Gilda

Two problems with this argument. First, leopard isn't on the continuum of human sexuality. Female is. An MTF is already female in her mind; that part of her is already at the female end of the spectrum. Sexual reassignment moves the body and social role along from one end of an already exisiting continuum to the other. The differences between male and female are smaller than the similarities, and most of those can be altered to the preferred form with differing degrees of success.

Second, I don't accept the premise that transsexuals are mutilated or disfigured that is driving the analogy here. It's an irrelevant sidetrack, as the surgery in question did not create a disfigurement and isn't visible. Many younger MTF's will undergo facial feminizaion surgery, which is visible, but which makes them more attractive and feminine in the process. They no longer look like males, but that's precisely the point, and not male =/= mutilated or disfigured.

SRS surgery gives the genitals a different, more pleasing appearance and function for the person having the surgery and, in the case of younger transsexuals, for their partners. The appearance and function of the new genitals ranges from similar to to indistiguishible from those of a biological woman.

Gilda

Marvelous Marv

Answered in kind: No, you are.



Yes, you've made a big deal out of it almost constantly. If your goal was to ensure that no one cares, you accomplished it.

Your words may be accurate in the overall meaning, or they may be only technically accurate (in other words, you may not have HEARD them).

I HAVE heard complaints of that nature, from males in the Navy when I was a division officer, and from the girls in my high school, where their gym teacher was the stereotypical gay woman.

I started to provide my qualifications for not being anti-gay, but thought better of it. All it would have done would be to open up an avenue of attack from others.

I'll just say that because I'm a sensitive, 21st century kind of guy, I can empathize with those who AREN't comfortable being deprived of their privacy.

__________________
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
Margaret Thatcher

Marvelous Marv

Leopard or man?

__________________
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
Margaret Thatcher

trickyy

that's true.

my main concern here is the possibility that a teacher's appearance would be distracting in a learning environment, that's all. of course, upon meeting the person, more aspects would be considered as is typical when one speaks to potential teachers.

as for the hypotheticals...maybe the person is a great teacher, or maybe the person has some issues, i don't know unless i've met them. but to a certain degree, i can gauge from pictures if someone looks so unusual that *i* would have trouble concentrating on what they are saying. i guess leopard man just seems a bit much at first glance. not that i'm ruling him out, but he better know a lot about geopolitics. i'd have more sympathy for deformed star wars guy, since he might have something (more) to say about life. but i'm just guessing here, i can't say for sure what these people would be like.

Gilda

Nah, you're wrong. Of the two of us, I'm pretty sure that I'm the only one qualified to decide what my arguments are or would be in a hypothetical debate we aren't currently having.

Really? Almost constantly? Let me check. One mention here. Three or four other threads out of the forty on my first page, all of them relationship threads. I mention it where it's relevant to the discussion.

They're accurate in the only meaning they have, in that I've never heard a complaint from another woman about sharing a bathroom with me. It has, therefore, never been an issue I've had to deal with.

Our experiences differ.

By golly, so am I. Except for the guy part. I think we can agree completely on this statement.

Gilda

docbungle

Gilda,

You've answered so many posts with statements like "Nope" or "You're wrong" that it's become a little pointless to discuss this issue with you any further. However, I will say that I understand your viewpoint completely. And I don't think you're wrong. I just disagree with you. Completely. That doesn't make anyone wrong. We are not discussing facts here. You must know that?

We seem to look at this issue from such fundamentally different points of view, that one side does not really take the other side very seriously. This seems obvious to me.

Sort of like politics, no?

I hereby agree to disagree with you completely on this subject. But I'll bet we agree on something else down the road a bit.

__________________
Bad Luck City

Gilda

I told you you were factually wrong when you posted a statement that was factually wrong. It remains so. It's so obviously factually wrong that I hardly see why it's necessary to point this out.

I told Marv he was wrong when he posted what my opinon of a different issue was. As that is not my opinion, stated or otherwise, that statement was also wrong.

"Nope" is a variant of "no." It expresses disagreement.

There are facts involved here, and there are opinions and judgements also.

As it does to me, though I doubt we'd agree as to who that is.

Look at my last response to you. It was nothing but respectful. I responded and defined my terms, and asked for you to do the same, and you compared SRS to having a thumb transplanted to your forehead. You have so far not explained what it is that makes you classify this person as a man and not a woman, responding with statements such as "It is what it is", which are essentially meaningless.

Politics often involve both facts and opinions. Calling someone who has made a factually erroneous statement is fair debate.

Could be.

Gilda

analog