Is being bi-gender a "thing" at your kid's school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, who gave you and your social engineering control of public schools which are paid for with mine and others tax dollars? How about you take your social experiment out of the public schools and start your own private school? Please do.

Who's social engineering what, here? You're the one calling for greater controls. Letting people be who they say they are may represent the moral collapse of society, depending on your personal beliefs, but it's definitely not social engineering control. Tell your kids to focus on their school work.

Where you're wrong: What people "say they are" is not right. And because society is now too cowarded to speak the truth to these fools, they are suffering in the end even more than the rest of us.

There's another losing argument.

You: You poor deluded "transgender" people would be much happier if society forced you to live as the gender assigned to you at birth!
Many transgender people: No, actually, we wouldn't.
You: Yes you would too!

[Anonymous]

Again, go make your own special school for your own special way of looking at life. I do not want to pay for your social engineering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No matter how you feel about the issue, the above posters should be ashamed at their lack of trying to really engage The false equivalencies to race and weight and BS comparison and mocking is juvenile, illogical and badly stated.

I mean, really, this is the best you can offer? Such shallow intellects.

I'm not interested in engaging you or trying to change your bigoted mind. I am merely dismissing you out of hand. Your position isn't valid and doesn't merit discussion at all. You don't count and aren't relevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have one "transgender" coworker, in his 60s. All he's interested in is makeup, hair, nails and dressing up. He has no idea what it means to be a woman and no real respect for women. He's just an exhibitionist who likes all the attention, in my view.

He's not transgender, or even "transgender". He's a cross-dresser.

He had the operation in Brussels, complete with new vagina built from his former scrotum. He called the women's rights march a bunch of "feminazis." He's a gospel spouting fundamentalist who was thrown out by his church but still believes men should dominate women and he's been doing speed dating to find a man (not successful so far). He's still a he to me, no matter his surgically altered genitals. I honestly think he was attracted to other men but couldn't square it with his religious beliefs so now insists he was always a woman. This 6'4" former linebacker wears pink frocks and frilly hats to work - every day.

This is more information than either you or I need to know. Nobody needs to know anything about any co-workers' genitals. Use whichever pronoun your co-worker wants you to use, because that's polite.

I'm sorry but WTF. United Health Care is now covering gender re-assignment but doesn't effectively cover mental health. No wonder health care costs are skyrocketing.

You can't have this both ways. If you're going to argue this is a tiny sliver of a fraction of the population, then it can't be causing health care costs to skyrocket.

Health care costs are skyrocketing because of end-of-life care, anyway. Not because some people have sex reassignment surgery without sufficient mental health services. You're probably one of these people who fixate on welfare costs in the federal budget. Both are a tear in a salted sea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again, go make your own special school for your own special way of looking at life. I do not want to pay for your social engineering.

Well, the way I see it, you're the one doing the social engineering -- or rather, you're the one who wants schools to do the social engineering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No matter how you feel about the issue, the above posters should be ashamed at their lack of trying to really engage The false equivalencies to race and weight and BS comparison and mocking is juvenile, illogical and badly stated.

I mean, really, this is the best you can offer? Such shallow intellects.

I'm not interested in engaging you or trying to change your bigoted mind. I am merely dismissing you out of hand. Your position isn't valid and doesn't merit discussion at all. You don't count and aren't relevant.

And that is the way 90% of the country feels about you. You really need to get out of your parent's basement in Annadale once in awhile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, who gave you and your social engineering control of public schools which are paid for with mine and others tax dollars? How about you take your social experiment out of the public schools and start your own private school? Please do.

Who's social engineering what, here? You're the one calling for greater controls. Letting people be who they say they are may represent the moral collapse of society, depending on your personal beliefs, but it's definitely not social engineering control. Tell your kids to focus on their school work.

Where you're wrong: What people "say they are" is not right. And because society is now too cowarded to speak the truth to these fools, they are suffering in the end even more than the rest of us.

There's another losing argument.

You: You poor deluded "transgender" people would be much happier if society forced you to live as the gender assigned to you at birth!
Many transgender people: No, actually, we wouldn't.
You: Yes you would too!

Many so-called transgendered people are so mixed up they have no idea what they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, who gave you and your social engineering control of public schools which are paid for with mine and others tax dollars? How about you take your social experiment out of the public schools and start your own private school? Please do.

Who's social engineering what, here? You're the one calling for greater controls. Letting people be who they say they are may represent the moral collapse of society, depending on your personal beliefs, but it's definitely not social engineering control. Tell your kids to focus on their school work.

Where you're wrong: What people "say they are" is not right. And because society is now too cowarded to speak the truth to these fools, they are suffering in the end even more than the rest of us.

There's another losing argument.

You: You poor deluded "transgender" people would be much happier if society forced you to live as the gender assigned to you at birth!
Many transgender people: No, actually, we wouldn't.
You: Yes you would too!

Many so-called transgendered people are so mixed up they have no idea what they want.

You know what they want better than they do how?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, who gave you and your social engineering control of public schools which are paid for with mine and others tax dollars? How about you take your social experiment out of the public schools and start your own private school? Please do.

Who's social engineering what, here? You're the one calling for greater controls. Letting people be who they say they are may represent the moral collapse of society, depending on your personal beliefs, but it's definitely not social engineering control. Tell your kids to focus on their school work.

Where you're wrong: What people "say they are" is not right. And because society is now too cowarded to speak the truth to these fools, they are suffering in the end even more than the rest of us.

There's another losing argument.

You: You poor deluded "transgender" people would be much happier if society forced you to live as the gender assigned to you at birth!
Many transgender people: No, actually, we wouldn't.
You: Yes you would too!

Many so-called transgendered people are so mixed up they have no idea what they want.

You: You poor deluded "transgender" people would be much happier if society forced you to live as the gender assigned to you at birth!
Many transgender people: No, actually, we wouldn't.
You: Yes you would too! What do you know about what you want! I know better! *stamps feet*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excuse me, who gave you and your social engineering control of public schools which are paid for with mine and others tax dollars? How about you take your social experiment out of the public schools and start your own private school? Please do.

Who's social engineering what, here? You're the one calling for greater controls. Letting people be who they say they are may represent the moral collapse of society, depending on your personal beliefs, but it's definitely not social engineering control. Tell your kids to focus on their school work.

Where you're wrong: What people "say they are" is not right. And because society is now too cowarded to speak the truth to these fools, they are suffering in the end even more than the rest of us.

There's another losing argument.

You: You poor deluded "transgender" people would be much happier if society forced you to live as the gender assigned to you at birth!
Many transgender people: No, actually, we wouldn't.
You: Yes you would too!

Many so-called transgendered people are so mixed up they have no idea what they want.

You know what they want better than they do how?

Because a definition of sanity/ rationality is accepting reality as it is, not what you want it to be. I want to be a 25 year old multi-millionaire with long golden locks and men falling at my feet. That is not how the rest of the world perceives me, however. So, for my own peace of mind and to lead to "happiness," I am best off accepting reality.

[Anonymous]

If transgender people were just playing dress up like emo and punk people did, it wouldn't be as big an issue. But they're saying their gender expression is also a representation of their sex. As a society, there are certain things we have that are sex segregated - bathrooms/changing facilities and athletics being 2 big ones. Some social groups are sex segregated.

If it were just dress up, or girls and boys being less stereotypically gendered in their dress, I really don't think many people would care. And that's where transgender gets weird. Gender isn't a thing, it's a social construct like race. Sex is a thing. But transsexual isn't the word people want to use, even though it's the area where most of the problems come up ... because saying you're a man because you're taking hormones or surgically modifying yourself to be more physically like a man is like saying you're not a human because you amputated your legs. Of course that's going to get sticky, especially since it starts to have real consequences for other people. Dress like a girl, whatever. Say you're a girl, try out for girl's athletic teams, try for girl focused college scholarships, because you're saying your gender representation is also your sex, and now you're potentially preventing girls from accessing those things. Girls sports aren't segregated because of gender representation. They're segregated because of biological, sex based differences (and years of discrimination and abuse, but that, too, is tied into biological, sex based differences).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Because a definition of sanity/ rationality is accepting reality as it is, not what you want it to be. I want to be a 25 year old multi-millionaire with long golden locks and men falling at my feet. That is not how the rest of the world perceives me, however. So, for my own peace of mind and to lead to "happiness," I am best off accepting reality.

No, now you're shifting the goalposts. First you said that transgender people don't know what they want. Now you seem to agree that transgender people do know what they want, it's just that you think they shouldn't get to have it, because you think it's not good for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If transgender people were just playing dress up like emo and punk people did, it wouldn't be as big an issue. But they're saying their gender expression is also a representation of their sex. As a society, there are certain things we have that are sex segregated - bathrooms/changing facilities and athletics being 2 big ones. Some social groups are sex segregated.

If it were just dress up, or girls and boys being less stereotypically gendered in their dress, I really don't think many people would care. And that's where transgender gets weird. Gender isn't a thing, it's a social construct like race. Sex is a thing. But transsexual isn't the word people want to use, even though it's the area where most of the problems come up ... because saying you're a man because you're taking hormones or surgically modifying yourself to be more physically like a man is like saying you're not a human because you amputated your legs. Of course that's going to get sticky, especially since it starts to have real consequences for other people. Dress like a girl, whatever. Say you're a girl, try out for girl's athletic teams, try for girl focused college scholarships, because you're saying your gender representation is also your sex, and now you're potentially preventing girls from accessing those things. Girls sports aren't segregated because of gender representation. They're segregated because of biological, sex based differences (and years of discrimination and abuse, but that, too, is tied into biological, sex based differences).

No, actually they're saying that their gender expression is a representation of their gender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If transgender people were just playing dress up like emo and punk people did, it wouldn't be as big an issue. But they're saying their gender expression is also a representation of their sex. As a society, there are certain things we have that are sex segregated - bathrooms/changing facilities and athletics being 2 big ones. Some social groups are sex segregated.

If it were just dress up, or girls and boys being less stereotypically gendered in their dress, I really don't think many people would care. And that's where transgender gets weird. Gender isn't a thing, it's a social construct like race. Sex is a thing. But transsexual isn't the word people want to use, even though it's the area where most of the problems come up ... because saying you're a man because you're taking hormones or surgically modifying yourself to be more physically like a man is like saying you're not a human because you amputated your legs. Of course that's going to get sticky, especially since it starts to have real consequences for other people. Dress like a girl, whatever. Say you're a girl, try out for girl's athletic teams, try for girl focused college scholarships, because you're saying your gender representation is also your sex, and now you're potentially preventing girls from accessing those things. Girls sports aren't segregated because of gender representation. They're segregated because of biological, sex based differences (and years of discrimination and abuse, but that, too, is tied into biological, sex based differences).

No, actually they're saying that their gender expression is a representation of their gender.

Transgender women aren't interested in using women's locker rooms, and transgender girls aren't interested in trying out for girls sports or girl focused college scholarships?

Is that what you're saying? Because reality says otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If transgender people were just playing dress up like emo and punk people did, it wouldn't be as big an issue. But they're saying their gender expression is also a representation of their sex. As a society, there are certain things we have that are sex segregated - bathrooms/changing facilities and athletics being 2 big ones. Some social groups are sex segregated.

If it were just dress up, or girls and boys being less stereotypically gendered in their dress, I really don't think many people would care. And that's where transgender gets weird. Gender isn't a thing, it's a social construct like race. Sex is a thing. But transsexual isn't the word people want to use, even though it's the area where most of the problems come up ... because saying you're a man because you're taking hormones or surgically modifying yourself to be more physically like a man is like saying you're not a human because you amputated your legs. Of course that's going to get sticky, especially since it starts to have real consequences for other people. Dress like a girl, whatever. Say you're a girl, try out for girl's athletic teams, try for girl focused college scholarships, because you're saying your gender representation is also your sex, and now you're potentially preventing girls from accessing those things. Girls sports aren't segregated because of gender representation. They're segregated because of biological, sex based differences (and years of discrimination and abuse, but that, too, is tied into biological, sex based differences).

No, actually they're saying that their gender expression is a representation of their gender.

Transgender women aren't interested in using women's locker rooms, and transgender girls aren't interested in trying out for girls sports or girl focused college scholarships?

Is that what you're saying? Because reality says otherwise.

Eh, what? Of course transgender women/men want to use the women's/men's locker room. That's because people want their gender expression to be a representation of their gender.

What you want, is to require people's gender expression to be a representation of their sex. But sex and gender are two different things -- as you yourself say.