's why people put it into their dating profiles! Your conception of yourself as a woman doesn't change the fact you got an inside out penis and scraped adams apple.
What's reasonable is to shift the burden onto 99.996% of people? Go ahead and explain why that is actually the reasonable choice rather than making the group that represents less than half a %, and who try to be physically misleading, disclose.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
No, I support this because my default stance is privacy. That is, you do not need to offer any information you do not want to for the bare minimum standards of consent. For particular types of information, I have seen compelling arguments that they should be disclosed, therefore for those particular types of information I support disclosure. For example, the fact that you currently have an STD should be disclosed because the potential harm of a disease is real and measurable. I have not seen a compelling argument that trans status should be disclosed.
My posts about how trans people have form and functionality were a response to some other claim you made on a tangent and doesn't really have anything to do with that.
That is actually still in dispute. Just because i haven't had the time to teach you both logic and how to read and interpret case law doesn't mean you are correct. I can only make so much long ass posts in one day
Obviously you should disclose more information about yourself in a long term relationship then the minimum needed for casual sex.
The argument you previously were making, that "You're out here, trying to show that when it comes to sexual intimacy the right not to associate no longer is more important than the right to associate" was absolutely based on what I correctly identified as premise for that particular argument.
Likewise with similar claims about "my foundational view of consent".
What you are describing here is a different argument with different premises. This may be your general argument, then you should focus on it, and stop beating around the bush like you promised to.
I'll admit, I totally didn't forsee you claiming that you didn't even make that argument, when I made sure to quote it directly. But that's part of the fun of discovering just how poorly your logic works. You really don't disappoint.
That's not my argument. Explanation already above.
The primary point of that was to illustrate that the premise you are claiming wasn't a premise actually was a premise for that argument, since if you swap the premise for a different one the argument becomes not true (thus illustrating the argument depended on the premise). That was a continuation of the point above.
but funny you should mention the case, because he actually specifically says that deceptions based on wealth are okay, you can flat out lie about that and it doesn't violate consent. Read 23-25. "In reality, some deceptions (such as, for example, in relation to wealth) will obviously not be sufficient to vitiate consent. "
Yea, im pointing out the things you think are arguments use your conclusion as a premise, which make them pointless.
As an example, the general conclusion of my argument is that trans people don't have to disclose. I can use that statement, assume it is true, and then build additional arguments on top of it, and use the conclusion as a premise. So lets say, I say you are wrong because you are trying to violate the right to privacy trans people have. That argument requires the premise that trans people don't need to disclose. You would not find that to be compelling argument, since you don't believe the required premise is true. The same is true when you make arguments trying to claim I'm wrong because I am trying to allow trans people to violate standards of consent. I'm not, and that's not a compelling argument because I don't believe the required premise of that argument is true.
Are you referring to TERFs? I'm not really sure what NERFs are, but TERF's believe in some pretty retarded things that you probably wouldn't agree with. There have been a few posts here mocking them very recently actually. You probably shouldn't look to them for ideology guidance.
It's also a bit silly to ask them even if they were semi sane, because they are anti-trans, so of course they would agree with you. You are basically saying "ask people who agree with me, and see how much they agree with you". At which point I could just say the same back, as there are plenty of pro trans places that would agree with me.
If by NERFS you are talking about something else, I sincerely don't know lmao, googling NERF's just gives me NERF, the toy gun brand, and I'm not sure if they would answer to questions about sexual consent.
(CONTINUED IN NEXT POST)
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Because you believe that a persons right to privacy is greater than the right to informed consent.
Because they're not the biological sex they pretend to be, they have mutilated genitals, and most people aren't cool with that. How is most people not being cool with trannies not compelling?
You don't know what a premise is and you think that 99.996% of people have to take an extra step rather than 0.004%. That's the definition of illogical.
The bare minimum for casual sex is that your appearance matches your biology. Which is why 99.996% of the people don't have to disclose their biological sex.
You literally are arguing that in response to P3 you mong.
Like when your "logic" has girls feeling violated and dragging trannies to court? Please, tell me how that's good logic. That tranny didn't disclose because "muh privacy" but look what happened. Holy shit you're like a pigeon playing chess. You shit all over the board and think you won.
Because you don't understand what a premise is, right we all understand you don't understand premises unless they're in premise-conclusion form. You don't need to rehash that.
Again, you thought this because you can't identify premises outside of premise-conclusion form. You're just showing how bad you are at this. It's embarrassing TBH.
Premises lead to a conclusion, conclusions aren't established and then premises created to support them.
Their right to privacy ends when it comes to another persons body and their bodily autonomy. See? Again you're trying to argue that a tranny getting sex is more important than informed consent. You're literally saying here that a trannies right to privacy is greater than all other humans right to informed consent. It's not.
I did mean TERF, all I really remember about them is they believe that gender is a social construct (which is retarded) and that trannies aren't women. I agree with that second belief.
I'm saying ask people who care about biological sex why they care about biological sex.
Yeah the rapey trans in/r/TransgenderReality who think their right to privacy overrides peoples right to not sexually associate.
Claims like the right to not associate sexually are greater than the right to associate sexually? Or the claim that each person is allowed to have their own conception of gender and to want to only have sex with certain biological sexes. If we take your "if it looks like a woman and has the similar genitals as a woman" to mean they are a woman, then all sex dolls are now women.
As much as you REEEEE about your logic you love to bring up false equivalences. When a dude hits on a woman, he's clearly under the impression she is a biological female. That's why he is hitting on her. This is immediate and known. What isn't immediate and known would be his feelings about criminal conviction. This is a big part why I'm saying that disclosing biological sex matters. It's the primary reason people get hit on and is the foundation for why they're hitting on them. You really still think that these arrangements work and that's because you're stupid.
We're talking about the reasonableness of your suggestion that 99.996% of people need to always say "Hey I don't want to fuck a tranny" on a date rather than 0.004% to have to say "Just so you know, I really like you but I was born a man. I really hope you're okay with this.".
Having sex with a different faith really isn't the same as having sex with a different biological sex. However if we knew most people wouldn't want to have sex with Jews, and Jews made up 0.004% of the population then yes they would have to disclose.
Tell that to the British girl. Please though, tell me why hundreds of millions need to constantly mention this because it would make less than 2 million sad to have to mention it? Is the harm in saying "So I really do like you and we have been getting along really well. But I just want you to know that I was born as a male but have all the functional parts of a woman." worse than all the rest of society having to constantly mention this when they would have had a 99.996% of being correct that their partner was the right sex?
You mean things like this happening when you don't disclose because "muh privacy". Trannies are at risk by violent assholes when they don't disclose. Disclosure would both reduce the amount of violence and the risk to trannies.
Yes, that vague number that you're mentioned but are assured are the majority. Spoiler alert, I can't see it being higher than 1 in 10 at very best. Still doesn't mean you don't disclose because it would make you sad.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
I did correctly identify that as a premise. The problem is you can't identify your arguments on top of failing to identify premises for your arguments. You imagine you have just one general coherent argument, what you really have is a splattering of additional statements, that are also arguments in addition to that argument.
Those additional arguments are based on assuming the conclusion to your general argument is true, and yet at the same time you attempt to use these additional arguments to support your general argument. Hence circular reasoning.
Its like I measure a spheres diameter, and you measure the same spheres diameter, and get a different result. Then we both use the equation "(4/3) Γ pi Γ r3" to calculate the volume. Then you disagree with the measurement of the diameter I did, but you spend your time saying that I don't know the equation to calculate the volume of a sphere, I don't know how to do math, I don't know what pi is, instead of actually addressing my how my original measurement is wrong. You may be right in saying my measurement is wrong, but all the arguments to why my original measurement is wrong are flawed. In the same way my equation of consent is the same as yours, and I do believe that right to consent is greater than right to privacy.
This is basically why this argument will never end if I keep going, so this will maybe be my last post, or the next one. Who knows, self control in walking away from internet arguments was never my forte
...
Really this pretty much settles this argument to me. The same logic applies to convicted murderers. Most people wouldn't want to sleep with one, and they are an equivalently small amount of the population. Likewise, someones feelings about sleeping with jews wouldn't be immediately known.
Yet you said that hypothetical jews should disclose, and not the murderers, even though the situations are the same. As far as I'm concerned, that's because your logic isn't really consistent at all.
Personally, I don't think either needs to disclose.
If you honestly think that the jews in that hypothetical situation are raping other people simply by not disclosing their ethnicity, I am glad that I don't adhere to your moral standards. I view that as absurd.
(I honestly think if you were asked that hypothetical question out of the blue, without the context of this conversation, you would have thought that idea is absurd too. Of course that's just speculation. It's been fun)
(also trans people make up 0.4% of the population btw, to express things as a percent you have to move the decimal point to the right twice after the division)
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
No you didn't which is why I had to give you premise-conclusion form. It's okay champ, everyone makes mistakes, like God when he made trannies.
AKA "REEEEEEEE I can't defeat either P1, P2, or P3 so I'm just going to say you're incoherent!"
Nice try.
Either fucking address the premises I outlined in my premise-conclusion form of shut the fuck up. You're literally just throwing a tantrum right now because you can't make a reasonable case for why a trannies right to privacy is greater than 99.996% of the populations right to sexual choices and bodily autonomy.
It keeps going because you refuse to admit that you're trying to prove that a trannies right to privacy is greater than 99.996% of the populations right to sexual choices and informed consent. You can't say why that is, nor can you reconcile the fact that the deceit that you advocate results in both violence against trannies, and a great deal of emotional harm in the other partners. You freely admit that they're are plenty of people who would gladly bang a tranny, but then refuse to just have trannies tell the truth and get enthusiastic consent. You prefer the trannies get uninformed consent because it would make them sad to tell the truth.
Tell me more about how the examples of that Indian kid or the British girl are good. They're both the logical results of your argument that "Trannies have a right to privacy greater than humanity has the right to informed consent REEEEEE! We can't tell the truth because it would make us sad REEEEEE!" You yourself can't stand the logical results of your argument, so you try and backtrack and say "well for hookups it's okay to lie but for relationships it's not" ignoring the fact that by doing so you're admitting that being a tranny is a relevant detail.
This is really fun seeing you squirm and try and contort yourself into being the "reasonable" one. You've freely admitted multiple times that being a tranny is relevant, but then you try and twist it so somehow it's not.
Which is true but you're still ignoring my point that we immediately know what biological sex is important to someone when they hit on another person. If a woman starts hitting on another woman, it's because she thinks that a woman in both sex and gender. We now know that for this woman, she's a lesbian who wants to sleep with women. We can talk to her and find out if she is bisexual or purely a lesbian, but what we can know for sure is that she's interested in women. You keep trying to equivocate things that are immediately known with things that you only find out through talking to them. Again, you're thicker than pig shit and just squirming to try and find a way to justify purposeful deceit in order to get around bodily autonomy.
Unless they want to be in a relationship right? That's the standard you put for trannies. Funny how you even mention that they should disclose. Maybe it's because you yourself realize that it's a very relevant detail.
Yes, being truthful and getting actual informed consent is so horrific. God, I even claim theft is wrong. I'm a monster.
Ah yes, 0.43% I messed up here, my bad. Shows what happens when you rush things. Good you caught it though, accuracy is always important. Especially when you're not the biological sex you present yourself as and people don't realize that.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
I agree! Luckily we have now have the medical technology to fix God's mistakes. It totally sucked when God made them be born the wrong sex, but now we can fix that =)
Hopefully medical technology will progress till we can fix God's other mistakes, like letting you be born without the ability to reason. I really tried, but nothing I can do to fix it.
False, you only know that the majority of people are interested in biological sex. I know plenty of people who don't care about biological sex and only care about gender. Therefore, when they hit on a women, if you were to draw the conclusion they are only interested in biological women, you would absolutely be incorrect. Fact. The only way you would "know for sure" would be to ask them.
The imaginary distinction you've made between "immediately knowing" and "having to ask them" is quite amazing. In all of these situations all you are doing is making reasonable assumptions based how the majority would act.
The idea that a healthy long term relationship should involve more disclosure than the minimum needed for casual sex is such a crazy idea, I know rite
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Hold on there coyboy. I would agree with you as soon as they can be transferred into new bodies. Turning your dick inside out and getting implants isn't even close to becoming a woman.
Says the guy who is saying that being trans is a relevant fact but also is not because trannies getting laid is more important than informed consent. Fantastic.
/r/TotallyTrans is not representative of the population as a whole. Again, you have zero numbers to back this up. They actually wrote an article about you too <3. Either way, 4% at best doesn't mean trannies get to lie about the fact their a biological man LARPing as a woman or a biological woman LARPing as a man.
So trannies need to disclose. You admit it! Fucking finally! It's been a long road but you're finally here.
I have a cousin who served in Afghanistan. He met a woman about a year and a half after he left the Army. She was pretty hippy and new age but they got along really well and ended up dating. Then one day she said she would never want to be a soldier in response to a story about a Marine throwing a dog off a cliff. He told her that he had served and never did anything like that. He showed her his military ID and told her which province he served in. She did some soul searching and ended up realizing that he was still a good person and wouldn't have been the worst of the Army. They're married now but this is an example of shit people don't know right away. The fact she assumed that he was a biological male was immediate and a correct assumption. In the case of trannies, it's not a correct assumption so they need to disclose it. Yeah she was a hippy but that doesn't mean she would never want to be with a soldier, which is why you disclose that shit the second it becomes relevant.
Yes, as is tradition.
And why should the tranny disclose? Because it could change the other persons consent towards the relationship, something you recognize and accept. Knowing that the truth could change consent is just as relevant for a fling as it is for a relationship you mong.
Just admit it that a trannies right to privacy is not greater than the right to informed consent and sexual autonomy. You've yet to show why people have less of a right to informed choices and to associate sexually in accordance with their beliefs than a tranny has to being "private" even though you recognize the shitty situations that come from non-disclosure.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
This is what, the 4th time you've linked that subreddit? I don't even know what it's about lmao, its a private subreddit.
I am talking about a variety of people I know, from various places that are pro LGBT, both online and in person. I'm also not making any statements about the general population, nor did I estimate any statistics.
Lmao omg, no, the point I made was literally the opposite of whatever you are imagining. You said someone who is interested in a woman is only interested in biological sex. I was saying that you don't know for a fact that someone who is interested in a woman is only interested in biological sex. I was responding to a statement you made. That said the opposite. I'm just, wow. How do you even get these conclusions? Its absolutely astonishing
You've lost the point and ended up in Afghanistan. It's a beautiful story, don't get me wrong.
So you admit all of those hypothetical situations are identical
Please, stay on topic. You can do it. I'm really only still in this conversation to see you attempt to justify why convicted murderers don't have to disclose while the hypothetical jews and trans people do. They all satisfy the supposed reasoning for why trans people should disclose.
Most people don't want to sleep with trans people, most people don't want to sleep with convicted murderers, Check.
You usually immediately assume that your partner isn't trans, you usually assume immediately that your partner isn't a convicted murderer. Check.
Consent could be revoked if they knew their partner was a murderer, Consent could be revoked if they knew their partner was trans. Check.
The amount of trans people in the US is really small, the amount of convicted murderers walking around the US is really small. Check.
Things that should be in a good relationship: deep knowledge of you partners past, plans for the future, interests and hobbies , whether you want to have children
Things that are needed in a healthy relationship doesn't mean they are needed for casual flings. Any of those things could end consent towards the relationship and for sex too. The fact that I said something belongs in the category of "Things you should talk about in a relationship" doesn't mean it also belongs in the category of "things you HAVE to talk about to get consent for sex"
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Yet you're a very active participant in it. In fact you've made exactly 48 posts to it. Probably to justify non-consent but still, 48 rapey posts. Don't bullshit a bullshitter son. Are you going to tell me you don't own an android device next?
Fucking kek. The "I don't have any objective truth bombs to drops so I'll drag my degenerate friends into this" argument.
Hoooo boy now this is pod racing!
You were rambling on about how most people wouldn't want to date a murderer or criminal. So I told you the story of my veteran cousin and his now wife. She was a hippy, hippies usually don't like soldiers but she didn't know he served because of his long hair and beard. When she mentioned she wouldn't fuck a soldier he told her he had been one. These sort of things aren't as self-evident as people have a preference for biological sex. If there was any doubt you weren't retarded before it's been erased now.
No you're not. You're still here because you're a rapey tranny who thinks that both trannies should disclose because its a relevant fact, and that they shouldn't because its an irrelevant fact. This is seen in your argument that trannies in relationships should disclose while trannies looking to fuck NEETs shouldn't. You can't prove that so you've just REEEEEEEing because you don't know how to handle the fact you've been beaten like a rented mule.
Yet you're saying that trannies have more of a right to sex than every other human has to consent. Yes it may make trannies sad but that goes with the territory of everyone else pretending they're the gender they identify with and not constantly ripping on them. IMO there are only 2 times a tranny needs to disclose, #1 before medical treatment, #2 before sexual relations.
Also the fact they have an inside out dick. Hell, thats relevant for all relationships with the mistakes of God.
So consent is important as long as it doesn't keep a tranny from getting laid. Yes I've brought this up but you keep denying saying it while you say it. Fantastic, absolutely fantastic.
When you're LARPing as the sex you aren't yes it is. Fuck, you're twice as thick as pig shit and twice as offensive.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
OMG you are right lol, I remember.
Transgenderreality is an ANTI TRANS subreddit in which I had a big old argument with a anti-trans person almost a year ago (that had nothing to do with consent and sex, but the bathroom issue), just like I'm having one with you. Heck I've made as much posts in r/drama, doesn't mean I agree with all of them, does it?
If anything, that subreddit is your people, not my friends ahahaha
proof https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/4oqpxy/an_argument_over_the_ownership_of_an_offsite/
its okay tho, just one more in a long line of assumptions presumed as fact from a bullshitter
Yes exactly
A soldier isn't even close the same as a convicted murderer. Some people don't like soldiers. Some people in our society LOVES soldiers. We shower them with honors.
In comparison, almost everyone does not like convicted murderers. That's why society has them spend decades in jail.
You've made a cute anecdote about a topic that doesn't compare. it's cute, but irrelevant
The idea that people wouldn't want to sleep with a convicted murderer is at least as convincing as your idea that they wouldn't want to sleep with trans people. They are both reasonably large majorities.
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
note that none of that is actually giving a straight answer on the convicted murderer thing
No, I'm saying justify your contradictory logic in regards to convicted murders. Do it. Do iit.
I really want to see how many things you would think a person would need to disclose under the same logic, we already have ethnicity, what else?
Nope, thats not what i said. Look, here are the words I said
"Things that are needed in a healthy relationship doesn't mean they are needed for casual flings."
logic, u aint got it because -
this is u failing at arguments again
it keeps happening
your first argument "You said that disclosing matters for relationships, GOTCHYU! That means it should matter for consent"
my response "something mattering for a relationship doesn't necessary matter for consent"
your response "yes but THIS ONE DOES"
You are so focused on being right that you can't realise that you throw out fallacious argument after fallacious argument, then pivot pack to your original argument when I call you out on it (and pretend you didn't make a fallacious argument). My response was a perfectly valid response to your original fallacious argument, regardless if you are right about the overall topic of disclosure.
admit ur argument was fallacious and i might gain like 1% of respect for your intellect
REEEEEEEE
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Says the guy who literally is trying to make the claim that everyone would be okay with having sex with a tranny, so they don't have to disclose. Why do trannies have a greater right to privacy than the rest of humanity have to informed consent champ? You're still not addressing this in any meaningful way aside for "But me and my friends would bang trannies so they don't have to disclose".
Ironically you bringing up your friends being cool with fucking trannies makes far more of a case for disclosure rather than non-disclosure.
You missed the point completely showing once again that you're literally mentally retarded. The point was that as soon as you realize that someone might revoke consent when a fact was known, you have a moral duty to disclose that fact. For him it was when she mentioned her aversion to the armed forces, for trannies it's when a heterosexual or homosexual person hits on them, for murders it would be the fact they're murderers (especially if they committed murder against a spouse or child).
Do you really need everything spoonfed to you?
I already have you literally retarded mong. I've said repeatedly that **as soon as you realize that a fact about you might revoke consent, you have a moral duty to disclose that". That covers murderers too, especially if they've committed violence against a spouse or child. Guys like this really should mention that they're a murderer, however like trannies murderers tend to want to hide relevant facts that might revoke consent.
For fuck sakes. If a person who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual hits on a person who appears to be the relevant sex, it's because they think that person it actually the relevant sex. No one fucks a gender, they fuck a biological sex. So trannies should disclose that they're trannies so the person who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual can make an informed choice if they want to continue.
You can bring up other examples until the cows come home but it doesn't change the fact that trannies immediately know that consent is given to the sex they appear as, not the sex they are. Hence the need to disclose. Maybe they'll get lucky and the person will be okay with that, but you don't get to assume when simply telling the truth you let you know for sure.
You've still not been able to explain exactly why in a world where there are people who would give full consent to sex with a tranny, they need to lie about being a tranny. You avoid trying to explain why exactly you keep claiming that trannies have more of a right to privacy than the rest of humanity has to informed consent and bodily autonomy.
AKA "I know and accept that a tranny being a tranny is relevant, but I think that a tranny getting laid is more important than informed consent."
What's needed for casual flings is consent. When a person clearly gave consent to a sex you aren't, you need to make sure they are aware you are not the sex you're trying to appear as. Whats the word again for sex without consent again...
Holy shit that is fucking rich coming from a guy trying to hard to justify deception and argue that informed consent is not relevant for sexual relations. You're out here both saying that being a tranny is a relevant detail, but it's not when it comes to sex, something that very much
Says the guy who forgets to capitalize the start of sentences and "I". Fantastic, absolutely fantastic. You're out here still trying to justify deception in order to get consent because you're saying that a trannies right to privacy is more important that everyone elses right to informed consent and bodily autonomy. You keep trying to deny this but this is central for you. You're falling back on the "oh it's no big deal if you don't disclose" in order to try and make it seem that being a biological male who has to actively keep his body from trying to heal his inside out dick is no more important or relevant than your breakfast.
How exactly is lying and hiding facts in order to get sex moral? After all if the person appears heterosexual or homosexual, and they're hitting on someone who appears to be the right sex, then they've consented to that sex, not the one they don't realize. You're saying that this doesn't matter because they might be okay with trannies, but can't provide a convincing argument for why they shouldn't just tell them so they can get informed consent. You'd consent to bang a tranny, and a TERF wouldn't. So why is it that you have decided that the bodily autonomy and right to not sexually associate of the TERF is less important than the trannies right to privacy?
If disclosure is important, it's always important you absolute retard. Why is being a tranny relevant in a relationship? Because you need to be honest with your partner and make sure they're fully aware of who you are.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Says the guy who was wrong. Fact. Want to tell me more about my "friends" at transgenderreality? Shhhhh you won't respond, that you require to acknowledge that you can be wrong in your assumptions, which is a self introspective skill you do not have
Oh, so murders are actually the same now and they have to disclose? Wow interesting, don't you remember this:
What a wacky change from your previous position, where you said it was a false equivalence and that it's a completely different type of situation. I guess "I already have" means pretending you didn't say things in the first place.
This really isn't surprising, when a person is shown that their positions contradict, they sometimes pretend they didn't even have the position instead of confronting the fact that their logic for their positions is contradictory
"disclosure of future plans to go to university is important in a relationship. That is not important for casual sex."
Boom, I just showed something can be important for relationships and not for sex. Since a single counter example is all you need to prove an "always" statement wrong, your reasoning was wrong.
Your next step is to completely miss the point that I'm talking about your reasoning being fallacious and instead make a whiny response that will likely involve the words "tranny, disclose, consent" thrown together
Well ya, that's because I realize that the definition of rape isn't "Gee I don't like what happened in that situation"
That's because I use logic to determine positions, not feelings
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
I assumed it was a support sub for trannies like you who want to try and avoid consent by lying. My bad there.
Holy fuck you're so retarded you must have a tard wrangler. I told you that as soon as you're aware that there is something about you that might revoke consent you should disclose it. You're saying that if you know there is something about you that might revoke consent you should hide it because it might make you sad to tell the truth. Fucking kek.
You're still not answering how lying and purposeful deception are moral and should be followed. Especially when doing exactly what you advocate results in situations you yourself don't like. But please, post more bullshit.
"Trannies should disclose, also trannies shouldn't disclose" - /u/Ls777
Please. Tell me more how the examples of British girl and Indian guy are good. Especially since they are what happens when you say "99.6% of the population has to ask if they're a tranny because it would make 0.4% sad to disclose that." Go ahead Mr. Logical.
Hahahahaha holy shit you literally are this retarded. This is nowhere near the same thing as not being the biological sex you present yourself as. "Someone might go to University in the future so I better lie about being a woman while being a dude" You honestly must have been kicked in the head by a donkey in order to be this retarded.
My position that if someone who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual hits on someone who appears to be a relevant sex then the tranny must disclose? Yeah, you really showed how informed consent isn't important.
Except when multiple people tell you that they aren't cool with fucking trannies and then you claim everyone would be because you and your friends would be okay with it. This is absolutely fantastic. You can't prove how it moral to lie to get sex so you make up bullshit and then pretend to be the logical one. You're exactly like the pigeon who shits all over the board and thinks he won.
Please though, explain exactly to me how lying and fostering deception in order to get sex is moral. Because unless you can do that, you're advocating for an immoral stance, and when is the right thing ever an immoral action?
"I'm okay with fucking trannies and I feel it's no big deal so they don't have to disclose". This literally has been your argument, that you don't feel they need to disclose because you don't feel that it's important". You also feel that more people than I would think would like to fuck a tranny but offer no supporting proof. The highest number I can find is 11% (the amount of people who have some attraction to the same sex), which is absolutely not high enough to just avoid consent.
You haven't be able to show that P1, P2, or P3 of my argument is false, but you keep squealing about logic. It's lovely really. You're trying so, so hard to justify deception in order to get sex while completely ignoring the results you don't like.
You said that if 99.6% of the population doesn't want to fuck a tranny then they should say that right away. Ignoring the fact that this 99.6% could have honest informed consent regarding their partners sex in 99.6% of cases you're still stuck with examples like that tranny dating that Indian kid and the one in England. You clearly don't like those results but they come with your stance of "You don't have to disclose". That's why you don't address them while squealing about logic, it's because you know that you've been beat but you have too much pride to just admit that trannies should tell the truth. You're trying to make a case against the truth for fuck sake and thinking you're in the right. You're trying to have them justify a lie and trying to prevent people from getting informed consent because they would feel bad.
"Iβm a huge advocate for disclosure, because I believe a lot of people get themselves in bad situations because they do not disclose. For example, trans women who might hook up with a cis-gendered guy and then he goes home with her and finds out she has a penis and flips out and beats her up or kills her. Thatβs horrible, and I really believe by not disclosing itβs very disrespectful to the other person because they might not be into it and it makes them feel very freaked out about themselves. Disclosure is huge for me, and how do you do that in a bar situation? Youβre right, itβs very strange. For me, how I always did it was if I knew it was going to turn into a sexual situation, immediately, immediately, I would say, βI need to let you know about this situation.β But the dating site puts it right out there: Iβm a man with a vagina!"
So how is not disclosing not valuing your privacy over informed consent? You still avoid addressing this because you know that you can't make a case for avoiding consent in good faith. You just value getting laid over morality and telling the truth. Please though, try and explain how hiding your status is more moral that telling the truth and getting informed consent Mr. "Logical". I'll wait while you avoid this again.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
A miracle! There's hope!
A convicted murderer is always aware that most people would not want to sleep with a murderer. Therefore they must always disclose their criminal history to a sexual partner. This is a direct reading of your stated logic. If true, why does that contradict your earlier conclusion that the analogy is completely different and they don't have to disclose.
Like I said before, the only reason I am in this conversation is for you to justify this contradiction and BOY IS IT GETTING GOOD, your posts just get longer and more rambling
"I am a retard, also I smell" - /u/MegaSeedsInUrBum
I too also like making up random quotes
You missed the point exactly like I said you would, it's almost scary how I can perfectly I can predict your thought process now. If you believe they aren't the same, then your statement "If disclosure is important, it's always important you absolute retard" is wrong. The point of that analogy was to disprove your statement, not say the situations are the same. I never said they were the same.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
You really are this stupid huh? For the vast majority of society, gender = sex and they act under that belief. So when a hetero guy is hitting on a woman, or a gay man is hitting on another man, the belief will almost certainly be that the other person is the sex that usually is associated with that gender. So when someone who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual is hitting on a trans person who has the gender that heterosexuals or homosexuals have an interest in, then the tranny has a moral imperative to make it clear that they're a tranny. You've still not been able to show that the majority of heterosexuals or homosexuals would be okay with a tranny aside from you and your friends.
So let's take a look at a study that focused on trans people being accepted into gendered spaces at Universities. After all most students are rather liberal these days and you certainly can't make the case that more people would have sex with a tranny than would share a bathroom with one. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10538720.2016.1261749
So let's see how trannies are generally accepted into gendered spaces.
"In addition, they reported that their experiences on campus were often negative when they attempted to access a gendered space consistent with their gender identity. Seelmanβs (2014) research indicated that about one-third of transgender college students reported not being allowed to live in housing that matched their gender identity and/or use the appropriate restrooms or other gendered spaces. Of the students who reported having access to housing and other facilities, they were subjected to harassment and intrusive questioning by residents and staff. Sometimes, preoperative transsexual individuals are required to live in gendered residence halls on college campuses that are consistent with their legal sex."
Huh. It doesn't seem to be the case that most University students are okay with trannies. That's not a good sign for you especially since University students tend to be far more liberal than wider society. Fun fact is that this study omitted everyone over 30 from it so it focused entirely on younger people raised in an age where LGBT people have been more accepted than ever. I guess your feeling that most people would be okay with fucking a tranny isn't quite right.
You said though that as long as they have the "right equipment" guys would fuck them right? We'll when it comes to something as inconsequential as a bathroom...
"Although past research, using a measure created to assess specific evaluations of trans women and trans men, did not find significant differences in an evaluation of trans women and trans men (Gerhardstein & Anderson, 2010), the current study, using a validated measure of transacceptance, found that trans women were less accepted than trans men."
Uh oh. Looks like you and your friends aren't exactly representative of society as a whole. That's what I told you but you still seem to think that you are. Trans-women are less accepted than trans-men. Gee, it seems like that's what everyone else has told you too.
How about gay people though? Surely gay people would be far more accepting of trans people right?
"Weiss (2003) made the argument that prejudice toward transgender people exists within the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community. One study suggested that gay men have a greater struggle with transgender inclusion than lesbians (Stone, 2009)."
Looks like a rather large amount of people actually care if their partner is a tranny. That doesn't work so well for your "Most people wouldn't care as long as they have a 'vagina'!" Turns out gay men really aren't a fan of transgendered people. Seems to be that the facts are in my corner, while the feelings are solidly in yours.
Now you did say that heterosexual men really wouldn't generally care if the other person is the same biological sex as them as long as they looked right, right?
"Results appear to suggest that while college men would be appropriately nice toward the trans woman as a roommate, they would still disapprove, feel uncomfortable, and perhaps attempt to avoid the situation altogether by asking for a new roommate.".
Oh goodness me! Most guys wouldn't even want to live with a trans person! Gosh that must mean they'll all be totally okay with fucking one right? After all you feel that they would because you would want to fuck a tranny.
If we know that a very significant number of people don't want trannies into certain gendered spaces, then how is it more reasonable and "logical" to assume that a significant number of people would have sex with them instead?
It's well known that trannies are not exactly accepted, which is a big part for why they have to disclose that they're not the sex they're trying to appear as. Again, it's not more reasonable to assume that people wouldn't want them in their bathrooms but would be okay with fucking them. When it comes to disclosure they might get lucky and the person will be like you and will enthusiastically consent, or they may not and the other person won't be okay with them being a tranny. I don't agree with berating or acting aggressively against trannies who disclose because they did the right thing.
Spoken like a tranny who tries to put their right to privacy above others right to bodily autonomy. It's always fun seeing how you can't prove why Buck Angel was wrong about disclosure though. Buck does have a good point about how it's very disrespectful to not allow the other person to make their own boldly choices with full informed consent. Dude's a porn star and is advocating disclosure in order to get true consent for simple sex. You're a weird internet tard trying to claim that deception in order to get sex is moral. I think the pornstar has a much more informed view regarding consent towards sex since he deals with it so much.
You mean your thought process of "I know that most people don't like trannies in gendered bathrooms but I feel most people would fuck them because they try and appear as the other sex."? "Logic" like that?
If disclosure is relevant towards consent in sex you need to disclose it you fucking mong. Someone going to university in the future is not nearly as relevant to sex as you not being the biological sex that you present yourself as, especially for simple sex.
Yes, I'm sooooo wrong that when a heterosexual or homosexual person hits on someone they believe to be the relevant sex then they're consenting to sex with that biological sex. Since the tranny isn't that biological sex then they need to disclose that in order to actually get consent.
But being a tranny isn't relevant right? I mean, so many people accept them for being trans right?
{"Despite the signs of more acceptance for transgender people, many studies show that they continue to face significant challenges. Research by Aaron T. Norton and Greg M. Herek, PhD, at University of California, Davis, for example, found that the rejection transgender people encounter is significantly harsher than the negative attitudes experienced by lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) people (Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 2012). A 2009 study by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network also found that transgender students face much higher levels of harassment and violence than LGB students."
Oh, looks like they don't. Looks like a very large number of people don't want anything to do with a tranny. Kinda means that they wouldn't knowingly consent to sex with a tranny right?
You did say that informed consent is only important for relationships and not sex. You're somehow trying to prove that non-disclosure of your status as a tranny isn't important for sex, but is for a relationship while ignoring the fact that trannies have a very low level of acceptance overall, and most people wouldn't willingly consent to sex with one. Hell, a very large number of people don't consent to them sharing a bathroom with them, so how can you honestly try and claim that most would consent to sex with a tranny.
How about you explain to me how hiding your biological sex to someone who appears to be heterosexual or homosexual is more moral than just disclosing it and possibly getting actual informed consent? You're still trying to say that deceptions and purposeful omission is moral, mainly because you're saying that it doesn't matter, but you just have to look at all the anti-trans laws people are trying to pass to see how few people actually would want to be with a tranny. You know damn well that most people wouldn't consent to sex with a tranny, so you try and argue that actual informed consent isn't as important to everyone else's right to sexual choice and bodily autonomy.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
This is an amazing amount of text to show the concept 'most people wouldn't want to sleep with a trans person' is true, which is something I've said I agree with multiple times, explicitly. This is because you really don't have a grasp on the arguments I'm making at all.
This is pretty much how its gone down for thousands of words: You say that everybody would not be okay with it to dispute that, I point out that some people would be okay with it. You interpret that to be me arguing that most people would be okay with it.
nope did not say that, just that some people wouldn't care
Overall tho, that section again missed the point yet again. I'm not sure how I can simplify the wording anymore, so I will just repeat the paragraph you read but did not comprehend
A convicted murderer is always aware that most people would not want to sleep with a murderer. Therefore they must always disclose their criminal history to a sexual partner, This is a direct reading of your stated logic. If true, why does that contradict your earlier conclusion that the analogy is completely different and they don't have to disclose.
Like I said before, the only reason I am in this conversation is for you to justify this contradiction and BOY IS IT GETTING GOOD, your posts just get longer and more rambling
Same here. So much rambling on and on about bla bla bla when all I'm addressing is specifically the argument "If something is important to disclose in a relationship, then that means you have to disclose it for sex" which is the reasoning you were using to make your argument.
You are actually incapable of focusing and realizing that line of argument was flawed, and it is spectacular to see
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Really? You agree with this? Then why are you arguing that not disclosing trans status is not important? Especially when you're talking about how it wouldn't matter to you or your friends? Seems like if most people wouldn't want to fuck a tranny then trannies should disclose that they're a tranny. After all if 99.6% of the population doesn't have to correct any misconception about their biological sex because there is no misconception then why is it their responsibility and not the 0.4% that actually has this issue? You can't address this aside from "But it would make the trannies sad" while ignoring the violence that happens to trannies that don't disclose. Something Buck Angle himself mentions.
I literally said in the post you're replying to that some people would be okay with fucking a tranny. I explicitly said that this is another reason that trannies should disclose, in order to ensure they're actually getting consent. Go back and ctrl-f "enthusiastic consent" champ.
Because word for word you said this when you were going on about how and inside out dick is the same as a vagina. You even tried to justify it by saying that "more people than you think would be okay with it" and how you and your friends are okay with it. You're just flailing now. You're refusing to accept that being trans is relevant for sex while admitting that most people wouldn't want to fuck a tranny.
You literally said "more people than you think" would want to fuck a tranny. You tried to make it seem like the majority wouldn't care about the other person being a tranny. I said you need to disclose so you could make sure you're getting consent. Most people care, some don't, so check to make sure they'll be cool with it. You got mad and said that it would be more of a burden for the tranny to disclose even though it would keep people from finding out the next morning and freaking out.. Your argument that they shouldn't disclose they're trans puts them at far more risk of violence than disclosing in a public place, most likely with bouncers.
Holy fuck you really still don't understand do you? Being a convicted murderer is not at all the same thing as trying to appear as a sex that your not. In the case of trannies, when it comes to people who appear as heterosexual or homosexual, they're clearly consenting to sex with the appropriate biological sex which they believe the tranny to be. So when the tranny isn't the biological sex they try and appear as, they need to disclose that in order to make sure they're actually getting consent. You're trying to make this seem to be the same thing as not wanting to be with a murderer, which is immediately known.
Now go ahead and make the case for why hiding being trans is more moral than disclosing it and getting consent? You can't so you keep trying to say that the exact same number of people wouldn't want to be with a criminal as wouldn't want to be a tranny. See if you can find proof of the same numbers of people, preferably from a peer reviewed journal.
No, the only reason that you're still here is you have a really hard time admitting that trannies should disclose for sex. You've stopped trying to make any decent points and are just too prideful to give up. Fucking trans pornstars are even saying that being trans is relevant for sex, but you refuse to accept that because you can't accept that you're wrong. You can't say how it's more moral to not disclose than to disclose and to get informed consent, so you just squeal about murderers with literally no actual proof for it. You keep going on about "logical contradictions" when just now you've admitted that most people wouldn't want to fuck a tranny, but in the past said "more people than you'd realize" and "me and all my friends wouldn't care" in order to try and make it seem like most people would want to fuck a tranny.
You're admitting that most people wouldn't want to have sex with a tranny, then try claiming that most people don't care, then backtracking and trying to say that you never said that. Go look back to when you were trying to say that as long as the tranny has functionality of the other biological sex it doesn't matter. I'll wait.
Holy fuck you're really this stupid. I said that IF YOU REALIZE THAT THERE IS SOMETHING ABOUT YOU THAT MIGHT REVOKE CONSENT, YOU HAVE A MORAL DUTY TO DISCLOSE THAT. It applies to casual sex just like with a relationship. You're trying to twist this into me saying "You need to disclose everything you would for a relationship for casual sex." I didn't say that, I said that if someone thinks a tranny is a biological sex they aren't, the tranny needs to disclose they're a tranny so they can get informed consent. Being a biological male when you're trying to appear as a biological female is incredibly relevant to both casual sex and a relationship.
If a dude hits on another dude, it's more than reasonable to assume he wants to fuck a dude. For the vast majority of society their gender=sex so this isn't an issue if both these people are biological men. They don't need to disclose shit about their biological sex because there is no mistaken assumption.
If a woman hits on someone who appears to be a woman, it's more than reasonable to assume she wants to fuck a woman. For the vast majority of society their gender=sex but if the other "woman" is actually a biological male, then the tranny needs to disclose because it's more than likely that the woman is consenting to sex with a woman. Best case scenario it doesn't matter to the woman and they can progress with informed consent, worst case she doesn't realize until later and beats the tranny for lying to her.
"Iβm a huge advocate for disclosure, because I believe a lot of people get themselves in bad situations because they do not disclose. For example, trans women who might hook up with a cis-gendered guy and then he goes home with her and finds out she has a penis and flips out and beats her up or kills her. Thatβs horrible, and I really believe by not disclosing itβs very disrespectful to the other person because they might not be into it and it makes them feel very freaked out about themselves. Disclosure is huge for me, and how do you do that in a bar situation? Youβre right, itβs very strange. For me, how I always did it was if I knew it was going to turn into a sexual situation, immediately, immediately, I would say, βI need to let you know about this situation.β But the dating site puts it right out there: Iβm a man with a vagina!"
A trans pornstar, someone whose livelihood revolves around sex and not relationships, is saying that trannies need to disclose for sex. You, a random person on the internet who has never sourced a single claim about consent is saying that being trans doesn't matter while also saying 'most people wouldn't want to sleep with a trans person'.
You said that being trans is not an important thing to dislcose for sex, but it is in a relationship. Yet you've also said " 'most people wouldn't want to sleep with a trans person' is true, which is something I've said I agree with multiple times, explicitly." just now. So how exactly is it that being trans is not a relevant detail for sex when you yourself admit that it is?
This is great. You honestly believe that non-disclosure in order to get casual sex is moral, but you can't explain why that is. Watch that video of the Irish tranny in this post and tell me exactly how this is a fantastic and good consequence of a tranny not disclosing. You can't explain this anymore than you can admit that you're wrong and being trans matters for sex.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
I only said so multiple times
because i don't agree with the logic that "most people wouldn't sleep with people who are or have X, so they must disclose X everytime, otherwise they are raping people."
If you don't agree that convicted murders should disclose everytime, then you don't agree that that statement alone is enough to prove rape, because convicted murders fit directly into that statement.
So when you say to me "you agree that most wouldn't sleep with a trans person, that means you should agree that trans people should always disclose otherwise it's rape", you are making the same argument as above. This is why I keep on referring to the convicted murders thing as a contradiction, because you keep making that specific argument.
If you don't agree with that logic, then you need to stop making that argument lmao.
I also refer to it as a contradiction because you originally agreed that jews should disclose according to the same hypothetical situation that "most people wouldn't want to sleep with Jews".
Okay, let's revisit that quote. First you said
Then I said
I was simply contesting the idea that it was an overwhelming majority who wouldn't. I wasn't saying there was a majority of people who would be comfortable with it. Just that there were more you than think they are, since you continue to imply the amount is vanishingly small. To be fair, I can see how it could seem that I was saying it was a majority who are comfortable with it. This is why in my next post, I said....
...to make sure I clarified my point.
That's not what buck angel is saying. He is saying that they should disclose it for sex. This is why he described not disclosing as "disrespectful", not "sexual assault" or "rape".
Right, you have said that before, but if you deconstruct your current argument you are saying everybody.
Simply just because someone is heterosexual or homosexual, that does not mean they are only consenting to a particular sex. Most homosexuals, or heterosexuals, are only consenting to a particular sex, yes. But some people are not, and are only consenting to a particular gender. Furthermore, you can't 100% accurately judge sexual orientation by appearances either. That is another assumption based on the idea of "most"
Thefore, this argument is just a really convoluted version of the one I posted above, restated.
I originally, a long time ago, said that trans people should disclose in relationships. You have consistently been bringing it up, and saying that that means that I should conclude that trans people should disclose for sex.
If you disagree with the statement that "You need to disclose everything you would for a relationship for casual sex", then you there is no point to continually bring up the fact that I said trans people should disclose in relationships, since that you agree that the same disclosure standards for relationships are not the same for casual sex.
See the second line in this post
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
So you understand that most people wouldn't sleep with a tranny but you then say that they don't need to disclose. Fantastic.
Again with the murderer shit? Wew lad you're really stretching. If they have a reason to believe it would revoke consent they do. Just like trannies who are hit on for appearing as a sex they aren't.
No I'm not because the tranny will immediately know that the other person consented to a sex other than what they are. Christ you're as retarded as you're stubborn.
Then I showed you that an overwhelming majority wouldn't even share a bathroom with a trannie let alone sleep with them. Either way, this doesn't avoid the fact that a tranny needs to get informed consent.
What the word we have for sex without consent again?
I'm saying that we 99.6% of people don't have this problem the burden is on the 0.4% to make sure they get informed consent. What's the word for sex without consent again? Please, what is it? Frape? Grape?
Because they need to because most wouldn't fuck a tranny and the trannies right to privacy is not greater than everyone else's right to informed consent.
Being a tranny is just as relevant for casual sex as it is for a relationship. Especially since you yourself admitted most people wouldn't fuck a tranny. God you just don't know when you're beat. First clue should have been when you avoided answering how it is moral to deceive in order to get sex.
You're still saying that being a tranny is only relevant in relationships but not for sex, even though literal trans pornstars have told you otherwise and you yourself freely admit that most wouldn't fuck a tranny. When 99.6% of people don't have to correct mistakes as to their biology, it's up to the 0.4% to disclose they're not as they appear.
Please though, tell me more how trannies hiding this fact is moral, because you've repeatedly avoided answering this. You don't purposefully avoid answering how it's moral to lie to get sex when you're coming from the morally correct position.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
"So you understand that most people wouldn't sleep with a
trannyconvicted murderer but you then say that they don't need to disclose. Fantastic. "one second you say that's not your argument
then the next second you make the argument again
then its not ur argument
then is
No, they wont. They do not immediately know anything, they assume. An assumption is not knowing. It is an assumption exactly like assuming most people won't sleep with a convicted murderer. The situations are the same.
This is you misunderstanding the conclusion. 2/3 were allowed to use housing and restrooms. Most of them were harassed and questioned, but that doesn't tell you anything at all about the percentage of people who harassed them. You can think that through by realizing that each trans person will use the bathroom many times throughout the year, but they only need to be harrassed once or twice a year to report that they experienced harassment.
This is based purely on the information you've posted, I don't have access to the full study, but I am fully confident in your ability to misinterpret data
Nowhere does Buck Angel say that people who don't disclose are having sex without consent. This is something you imagined since you found someone trans saying something critical about the concept. It's actually hilarious you are clinging to this guy (who doesnt even agree with you) so hard, since I can go out and easily find plenty of trans people who support my position
Again, when people think something is rape, they usually call it that. They wouldn't call it "being very disrespectful". That would be a comical understatement. You really have piss poor reading comprehension btw, you literally imagine statements in the text that aren't there lol
I wonder, I could probably get him to clarify on that actually. If I do, would you admit that you have piss poor reading comprehension if it turns out you are wrong? And poor reasoning skills too?
You mean like how 99% of people aren't convicted murderers but you think the burden is on them to ask every one they sleep with if they are a murderer? Or you admit that according to your logic they should also disclose all the time?
Note that you avoid the flawed argument that got you in this mess. Instead you pretend that you never made it.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Hooo boy you really are fully retarded if you think this is the same. You're honestly trying to say that it's unrealistic to assume a guy who is hitting on another man is gay and that he believes that the other guy is a biological man because of his appearance because most people don't like murderers. If the other person is actually a biological female, it is absolutely reasonable to assume that the guy may not want to be with a biological woman.
Let's dissect your stupid "you don't have to disclose for sex but do for a relationship" 'logic' again. How many times does sex turn into a relationship? It's definitely not unheard of and I've had a past girlfriend where we had started by just hooking up. So say the tranny is going to disclose when the other person wants to make it official, do you really think they always will? With that Indian kid the tranny kept hiding their status because she was afraid that the Indian kid would break up with her when he found out. If you like someone enough that you want to date them, you usually don't want to risk the whole thing by disclosing, so you end up in situations where the tranny just keeps it secret until they can't anymore, just like with that Indian kid. You think that somehow by saying "disclosure isn't important for sex but is for relationships" that no relationship will ever grow out of sex.
Furthermore how do you think the other person will react to the news that their partner both isn't what they thought they were, and that they've been deceiving you? A lot of times it doesn't go well and has many times ended up with the tranny being murdered. By starting with a foundation of a misconception, you easily risk everything built on it when people realize you aren't what you seem.
My argument that trannies need to disclose for sex would avoids all of these problems. If that British tranny had disclosed, she would have ended up actually having the relationship she wanted. Remember how the victim said "If you had told me things would have been different"? As for the Indian kid he probably would have not been with the tranny since biological kids seems to be something important to him but she could have found someone else who would accurately love her for who she was.
How on earth is it more moral to foster a misconception and practice active deception in order to get sex, than it is to just disclose fully? Seriously, answer this question because if you can't, that means you've realized you're advocating an immoral stance.
Also please contact Buck Angel, I would love to see that email. "Hey Buck Angel, so I know you said trannies need to disclose for sex because it's both truthful and prevents physical violence, but I'm so retarded I think you're actually saying that you don't need to disclose for sex. Please tell me that I'm right because I want to be right."
FYI, please tell me what the English word for sex without consent is again. I seem to have completely forgotten it. God, what is that word we have for sex without consent.
Being a murderer is nowhere close to being a tranny and you're super desperate to keep clinging to it while not explaining how fostering a misconception and actively deceiving someone is moral.
Really though, this is getting tiring because you're dead set on trying to prove that informed consent isn't necessary, and how it's unreasonable to assume that a dude hitting on a dude is homosexual. Also, access that article through your university library. This isn't rocket science.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
No, i didn't say it is an unrealistic assumption. It is a reasonable assumption. Just like it is absolutely reasonable to assume the guy does not want to be with a convicted murderer. The logic you use to say that trans people should disclose applies to convicted murderers too, no matter how you slice and dice it. You also had no problem saying that jews have to disclose too, in the hypothetical situation where most people don't want to sleep with jews and jews comprise a very small amount of the population.
no, you don't HAVE to disclose it for a relationship either, it's just that you probably should
okey, will wait for response
I don't go to uni, finished years ago
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
My claim was unsupported in the same exact way that your claim was unsupported. I don't think that my claim is absolute fact, I am disputing your claims that YOU are treating as absolute fact with an equivalent level of antecodal evidence. I actually don't disagree with the claim that most wouldn't sleep with a transgender person, I just disagree with your rhetoric that implies nearly all wouldn't.
So lets use the fact that most wouldn't sleep with a trans person.
Does the logic that "most people wouldn't want to sleep with people with that characteristic, therefore that person should disclose that characteristic to every person beforehand" hold up?
I don't really think so. If you apply the same logic to anything else that most people would find a turn off, then they wouldn't be usually considered rape either. For example, I'd imagine that most people wouldn't want to sleep with a convicted murderer. Likewise, you wouldn't assume your partner is a convicted murderer, nor would you think to ask. Does that mean the convicted murderer is raping everyone he sleeps with if he doesn't disclose his criminal history before hand? I'd think not. If so, where does it end? Felonies? Misdemeanors?
Secondly, "Most" is a descriptor of a percentage of a larger group. The thing is, individuals of a group are not always distributed evenly - for example, there are more LGBT folks located in highly liberal cities then in rural, conservative areas. A definition of consent and rape that involves "Most" means that the meaning of consent could change from location to location, and depending on how the group is defined. Admittedly this wouldn't matter in the particular instance of sleeping with trans people since i doubt there's currently any group where theres a majority that wan't to sleep with trans people, but if you want to use that logic I could imagine issues that could, and consent standards changing per location and group makes determining if consent was violated even messier
And lastly, in ethical discussions, should things always be decided by the majority? I would also say no. For example, if the majority of people don't want to sleep with jews, then by this logic a jew should always disclose the fact that they are jews, otherwise they are raping people. Now, in this situation everybody, of course, has the right to "not to associate" for any reason, including anti-semitism. So the majority of people expressing their sexual preference is not wrong, nor a violation of consent. Yet you would essentially legislating anti-semitism into law by requiring jews to disclose simply because the majority does not like sleeping with jews. I would not consider the jews to be raping other people in this situation.
arguably the burden of revealing that "you aren't into trans people" is much lighter per individual than the burden of having to disclose trans status, which currently can result in much worse consequences, both social and physical. There are a lot more people who would have to, so the overall burden would be much higher, but a healthy discussion of sexual preferences are something that people should do with partners anyways. I understand the annoyance, but the burden amounts to "I don't want to ask my partner a simple, if awkward, question".
While I appreciate your attempt to use statistics, I hope you can see the flaw in using the percentage of people who are not transgender as the amount of people who would not sleep with them.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Now either defeat my First, Second, or Third premise in order to prove my conclusion false, or stop trying to justify lying in a relationship because it would make 0.004% of people sad.
n/a wowbagger88 2017-04-24
FALSE DILEMMA
A
L
S
E
D
I
L
E
M
M
A
I'll take the third, "neither," on account of not being a 'mo.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
You are right that is a false dilemma, but somewhere, there is certainly a trans girl that you will probably find attractive, absent the knowledge that they are trans to color your opinion.
n/a wowbagger88 2017-04-24
What part of "I ain't a queer" don't you understand?
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
that's the whole point, you wouldn't know they were trans
sadly, ur dick can't detect chromosomes, all you'd see is a hot girl.
There are so many trans girls that are 100% feminine and have attractive features indistinguishable from cis girls. It's pretty much impossible to say you wouldn't be attracted to a single trans girl, at least from a purely superficial visual glance.
anyone who says otherwise is just lying to themselves, or actually has no idea what decades of hormones from a young age actually accomplishes
n/a wowbagger88 2017-04-24
Apparently, hormones early on accomplish genital shrinkage to the point where bottom surgery isn't possible.
And don't tell me what my dick can't do. You can try to justify your homosexuality all you want, but not everyone shares in your immorality.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Is that so? I didn't know that. Doesn't really change my point tho, you can find people attractive before you see their genitals. There are also people who are 100% feminine and have had bottom surgery, so it's also not a given thing
I can state facts about ur dick, ya
You can disagree with them, doesn't make them not facts
n/a wowbagger88 2017-04-24
I didn't know that either. But apparently it's a thing that came up in that TLC show about a transgender teen named Jazz. I just heard about it, I have no idea how I'd search for it without popping up on some list and tbh I don't really give a fuck. I'm sure it's not a 100% thing, but it's gotta be horrifying to find out for all parties involved.
I honestly don't even know where this goes from here, but I'm running low on effort and I just want to repeat that you're a homosexual who gets turned on by feminine men and for that you'll burn in hell. ""You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." Leviticus 18:22
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
dont worry, being willing to fuck anything is probably at the bottom of the list of why ill burn in hell
n/a Works_of_memercy 2017-04-24
The problem is that most people are transphobes. You can argue with them using Logic and Reason that it shouldn't matter to them, but it does, and you know in advance that it probably would.
So the only reasonable way to solve that problem is with coercive rape. Read up on it, it's a has a rich and extensive history in combating various forms of degeneration and bigotry. The best part is that it literally can't go wrong, the only people who end up feeling that they were raped are the exact people who deserved to be raped. It's like a freaking heat-seeking missile, only it homes on bigotry!
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
So you are saying trans people should rape most people till they stop being transphobes? A bit extreme, but reasonable. I'll put it up for discussion when we decide the next item on the Trans Agenda
n/a TheAlmightyProphet 2017-04-24
who knew that right-wing homophobes would be the only ones left to fight against rape-apologists like you
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
who knew that left wing sjws would be the only one fighting against people defining things as rape when it isn't. A fun exchange of roles, I'm not sure the MAGA hat works on me but you look great with the colored hair =3
n/a skeetsurfing1984 2017-04-24
Okay, but this can be extended to . . . just about anything. Like that case in Israel several years ago where the Arab man was prosecuted for sexual assault when he lied to his date that he was Jewish. It's easy to think of other examples along those lines, and hard to come up with a good bright-line rule for what is merely a white lie and what transforms otherwise kosher sex into rape.
Personally, I think this focus on sexual consent as an esoteric subspecies of contract law is an unfortunate development and logical dead end.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Yeah it only really extends to situations where any reasonable person would know that consent would be revoked if the truth was known. In the Arab guy's case he lied because he knew she wouldn't have sex with him if she knew the truth. Yeah puffery exists but it's a fairly clear line between what's an overly flattering claim, and what's purposeful deceit meant to attain consent that you know you wouldn't get if the truth was known.
If I brag about my skill at baseball or in hockey, that's not nearly the same thing as lying about your biological sex in order to have sex with someone who thinks you're the opposite biological sex. In the same way most guys wouldn't have sex with another guy, most people wouldn't have sex with a tranny if they knew. That's really the only reason to lie about it. It's not hard to be truthful and find someone who likes you for being you. You don't get to lie to someone like that in order to have sex. No one owes you sex and it's really weird to try and argue that it's okay to lie about something that big.
n/a skeetsurfing1984 2017-04-24
Is it really? I'm more skeptical. Because this
is essentially assuming mind-reading powers on the part of the defendant. How would Random Person A "know" what was or was not decisive to Random Person B's choice whether or not to go to bed with someone?
Biological sex at birth is an "easy case" -- transgender status is probably material for a majority of people -- as is stuff like "went to state finals my senior year" which is an "easy case" as well since it almost certainly isn't. But there's a lot of stuff in the middle.
Income? Ethnicity? Religious affiliation (or lack thereof)? Marital status? Desire for kids? Educational background? Criminal history? Kids from previous relationships?
People lie about these things all the time. If Alice and Bob meet at a hotel bar and the married Alice lies and tells Bob that she's single, and they go to bed with Bob thinking there's a long-term potential there, has Alice "raped" Bob? One would think not, but I can't see any obvious, non-ad-hoc limiting principle in the way you're conceptualizing this that would rule-out this case.
Thanks for the cogent, non-dickish reply. Cheers.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Fun, yes I see your point but mine is that as long as there is a reasonable expectation that what you see is what you get it is a violation to lie.
Picking up a chick in a bar isn't the same as expecting the thing that looks like a woman is in fact a woman. Bar hookups are for fun and the assumption is that they are the biological sex that they look like. I know what you're going for but my point is that the trannies/Alice knows that Bob/Normal people wouldn't have sex with them if they knew the truth. As long as you know you aren't what you represent, and that if the truth was known then consent was revoked, then you need to tell the truth. If bob was looking for a new life partner, and Alice reasonably knew this but still lied then she did rape him. After all, the definition of rape is sex without consent. If you know that consent would be revoked if you told the truth and lied to obtain it then it never was consent.
n/a 420CO 2017-04-24
This has devolved into seriousposting at this point. Both of you need to kys to atone.
n/a tyuijvhvhcfcjf 2017-04-24
Newbies here really don't understand how dangerous seriousposting is. I could get into it, but bussy mayocide lmao
n/a lvl99SkrubRekker 2017-04-24
Witholding information relative to sex in the fear that someone will revoke consent is fucked up and absolutely is a betrayal of informed consent. You might as well be one of those wierdos that dont inform people you have stds because you arent having a outbreak at that minute. Sick af.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
no, that's different, for obvious reasons
n/a lvl99SkrubRekker 2017-04-24
No it's not. In my other post for instance I cited HIV which can be made entirely undetectable by medication. So, if the pussy or dick in question is like any healthy dick why are you being a bigot all the sudden?
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Its not because it has an STD. Regardless of any treatment, there is always a incredibly low chance of transmission. A better analogy would be if you were cured completely. If you were cured completely, then I wouldn't say you need to disclose.
n/a lvl99SkrubRekker 2017-04-24
As I said HIV can be made effectively dead by medication. Thus there is no STD basically. It cant be transmitted. However, you would still want to bee told yes? Much like every mtf tranny being infertile could be a issue yes?
So you feel a .1% chance of transmission is a need to know, but knowing that thereis a 100% of being with someone who is a infertile hormone addict with a mental disorder isnt important?
Pfffft
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
definitely
Why does that matter if you are just sleeping with them? We arent talking about dating
You are on the same amount of hormones too, dumbass. They just take them externally
not according to relevant medical literature
anything else?
n/a lvl99SkrubRekker 2017-04-24
Kay, my point still stands.
Uh, we are. You are defending people who lie about a very specific physical and mental deviation from the norm and certain in this instance its a long term relationship. Most people want kids, the vast majority of women have fertile wombs. Get over it.
I didn't have to get a optional surgery to get my penis and testes which naturally provide my hormones. If a mtf transgender person ever stops taking hormones there are serious medical consequences due to their elective choices.
Really? Because I don't recall transgenderism being diagnosed by any medical doctors lately. In fact, even with the small scale quackstudies available there has never been a blind study wherein a medical expert could accurately determine determined gender by physical observation. It's diagnosed by psychologists for a reason dip shit. Lol
Inb4 theu fuuund female like brain perts in muh tranny study.
Show me a blind study goober.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Talking about whats needed to disclose to have consent for sex. Infertility should be disclosed in a long term relationship whether trans or not.
Who cares? They are the same hormones. Home grown or store bought. Are you one of those hippies that loves the nature fallacy? You should disclose that before you have any sex
The psychologists said its not a mental disorder dip shit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-5
n/a lvl99SkrubRekker 2017-04-24
So if you know almost 100 that if you disclose you are trans that could endanger you tricking someone into sex, so you dont tell them and they have sex with you when they probably wouldn't, you dont feel that is at least super shit behavior? I mean, I'm not calling it rape, but it is definitely on a the same fucked up level as not disclosing herpes. The vast majority of guys dont want to fuck guys, no matter how much surgery they get or drugs they take to play pretend.
They are absolutely not the same substances, chemically. Nature fallacy ? Lol Listen dipshit, your body properly producing hormones until old age IS something we do naturally. Getting your dick sliced off, havibg your adams apple trimmed, and getting breasts implants and cosmetic surgery us not natural. Also, trans people develope medical issues that normal women dont when they drop hormones. It's in no way the aame.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Wew mental gymnastics. Still diagnosed by psychologists, dosent require any physical diagnosis. It looks, sounds, and walks exactly like a duck.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
What possible "danger" is there? STD's you can point to a real world risk. Do you think the trans vagina is gonna bite ur dick off? They are tricking you into sex? No, they consider themselves actual women and thus think there is no problem with them having sex with guys without having to disclose their medical history. If you have preferences for cis girls maybe you should disclose that, that would solve the problem.
Yep, thats the nature fallacy
Side effects are side effects, true of any medical treatment
"The American Psychiatric Association, publisher of the DSM-5, states that "gender nonconformity is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition."
maybe try reading instead of trying to decipher how the words walk
its funny how a trans girl can look, sound, and walk exactly as a girl but then suddenly the details matter, right ;)
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
I have an identical twin, women can't keep us apart.
If I fucked my brother's girlfriend without her knowing it's me and not him, would that be okay?
trannic rape logic says it's completely fine cause the gf doesn't notice she's having sex with someone else.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Pretending to be someone else is lying. You are not your brother. A trans person presenting as their gender is not lying. They are that gender.
Assuming that their gender is the same as their biological gender is a reasonable assumption statistics wise, but you don't get to call it rape just because you made an assumption about somebody and they turned out to be the exception.
That logic is stupid, because you could claim any trait that someone has that is uncommon and unfavorable means that they are raping you if they don't disclose it. If this was posed from a leftist perspective, about something other than trans people, people here would have no problem ripping apart that logic.
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
no amount of language tricks and social constructivism changes that they are clearly lying.
they are lying because they know they would have a harder time getting sex if they were honest.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Language tricks lmao
The fact that you don't understand trans people or how to win an argument doesn't mean we are lying, that just means ur dum
Sorry
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
i understand them perfectly.
they know that it's harder to get consensual sex, so they rape.
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
it is rape.
that's why everyone gets to call it rape.
because it is.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Continuing my previous point, if a leftist was reduced to saying "Ya well it's rape because it IS" after ignoring a large post debunking that you would be mercilessly mocking them
It's time to get some colored hair, you are the Tumblr feminist now
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
you didn't debunk shit.
you try to pretend being trans or cis doesn't matter for consent to sex. it does for 99% of people.
just like it matters for 99% of people for consent to sex whether i'm my twin brother or myself.
you're no different from any other rapist, they all make excuses why they should have the right to do it without informed consent.
"refugee" gang rapists talk about "muh culture" and "sexual emergency", frat boy rapists talk about "she's a slut, she wanted it", rat king trannies say "he had no right to refuse sex with me, because i deserve sex more than he deserves informed consent."
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
"Waaaaa everyone who disagrees with me is a rapist"
That's the problem with u leftists, you call everything rape when it isn't
"Waaaaa I had sex with someone and regretted it because I didn't realize they were trans, that means they raped me"
Don't want to have sex with trans people? Then say so. You have a mouth and can make your preferences known, be a big boy and use it
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
if the twin brother thing is rape, then so is the tranny thing.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
not an argument, just like your earlier incredible rebuttal, where you said "rape is rape".
Yep, it's definitely less than ideal. ideally, I think trans people should be open about it.
I just think it's their right to not have to offer that information if they don't want to. This applies to anybody with information that is private and potentially deal breaking, but otherwise does not affect the other person in any way.
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
like being the boyfriend's twin instead of the bf himself?
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
That situation has additional context that makes it wrong. Just the fact that the information is private and potentially deal breaking doesn't make it wrong to be withheld. Remove all the context of the twin being her boyfriend and impersonating him then there's nothing wrong with not disclosing the fact that you have a twin.
Why not actually try an argument instead of attempting poorly thought out gotchyas? Use those brain cells!
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
if the brother wasn't her bf, there would be no issue.
if the trans woman were cis, there also would be no issue.
what exactly makes the twin example worse? you didn't actually manage to say
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
I did say. I'll reproduce.
"Pretending to be someone else is lying. You are not your brother. A trans person presenting as their gender is not lying. They are that gender.
Assuming that their gender is the same as their biological sex is a reasonable assumption statistics wise," but it doesn't qualify as rape just because you made an assumption that turned out to be untrue. Even if it is usually a safe assumption.
"That logic is stupid, because you could claim any trait that someone has that is uncommon and unfavorable means that they are raping you if they don't disclose it. If this was posed from a leftist perspective, about something other than trans people, people here would have no problem ripping apart that logic. "
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
I never said I'm my brother, I'm not actively lying in that scenario. I just come inside, say "how was your day", give her a kiss and say "let's have sex before dinner".
At no point did I say "I am your boyfriend."
It's not my fault that she assumes I am, just because I look like her bf.
And sure, statistically she might not consent to sex if she knew I'm the twin brother, but I didn't lie.
Clearly it's her job to ask "are you my boyfriend or his twin?"
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
But you are clearly pretending to be someone else. The fact that you are not verbally doing it is irrelevant. It is an intentional attempt to mislead.
The consent was given to the boyfriend, not you. This is implicit and understood by all parties involved. A basic standard of consent - it only applies to the person you give it to.
For trans people, again, Trans people aren't lying. From their perspective, and mine, they are accurately living life as women (gender). That involves looking just like cis women, because that's what women look like. They aren't trying to maliciously trick you into thinking they are cis women, they want to be indistinguishable from women because they consider themselves women. You may reject this, but there are plenty of others that accept that perspective. Hence the controversy.
The same standards of consent are not implicitly agreed on by everybody here. Plenty of people consider knowledge of birth sex not necessary here. Not a majority, but enough to be significant. The standards of consent are in dispute here. So just the fact that the standards are in dispute makes the situation not equivalent, even if your side is the correct one. Acting according to standards of consent that you believe in isn't as bad as intentionally violating consent like the twin scenario
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
translady is clearly pretending to be cis
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
translady is accurately presenting as a woman. The fact that you think that means they are pretending to be cis is because ur dum, not any fault of theirs
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
and i'm presenting as my twin brother.
sheesh, could you at least try to find a coherent argument to justify your double standard?
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
You arent accurately presenting as your brother, because you arent your brother. Trans people are the gender they present as.
I wonder if it is justifiable for a person to be this particularly stupid
I guess if you were dropped as a child or something it wouldn't be your fault
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
trans women aren't cis women.
70% of men find are repulsed by the idea of having sex with a trans woman. another 20% would be okay with it, but still want to know whether the person they're sleeping with is trans.
it's really simple: if you're pretending to be cis in order ensure sex with someone, that's the exact same situation as me pretending to be my twin.
you KNOW that you wont get consent if you're honest. That's Why You Lie, aka Rape by Deception.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Okay
So then they should make sure they don't sleep with trans woman by asking potential partners if it is that important to them
Luckily, we've already established trans woman arent pretending to be cis. Therefore, you admit the situation isn't the same.
No, this is you wondering and guessing. You think this is equivalent to knowing something because your brain is located in your ass, just like the statistics you pulled from there
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
/trannic rape logic
of course they are.
they want sex, and they don't want with men who actually like trans women.
they want sex with men who only like cis women. successfully date raping a guy is super empowering to them.
that's why they lie.
#BringBackTransPanicDefense
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Pretending to be someone else is lying. You are not your brother. A trans person presenting as their gender is not lying. They are that gender.
You will go to jail under rape by fraud laws if you try the twin brother thing. Trans people won't for not disclosing, because it's not rape by fraud.
The fact that they don't immediately offer private information to everyone is not enough to justify those conclusions. You can't comprehend that cuz ur dum
If a man says he only likes sex with cis women, then they won't have sex with them.
It's up to you to disclose your preferences.
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
I don't pretend anything.
I present as my brother, by merely being myself.
I am a passing trans-my-brother, aka I look like my brother, I could fool people.
they should.
Really? Then explain:
why do you want to have sex with men without their informed consent?
IMHO it's for the same reason why so many trans women online are "rat kings." you're a manipulative sociopath who gets off on that. but maybe you have another explanation.
there's 500 times more men who are into trans women than there are trans women, it wouldn't be hard to find one who wants to be with you consensually. but you don't want that.
/tranny rape logic
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Two things
Nonsense. The only thing that you can justify as "being yourself" is merely looking like your brother. To bed your girlfriends brother you'd have to knowingly deceive her about your identity. Possibly just by omission. Likewise, to be clear, I agree that the trans girl in the link above is being deceptive, I just don't think every trans person who doesn't disclose is being deceptive. Which brings us to the next point:
The second thing is: just being deceptive, and even outright lying about something, isn't enough to qualify as rape. For example, men routinely lie about income, their work, personal accomplishments, etc to pick up girls for sex. To make "lying about something to get tail is rape" a thing has far more reaching consequences then you think. It'd probably make about 90% of the country considered rapists. That is why rape by fraud, in the US, usually only applies to people lying about their identity. Because consent is undeniably always implicitly tied to who you are consenting with. Lying about anything else is common, and I don't see why lying about birth sex should be treated differently.
Begging the question, the correct question is why trans people generally want to avoid disclosing their birth sex. There are many reasons outside of tricking people into sex.
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
if she really that twin-phobic that she actually cares whether she's sleeping with her bf or with his twin, she needs to ask.
this is not about disclosing it to random people.
it's about disclosing it to people you're going to have sex with.
But as long as they look the same, and you can't tell them apart, is that right?
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
I'm not really sure why you think making your retarded analogy justified with equally retarded logic is a valid argumentative strategy, but it's amazing to watch.
Obviously you somehow think my logic is the same as the one you used there, but it's not.
I mean, If you get rid of the whole analogy and just have a random person who is "twins phobic", then my logic Is that it is their job to avoid people who may happen to be twins. The twin does not need to say before they sleep with anybody that "oh by the way, just a random unrelated piece of information, but I happen to be one in a pair of twins"
What makes the original analogy wrong is that it involves impersonating another person. The twin aspect is irrelevant. Duh
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
just stop, rape apologist. it's never gonna be ethical.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Oh, is this the part where you give up because I unequivocally schooled you in the other post I made? Awesome, that's my favorite part!
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
your unwavering support for rape is getting creepy
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Don't you Tumblr feminists have anything better to do than call everything rape? this is why trump won
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
Not according to UK case law.
In fact it's considered an offence which warrants 9 months in prison and 2 years prohibition.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
That person was not trans.
That person explicitly lied about their gender, not just about their sex.
No straight woman would want to have sex with the woman gender, so consent is much more explicitly denied.
A straight woman could want to have sex with a trans man that was born a woman.
And finally, as usual, a trans person is not lying about their gender. This person did. This case does not necessarily mean that UK would treat a trans person who did not disclose in the same way. At the very least, there would have to be explicit lying, not just failure to disclose
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
The appellant kept talking about wanting a sex change and M said the appellant had lied to her for four years and all that time she had been calling her Scott.
They were trans, they just didn't have the surgery to make a penis out of a vagina.
It is already case law, and if you know what case law is then you'd realize they would. This is now a legal precedent to be followed by lower courts. AKA, trannies who don't disclose are legally culpable and will now face jail time over non-disclosure in the UK.
"M felt physically sick. She told the appellant if she had told her from the start she wouldn't have judged her and things might have been different, but she was mainly in shock and asked lots of questions."
Again, if the tranny just outed herself, then she wouldn't have ended up in prison and would have had the relationship she wanted. The tranny was lying about her sex, that's why the other girl bought condoms and why she wore a dildo. This isn't a gender issue, this is an issue with trannies not disclosing their condition in order to try and get consent, and you encouraging it.
No it's not.. Your right to sexual association doesn't trump another persons right to not sexually associate. Every person is king when it comes to their own sexual preferences, and you can't just invalidate the sexual preferences of a heterosexual or homosexual because you want to get laid. Each person gets to make their own judgement on whether or not the other person counts as a man or a woman, you don't get to decide that for them. All people have a bodily integrity right to say βnoβ to sex, no matter how ugly, offensive, or nonsensical their reasons for doing so might be to you. You can't bypass that because you're a tranny.
"When cross examined before us, she agreed that she did not want to tell M the truth. She said that in a way, if she told M the truth, she might have ended the relationship and the appellant did not want it to end; therefore she did not tell her."
Isn't this what I've been going on about? You only lie when you worry the truth would have negative consequences for you. Even basing hookups on false consent and purposefully ensuring that informed consent was never achieved it at very best, morally reprehensible and disgusting behaviour.
Please though. Explain why consent isn't necessary and how the bodily autonomy of a person is not nearly as important as a tranny lying to get sex.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
She never made a defense as being trans, and the courts didn't recognize her as trans. Therefore they did not evaluate her case as a trans person.
In order to legally change your gender in the UK you need to submit a request for a gender recognition certificate. Once you get your certificate, then you are considered by your chosen gender for legal purposes. Look:
http://formfinder.hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/t455-eng-2016.04.01.pdf
gender β either male or female β that is registered on their birth certificates. The Gender
Recognition Act 2004 enables transsexual people to apply to the Gender Recognition Panel
to receive a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC). If you are granted a full GRC you will,
from the date of issue, be considered in the eyes of the law to be of your acquired gender. You will be entitled to all the rights appropriate to a person of your acquired gender. "
If the law had seen her as male, then she would have not been convicted of lying about her gender. Because she wouldn't have been lying about her gender.
FURTHERMORE (and this is the good stuff here) The UK actually provides guidelines on how to handle precedent from case law. I would like to direct you to this segment here, under the heading " transgender subjects"
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/rape_and_sexual_offences/consent/
Please tell me oh wise one, why any of that would matter if a transwoman saying she is a woman is always "deception of gender that vitiates consent"
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Fun how you're still refusing to address how your claims are all based in the fact that you consider bodily autonomy and informed consent to not be as important as the trannies feelings. Seriously, prove me wrong here because if you can't, then you have no justifiable argument. So far you've been avoiding this like the plague because you know damn well that you can't muster a reasonable defense that states that a trannies right to sexual association is greater that any other persons right to not sexually associate.
She was convicted under that Sexual Offences Act 2003 for assault by penetration, specifically Section 2, and in relation to Subsection 2 "Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents." Section 74 is where the tranny really got burned because "For the purposes of this Part, a person consents if he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice."
That tranny didn't get consent because they lied about their sex. That's why it was relevant in the case that the victim had purchased condoms. Regardless of gender, you don't buy condoms unless you're under the impression they were a specific sex.
"When cross examined before us, she agreed that she did not want to tell M the truth. She said that in a way, if she told M the truth, she might have ended the relationship and the appellant did not want it to end; therefore she did not tell her."
Remember this? This is a major reason she got convicted, because she did not reasonably determine if she had consent. She lied about her sex in order to have penetrative sex, and that's why she got convicted. Her being considered a male gender wouldn't have mattered if the sex of the person wasn't clearly the problem here.
Are you seriously so stupid that you could read that case and take away from it that if she had changed her gender it wouldn't have mattered? Her sex is what mattered, as was her lying, which is coincidentally something you gladly and enthusiastically advocate for. Funny to see someone who shares the same views as you getting convicted for a sex crime isn't it? I guess that's why you try so hard to make it seem like it's okay to not get consent. Guilty conscience and all.
You know what, even if she had changed her gender, it wouldn't have mattered and it would still have been in violation of the Sexual Offenses Act because, as I've mentioned before, each person gets to make their own judgement on whether or not the other person counts as a man or a woman, and non-disclosure of your biological sex is a breach of the freedom and capacity of a partner to consent to sexual activity. If the partner is consenting to having sex with a biological man, and not a woman with either a dildo or a penis made out of a vagina, then if you're either wearing a dildo or have a penis made out of a vagina you never actually did get consent. This is not hard but I guess it is hard for you to admit that you're arguing in favour or recognized sex-crimes.
Couple things; 1) A moderately intelligent rooster with a mild understanding of the English language wouldn't be as much of a sexual assault advocate as you are, 2) Vitiate means to make something faulty, that woman who got charged clearly considered herself to be a man, maybe didn't fill out the paperwork, but the crux of the matter is that she is still a she. The victim consented to sex with a man, not a legal definition man but an actual biological man, which is exactly why she bought condoms. You don't buy condoms to have sex with the gender man, you buy them because you're having sex with a biological man. As such, the consent given was based on the sex of the other person, and their gender status is irrelevant in this case.
Sex still matters to the vast majority of people! That's why sex matters to lesbians, gays, heterosexuals, and anyone going on a blind date or using a dating website will select the sex they're interested in.
I notice again you refuse to address the fact that the victim clearly stated that things would have been okay if the tranny had told them the truth. The convicted woman was the very definition transgender. You don't dress as a man, LARP as a man, and wear dildos under your pants to meet a woman you spent the last few years telling you were a man if you're not transgendered. So yes, this is case law that applies to all UK, and even Commonwealth trannies that feel that their right to sex is greater that all other humans right to bodily autonomy.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Don't worry, I was saving that one (and now this one) for when I get home from work, because that one is juicy. I've replied to pretty much every post in this thread that has replied to me, you think that one scares me? Pfft
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Oh I look forward to you trying to prove that sexual autonomy is not more important that a trannies desire for sex. You're literally going to have to make a case against informed consent and against people's right to sexual choices. It'll be a shitshow of delusion.
That's the glorious thing. You can't make an honest case for a tranny hiding their condition without claiming that a persons own sexual preferences are not relevant. I'm excited now.
Also stop lying, saving nothing. You've talked out of your ass and now you're stuck. More time won't help you claim that consent isn't important for sex. Honestly though, you need to spend a hell of a lot less time on /r/TransgenderReality with those other rape trannies. Your argument was tried in a court and it resulted in a 3 year prison sentence.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Right. They determined that she broke that law, because she lied about her gender.
According the court, her gender and her sex were the same. While you are right that she lied about her sex, she also lied about her gender, because the court treated her gender and sex as one and the same. Therefore, the court did not address biological sex and determined that the reason that she violated the consent was because she lied about her gender.
If the court had treated her as transgender, then its possible that the court would have ruled that non-disclosure of biological sex violates consent. But that is not what the court ruled on in this instance.
Nothing here contradicts with what I am saying. She did not tell the truth about her gender as determined by the court.
This is incorrect. She was convicted because she lied about her gender.
The legal definition of vitiate means to "To impair or make void; to destroy or annul, either completely or partially, the force and effect of an act or instrument." http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/vitiate
Since this word precedes consent, then that means that this is a description of things to take into account before it can be determined that deception about gender vitiated (voided) consent.
The page which provides guidelines about how law is interpreted in relation to consent, literally says gender status is relevant, with a direct reference to that case.
Not according to the court, which is the only thing that matters in your argument that this case sets precedent for transgender non-disclosure.
lol
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
You used so many words to say so little. Awesome.
Okay, so now you know what happens when you lie about your sex/gender, good. Still care to argue that disclosure isn't necessary? This whole case is the exact result of your argument that a tranny doesn't have to disclose. Funny how this is what happens when you lie like you encourage trannies to lie.
Here is the thing you're missing, if she had been legally the gender of a "man", that still wouldn't have kept her mother from confronting her, same as the victim. She lied about her sex, and just having a bit of paper that says "X now claims to be a man" doesn't change the fact that she was a she. Her pretending to be a man when she was actually a woman means that she didn't get consent from the victim who wanted to have sex with a biological man. Hence the condoms purchased.
Yes they nailed her for not being legally a "man" because that was the obvious route to go, but she still would have been dragged into court over her deceit anyways regardless of her piece of paper where she says she thinks she is a man. Personally I would have preferred her to have legally declared herself a man so that they could have addressed her tranny deception completely and not have had the easy way out where she missed the piece of paper. Just because they took the obvious route to prosecution doesn't mean that this absolves trannies of lying for sex. What it should show you is that trannies lying about their sex is something people feel strongly enough to take to court. Their self declared gender doesn't override their actual sex.
None of this however changes the fact that the victim consented to sex with a biological man and not a biological woman. You really, really, really want to justify trannies lying to get sex yet still refuse to believe how immoral it is to use deceptions to get sex.
All of this really is purely theoretical because people can spot a tranny a mile away. Still doesn't mean they don't have to identify to people thick enough not to realize that's clearly a man.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
The court case would have happened regardless, but
I would have preferred that too so the question could have been put to bed.
Regardless of whether outright lying about biological sex would have been ruled to violate consent(a pointless debate to have, our posts are already long enough), I am reasonably sure that simply failing to disclose biological sex would not have been ruled to violate consent. After all, you don't have to disclose HIV+ status in the UK as far as i can see. You can get prosecuted if you actually transmit it to someone, but just not disclosing it doesn't violate consent. And I consider that a much more unethical piece of information to withhold when sleeping with somebody.
It does establish that what you thought is precedent, is actually not precedent. Which was really the only point here.
Ive seen far, far more pictures of trans people, as well as interacted with them in real life, than you have honey. The fact that those particular people aren't passable doesn't mean they all are. There are people that would fool you.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
How? Especially since that girl clearly consented to sex with a biologicial man and not a woman. Hence the condoms. You don't buy condoms if you just consented to a gender.
Oh I promise the next time a tranny doesn't disclose and gets hauled into court this case will be cited. I absolutely promise that.
They look like that too. You can miss a lighthouse at night easier than you can miss a tranny.
Oh I promise you they wouldn't. Y'all always think that you're some 4Chan trap fantasy but even Jenner, will all that money can't be passing.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
That only maybe shows that that particular example would be engaging in deception in regards to sex. Even if they were to rule that was the case, you would be hard pressed to get the legal system to agree to the idea that all trans are engaging in deception in regards to sex simply by presenting as the gender that they are legally recognized as. Again, their decision on not disclosing HIV+ status illustrates that they are less likely to deem failure to disclose things to violate consent than you think.
It will certainly be cited since it's a similar case. That doesn't mean it is set as precedent. In the same way that the HIV+ case was cited in this case, but it was determined it was not the same situation and thus the HIV+ case didn't set precedent for this one.
You steadily ignore this, but again this page: http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/rape_and_sexual_offences/consent/ pretty straightforwardly describes how this case should be interpreted in respect to trans people, and it specifically says to take their own self perception of their identity into account, not ignore it. While you may make your promises, I am much more convinced by the link above and so I won't worry too much.
Money really isn't an important factor in passing, its more age of transition and genes among other things. Your insistence that you can identify every single trans person as trans gets funnier every time tho. Trust me, many stealth trans people have stories of people saying similiar things to them without even realizing they are trans, lmao. It seems to be common fantasy, like the people who believe they have an innate "gaydar".
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Which you very strongly advocate for, yes we know.
Except for this case. Yes they nailed her for not legally changing her gender but she was dragged into court because she lied about her sex. Boy you're thicker than pig shit.
Considering that the whole thing was started because she lied about her sex yes it will. Yes they nailed her with the obvious case of her not changing her gender but that doesn't change the fact that the victim was traumatized by the very "logic" that you advocate for. The "but muh privacy" doesn't extend into the bedroom.
No I already addressed that but apparently you're just trying to be difficult. Yes they take their gender perception into account, but that doesn't change the deceit as to their sex. The victim consented to sex with a biological male, and not a biological female. It wouldn't have changed anything in terms of the violation that the victim felt, nor the fact that she did consented to sex with a biological male, and not the gender male. You don't buy condoms to have sex with a gender male you tard.
So Kaitlyn Jenner totally passes even with all the surgery though. FYI things like narrow hips on a "woman" and wide hips on a "man" are dead give aways. As are the other much more subtle social cues and responses.
Yeah when the person is Irish drunk or a super inexperienced Indian kid.
The mother of the victim clearly realized that the girl was LARPing.
n/a -x-y- 2017-04-24
I know you're a troll, but all the men into trans women that I meet want me to penetrate them. I want to be penetrated.
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
difficulty finding consensual sex partners justifies rape by deception?
"interesting" viewpoint, but i disagree
n/a -x-y- 2017-04-24
No, it doesn't. I don't do that sort of behavior (I'm married) but I was trying to explain why other people do.
We don't want to be seen as trans women. We want to be seen as women.
n/a Clark_Savage_Jr 2017-04-24
You should father your own nephews, with her consent, of course, and become Internet famous.
n/a lvl99SkrubRekker 2017-04-24
Are you fucking thick? I said endanger you in reference to the colloquial you feeling your ability to get laid would be endangered by telling people you arent a real woman and you have serious mental and physical issues. Frankly, you need to bring a better argument, not telling someone is completely shitty behavior any way you slice it. As I said, men dont want to fuck men generally, the surgery isnt going to change their mind, and tricking therm puts trans people rightfully in danger.
Having your dick removed isnt a medical treatment, it is considered a elective medical procedure. Most trans people never get the surgery you dolt. Also, how is it a nature fallacy? A constructed vagina is in no way even closeto the same in form or function as the real thing.
Funny how they just clarified how gender non conformance isnt a mental disorder. Extreme dysphoria ie wanting to cut of your dick, is still considered a mental disorder. Read harder.
Funny how you can put lipstick on a pig and call it Adele. Funny how no trans women can do anything most natural women can expert except play dress up to pretend. Funny how their so called vaginas need to be dialated so they dont close like a open wound lol U r insane.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
You can pee out of it and you can fuck it, and it looks like the real thing (assuming the surgeon was competent) . Form and function. It doesn't self lube as well, but so does some cis women. Their vaginas are still considered vaginas. They can't give birth, but same with some cis women. Their vaginas are still considered vaginas. Sorry if this is triggering for you. It's the miracle of modern medicine.
Nope, the dysphoria is only the distress caused by being in the incorrect body. It's literally what the word dysphoria means. You are too stupid to know that, so no worries.
The surgery is actually one of the recommended treatments of gender dysphoria by the dsm 5. Since a trans person being treated successfully suffers no distress, then they no longer have dysphoria. Since a trans person can exist without dysphoria, then you can't say that being trans is a mental issue. Just like chronic pain can cause dysphoria, but you wouldnt say that the pain is a mental disorder if it is being caused by a physical issue.
I've always wondered how it feels to wake up in the morning, with such self confidence that you can state such things easily debunked things as true in an argument without even wondering if you could be wrong. You obviously have read any of the relevant material at all, nor bothered to research it at all. You can't be faking your stupidity because there's no point this deep in this comment thread, it makes no sense to do so.
Funny how there are certainly trans woman you would find hot and bang and if they didn't tell you they wete trans you wouldn't know. Oh there's no way I can convince you of that or get you to admit that because it would shatter your worldview, but it does make this conversation immensely entertaining from my side
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
sorry, some trans women i assume are great people, but they're not completely cured of maleness. we just don't have the technology yet.
n/a FreeRobotFrost 2017-04-24
HOO BOY, NOW THIS IS PODRACING
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Thanks, there was no drama in the linked thread so I brought it here
n/a PM_ME_HAIRLESS_CATS 2017-04-24
Let's try spinning, that's a good trick
n/a OniTan 2017-04-24
/u/magicslave is committing rape.
n/a CuriousKrow 2017-04-24
I'm okay to get down with anyone if they are feminine and attractive enough but I'd rather fuck boipussy over fake vagina.
n/a Somenakedguy 2017-04-24
Not like you cant still fuck the bussy, just throw a strap-on on her so you can't tell she's post-op
n/a SpectroSpecter 2017-04-24
There's just something unsettling about the whole affair. I feel like the whole mechanism could just break apart. I don't know how to put someone's intestines back in and I don't want to know.
n/a Awayfone 2017-04-24
I mean they still have a boi pussy.
... I think.
n/a wokeaspie 2017-04-24
Apparently it's NBD to get into a relationship without mentioning that your vagoo isn't real? This is how trannies get murdered
n/a botchlings 2017-04-24
I feel like saying "I'm a tranny" is first date material. If not it's certainly second date material.
n/a wokeaspie 2017-04-24
Hell, put it on your dating profile. Less chance of a knuckle sandwich that way, I figure.
n/a harrah8083 2017-04-24
It should be in their fucking tinder bio. If I found out the date I was trying to bone was a tranny, I would politely excuse myself from that date pretty fucking quick.
n/a botchlings 2017-04-24
I'd just get up and leave. Leave money for my half of whatever we were doing and out the door I'd go.
n/a harrah8083 2017-04-24
I mean i would tell him why I'm leaving so they don't run to the internet and say, "Oh my god this transphobic shitlord just left me with the bill". And hope they understand why they were in the wrong. But after that, I'd be out the door real quick.
n/a wokeaspie 2017-04-24
Spoiler alert: they're gonna do that anyway. Some leftist rag will pick it up as a story, you'll get doxxed and swatted and some cop will shoot your dog.
The only winning move is not to play.
n/a harrah8083 2017-04-24
I know I was just trying to seem like not a terrible person. I would probably call him a fag then ditch him and not pay the bill.
n/a wokeaspie 2017-04-24
Oh, please. We both know where we are.
Much better.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
I'd let them pay for my half too. They used to be a man so they should be used to it.
n/a FitAndDumb 2017-04-24
I'd splooge in their bussy and hook up again the next day. No wait...
n/a if_it_fits_Sit 2017-04-24
Rofl
n/a GeoStarRunner 2017-04-24
Doesn't the guy I normally pay for dinner? If so then he should pay
n/a niczar 2017-04-24
As far as I'm concerned, it's a clear signal to keep a 100Β m safety radius.
n/a RKola 2017-04-24
There was a woman who was 'presenting' as a guy, and got a girlfriend, used a dildo during sex and didn't allow her to see/touch and she genuinely thought she was 'he'. She got eight years for sexual assault, but last i heard there was an appeal and re-trial.
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
but that's different because the victim was a woman.
if the guy wants justice, he needs to become a trans woman first, and then sue /u/magicslave for lesbian rape by deception.
n/a Akai_Hana 2017-04-24
/u/magicslave you're fucking delusional and should feel ashamed of yourself. No one will love you not because you're a tranny but because you're a lying cunt.
n/a pastryarchy 2017-04-24
Let's get real here - the real lie is that "she" meets men willing to date her.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
But somehow if the dude was a secret Trump voter they would REEEE themselves into justifiable homicide of him.
n/a tyuijvhvhcfcjf 2017-04-24
Being a Trump supporter means you're fucking stupid.
If you date a Trump supporter, and then you come to realize he's a Trump supporter, you should also come to realize that you're also fucking stupid.
n/a DeadTrumps 2017-04-24
So this person is hiding the fact that they're trans from their boyfriend that wants to have kids?
Sounds like a piece of shit.
Also
n/a MakeAmericaSageAgain 2017-04-24
Well;
So there you go
n/a wokeaspie 2017-04-24
So not only a fake vagina, a sloppy hackjob from a 3rd world shithole. Give this guy a gold fucking star
n/a MakeAmericaSageAgain 2017-04-24
Oh, buddy... It's much more than that. Now I don't know if OP is a Hijra (her partner would probably know, unless he's white?) or secular, but;
However, the Hijras I've met have been really cool. As long as you give them money. Very sexually overt considering they don't have any balls... How does that work?
n/a pastryarchy 2017-04-24
What the fuck was that!?!
I knew I should not have clicked! Thanks a lot asshole, you just gave me brain cancer.
n/a Aimless_Drifter 2017-04-24
one of the epic moment from most epic indian film ever
n/a Eggmont 2017-04-24
It's almost impossible to tell the difference if they had a good surgeon.
n/a DeadTrumps 2017-04-24
Do fake pussies self lubricate?
n/a Eggmont 2017-04-24
They do actually
n/a DeadTrumps 2017-04-24
...how?
n/a Eggmont 2017-04-24
Dunno, not a doctor, but what I saw was better than some of the equipment some girls get at birth
n/a DeadTrumps 2017-04-24
Sure it wasn't just a fake trans bro
n/a Eggmont 2017-04-24
If they were it was a fucking long and complicated con involving half a dozen close friends and her father doing an amazing impression of a guy who disowns a child
n/a Awayfone 2017-04-24
Anything for the lulz
n/a Eggmont 2017-04-24
I would laugh, but it's not as funny when you see someone have their arm broken by their own dad just for being themselves. Hell imagine our lives if we got beaten for shitposting!
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
that's awful
but OTOH the dad might have prevented her from committing a few rapes by deception until her arms heal.
always look at the positive :)
n/a Eggmont 2017-04-24
Oh fuck off
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
rape is worse than murder
murder is worse than broken arms
n/a Eggmont 2017-04-24
You're calling a good friend of mine a rapist who seemingly deserved to have her arm broken for being trans.
Fuck off
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
i said "might have"
it's like if one in three smarties was poisoned.
male tears lol
n/a Works_of_memercy 2017-04-24
What if she sexually identifies as trans, shitlord?
n/a DeadTrumps 2017-04-24
What if she identifies as a fake trans, faggot
n/a Works_of_memercy 2017-04-24
Idk man, it just doesn't sit well with me that our young boys who went out specifically to fuck a transwoman were tricked into putting their penises into natural vaginas.
n/a Akai_Hana 2017-04-24
Maybe you're failing your only job as a man and not getting them off enough before putting your pee pee inside them?
n/a Eggmont 2017-04-24
Or some chicks just have a hard time getting suitably wet, it's not all that uncommon
n/a Michaelphelpsisquick 2017-04-24
OP is delusional, he's going to leave you the moment you tell him the truth and why? Because you built your relationship on a lie. Her boyfriend sounds like a dumbass so her best option is to have him bang your puss, pretend to be pregnant and adopt a baby.
n/a wokeaspie 2017-04-24
I'm imagining her strapping on a fake paunch that gets bigger and bigger until the day of the "delivery". Then she steals a baby from a nursery while out lube shopping. This could be hilarious on the right sitcom
n/a SpinningNipples 2017-04-24
Why did it have to be this specific, I'm laughing so much.
I totally picture her talking to a friend who says something like "you can't keep this situation going on, it's surreal and he'll eventually find out your pregnancy is fake. It's time to do something about it". She replies with "yeah, I guess you're right" while the camera slowly zooms in on her sad face. Then the scene suddenly cuts to a clip of her running while holding a baby and being chased by the nurses.
n/a wokeaspie 2017-04-24
Hahaha. You get me. If it's not a Whitest Kids You Know sketch, it should be.
n/a Bucklar 2017-04-24
Arrested Development had an arc very similar to what you just described. It was gayer though.
n/a wokeaspie 2017-04-24
Fuckin' sold. People have been telling me I need to watch that show, now's as good a time as any
n/a Bucklar 2017-04-24
I honestly thought you were just referencing AD at the start, that's how close your description was. It's a great show. Hard to think of a more sharply written one.
I've only seen Steinfeld, so I can't compare, but it was pretty jewey.
n/a botchlings 2017-04-24
Not really. You date someone long enough and you just sort of know. Besides, if you're having sex there's a certain point at where you want to make sure she's having her period, even if you are using protection...
n/a take_a_dumpling 2017-04-24
you fingerbang a woman enough times and you know her period like the back of your hand.
n/a wokeaspie 2017-04-24
holy fuck comment of the year
n/a DannyLee90 2017-04-24
https://i.imgur.com/wPtRhED.gif
n/a Will0saurus 2017-04-24
http://i.imgur.com/wcKAZcH.gif
n/a Michelanvalo 2017-04-24
As of now that reply is sitting at 103. 103 people who have never had a long term relationship where knowing this shit is pretty common.
And it's not even something you go out of the way to learn, it just happens.
n/a theRagingEwok 2017-04-24
She was a dude, so she probably didn't learn it.
n/a SanityAssassins 2017-04-24
I had an ex that would openly talk about it with me, just like out of the blue. Like "Sorry if I'm acting bitchy tomorrow" and it's like yeah, alright. We had a very jovial relationship.
Like you said, it just happens. Did I know when hers was? Sure. These people are the same ones who want menstruation to stop being "Taboo" and seen as "disgusting/gross" then REEEEE and complain like children who didn't get a toy, if a guy even knows it exists.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
I've never had a guy ask me about my period... I didn't know this was a common thing. And the BC I'm on now stops my periods anyways. Best invention ever.
n/a takaci 2017-04-24
Yeah I'd be very confused if I was in a long term relationship with someone and I never saw a single period pad or tampon
n/a midairfistfight 2017-04-24
Shit like this is great, because crazy posts about normal topics reminds me if reddit is insane and I know not to trust a goddamn thing said here when I'm doubtful of something.
Who the shit doesn't know exactly when their girlfriend is on her period? I even know when my roommate is on hers because we've know eachother for a few years and talk about our lives like adults.
n/a my__name__is 2017-04-24
It's disturbing that they are discussing it like it's just a fact of life. Not a single person brought up that she is lying. This is completely normal to them.
n/a Akai_Hana 2017-04-24
Well what did you expect from mentally ill degenerates?
Just kidding I don't hate trannies but reddit trannies are the cancer of this world and deserve to die in a fire.
n/a StrategicSarcasm 2017-04-24
kilself
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
So I will presume that there is a huge difference between real and manmade vagina ( having the privilege of only seeing and interacting with the rea onesl) . That said, if ,,the dude" does not know the difference she is probably his first girlfriend/ person he had sex with. And that is tge scariest part of this story. She is lying and her ,,community" applauds her for that. Now in the she or her family ( or friends) will spill the beans. Could you imagine the reaction of that man? And to said transwoman: ,,You are a disgusting liar and a user, LET'S NOT MEET YOU HORRIBLE INDIVIDUAL"
n/a ThatDamnedImp 2017-04-24
I'm assuming a difference, but vaginas vary so much in size, shape and formation, that it's no viable to expect someone to be sure it's 'fake' if it looks even slightly passably real.
I often get the feeling that the people here have either never had sex, or have a very limited experience with it.
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
That may be lol , but I'm not talking about shape, size or formation. To my limited knowledge (from quara lol) transwomen need to prepare before sex (aka lube) so that might be a giveaway (maybe)? So I was talking about that.
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Cis women use lube sometimes too, so not really much of a giveaway
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
But then, how do you know that you are not having sex with post - op transwoman who lies to you? ( P.s I'm scared now) LITERALLY SHAKING
n/a Ls777 2017-04-24
Depending on how passable the women is and how skilled the surgeon is, decent chance you can't tell
Now you will have that nagging doubt every time, rip
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Nah, because it is unlikely that I will meet a ,,secret transwoman" in my country even if my current relationship fails.
n/a Zachums 2017-04-24
I'll assume you live in a real shitty third world country because of the amount of unnecessary commas in your comments. And if that's the case, it's even more necessary for trans people to be in stealth.
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Sooo....just like you?
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Sooo....just like you?
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
I'll assume you know that after the dissolution of USSR the term,,third world" is no longer applicable.
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
I'll assume you know that after the dissolution of USSR the term,,third world" is no longer applicable.
n/a Zachums 2017-04-24
Why do you keep using commas like that?
n/a Bucklar 2017-04-24
Goat's milk on the keyboard.
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Goats would eat my potatoes, why the fuck should I keep goats.
n/a Bucklar 2017-04-24
What else would you fuck?
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Your close female relative who is in between 18 - 40 years of age.
n/a 420CO 2017-04-24
Jesus where the fuck do you live? Latvia?
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Most eastern europeans like potatoes it's not a Latvian thing.
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Also latvians only wish to have as many potatoes as we do.
n/a 420CO 2017-04-24
Don't lie we can tell you're Latvian.
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Don't insult me by calling me Latvian I have few things in common with those bitches of the teutonic order
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Because in my language we use them like that in certain occasions and hell everybody around me is appropriating something, so appropriating english by inserting grammar rules of my own language into english.
n/a CaLiKiNG805 2017-04-24
Wow, you and your country are dumb
n/a Sarge_Ward 2017-04-24
He's trying to make a quotation mark ( " ), but like on the bottom of the line. I guess to imply its really sarcastic or something.
Instead of saying "third world" he does it like ,,third world."
I've actually never seen anyone do this before. It's really weird.
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
No, that's probably 2nd world country.
n/a OniTan 2017-04-24
Look for the clit. Trannies fake pussies don't have one.
n/a porygonzguy 2017-04-24
I think transgirls also have to use a medical dildo to keep things from, uh, healing.
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
That's sad.
n/a Eggmont 2017-04-24
Only for the first few months
n/a Eggmont 2017-04-24
Nah modern surgeries even create one that can self lube.
n/a WholeLottaToughLove 2017-04-24
Vaginas don't vary much in size, shape and formation in my experience, because I only ever had sex with 17-22 year old, petite, fair-skinned Polish girls.
So if you're trying to shame for not knowing how a 50 year old crackwhore's beef curtains or 400 lbs sheboon's fupa crack feel like, I'm afraid you're not going to succeed.
n/a NGC_6960 2017-04-24
90% of this sentence is disgusting.
n/a Bucklar 2017-04-24
Ewwww.
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
If just right now Joanna Krupa walked into your room and said that she wants to have sex with you, would you say no?
n/a Bucklar 2017-04-24
Who's that dude?
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
http://www.santabanta.com/wallpapers/joanna-krupa/
n/a Bucklar 2017-04-24
Is there a penis under there?
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Nope
n/a Bucklar 2017-04-24
Am I being paid?
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
No, but she might bring a friend...
http://celebs-place.com/photos/natalia-siwiec/
n/a Bucklar 2017-04-24
That one looks like a latino. :S
Really not into the ethnic thing for my men.
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Thats just fake tan...
n/a Bucklar 2017-04-24
Oh, just like my 65 year old mother.
Weren't you trying to sell me on having sex with this person?
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
Nah, you can take them for free, I don't care what happens to polish women.../s
n/a Wackynews_the_White 2017-04-24
don't lie, you're on /r/drama
n/a mehforeverybody 2017-04-24
No, that just makes me better that 90% or r/drama
n/a DannyLee90 2017-04-24
Missing out on quality boi pucci is not what I'd consider a positive, but okay.
n/a Eternal_Mr_Bones 2017-04-24
Fucking transphobe!
n/a Bureaucrat-72 2017-04-24
I don't think they're having sex yet.
n/a drvgyn2 2017-04-24
Stop using commie quotation marks bastard
n/a WyrmSaint 2017-04-24
/u/magicslave until you tell him you're raping him.
n/a BoogerSlug 2017-04-24
Hiding something because you know the person you're seeing would revoke sexual consent afterwards is fucked. Lying and deceiving someone like that is awful.
n/a captainpriapism 2017-04-24
sorry but if i told you i had a myriad of stds you wouldnt have followed through
n/a StingAuer 2017-04-24
Honestly, you should disclose things like this before getting into an intimate relationship. This goes for both involved parties, you can't build a lasting and healthy relationship without being open with each other.
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
Hmm, what could possibly deter people from having sex with bleeding genitals, hmmm
Also I wonder if these people surprise at period tracking is a consequence of (((sexual revolution))) in the West.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
I thought the rhythm method came out of Vatican II?
Also, what if a woman said to you "we can have sex, but I don't like cum, it smells gross and makes me feel sick" which is like, not extraordinary considering semen contains Putrescine and Cadaverine, both found in rotting corpses: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semen
n/a HelperBot_ 2017-04-24
Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semen
HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 60279
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
Is it really strange? Internet is full of engaged/married men who whine about their wives/girlfriends not giving them a blowjob.
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
No, no cumming full stop. "I just really don't like it, but we can still have sex, maybe you just cum later in the shower or something?"
n/a OniTan 2017-04-24
"How about in your sister?" (Canned laughter)
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
"If she wants it, fine by me" (canned woooing)
n/a OniTan 2017-04-24
(Flushes toilet, audience goes wild)
n/a Nomadlads 2017-04-24
>current year
>not liking cummies
KYS
n/a RKola 2017-04-24
Or if they actually had bleeding genitals they would know how they feel every month. Some girls are into that, most i know aren't because it is uncomfortable as hell.
n/a theRagingEwok 2017-04-24
Why the fuck is the rest of the community supporting "her" psychotic behaviour?
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Because we live in the alternate timeline where /r/Drama is the voice of reason.
n/a CC3940A61E 2017-04-24
why
is
it
always
trannies
n/a jPaolo 2017-04-24
There's never transmen drama.
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-04-24
Here you go: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2013/1051.html
n/a mattreyu 2017-04-24
the thing is, if you know your body well enough, it can be reliable
n/a Time_to_Drink 2017-04-24
Yeah, but not if you are so obese that your body no longer produces the right hormones, which I'm guessing is the majority of that sub.
n/a Awayfone 2017-04-24
In her case I gauretee tracking cylces will be 100% effective
n/a giants888 2017-04-24
I'm really stunned at that thread. No one says anything about the fact that her bf has no idea she was born a man. In fact, some comments even suggest new lies to help keep the deception going for longer. I feel so badly for the boyfriend. He's in love right now with someone that has basically conned him into a relationship.
n/a LSeww 2017-04-24
This world needs cheap chromosome testers you can use on your gf biomaterial.
n/a Awayfone 2017-04-24
There don't consinder it lies because reasons.
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
probably some mod is supporting trannic rape logic in that sub by deleting all voices of reason.
n/a lifesbrink 2017-04-24
So tell us, u/magicslave, what's the reason for deception here?
n/a magicslave 2017-04-24
We have a lot of mutual connections and they don't know either, so I didn't want to tell him because he could put me to others.
People have made a lot of assumptions here about me from that post but most it is really wrong.
This thread is dead though so I doubt there's any interest for me to go into any other details.
n/a TheAlmightyProphet 2017-04-24
In 40 years, when people ask why hitler 2.0 happened, im citing this post.
n/a -Princeps- 2017-04-24
why are trannies so obsessed with raping men
n/a PreussenSoldaten 2017-04-24
u tell me cupcake
n/a rarestpepesforsale 2017-04-24
If you consider this to be rape, you'd also have to say that they're obsessed with women too, since I've seen some grumpy lesbians who aren't particularly fond of pre-op transwomen genitalwise. And they've complained in a similar manner.
I don't consider it rape, but it is a huge violation of trust and a terrible way to behave with someone who you supposedly love.
And of course it feels bad when someone you like doesn't feel the same way in return, or wouldn't if they knew the facts. But lying and dancing around the truth makes it a selfish act, instead of a loving one, which is the basis of a healthy relationship.
n/a CirqueDuFuder 2017-04-24
Those grumpy lesbians probably just needed dick anyway to fix their attitude to be fair.
n/a rarestpepesforsale 2017-04-24
I've said that about some gay men. Just try the pussy I've said, and it will make you happy like magic.
But they obviously want to be like that. So if we can just tell them that their choice is wrong enough times, it will eventually make them want to have sex with vaginas.
n/a RKola 2017-04-24
So weird, a bunch of guys arguing over female contraception rather than the huge fucking red flag elephant in the room...
n/a 0ldBasterd 2017-04-24
Girlfriend needs to show him this, courtesy of Bill Nye
n/a Awayfone 2017-04-24
That was so cringey
n/a Awayfone 2017-04-24
Do people generally hide the fact they know they infertile from their ltr? They seem to think that is reasonable
n/a ghostchamber 2017-04-24
.... uhm, that's actually a fairly good way of preventing it. It is not foolproof, and is probably best used in conjunction with another method. But ... well, fertility happens in a rather small window every month.
n/a Chicup 2017-04-24
Only a bunch of trannies would think a boyfriend asking about a gfs period timing was weird. They not being women wouldn't understand that they are inconvenient at best and terrifying when late.
n/a CaliggyJack 2017-04-24
There was barely any drama here. Come on OP.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
I'm afraid you are past the point of saving. Lost cause. When you compare rape (like actually traumatic rape) to having sex with a trump supporter, you are an embarrassment to the American people, and mocking people who actually have experienced trauma. Go fuck yourself.
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
πππΊπΈππ€ππππππ€πππ₯ππ³πππ·ππ€πππππππ€ππ΅πππ΅ππ€π
Idiot.
n/a ProgressiveFragility 2017-04-24
/u/finiteteapot giving some good advice:
But I have a better advice:
Tell the guy: "I can't answer that question, because it would fuck up this sweet rape-by-deception thing I have going with you."
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
You actually consider yourself intelligent? Invreeding is
n/a muffy2008 2017-04-24
Let me guess, because you predict I'm using an apple device, I must be on the apple bandwagon, therefore undermining my entire argument that you're a pretentious asshole.
You just proved my point that you can't even come up with an original argument.
n/a takaci 2017-04-24
This thread triggered me big time
n/a MakeAmericaSageAgain 2017-04-24
No joke If /pol/ took the time to actually investigate they'd have a way more nuanced meme portpholio.