Topic: Do I look like a typical white cis scum male to you?
Green started this discussion 11 years ago #39,361
| Poll option | Votes | Percentage | Graph |
|---|---|---|---|
| Typical white cis scum male. | 2 | 17% | |
| Single independent black woman who don't need no man. | 10 | 83% |
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later[^] [v] #523,825
I will never call you or anyone else "cis".
You are mean green, and nothing less.
You are mean green, and nothing less.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,834
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
CIS just means somebody who is comfortable with their assigned gender, you know. It's not some weird, outlandish term.
Really, it's as offensive as calling somebody heterosexual.
CIS just means somebody who is comfortable with their assigned gender, you know. It's not some weird, outlandish term.
Really, it's as offensive as calling somebody heterosexual.
netscape joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,838
you look like an alcoholic
Green (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,840
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 2 seconds later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,841
@523,834 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Except the only reason the term exists is because trannies wanted some term to group together the normal people. It doesn't help that they tend to use it in spite.
Except the only reason the term exists is because trannies wanted some term to group together the normal people. It doesn't help that they tend to use it in spite.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 15 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,843
@previous (E)
Well... Do you disagree with the term "heterosexual", then? That is also a way of classifying "normal" people.
And it is hardly used in spite constantly. I have seen it used plenty in a purely factual manner.
Well... Do you disagree with the term "heterosexual", then? That is also a way of classifying "normal" people.
And it is hardly used in spite constantly. I have seen it used plenty in a purely factual manner.
(Edited 48 seconds later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 52 seconds later, 16 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,845
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
No, because that term hasn't been invented by a bunch of mad trannies.
No, because that term hasn't been invented by a bunch of mad trannies.
Green (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 17 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,846
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,850
@523,845 (E)
Wrong. One of the first usages was by a university researcher, back in 1994.
Regardless, origin does not matter. There is a need for the word, in that it is a specific term for the majority group. Again, if you have a problem with CIS, you might as well have some problem with the term heterosexual.
Wrong. One of the first usages was by a university researcher, back in 1994.
Regardless, origin does not matter. There is a need for the word, in that it is a specific term for the majority group. Again, if you have a problem with CIS, you might as well have some problem with the term heterosexual.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,855
@523,834 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I dont like it because its used to gender people, just because they arent trans.
I dont like it because its used to gender people, just because they arent trans.
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 13 seconds later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,856
@523,850 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I never said I have a problem with it, I just think it's a dumb word. I've never heard it used (non-jokingly) by anyone except a buttmad tranny either, so there's that. I also don't see why we need a word for the normal situation. When I say a "straight male" it means a heterosexual male. When I say a "straight tranny male" it means a female who thinks she's a male attracted to women.
I never said I have a problem with it, I just think it's a dumb word. I've never heard it used (non-jokingly) by anyone except a buttmad tranny either, so there's that. I also don't see why we need a word for the normal situation. When I say a "straight male" it means a heterosexual male. When I say a "straight tranny male" it means a female who thinks she's a male attracted to women.
(Edited 57 seconds later.)
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 46 seconds later, 29 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,859
Green (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 34 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,862
The twattering mark 2 shall fuck yo cis concepts.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,865
@523,859 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Irrelevant. You can use many things as an insult, such as "gay". This doesn't invalidate them as terms.
@523,855 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
...Not really. It is just a technical term for somebody who isn't trans. Such a term needs to exist, just as heterosexual must have needed to come in, at some point.
I could also say that heterosexuality does a similar thing, "just because a person isn't gay". Your criticism makes no real sense.
@523,856 (E)
But have you actually looked for any trans people who aren't aggressive? Or is your main exposure to them through posts on chans, laughing at extreme Tumblr posts?
Irrelevant. You can use many things as an insult, such as "gay". This doesn't invalidate them as terms.
@523,855 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
...Not really. It is just a technical term for somebody who isn't trans. Such a term needs to exist, just as heterosexual must have needed to come in, at some point.
I could also say that heterosexuality does a similar thing, "just because a person isn't gay". Your criticism makes no real sense.
@523,856 (E)
But have you actually looked for any trans people who aren't aggressive? Or is your main exposure to them through posts on chans, laughing at extreme Tumblr posts?
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 56 seconds later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,868
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 50 seconds later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,870
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 7 minutes later, 44 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,874
@523,865 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Either cis means not trans, or it means someone who is comfortable with their "assigned gender". It cant be both. Either heterosexual means someone who isnt gay, or it means someone who is attracted to the opposite sex. Not both.
Also, when a word is used most frequently as an insult, then it begins to be seen as just an insult.
Like the word nigger.
Either cis means not trans, or it means someone who is comfortable with their "assigned gender". It cant be both. Either heterosexual means someone who isnt gay, or it means someone who is attracted to the opposite sex. Not both.
Also, when a word is used most frequently as an insult, then it begins to be seen as just an insult.
Like the word nigger.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ double-posted this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,876
@523,870 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Ive lurked on many trans sites, including some recommended by trans users of this site. You should do the same and see what you learn.
Ive lurked on many trans sites, including some recommended by trans users of this site. You should do the same and see what you learn.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 11 minutes later, 57 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #523,879
@523,874 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
What...? Of course it can mean both. A person comfortable with their assigned gender is, by definition, not a transexual. Same for heterosexual.
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
I've seen plenty of transexuals posts, thanks, and they were just people like you or me, who just happened to be a little different. And they weren't necessarily angry or hateful of CIS people. Transsexualism doesn't dictate attitude, just thoughts on gender identity.
I have nothing to "learn" from your mindset, thanks. It's just the same bigoted mindset that's come up in history time and time again. No different than racism or homophobia, just a load of unfair generalisations and disguised unease.
What...? Of course it can mean both. A person comfortable with their assigned gender is, by definition, not a transexual. Same for heterosexual.
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
I've seen plenty of transexuals posts, thanks, and they were just people like you or me, who just happened to be a little different. And they weren't necessarily angry or hateful of CIS people. Transsexualism doesn't dictate attitude, just thoughts on gender identity.
I have nothing to "learn" from your mindset, thanks. It's just the same bigoted mindset that's come up in history time and time again. No different than racism or homophobia, just a load of unfair generalisations and disguised unease.
Anonymous E replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #523,886
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I think the entire issue stems from the fact that transsexual people are mentally insane, so there isn't really any reasoning that can be done about it.
I think the entire issue stems from the fact that transsexual people are mentally insane, so there isn't really any reasoning that can be done about it.
netscape replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #523,892
that can is so tiny!!!!
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #523,894
what a lame discussion
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #523,897
@523,879 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I dont agree that everyone who is uncomfortable with their gender is trans. I also dont agree that anyone who isnt gay, is heterosexual.
Multiple terms that used to be descriptors, are now considered insults. Like retarded
And if you have really been on many trans sites, you would have seen the word cis being used as an insult. After work, I might pull up a few dozen examples.
I dont agree that everyone who is uncomfortable with their gender is trans. I also dont agree that anyone who isnt gay, is heterosexual.
Multiple terms that used to be descriptors, are now considered insults. Like retarded
And if you have really been on many trans sites, you would have seen the word cis being used as an insult. After work, I might pull up a few dozen examples.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,933
@523,886 (E)
Nah.
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
> I dont agree that everyone who is uncomfortable with their gender is trans. I also dont agree that anyone who isnt gay, is heterosexual.
Well, of course not. These things exist on continuums. But a CIS person is somebody who is comfortable with their birth gender, and who isn't trans. That's all the definition is. You are attatching some negative meanining to it that simply isn't there.
> And if you have really been on many trans sites, you would have seen the word cis being used as an insult. After work, I might pull up a few dozen examples.
Oh, why don't you show me some black people using "cracker" as an insult? Must mean that black people are hostile as well, right? If you can find some examples of some members of a particular group saying bad things, clearly, it means that we can infer things about all people in said group.
Do you ever consider why some of them might be upset? Maybe because so many people are hostile to them? No, that doesn't justify what they're saying, but it's understandable why they feel like that.
And, really, all transexualism is is an issue with gender identity, it isn't some bearing on personality or attitude like you are making out.
Nah.
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
> I dont agree that everyone who is uncomfortable with their gender is trans. I also dont agree that anyone who isnt gay, is heterosexual.
Well, of course not. These things exist on continuums. But a CIS person is somebody who is comfortable with their birth gender, and who isn't trans. That's all the definition is. You are attatching some negative meanining to it that simply isn't there.
> And if you have really been on many trans sites, you would have seen the word cis being used as an insult. After work, I might pull up a few dozen examples.
Oh, why don't you show me some black people using "cracker" as an insult? Must mean that black people are hostile as well, right? If you can find some examples of some members of a particular group saying bad things, clearly, it means that we can infer things about all people in said group.
Do you ever consider why some of them might be upset? Maybe because so many people are hostile to them? No, that doesn't justify what they're saying, but it's understandable why they feel like that.
And, really, all transexualism is is an issue with gender identity, it isn't some bearing on personality or attitude like you are making out.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,941
Green !BEERiVqJJw (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,943
Who gives a shot lol?
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 18 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,961
@523,941 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Well, if you're really uncomfortable with your assigned birth gender, then you would not be CIS. I am unsure exactly what term would apply to you though, given that you've also said you don't feel like you're trans either.
Well, if you're really uncomfortable with your assigned birth gender, then you would not be CIS. I am unsure exactly what term would apply to you though, given that you've also said you don't feel like you're trans either.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,965
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
But I must be trans, because if you're not cis, you're trans.
But I must be trans, because if you're not cis, you're trans.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,969
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
After a quick googling, it seems that the term "trans" applies to anyone who isn't, in some way, comfortable with their birth gender. So, if you're being serious, you would qualify as trans, yes.
Though you obviously don't feel like you're like "the usual" sort of transexual who wants to be the opposite gender, given how often you generalise and insult said people. So, as I said, there may be a different term for you.
Tell me, how exactly do you feel trans? Do you not identify with the female gender, in some way? You seem to have identified as such just fine, in the past.
After a quick googling, it seems that the term "trans" applies to anyone who isn't, in some way, comfortable with their birth gender. So, if you're being serious, you would qualify as trans, yes.
Though you obviously don't feel like you're like "the usual" sort of transexual who wants to be the opposite gender, given how often you generalise and insult said people. So, as I said, there may be a different term for you.
Tell me, how exactly do you feel trans? Do you not identify with the female gender, in some way? You seem to have identified as such just fine, in the past.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,971
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I never call myself a woman. Have you ever noticed that? I also dont adorn myself with most of the trappings of femininity.
Though I dont have body dysmorphia, so I cant be called trans.
I never call myself a woman. Have you ever noticed that? I also dont adorn myself with most of the trappings of femininity.
Though I dont have body dysmorphia, so I cant be called trans.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,973
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Trans isn't just having body dysphoria. It's simply not identifying with your assinged gender. For example, that could also mean not identifying with any gender at all. It's a common misconception, one which I myself had just a few minutes ago, I suppose.
So, yep, if you don't identify as female, you come under the transexual umbrella.
Trans isn't just having body dysphoria. It's simply not identifying with your assinged gender. For example, that could also mean not identifying with any gender at all. It's a common misconception, one which I myself had just a few minutes ago, I suppose.
So, yep, if you don't identify as female, you come under the transexual umbrella.
(Edited 21 seconds later.)
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,976
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I identify as a female, because that is reality and female isnt a gender. I dont identity as a woman. Now that I'm trans, I'm going to work with the trans community and try to end their unhealthy obsession with gender roles.
I identify as a female, because that is reality and female isnt a gender. I dont identity as a woman. Now that I'm trans, I'm going to work with the trans community and try to end their unhealthy obsession with gender roles.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 13 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,981
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
So... If you think that female isn't a gender, then why don't you also identify as a woman? By the definition you are using here, those must be different, distinct things.
> and try to end their unhealthy obsession with gender roles.
An "unhealthy obsession" that I have shown you has a biological basis multiple times. But you like to forget about that, eh? Too inconvenient for you, lol.
So... If you think that female isn't a gender, then why don't you also identify as a woman? By the definition you are using here, those must be different, distinct things.
> and try to end their unhealthy obsession with gender roles.
An "unhealthy obsession" that I have shown you has a biological basis multiple times. But you like to forget about that, eh? Too inconvenient for you, lol.
Green !BEERiVqJJw (OP) replied with this 11 years ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,982
I, Green, am a Legend. Am getteng my ass out of here!
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 8 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,988
@523,981 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I dont understand. Female is my biology, woman is not. And many scientists dont agree with those posted studies.
I dont understand. Female is my biology, woman is not. And many scientists dont agree with those posted studies.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 4 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,990
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Allright then, so you agree that there are different terms, one biological and one not. Glad we agree on that, pal.
> And many scientists dont agree with those posted studies.
They don't agree with brain scans, or childhood studies? But allright them, show me some of these "many scientists". I eagerly await your rebuttal of the current scientific consensus.
Allright then, so you agree that there are different terms, one biological and one not. Glad we agree on that, pal.
> And many scientists dont agree with those posted studies.
They don't agree with brain scans, or childhood studies? But allright them, show me some of these "many scientists". I eagerly await your rebuttal of the current scientific consensus.
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 5 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,993
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
You never showed me any published studies yourself, and I've always recognized that difference between sex and gender.
You never showed me any published studies yourself, and I've always recognized that difference between sex and gender.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 8 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #523,996
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Yes I have. I showed you one just recently comparing lesbians to FtM transexuals. And I referred to the David Reimer case, and I've definitely linked you to some articles about brain scans and such.
But hey, in case you don't believe me, here is a whole Wikipedia article mentioning biological causes of transexualism, cited with numerous published studies. Menawhile, the envrionmental theory is confined to one section and treated as laregly discredited.
Now, where are these "many scientists" that dispute transexualism having biological causes, Buspuppie? They certainly aren't on that Wikipedia article. You did mention them, so you must know of some? "Many", in fact.
Yes I have. I showed you one just recently comparing lesbians to FtM transexuals. And I referred to the David Reimer case, and I've definitely linked you to some articles about brain scans and such.
But hey, in case you don't believe me, here is a whole Wikipedia article mentioning biological causes of transexualism, cited with numerous published studies. Menawhile, the envrionmental theory is confined to one section and treated as laregly discredited.
Now, where are these "many scientists" that dispute transexualism having biological causes, Buspuppie? They certainly aren't on that Wikipedia article. You did mention them, so you must know of some? "Many", in fact.
(Edited 39 seconds later.)
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 9 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #524,003
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I cannot post links now, but I probably will be able to do so after work.
I cannot post links now, but I probably will be able to do so after work.
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #524,015
Fuck it, nevermind...swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 12 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #524,019
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 6 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #524,024
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
I don't even know where to begin, plus I'm not interested in having a bunch of people tell me why my opinion is invalid even though it's my opinion.
Also I'm too lazy to keep explaining my PoV when it's obvious that the other person is in so deep that they can't even pretend that other views have logical merit. Blame vocalon. rip
I don't even know where to begin, plus I'm not interested in having a bunch of people tell me why my opinion is invalid even though it's my opinion.
Also I'm too lazy to keep explaining my PoV when it's obvious that the other person is in so deep that they can't even pretend that other views have logical merit. Blame vocalon. rip
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #524,040
@previous (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
I see. I'd like to discuss this privately sometime, if you don't mind.
I see. I'd like to discuss this privately sometime, if you don't mind.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 1 hour later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #524,073
@524,003 (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
I look forward to it.
@524,024 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
It's all well and good having an opinion, but opinions can be wrong, and this issue isn't really very controversial (or, it shouldn't be). Science pretty much agrees that it is a biological thing, and common sense indicates that transexuals are really just ordinary people, worth respecting the same as any other regular person.
I look forward to it.
@524,024 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
It's all well and good having an opinion, but opinions can be wrong, and this issue isn't really very controversial (or, it shouldn't be). Science pretty much agrees that it is a biological thing, and common sense indicates that transexuals are really just ordinary people, worth respecting the same as any other regular person.
(Edited 46 seconds later.)
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 11 years ago, 8 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #524,082
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
To put it simply, neither side would agree with my stance. I'm fickle like that.
To put it simply, neither side would agree with my stance. I'm fickle like that.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 2 hours later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #524,090
Calling someone cis is like calling them a nigger. It is not up to the person making the derogatory comment to decide if it is derogatory or not, it is up to the person being labeled and called it.
It's simple really, if you are white and you call a black person a nigger it's considered racist. But if you are black and call a black person a nigger then it's up to the person being called that as to whether they find it derogatory, many don't. It's the same if gay people call each other faggots etc
The term cis should be held in the same contempt as the terms nigger and faggot when it is used, why shouldn't it be? Niggers are just people that are comfortable with their birth race that aren't white.
Killer Lettuce is a faggot cis nigger btw.
It's simple really, if you are white and you call a black person a nigger it's considered racist. But if you are black and call a black person a nigger then it's up to the person being called that as to whether they find it derogatory, many don't. It's the same if gay people call each other faggots etc
The term cis should be held in the same contempt as the terms nigger and faggot when it is used, why shouldn't it be? Niggers are just people that are comfortable with their birth race that aren't white.
Killer Lettuce is a faggot cis nigger btw.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 2 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #524,111
@524,073 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
To amend this, I'm only so blunt to Buspuppie because she is so forward and mean with her bigotry. I like to think I'm polite enough when discussing this stuff with a more reasonable person, otherwise.
But still, it's not really a grey area. There's facts in play.
@524,082 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
I would be interested to hear your stance, were you willing to describe it. Are you simply unsure about transexuals? Transnostic, so to speak?
To amend this, I'm only so blunt to Buspuppie because she is so forward and mean with her bigotry. I like to think I'm polite enough when discussing this stuff with a more reasonable person, otherwise.
But still, it's not really a grey area. There's facts in play.
@524,082 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
I would be interested to hear your stance, were you willing to describe it. Are you simply unsure about transexuals? Transnostic, so to speak?
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 11 years ago, 7 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #524,215
@523,996 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Wikipedia is known for its incessant censorship of independent research which rather convincingly tears through the current paradigm of known biological-cause models.
@523,879 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
You've seen Guardianistas and because psychopaths are two birds of a feather, you've deluded yourself into thinking that either you or any of these dregs are 'reasonable.' I have to laugh.
Wikipedia is known for its incessant censorship of independent research which rather convincingly tears through the current paradigm of known biological-cause models.
@523,879 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
You've seen Guardianistas and because psychopaths are two birds of a feather, you've deluded yourself into thinking that either you or any of these dregs are 'reasonable.' I have to laugh.
(Edited 33 seconds later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #524,302
So... Any chance of seeing some of those many scientists?
swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/ replied with this 11 years ago, 25 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #524,310
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I cant fucking link anything, and my phone hates minichan! One site to look at is called something like sexchangeregret.com
I cant fucking link anything, and my phone hates minichan! One site to look at is called something like sexchangeregret.com
(Edited 39 seconds later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 11 years ago, 22 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #524,315
@previous (swamplights !!0lQNsDoq/)
Okay, so some people regret transitioning. I never denied that such people exist. It is a very broad mindset, many might realise transitioning wasn't quite what they wanted.
However, this site isn't really relevant to the issue I raised. This is about people who regret getting sex-reassignment, not about the causes of gender dysphoria. It is just quesitoning the effectiveness of a common response to the condition, not the causes and validity of the condition itself.
Though, I will note, that site raises a valid point. It is a big step to go through, and not one that should be taken without some consideration. Some people certainly are happy due to transitioning, some are not. Some self-awareness, and some prior research, are necessary in order to make an informed decision. In fact, this is pretty much what the site owner is saying on the "research I've found" page, he recommends those considering it proceed with caution and undergo evaluation first.
I wasn't really aware that there were so many who had problems with the procedure, the site was an educational read. Thanks.
Okay, so some people regret transitioning. I never denied that such people exist. It is a very broad mindset, many might realise transitioning wasn't quite what they wanted.
However, this site isn't really relevant to the issue I raised. This is about people who regret getting sex-reassignment, not about the causes of gender dysphoria. It is just quesitoning the effectiveness of a common response to the condition, not the causes and validity of the condition itself.
Though, I will note, that site raises a valid point. It is a big step to go through, and not one that should be taken without some consideration. Some people certainly are happy due to transitioning, some are not. Some self-awareness, and some prior research, are necessary in order to make an informed decision. In fact, this is pretty much what the site owner is saying on the "research I've found" page, he recommends those considering it proceed with caution and undergo evaluation first.
I wasn't really aware that there were so many who had problems with the procedure, the site was an educational read. Thanks.