• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Transsurdity of the Day: Vagina is for Trans; Front Hole, Cis

calamity said:
Which one?
Click to expand...

The one that is judging a case where a transsexual was assaulted after being hit on by a woman in a bar who subsequently discovered that he was trans.
 
William Rea said:
The one that is judging a case where a transsexual was assaulted after being hit on by a woman in a bar who subsequently discovered that he was trans.
Click to expand...

Given the variety of how language is being used here and who ascribes which gender pronoun to which conditions, could you be a little more clear? From the context, I am assuming that the woman is a cis-woman. The individual she is hitting on, is that a MtF trans or a FtM trans. I honestly can't tell if you are applying the male pronoun to the trans based on physical gender or mental gender.
 
maquiscat said:
Given the variety of how language is being used here and who ascribes which gender pronoun to which conditions, could you be a little more clear? From the context, I am assuming that the woman is a cis-woman. The individual she is hitting on, is that a MtF trans or a FtM trans. I honestly can't tell if you are applying the male pronoun to the trans based on physical gender or mental gender.
Click to expand...

My post was made with intent as an interesting exercise for the person to unravel it; as a hypothetical. The hypothetical that I slipped in was that this was a 'cis woman' assaulting a male transsexual (FtM if you must).
 
William Rea said:
The one that is judging a case where a transsexual was assaulted after being hit on by a woman in a bar who subsequently discovered that he was trans.
Click to expand...

So, in English: A lesbian is in a bar. And, some dude disguised as a woman seduces her because she is kind of drunk and likes his Butch. Later, at home, when she finds out he's not a lesbian but is really a guy, she tells him to leave. But, he doesn't. Instead he violently rapes her?

I guess, my first hope would be that she was a good shot. My second hope would be that the rest of the jury agreed with me, voting to acquit. Worst case, I'd try to hang the jury. Rapists deserve to die.
 
calamity said:
So, in English: A lesbian is in a bar. And, some dude disguised as a woman seduces her because she is kind of drunk and likes his Butch. Later, at home, when she finds out he's not a lesbian but is really a guy, she tells him to leave. But, he doesn't. Instead he violently rapes her?

I guess, my first hope would be that she was a good shot. My second hope would be that the rest of the jury agreed with me, voting to acquit. Worst case, I'd try to hang the jury. Rapists deserve to die.
Click to expand...

Dodging the question huh? Thought so.
 
William Rea said:
Dodging the question huh? Thought so.
Click to expand...

Not at all. I gave a solid answer to what you wrote.

If you were fishing for something else, maybe you should ask it in plain English.
 
maquiscat said:
Given the variety of how language is being used here and who ascribes which gender pronoun to which conditions, could you be a little more clear? From the context, I am assuming that the woman is a cis-woman. The individual she is hitting on, is that a MtF trans or a FtM trans. I honestly can't tell if you are applying the male pronoun to the trans based on physical gender or mental gender.
Click to expand...

Yep. He needs to drop the PC gobbly-guk and just spell out what the hell he is asking.
 
calamity said:
So, in English: A lesbian is in a bar. And, some dude disguised as a woman seduces her because she is kind of drunk and likes his Butch. Later, at home, when she finds out he's not a lesbian but is really a guy, she tells him to leave. But, he doesn't. Instead he violently rapes her?
Click to expand...

Nice word twisting there to make it fit your paradigm. My question aside, which Will noted that this was a FtM hitting on the cis woman, he clearly stated that she was the one to assault the trans for being trans. Nowhere in that hypothetical was there anything resembling rape. The cis-woman in the hypothetical is straight and physically assaults the guy when she finds out they were born a woman. It says nothing about when this was discovered.
 
William Rea said:
My post was made with intent as an interesting exercise for the person to unravel it; as a hypothetical. The hypothetical that I slipped in was that this was a 'cis woman' assaulting a male transsexual (FtM if you must).
Click to expand...

Assuming no one was violently raped, physical assault is not warranted.
 
maquiscat said:
Nice word twisting there to make it fit your paradigm. My question aside, which Will noted that this was a FtM hitting on the cis woman, he clearly stated that she was the one to assault the trans for being trans. Nowhere in that hypothetical was there anything resembling rape. The cis-woman in the hypothetical is straight and physically assaults the guy when she finds out they were born a woman. It says nothing about when this was discovered.
Click to expand...

If there is no violent rape, physical assault is not justified or supported by any mitigating circumstance. I'd vote guilty.

If someone is actually raped, I'd be inclined to allow them to take revenge. Not guilty, if the allegation of rape is substantiated with overwhelming evidence.
 
calamity said:
Yep. He needs to drop the PC gobbly-guk and just spell out what the hell he is asking.
Click to expand...

Sometimes that "gobbly-guk" isn't about being politically correct, but about clarity. If we are dealing with something where it makes no difference whether the person was born with a penis or vagina between their legs, then presenting gender is the best way to deal with the individual. This will be about 90% of conversations. Now for those few, such as when dealing with whether or not a couple are going to be sexually active, or the trans status is relavant, then it is extremely helpful to know specifically dealing with a cis-gender or a trans-gender. It was Will's lack of supposed PC language that made the hypothetical confusing.
 
maquiscat said:
Sometimes that "gobbly-guk" isn't about being politically correct, but about clarity. If we are dealing with something where it makes no difference whether the person was born with a penis or vagina between their legs, then presenting gender is the best way to deal with the individual. This will be about 90% of conversations. Now for those few, such as when dealing with whether or not a couple are going to be sexually active, or the trans status is relavant, then it is extremely helpful to know specifically dealing with a cis-gender or a trans-gender. It was Will's lack of supposed PC language that made the hypothetical confusing.
Click to expand...

Not really

William Rea said:
The one that is judging a case where a transsexual was assaulted after being hit on by a woman in a bar who subsequently discovered that he was trans.
Click to expand...

If the above was meant to say, "If a chick hits on a dude who turns out to be a chick, would I justify physical assault?"

My answer would still apply: if no rape, there is no justification for physical assault.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom