Medical Website Indulges Trans Community With New Term For Female Genitalia

[Corvus Metus]

no one deserves to be physically attacked for ANYthing someone else said. "sticks and stones", remember? anyone is free to walk away from the offending comments.

This isn't about the person deserving to get hit, but if you're going up to random people at a bar and deliberately antagonizing them I'm not going to feel bad if you get punched in the face. I mean, it sucks for you, and you're free to press charges if you want... But if you deliberately antagonize people, something like that's bound to happen.

Why should I feel bad if someone who's going out of their way to be an asshole to other people? "Stick and stones", sure. Words shouldn't hurt you. But that doesn't give you the right to be an asshole and it doesn't mean that I have to have empathy for someone who's deliberately going out of their way to be hurtful to another human being.

 

[Thunderian]

Satan loves a good freak show and the chaos.

And that's exactly what it's all about.

 

[polymoog]

Why should I feel bad if someone who's going out of their way to be an asshole to other people? "Stick and stones", sure. Words shouldn't hurt you. But that doesn't give you the right to be an asshole

you keep repeating this and you are wrong. you DO have the right to be a back hole. reasoning like yours leads to ambiguous hate speech laws.

and it doesn't mean that I have to have empathy for someone who's deliberately going out of their way to be hurtful to another human being.

thats something else entirely.

 

[Thunderian]

you DO have the right to be a back hole

God bless America.

 

[polymoog]

That isn't true. Transgender people were just added to the list of groups that can't be discriminated against for being who they are. Businesses can't turn you away for being trans. Only in cases of legally defined harassment with malicious intent and discrimination against transgender people can there be consequences.

with respect to bill c-16 in canada:
youll find that no one has a problem with the discrimination laws, and the trans-folk are ALREADY covered under the human rights act in canada anyway. the main issue: refuse to go along with newspeak gender terminology means fines and/or imprisonment.

no one wants a demolition man style hate speech society.

 

[elsbet]

with respect to bill c-16 in canada:
youll find that no one has a problem with the discrimination laws, and the trans-folk are ALREADY covered under the human rights act in canada anyway. the main issue: refuse to go along with newspeak gender terminology means fines and/or imprisonment.

no one wants a demolition man style hate speech society.

She wouldn't even know how to use the seashells.

 

[mecca]

you DO have the right to be a back hole.

People have a legal right to be assholes but no one can escape the social consequences of their assholery.

 

[mecca]

with respect to bill c-16 in canada:
youll find that no one has a problem with the discrimination laws, and the trans-folk are ALREADY covered under the human rights act in canada

Bill C-16 is what added them to the human rights act.

the main issue: refuse to go along with newspeak gender terminology means fines and/or imprisonment.
no one wants a demolition man style hate speech society.

Accidentally misgendering someone won't put someone in jail but harassment or advocation of genocide against them would. It's not an issue if people aren't harassing others and people simply remain respectful in social situations. All Bill C-16 did was add transgender people to the human rights act.

 

[Thunderian]

Accidentally misgendering someone won't put someone in jail but harassment would. It's not an issue if people aren't harassing others and everyone simply remains respectful in social situations.

There is no right to not be offended, and there never was. We cannot make laws based on whether someone's feelings are hurt.

 

[mecca]

There is no right to not be offended, and there never was. We cannot make laws based on whether someone's feelings are hurt.

The law is not based on whether someone's feelings are hurt, neither is it centered around pronoun use.

If a business is discriminating against trans people and refusing to hire them or if someone is calling for the genocide of transgender people or if someone is harassing a transgender person, they could be fined.

Same for the other groups in the human rights act.

 

[Corvus Metus]

you keep repeating this and you are wrong. you DO have the right to be a back hole. reasoning like yours leads to ambiguous hate speech laws.

You have a legal right to be an asshole. But again, if you're an asshole there's going to be consequences. You could lose your job, friends, etc. The law doesn't protect you from any of that. It simply gives you protection from the government throwing you in jail.

And we don't have hate speech laws because people don't want people to be assholes. We have hate speech laws because people are assholes. In some countries, such as England, those hate speech laws are poorly enforced... But they don't exist because of people like me who just think people should be excellent to each other - they exist because they believe they have some moral right to call people all sorts of slurs.

thats something else entirely.

It's exactly what I'm talking about. I don't like hate speech laws, but you have to be a real piece of work to fall victim to them most of the time. The specific law in New York, for instance, contrary to what people say about it, doesn't fine you for accidentally misgendering people. It fines you for deliberately and repeatedly misgendering people...

And if you do that, you're being an asshole that doesn't care about the feelings of other people. I might think it's dumb that you get fined because you're just going to feel like a victim instead of realizing you're a jerk, but I'm not going to feel bad for you. At all.

 

[Thunderian]

Bill C-16 is what added them to the human rights act.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms more than amply covered discrimination in section 15.

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.​

​

(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.​

​

That covers everything, and there is no reason, other than pandering to special interests, to add to it. No religion or sexual identity needs special measures to protect it.

 

[mecca]

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms more than amply covered discrimination in section 15. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

What Bill C-16 added to the human rights act was "gender identity and expression" that's it. So now it protects transgender people from discrimination.

 

[Thunderian]

The law is not based on whether someone's feelings are hurt, neither is it centered around pronoun use. If a business is discriminating against trans people and refusing to hire them or if someone is calling for the genocide of transgender people or if they are harassing a transgender person, they could go to jail or be fined.

Same for the other groups in the human rights act.

Misgendering someone is not hate or harassment, no matter how much some people want it to be.

 

[Thunderian]

What Bill C-16 added to the human rights act was "gender identity and expression" that's it. So now it protects transgender people from discrimination.

What about furries? Otherkin? Why weren't they covered?

 

[Corvus Metus]

Misgendering someone is not hate or harassment, no matter how much some people want it to be.

If you deliberately do it, yes, it is. And if you say it's not, I'd like an answer as to why it isn't.

What about furries? Otherkin? Why weren't they covered?

Furry is a fetish, not a sexual orientation and otherkin do not have different brain chemistry, unlike people that suffer from gender dysphoria.

 

[Thunderian]

If you deliberately do it, yes, it is. And if you say it's not, I'd like an answer as to why it isn't.

There are only two genders. That's a fact. If someone who is a male insists they are female, no one is required to go along with that. A person may choose to, out of kindness, but to make it a criminal matter if they don't is too stupid for words.

Furry is a fetish, not a sexual orientation and otherkin do not have different brain chemistry, unlike people that suffer from gender dysphoria.

Otherkin is a dysphoria, and homosexuality is just as much a fetish as anything else, including being a furry.

 

[elsbet]

There are only two genders. That's a fact. If someone who is a male insists they are female, no one is required to go along with that. A person may choose to, out of kindness, but to make it a criminal matter if they don't is too stupid for words.

Otherkin is a dysphoria, and homosexuality is just as much a fetish as anything else, including being a furry.

Otherkin are a subculture who socially and spiritually identify as not entirely human. Some otherkin claim that their identity is genetic,[2] while others believe their identity derives from reincarnation, trans-species dysphoria of the soul, ancestry, or metaphor.[1] Joseph P. Laycock considers the belief to be religious.[3]


Oh. My.

 

[Corvus Metus]

There are only two genders. That's a fact. If someone who is a male insists they are female, no one is required to go along with that. A person may choose to, out of kindness, but to make it a criminal matter if they don't is too stupid for words.

Again, I'm not saying that I'm in favor of laws. I think I made that pretty damn clear the half dozen times I said it. But of all the messed up laws we have, hate laws are the least of my concern, even when it comes to free speech laws. I'm arguing that when you're interacting with strangers in the public, you have no reason not to refer as they ask. You don't have to be kind... But you bloody well should be kind, it a world filled with cruelty.

Otherkin is a dysphoria, and homosexuality is just as much a fetish as anything else, including being a furry.

To my knowledge, there is no scientific proof that otherkin have any different sort of brain chemistry than normal people. Transgendered people usually do. And if you think homosexuality is a fetish... I'm going to just believe that you've never actually had a serious conversation with a non-straight person in your life.

But let me ask you a question. Why are you so dead set on defending the idea that it's totally cool to be mean to people? Folks like you and polymoog argue about your rights... But what gives you the moral right to do so? I'm not talking about your legal rights. I'm in favor of your legal rights. But you legal rights wouldn't even be an issue if you just showed respect to people.

 

[Thunderian]

Again, I'm not saying that I'm in favor of laws. I think I made that pretty damn clear the half dozen times I said it. But of all the messed up laws we have, hate laws are the least of my concern, even when it comes to free speech laws. I'm arguing that when you're interacting with strangers in the public, you have no reason not to refer as they ask. You don't have to be kind... But you bloody well should be kind, it a world filled with cruelty.

It's ludicrous to expect everyone to refer to a man as a woman just to spare a person's feelings.

If an obese person asked to be referred to as slim, would that be reasonable? Of course not, because it's plain that no matter how thin they might feel inside, they still have a weight problem.

Having said that, I have no problem calling a transgendered person by their pronouns of choice as a matter of courtesy, but I will not pretend a guy is a girl just to spare their feelings. Facts don't care about your feelings, as they say.

To my knowledge, there is no scientific proof that otherkin have any different sort of brain chemistry than normal people. Transgendered people usually do. And if you think homosexuality is a fetish... I'm going to just believe that you've never actually had a serious conversation with a non-straight person in your life.

Lol. Two of my siblings are gay. One of my best friends for years (also my room mate for a couple years) is gay. I lived and worked in the restaurant industry in the gayest neighbourhood in Canada for a dozen years, which would probably confer honorary gay status on me if I wanted it, and I have probably had more gay and transgendered friends and co-workers in my life than I've had straight ones.

My opinion, based on first-hand observation and long conversations, is that there is never a one-size-fits-all reason behind sexual orientation or gender identity, but all of it is mental.

I used otherkin and furry as examples of predilections that are, for some reason, not specifically covered by human rights legislation, but based on the arguments for specially singling out LGBT+ people in legislation, should be.

But let me ask you a question. Why are you so dead set on defending the idea that it's totally cool to be mean to people? Folks like you and polymoog argue about your rights... But what gives you the moral right to do so? I'm not talking about your legal rights. I'm in favor of your legal rights. But you legal rights wouldn't even be an issue if you just showed respect to people.

Where did I defend the idea that it's cool to be mean to people? As I've said, I'm cool with gay people and trans people, and even don't mind calling a man a woman for the sake of getting along.

The issue I have is being forced to deny facts just to make a small group of people feel better. I'm sorry if you find that rude, but I imagine it's no ruder than I find it when someone denies that Jesus died on the cross for my sins.