I’m sure that by “turn the other cheek,” he meant ruin other people’s lives
Published by punkass marc March 1st, 2007 in Godbaggery, Conformity, LGBTEver wondered whether Americans actually believe a pair of boobs makes you worse at your job? Well, now we have the answer:
Steve Stanton loved this city he ran for 14 years. This week, he asked the city to love him back - to accept his plans to pursue sex-change operation and let him keep his $140,000 job as city manager.
It didn’t.
Yep, seems now that Steve Stanton wants to become Susan Stanton, 5 of the 7 members of the City Commission of Largo, FL believe Susan will suddenly be unable to carry out Steve’s duties as a high-level bureaucrat.
Not surprisingly, the Lord was invoked as justification for the position, this time as Arnold Schwartzenegger’s sawed-off-toting sidekick:
“If Jesus was here tonight, I can guarantee you he’d want him terminated,” said Pastor Ron Saunders of Largo’s Lighthouse Baptist Church. “Make no mistake about it.”
It’s really too bad Jesus-as-returning-savior is a myth; it’d be deeply satisfying to watch the fundies be cast down into the pits of hell for all the Roman-style oppression done in his name. In this case, methinks Pastor Ron would get sent to the circle where someone lectures him for hours on end about utterly false and completely offensive — yet somehow still inane — horsepucky until his eyes bleed.
Meanwhile, on the irony tip, the leader of a group called the Liberty Counsel busted out this defense of their anti-liberty policy:
“The city hasn’t changed the work environment. He has changed the work environment,” Staver said. “He has to take into consideration the consequences of that personal decision. I think it would be more difficult for the city to retain this person because of how it might undermine the representation of the city in the eyes of the community. It could become very awkward.”
You know, dude has a point. I was actually planning to visit Miami until I discovered Pedro G. Hernandez was their city manager. I’m sure I don’t have to tell you all the things _that_ guy’s done wrong, am I right? YUCK. When will more American cities realize that the personal politics of their civil servants comprise the primary definition of their identities?
Seriously, though, we’re infected with an ugly social sickness when hordes of people show up at a city council meeting to oust a loyal city employee who, by all accounts, has served everyone quite well for over a decade.
This sentence provides a disappointing punctuation mark on the entire embarrassment:
Commissioner Gay Gentry praised Stanton, but supported his firing.
If we can’t count on Commissioner Gay to stand up for LGBT rights, we’ve really got a long way to go.
I totally loved that New Testament parable where Jesus illustrated how minorities and those looked down upon by society would be smacked down.
Wait, now that I actually type that out, something there sounded wrong! Isn’t that what Jesus did? Smote people that we don’t like or disapprove of? IS THAT NOT FACT?
He meant “turn the other cheek so I can smack you again.”
That Jesus guy was tricky.
He said things like “turn the other cheek”, but we all know he was being snarky. He really didn’t mean it, anymore than he meant that crap about the rich guy, a camel, and the eye of a needle. And what about that stupid stuff about “the meek shall inherit the earth” - who hears something as dumb as that and takes it seriously. “Love thy enemies as thyself”? “Suffer the little children to come unto me”?
Come on. He was just messin’ with people. Duh!…
I personally don’t see how it is sick for a community to have significant problems with a transsexual man in an upper-leadership position. After all, such people are far less mentally stable and healthy than normal people.
As this points out transgender people have a much higher than average suicide rate (16%-37%) and require questionable non-FDA approved hormonal treatments, alongside their genital self-mutilation to restore their “natural” sexual identities.
I think fundamentally that civic officials should be judged on how effectively they discharge their civic duties. Despite possible past effectiveness this man has shown that he is in a major state of personal turmoil - as not to be certain even of his own sexual identity. In the midst of this massive, emotional, social and medical change he is about to go through and in light of the difficulties that a transsexual person would have in managing his disturbed subordinates and of the effect this could have on the city’s image (I think if that Pedro G. Hernandez was a transsexual more people might have heard of him) there is nothing sick or particularly wrong with the city reconsidering their employment of the man.
Right, right, those suicide numbers would have nothing to do with this kind of unwarranted oppression and ostracision. GREAT call, Adam.
Isn’t it also illegal to discriminate against people for depression? Am I wrong about that? So, even if Adam is being totally logical, isn’t the city still fucking up?
Meanwhile, there have been zero signs of Stanton showing the kinds of issues Adam would dearly love to see. All we know is that Stanton has performed the duties of a city manager to the satisfaction of the city for 14 years; firing anyone pre-emptively because _you_ think they may someday maybe have emotional problems — despite the person never demonstrating them — is completely unfair.
Oh, and one last thing, Adam — Stanton _is_ certain of his sexual identity; that’s why he wants to change to she.
Isn’t Adam North one of those rape apologist trolls from way back? Ew.
I wouldn’t go there if I was you. Suicide has at best a tenuous connection to oppression. I suggest reading French sociologist Emile Durkheim’s studies on the matter. He found that the groups typically with the highest suicide rates are those with the most independence and wealth. In fact he found that wealthy unmarried Protestant white men tend to have the highest suicide rate – hardly an oppressed bunch wouldn’t you agree? Also the suicide rates for people you might consider oppressed: women, blacks, undocumented workers, secular humanists, vegans - are not anywhere near as high as transsexuals.
The main issue I have a problem with is how you seemed to suggest that anyone thinking this man should be fired is not only wrong but morally “sick”. The fact is that a city council has to act in the interests of its city. This guy has chosen to partake of a very tumultuous change – one in which it is not unreasonable to believe will lead to less effective leadership. Setting aside the genital-mutilating surgery and the hormonal/chemical “adjustments” that this man is putting his body through - there are other issues. Psychologically I would question the health of a man who has been confused about something as basic as his gender for as long as he has. Personally, how is he going to deal with the stresses this will place on his wife and children? Is he heading towards a messy divorce and immense personal difficulty of redefining his relationship to his children? Then there is also the social scorn the man is going to have to deal with being a leader in a conservative community. Perhaps this scorn is inappropriate in the first place but it’s something that city council members need to acknowledge. The fact is that anyone of these things is very likely to affect his job performance – and the city council knows this.
Forced to reconsider a man who is far from certain to continue to be an effective public servant and one who will bring mostly negative attention to the city, I can see why the city council simply elected to find someone else competent to run things – someone without the baggage. This doesn’t make them sick or religious fanatics, anymore than his wife would be sick or a religious fanatic for divorcing him under the circumstances. You might not agree with them – that doesn’t make them morally questionable.
And let’s be honest. This was his choice. The fact is that he chose to do something fairly dramatic that will greatly affect those around him: his friends, family and community. He must accept that there are consequences to ones actions.
Psychologically I would question the health of a man who has been confused about something as basic as his gender for as long as he has.
How about you get your grubby little nose out of other people’s personal lives and get back to jerking yourself off?
Psychologically I would question the health of a man who has been confused about something as basic as his gender for as long as he has.
Then your reaction would stem from ignorance. Same with these morons.
And do you really wish to make the case that a) transgender people are not oppressed in our society when morons like you will question their own identity and that b) that oppression, which they experience from day one, contributes nothing to their suicide rates? If so, I have a study on shoe size and IQ that I think is right up your alley, meep.
No. That’s why I never made the case.
In fact I pointed to the oppression he would likely receive as being another way his job performance could be adversely affected.
I also never said that there is no connection between oppression and suicide rates. I simply said that the evidence out there suggests that such a correlation is very weak. Because it is.
Keep in mind too, that this man chose to upset his life, his marriage and his community. No one is oppressing him because he is something that he was born. They are simply concerned about how his choice to become something he isn’t is going to affect his job performance and their community’s reputation.
his choice to become something he isn’t
You could just say ‘I think transgenderism is bullshit!’, y’know.
I am actually quite surprised that a feminist site would actually come out in support of transgender rights.
It seems to me that transgenderality is fundamentally incompatible with feminist ideology After all feminism traditionally holds that the various differences between the sexes are not born out of innate biological differences but rather socially constructed artifacts.
Transgender people violate this feminist paradigm by defining gender in precisely the terms which feminists rail against. They define gender by what they perceive to be the set social role and essential characteristics of a given gender.
For example, when potential male transsexuals begin their change they frequently start with a transition period - a time in which they adopt what they see to be as appropriate feminine dress and behavior. They start wearing lipstick, dresses and high heel shoes. They act more demure, compassionate and other personality characteristics which they see as being “feminine”. In other words, they attempt to take on what they see as a feminine social role. Later comes the surgery and chemical “corrections”.
What’s important about this is that transgenderism depends upon these type of concrete social roles. It needs social differences between the sexes upon which to function. The whole point of transgenderism is to change what one believes is your gender - defined as what social role you are in, what kind of work you do, how you behave, dress, etc.. to match your sexuality - which is what kind of genitalia you have.
This makes transgenderism an anathema to feminism. If men and women are basically the same then transgenderism is based solely upon artificial differences - differences which, as feminists hold, need to be abolished.
This makes transgenderism an anathema to feminism.
Not really. If we still live in a world where certain gender-based differences are written in stone, and that individual is so unhappy with the role he was assigned that he’d be willing to go through the sex change process, which, by they way, is not exactly easy, then no one here is going to stop him.
Now, maybe in this mythical perfectly androgynous future you claim we’re all working towards, people won’t have to feel they’re the wrong gender and will never ask for sex-reassignment surgery. Of course, by then we’ll be so enlightened that the aliens will finally have made contact and shared their technology and sex-reassignment surgery will become something fun and shocking and easily reversed and the young kids will treat it like piercing is today and we’ll rail at them, shaking our fists at them from our flying cars “damn you hippie kids with your long hair and your sex changes and your bad music! When I was young we kept the naughty bits God gave us! Get a job!”
Until that day, anything that forces people to actually think about sex and gender and where they draw those lines in their head and why - like knowing someone who is openly transgendered - is not a terrible thing. The whole reason people are so freaked out over it is that those roles are still there, deeply engraved in our social fabric. If they weren’t, no one would give a fuck. If we are to view a transgendered individual only through the “how good is this for feminism” lens, he still gets our support because the value of the opportunity for dialouge with his community far exceeds the hit feminism will recieve when he starts wearing mascara.
You’ve missed the point completely, North. Feminism wants people to be happy and comfortable with who they are, without suffering the cruelty of small-minded jackasses such as yourself, even if they don’t happen to fit the roles they’ve been prescribed by society. No one thinks men and women are the same, not even evil hairy-legged lesbian monsters. Feminists think the differences between people shouldn’t lead to some people being treated like human beings while others aren’t.
junk science - “You’ve missed the point completely, North.”
higher up thread: “Isn’t Adam North one of those rape apologist trolls from way back? Ew.”
Junk, I think you’ve answered your own question. Now if we can get Kyso’s “Flash Gordon” trolls back we can all be one big happy family…
We all have a role to play in life. Some elements of that role are decided by us, others are preset for us. Most seem to be preset. We can rail against ourselves, against our nature, take steps to “correct” our state. But often we end up with the realization that none of it did any good. Had we spent all the time and effort on reaching acceptance and peace with our lot in life, we’d probably end up a great deal happier. I understand the notion that a person can be born into the “wrong” gender identity. I understand that it feels wrong, and that everything in the person’s nature can scream to be let free. But the self-mutilation and outright lying that a surgical procedure represents will not lead anywhere helpful. We can change the way we are perceived, fiddle around with the social construct that is gender, but giving in to the lie that we can change our sex represents weakness and cowardice at its most tragic.
“Not really” - Kyso
Yes, really.
Look,, the point I am making is that transsexuals are not pleased with their gender role for entirely different and incompatible reasons than feminists. Feminists want a society where either gender can basically behave anyway they want and have the same opportunities: political, social and economic. Feminists resist typical gender roles because they view them as agents of oppression in society and because they think the few differences between women and men are just not that big of a deal.
Transsexuals don’t go through their changes because they want access to more political rights or jobs. They sure as hell don’t do it for status. They do it because they believe that they are the wrong gender for the bodies they have. They base their identities on that which feminists reject - the notions that women dress a specific and separate way than men, and that there are set personality characteristics for both sexes.
As I said above transsexualism depends on these gender differences – which ARE NOT compatible with feminism.
See for yourself. This link is to a test that would-be transsexuals apparently take to identify what their “true, inner” sex is.
Here are a few examples of the questions asked – almost a case study in gender stereotypes.
1. Describe your relationship with mathematics.
4. You are at a meeting. Everyone at the meeting is the same sex as you. The leader of the meeting announces that it’s time for hugs all around! How do you feel about this?
10. In your early school days, how were you at writing essays, poetry, and reports?
13 You have been visiting a new town for several days. Someone asks you which direction south is. Do you know?
59. You are shown a film of close-up images of the faces of many different people. You are asked to describe the emotions that the people are feeling by the expressions on their faces alone. How well would you be able to tell the emotions of the people?
49. You are trying to describe the complex shape of an unfamiliar object to someone. You are not using your hands, and must rely on words alone. How easy is it for you to convey the shape accurately?
37. How easily do you cry at movies?
Basically you get the idea. If your “real” gender is that of a man you are good at math and direction finding but bad on feelings. If you’re a woman… good at emotions, language and literature, dressing up, etc.
Honestly most of the questions are like that. Check it out. I think you’re kidding yourself that this is either compatible with your movement or constructive to it. Transsexuality might very will bring up discussions of social roles and gender - but its not a discussion that is going anywhere you want it to go.
The COGIATI, as it currently stands, is an amateur attempt, and cannot be considered as medically or scientifically valid. It is my hope that professionals will be inspired by this effort and create a true, clinically valid and useful tool that would accomplish the stated goals of the COGIATI. Something like the COGIATI needs to exist, and being unable to find it, I decided that it fell to me to attempt to create it. I am not fully capable of doing this concept justice. Be alert to that fact, and interpret the results of the COGIATI in that light.
Great example, North. Very convincing.
The COGIATI, as it currently stands, is an amateur attempt, and cannot be considered as medically or scientifically valid. - Kyso
Wow. You really tore up my argument Kyso. Especially the part where I said the test was medically and scientifically valid.
Oh wait… that’s right. I never said that.
What I said is that transsexuality is inseparable from these kind of gender stereotypes - which is what makes it incompatible with feminism. I used the test as an example to show how the language many transsexuals use is rife with these stereotypical thoughts.
Mike Ess:
“Junk, I think you’ve answered your own question. Now if we can get Kyso’s “Flash Gordon” trolls back we can all be one big happy family…”
Why not come back for some fun. You people crack me up with your bad arguments and your random ad hom attacks. Calling people “rape apologists” because they demand proof of a crime is COMICAL, but on to the current issue.
I don’t see what Transgenderism has to do with being a Feminist other than you being glad one more man wants to chop his dick off and join the half of the species you favor. Perhaps the feminists can institute a charity organization that turns men into women. I guess you just can’t settle for emasculating man in the mental sense alone anymore.
While I don’t believe we should hate someone because the decide to become a different gender, I don’t blame the city for firing the guy/girl/thing either. There is evidence that this person will not be able to perform their job duties as required, which justifies their termination. I also think that it would of caused quite a few problems for his fellow employees.
The point here is that people occasionally make decisions with their bodies that effect their employability. For instance, if he came in the next day wearing punk rock clothes and a mo hawk, we would probably suffer the same treatment. While it isn’t wrong to wear punk rock clothing, the choice does have consequences. Same thing goes with drugs. Let’s pretend that the employee starts taking heroin during work hours. Does the employer have the right to fire them then?
In a free society, people should be allowed to make whatever choices about their bodies that they like, but at the same time, because we are free, people are also allowed to think what they want about those choices. It bothers me that you and you’re ideological ilk think that everyone should be forced to see things in your terms. Get over it, you don’t have the right to police the opinions of other people.
Here’s the bottom line: You have the right to do whatever you want to your body, but you do not have the right to dodge the consequences.
Mike, you thought it and they came back. That’s pretty cool.
Kyso, I SWEAR I didn’t expect that! Please forgive me!…
Next time, conjure me a damn pizza.
700 comments, here we come, and boy howdy!
you do not have the right to dodge the consequences.
Being fired by ignorant people for something that is no one else’s business isn’t a “consequence”. It’s bigotry.
Getting fake boobs and asking everyone to call you a girls name is as bad as being a smack addict? I think we may disagree here.
It’s clear that transexuals squick you out, but unlike say, heroin, squicking out tighty-whities such as yourself is not a crime. For some of us, it’s a hobby.
Mike! I’m still waiting! Pepperoni, double cheese and mushrooms! Or chicken and bacon!
Oh my god. And “they’re” even more dumb and boring than before.
“Being fired by ignorant people for something that is no one else’s business isn’t a “consequence”. It’s bigotry.” - Jack “I cite from blogs” Goff
Vultan’s point is that Stanton affected his employablity by choosing to become a transsexual. He made the choice. As we already have both pointed out, there are real and legitimate reasons for thinking Stanton might no longer be effective in his employment, i.e the strain his body will go under, the physiological instabilities of being transsexual, the immense personal difficulties of working things out with his wife, the condemnation of his community, the scorn of his workplace.
Let me call upon the wisdom of South Park. Have you seen the one where Stan’s dad gets Dolphinoplasty? What if Stanton had decided that he was a dolphin trapped in a man’s body and had a fin surgically attached to his back? Would the town still be remiss in reconsidering his employment? After all, it would still be his decision. And he has a had a so-far good record.
Keep in mind also that there are no conclusive scientific findings which even support the notion that a brain can have a different gender than its body.
Faletti’s own citation notes (fifth sentence) that more people who attened the City Comission meeting were there calling for Stanton’s ouster than those who were in favor of retaining him. Further CNN notes “City officials say they have received hundreds of e-mails about Stanton’s announcement, most calling for his removal.” http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/28/city.sexchange.ap/ Other sources note that the City Commisioners have recieved 7 emails calling for Stanton’s removal for every 1 rejecting the commision’s decision.
Unfortunately what the Femmies forget is that in the United States, government officials are elected and that the City Commisioners are obligated to serve those who they represent. Whether the city wants Stanton removed because they fear his leadership abilities will be dimished or whether they have moral convictions against his decisions should have no impact on what the decision of the comission—If the city wants Stanton out, then the commision should fire him.
Feminists resist typical gender roles because they view them as agents of oppression in society and because they think the few differences between women and men are just not that big of a deal….[Transgenderists] base their identities on that which feminists reject - the notions that women dress a specific and separate way than men, and that there are set personality characteristics for both sexes.-Adam North, March 4. Appearently Kyso totally missed these two statements you made, Adam. Actually I am certain that Kyso didn’t miss them but simply had no response and so instead reverted to the safety of “pizza conjuring” jokes. But hey why should we be suprised? We have known for a long time that these guys aren’t real feminists—real feminists work for the equality of women—all these guys are just a bunch of yappy little ultra-liberals who need something to bitch about.
Oh, I saw it. I was so glad that Adam came down to tell me what feminism was really all about. And I do believe I said that I think that a person who is willing to switch genders and lose their job and take this crap so that we can all talk about it is doing feminism more of a service than not.
You know, the ‘appeal to South Park’ fallacy is one I’ve not seen.
Hey, Jack. Haven’t seen you around much lately.
I would like to add to the point that the said individual is an elected official and public figure. In most service jobs, it is a condition of employment to keep ‘well groomed’, or in other words, inoffensive in appearance to even the most discerning of customers. UPS, for one requires all of its drivers to wear a brown uniform. Male drivers are not permitted to grow facial hair or have long head hair.
It is true that transexuality could not have been a condition specified for termination in Stanton’s employment contract, but the point is that what one does with their body is of paramount importance in any labor of service.
Stanton was a public servant and thus, the public image he projected was an essential part of fulfilling his duties. The way in which he is perceived by any party directly affects the wellbeing of every person in town. That means the reputation of every citizen, the arrival of new jobs in the town, and keeping current employers where they are. If I were an investor, would I decide to build a housing project or factory in Largo which is run by a man/woman who is said to be odd and unstable, or the town next door? It is not a matter of fairness or justice, I am an investor who wants to put his money in what seems the best possible place. That is just one example of why a sex change operation or any other decision to alter one’s appearance in an unusual fashion cannot be easily permitted in a public servant. That is why the worker at your local grocery store can’t show up with a mohawk, piercings, and tattoos.
Yet another point is that Stanton proposed a change that involved in a way, a new identity: A legally changed name, drastically changed appearance, completely changed hormonal balance. As a transexual, Stanton was asking all those around him to accept him/her as a new individual with a new role. In accordance with his wishes the city council reevaluated his/her ability to perform the job of city manager better than any other candidate. The city council was not only entitled to do this, it was obligated to examine the new Susan Stanton as a candidate for the position.
Hail, hail, the gangs all here!
Winter always gets me down, Kyso.
Well, keep commenting. I get all nervous when the regulars drop off the face of the planet. Like elfinity dissappeared and reappeared and I guess she was sick in the meantime and no one really knew- it’s kind of hard to keep track of online friends.
I’m having a lot of trouble reconciling my occasional comments here with the diabolical reappearance of the Zarkoff gang. I don’t feel responsible, but I did bring them up.
Coincidence? God I hope so, otherwise that’s a lot to carry on ones conscience…
I dunno, Mike - although I do find the fact that they all showed up at the same time to be kind of odd. Supernatural even. And I do blame you.
We’ll forgive you this time, but these guys are still boring so next time conjure up something more fun.
“It’s clear that transexuals squick you out, but unlike say, heroin, squicking out tighty-whities such as yourself is not a crime.” -Kyso Kisaen, March 4th anno domini 2007
Tighty-whities now is it? You all on this forum love to talk about bigots and racists, but now you go around making slurs against white people. After all that sanctimonious talk and you are the ones to assault people based on their racial identification. There is also the fact that you made this insensitive statement without even knowing if any of us are white.
In fact, you happen to be right. All of us know each other, or know of each other in real life. We are all white males and we are proud of our Anglo-Saxon, Irish, German, French, Scottish, Scots-Irish, whatever else is in there heritage. While we take pride in our ancestry, as Americans, it is our custom to judge each individual on their individual characteristics and merit.
We are about sick and tired, however, of those who try to blame society’s ills on white people. People who happen to be born with white skin are no more or less moral than anyone else and those who share that characteristic without doubt are responsible for a disproportianate amount of society’s most wonderful advancements. People with European heritage look to the strongest literary and musical traditions any culture has ever known and the foundation of modern science.
In America today, there are channels like BET(Black Entertainment Television) which are full of raunchy standup routines making fun of white people. Popular modern cartoons on television and syndicated in newspapers such as ‘The Boondocks’ also satirize and ridicule whites. In fact, I saw an episode of Boondocks in which one of the characters was ridiculing the way white people talk and saying how annoying he found it.
White people aren’t going to found a huge movement and protest even though we’re a majority in this country and could do so to great effect if we wanted. But perhaps there ought to be an Anglo-Saxon Station (ASS) to offset BET. ASS TV would be an inspiration to untold millions of white youth and instill pride while making jokes here and there about other peoples.
ASS TV? Are you guys trying to be a bad parody of blog trolls?…
Kyso, Kyso, Kyso….
How would a discussion on transsexuals help feminists exactly? I mean I’ve already explained that your goals are completely inimicable to each other. Simply provoking the discussion on an issue hardly guarantees advancement of your position on the thing. Maybe a discussion on transsexuality will yield knowledge that women do have a natural tendency towards a certain subdued social role?
The fact is you haven’t really made any argument to counter my legitimate concern that feminism and transsexuality are inherently opposed to each other - in the long run at least.
Mr. Cites from Blogs speaks again. I committed no fallacy. I simply used the South Park scenario as an example - not a reason that I was correct. In any case, if I am wrong you need to create an actual argument. You won’t though, because you don’t have a point.
Guys, I am noticing a trend that happened last time. We brought evidence, argumentation and reason.
They brought insults, (and now hate speech) and literally every fallacy known to man. They then accused us of being boring… and “Godwinned” the thread when it became too embarrassing for them. I was amused when I looked the term up on wikipedia to find this It is considered poor form to raise arbitrarily such a comparison with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized codicil that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin’s Law will be unsuccessful (this is sometimes referred to as “Quirk’s Exception”.)[4]
All of us know each other, or know of each other in real life.
You’re obviously all very close. Joined at the hip, it seems.
Ah, the boondocks. Certainly no commentary on the black community there, oh, no. Just makin’ fun of whites.
Actually, I thought the Boondocks was one of the best-made animated shows I’d ever seen on Adult Swim, or even ever.
I mean I’ve already explained that your goals are completely inimicable to each other.
Which is complete horseshit, as close ties between the LGBT community and the feminist community show. There are very few feminists working to degrade transgender people the way you and the people of Largo are.
Hail, hail, the gangs all here!-Kyso
NOW we’re all here. And in strict observance of the usual policy: JackGoff, you’re a peice of shit.
i before e, meep.
There are very few feminists working to degrade transgender people the way you and the people of Largo are.-Jack—I cite from blogs—Goff.
Jack would you mind explaining exactly how the people of Largo are “working to degrade” transgender people?
Stanton isn’t just risking divorce, mockery, his reputation, possible permanent sexual dysfucntion, and his reputation. Hormone reassignment also carries the risks of venous thrombosis, breast cancer, prolactin producing tumors, cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, embolism, baldness, marked increases in obesity risk, hypoandrogenemia, elevated triglycerides, decreasing serum levels of HDL-C, and diabetes mellitus. See citations below.
So let me make sure I have this right….If a city questions the mental state of their elected official when he (1) decides he is now a woman after living for 48 years as a man (2) decides he is a woman despite his choice to have a wife and kids and (3) is willing to risk life-threatening complications to make his body feminine…then the city is obviously full of unenlightened bigots whose sole aim is to oppress him…her? Yeah thanks for clearing that up for me Jack.
Guys, I am noticing a trend that happened last time. We brought evidence, argumentation and reason. They brought insults, (and now hate speech) and literally every fallacy known to man. They then accused us of being boring…-Adam North. Well look to the bright side Adam, atleast “pizza conjuring” is funnier than chanting “2%, 2%, 2%”.
Gooren, Louis J. G. (1999) Hormonal Sex Reassignment. IJT 3,3, http://www.symposion.com/ijt/ijt990301.htm
Jamie Feldman, New Onset of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with Feminizing Hormone Therapy: Case Series, http://www.symposion.com/ijt/ijtvo06no02_01.htm.
Fredrick C. W. Wu and Arnold von Eckardstein, Androgens and Coronary Artery Disease, http://edrv.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/24/2/183.
Stanton isn’t just risking divorce, mockery, his reputation, possible permanent sexual dysfucntion, and his reputation.
The risk of which are basically all predicated (except divorce) on bigotry and ignorance. Sexual dysfunction is BS. Are you saying that transgender people do not have sex after surgery?
And the rest, well, if you think people should be fired on the basis of whether or not they have a risk of obtaining certain diseases, then you’re going to have a mess on your hands. As well as a lot of lawsuits. Which people will win.
And the rest is bigotry, unsupported by the APA. Good job.
when potential male transsexuals begin their change they frequently start with a transition period - a time in which they adopt what they see to be as appropriate feminine dress and behavior. They start wearing lipstick, dresses and high heel shoes. They act more demure, compassionate and other personality characteristics which they see as being “feminine”.
You’re wrong: adopting an artificially feminine style comes before transition for those male transsexuals who bother. You could even say transition starts when they decide not to go through the charade any more.
Even if these allegedly close ties between Transsexuals and Feminists exist - which a lot of transsexuals would contest - it hardly refutes my reasoning.
After all, history is full of groups with completely different agendas working together against a “common enemy”. The fact that some transsexuals and feminists view themselves as being oppressed by mainstream society (and so have a common link) doesn’t change the fact that they are based on completely different notions of gender identity.
Some radical feminists do believe that transgender people perpetuate gender stereotypes, but mainstream feminism is not about eliminating gender identification, but about structuring society so that gender identity has no power over the amount of rights given to each sex, with certain physiological differences, namely physically-born female persons are given complete control over their reproductive potential. While MtF trangender people will not be able to reproduce, modern psychology says that they are born with a different gender than their birth sex.
“The risk of which are basically all predicated (except divorce) on bigotry and ignorance.” - Jack “I cite from blogs” Goff.
That might be true, but doesn’t change the validity of considering such factors when evaluating the employment of a city official.
Let’s face it - Largo’s City Council can’t control the beliefs of their citizens on transsexuals. All they can do is recognize the fact that Stanton has really pissed off the community - to the point it’s doubtful they will let him do his job. Remember - they didn’t ask for the controversy that comes with being a standard bearer for transsexuality - it was thrust upon them by Stanton. The fact is the C.C of Largo has the right to keep Largo the quiet sleepy community it wants to be. This doesn’t make them “sick” or religious fanatics.
“Sexual dysfunction is BS.”
JackGoff -
Rxplain to me how it’s possible to have vaginal intercourse without a penis.
Then explain how a man who can no longer have vaginal intercourse is not sexually dysfunctional.
Really. Do it. I want to hear this.
And the rest is bigotry, unsupported by the APA. Good job.
Jack “I cite from blogs” Goff
Dude… where’s your citation for this. Hans has citations, and you have nothing… try again dude. If you want to claim that this stuff is not true, then you need to produce a citation. Especially when you are faced with a citation from the other side.
You’re obviously all very close. Joined at the hip, it seems.
Junk Science
I smell jealousy. Do you not have any friends Mr. Junk Science?
I answered that, but it’s getting sent to the spam guard, I see. Do a google search for APA and transgender. Of course, if you were intellectually honest and curious, you would have done so already. Alas, you are but trolls.
According to Jack “My citation got eaten by my dog…. I mean spam filter” Goff, people who don’t agree with you = trolls.
Genius Jack… it’s almost as good as members of the religious right labeling anyone who doesn’t agree with them as anti American. Then again.. maybe you far lefties and far righties have more in common that you would be willing to admit.
I also like how you claim that your citation got caught in the spam filter, when we all know you didn’t have one to begin with. Besides, it’s not my job to find the citations you were too lazy to put in. The burden of proof is on you to convince me with your evidence, not on me to try and prove your point. Unlike you, I have a real job, which means I don’t have the time to do your dirty work.
Jack “I cite from blogs” Goff - Vultan is right.
Intellectually honest and curious people tend to actually cite their sources. They don’t expect other people to compensate for their laziness.
Also if you are going to not-cite be clear about what you’re not-citing.
Are you saying the APA doesn’t find any medical risks to sex changing?
Or that sexual dysfunction somehow magically doesn’t happen when a man gets his penis “reconfigured” into a not-vagina?
Are you saying the APA doesn’t acknowledge bigotry as accompanying transsexualism?
What are you saying?
Do you not have any friends [Mr.] Junk Science?
I do, thank you for asking. And some of them don’t even live in my head.
I fished out the comment for you, Jack.
I also like how you claim that your citation got caught in the spam filter, when we all know you didn’t have one to begin with.
And thanks, Junk.
Wow… a real citation. I’m surprised. There’s still a problem with that. While it’s a nice little primer on what transgender people are, it still doesn’t show anything about those people are at a smaller risk for anything. In fact, this is the only thing on the page that addresses mental disorders:
Transgender people experience the same kinds of mental health problems that nontransgender people do. However, the stigma, discrimination, and internal conflict that many transgender people experience may place them at increased risk for certain mental health problems. Discrimination, lack of social support, and inadequate access to care can exacerbate mental health problems in transgender people, while support from peers, family, and helping professionals may act as protective factors.
This actually supports our point. The only thing that the page shows is that trandgender people think they are a different gender, and I don’t really think anyone disagreed with you on that definition.
And the rest is bigotry, unsupported by the APA. Good job.
-Jack Goff
You still don’t show us what exactly is bigotry and what is unsupported by the APA. I hope you’re not claiming that the medical disorders aren’t supported by the APA.
You’ve found a creditable citation, congrats. Unfortunately, you have yet to link it with anything in our debate. If you are going to claim that the APA supports your point, I want a specific page. I’m not doing your dirty work for you.
“[M]odern psychology says that they are born with a different gender than their birth sex.” - JackGoff
Actually this is what your evidence says about the cause of transexuality:
And JackGoff - I am not saying that transsexuals disagree with feminists over the ideal level of rights accorded to women. What makes transsexuality so incompatible with feminism is how transsexuals define femininity. To them it literally appears to be women’s clothes and makeup, “softer” personality traits, being worse at math and directions, etc. The test I cited earlier is a good example of this.
All the feminists I have ever heard of resist those types of stereotypes. However if some “mainstream” feminists don’t then by all means direct me to them.
Adam, you can make generalizations about transexuals based on some hilarious test that some guy on the internet made up, or you and your friends can keep calling Jack “Jack I cite from Blogs Goff.”
One or the other, your choice.
However if some “mainstream” feminists don’t then by all means direct me to them.
What makes you think we dislike them enough to “direct” you to them? Paws off, meep.
“Adam, you can make generalizations about transexuals based on some hilarious test that some guy on the internet made up” - Kyso Kisaen
Hmmmm - “some guy”? Her name is Jennifer Diane Reitz, Oh wait - are you saying that she isn’t really a she because she is a former he? And you’re supposed to be in support of transsexualism?
In any case my point is that the test is a good example of the ideas regarding gender identity floating out in the transsexual community. The fact is that most of the transsexual sites out there seem to link to that test made up by that “guy” - which probably has something to do with the fact that it is the number one site that comes up on Google if you use “transsexual” as a search query.
And please nobody start screaming “Google Fallacy!” - everyone knows that Google indexes and ranks its sites according to their links - thus you need to deal with that fact that this test is taken seriously by many transsexuals. After all, they wouldn’t link to it if they thought it was simply “hilarious”.
“or you and your friends can keep calling Jack “Jack I cite from Blogs Goff…. One or the other, your choice. ”
He hasn’t cited from any blogs lately. Instead he has moved on to making not-citations. So his nickname has been dropped until a more appropriate one emerges.
Excuses excuses. Not only do we now have ‘The dog ate my evidence’ but:
Now we have what amounts to ‘I won’t give you any evidence because of (insert mouthy little quip: talk to the hand etc.).’
We finally got a real citation for a real web site for the first time in months. We thought we might finally be getting somewhere. Then the members of this forum not only neglect to present us evidence to back their cause, they openly refuse to do so. This strongly suggests that you have little to no evidence available for us. If this were so, it would mean your ideology as presented here is largely faith based, a sort of micro-religion or cult with no grounding in reality. Traditional religions are based on scripture and practices that have endured for millennia just for starters. This already is far superior than anything that the fractured collection of ideas pheminism has to offer.
If you are a faith, yours is an endangered one. Amanda Marcotte, an individual for whom many of you have expressed open admiration had only to put one foot in the larger public domain to be met with the scorn, revulsion, and shock of millions for her outright rudeness, intolerance, and insensitivity. She was banished quickly back to the shadowy little corner she came from, reviled by those on both sides of the political spectrum and an embarassment to all. Please let us know if your ideology is based on more than fatuous sanctomoneity, smug self satisfaction, and a set of wacky superstitions. Evidence please.
Kyso, Adam made it explicitly clear that he was using the quiz as an example of typical attitudes towards transgenderism. Since you disagree with Adam’s point, the next step is to demonstrate convincingly that transgenderism is not fundamentally tied to traditional gender stereotypes and therefore at odds with the goals of feminism.
The risk of which are basically all predicated (except divorce) on bigotry and ignorance.-JackGoff
The risks are still present no matter what predicates them. Stanton has chosen to take those social risks.
Sexual dysfunction is BS.-JackGoff
Jack how about you search the page for the phrase “possible permanent sexual dysfucntion”. Notice the word POSSIBLE? Dumbshit. Sexual reassignment surgery carries a RISK of permanent sexual dysfunction…you would know that if you had done enough reading to cite your “evidence”.
if you think people should be fired on the basis of whether or not they have a risk of obtaining certain diseases…-JackGoff
Largo didn’t fire him because he will have an increased risk of disease…Largo fired him because he makes decisions that affect their lives and they don’t trust him after having seen him make an unnecessary decision that carries tremendous and possibly life threatening risks.
Everybody read these next two quotes carefully…
However if some “mainstream” feminists don’t [believe transsexuals perpetuate gender stereotypes] then by all means direct me to them. -Adam
What makes you think we dislike them enough to “direct” you to them? Paws off, meep.-Junk Science’s response to Adam
Unfortunately Junk Science, you totally screwed yourself when you said that. First you refer to your femmie buddies here as “we” then you label mainstream feminists as “them”. Your language clearly isolates your buddies and yourself from mainstream feminists. So exactly what kind of feminists are you? Radical?
Secondly you ask what makes us think you dislike them enough to “direct” us to them? Why would you not direct us to them? Are mainstream feminists not tough enough to stand up against a few “Flash Gordon Trolls”? There are so many mainstream feminists out there, surely someone of your stature must know a few who are capable of dealing with us. Or perhaps you don’t want to direct us to them because they aren’t going to agree with you about transgenderism.
Oh well, atleast its a more creative response than, “we’re not going to respond because you guys are boring.”
…somebody here? (echo) Is there somebody here? (echo, followed by silence)…
[turns out light and closes door. hinges on door squeak a little, and then we hear the click of the latch…]
Here’s a new one: the “I can’t hear you” excuse we all used in kindergarten.
I think we should institute a new rule at PAB. If you’re too stupid to know when you’re being insulted, you’re no longer welcome to suck up space.
Thoughts?
Hmmm. I sense another “Godwin” coming. I guess when argumentation fails, guys, they desperately search for any pretext to end the embarrassing thread.
If you guys want to close the thread I don’t care. You stopped arguing anyway. We’ll just take it as your acknowledgment that we won. Again.
Oh Junk - if you’re so smart you could try actually making an argument.
…somebody here? (echo) Is there somebody here? (echo, followed by silence)…
[turns out light and closes door. hinges on door squeak a little, and then we hear the click of the latch…]
I think we should institute a new rule at PAB. If you’re too stupid to know when you’re being insulted, you’re no longer welcome to suck up space.
Thoughts?
I interpret that as victory for team Flash Gordon. Thanks for playing guys (and gals)
Hey Vultan! Let’s go on down to the AutoZone and see if we can get us some Bumper Nuts. I bet they’d look real good hangin’ under your truck. None a them terra-ists would fuck with us then, am I right?…
It has been some time since our claims and arguments have even been contested or addressed in any way. All resistance has ceased as we have destroyed anything they can throw at us. Oddly enough, the punkass peoples seem unwilling to confront me on my portrayal of their role model, considering they are essentially a satellite of her blog, pandagon. They even copy threads from over there, such as the one denouncing men who like it when ladies give a warm, cheerful smile. Enough.
These points considered, I hereby join my friends in declaring absolute and unmitigated victory.
Yes, you win. Now go away.
Come on guys, everybody knows that Stanton is really just getting the ole snip to make him invincible against the orgazmoraider toting Trey Parker and his sidekick Choda Boy. You’ll never stop me now Orgazmo!
Anyway, good show Flash Gordon! The only word that comes to mind is “cluster fuck”, because thats exactly what you did to them.
“Yes, you win. Now go away.” - Junk science
No shit, Sherlock.
No matter how you look at it, the priapistic ecstasy of the Flash Gordon Troll’s
triumphant victory, er,devastating logical massacre, ah,overwhelming rhetorical success, mmm,win by default for out-boring all other competitors, er, hanging on to the bitter end of a thread only a handful of us looked at past the first 2-days, wastruly something to seean awesome sighta spectacle.Sure, all the High-Fiving, the belly bumps, and the manly shoulder punching left bruises and pain in their wake.
Yes, it hurt. But it’s a good kind of hurt…
No shit, Sherlock.
How about fewer cliches and more getting the fuck out of here?
Oh, god, it’s another last-word-off. Didn’t we have like three of these in the last thread?
It’s sex discrimination, and therefore illegal, as I’ve discussed in my blog analyzing the legal issues http://jweissdiary.blogspot.com
Jillian, you may have just committed a grievous error. These guys swarm, and they reek as well.
Jillian, while I don’t blame you for not bothering to read the 80 or so posts you should know that the legality of the action was never really delved into by anyone on this thread.
We pretty much kept the argument limited the following:
1. Was the City Council of Largo “sick” for firing Stanton?
2. Is transsexuality compatible with feminism?
From what I read on your blog you know waaaaaaaaaaay more about the legal issues than anyone here. However, even if the law - which in your blog you admit is pretty dubious on transsexuality - is on Stanton’s side - the City Council still had legitimate and understandable reasons for reconsidering his employment. See above posts.
Hello all.
This has been much less than a rousing debate thanks to the unwillingness of the trolls to do anything but nitpick at the fringes of the truth, and I’ve let it linger far too long. By virtue of having to travel, I’ve been unable to participate, but as it’s my blog and my post, I believe I’ll be taking the last word here. Please note that as awesome and powerful as I am, I am not the government and therefore am _not_ oppressing anyone by closing comments. I’m just tired of the bad-faith swarming of a few angry fools who use terms like “femmie.”
Adam, Hans, KKK, Shaun, and Vultan seem obssessed with the idea that the operation could possibly make Stanton unable to perform the duties of the job:
And yet thousands of transexual women have proven to be perfectly healthy and normal. Firing someone because you think they may someday maybe have a physical problem that could prevent them from doing their job but without any evidence that it has or will occur would never hold up under a wrongful termination suit in the private sector. Why should it be okay in the public sector? Jillian’s analysis is far more comprehensive and deserves a read. It makes a devastating case against the firing on the grounds of sexual discrimination and bad procedure.
The act of release was unfair, and in my mind, robbing someone of a job they love for unfair reasons with discriminatory motives is sick.
And to the notion that more pissed off people wrote in letters than non-pissed off people equates to solid public opinion, well, that’s just an embarrassingly unscientific claim. Squeaky wheels don’t represent public opinion and never have. You need a genuine poll to determine what Largoans believe, so the Commission (and our trolls) can’t hide behind “public opinion via cranky letters” as a defense.
Adam and friends also cling to the idea that transexuality and feminism are incompatible. Feel free to read why that’s completely false. No reason to regurgitate what Ampersand has already said so well. You’d think the trolls would have learned how to Google by now if they were genuinely interested in exploring this issue, but we all know they’re not.
In the end, like most issues that rankle me, this boils down to fairness. No one posting in this thread or voting Stanton out of a job can say with certainty that the operation would prevent Stanton from doing the job. In fact, it’s extremely likely that it wouldn’t. Moreover, the City Commission failed to follow proper processes and performed sexual discrimination, as outlined by Jillian. So the firing was unjust. And because it was discriminatory, it was sick.
End of story.