I'm saying it's something only the male sex can do which is defined by having a penis. I'm not actually trying to complicate the discussion. Just stating that any man can rape and no female can do so and can only be done so with a penis.
I'm stating this to show that I'm leaning towards thinking of this person as currently more male than female, at least where this person in the story is at this stage of their change. I dont see why people should get emotive. I've put forward a reasonable scientific/what the law of the land says explanation to my view on this 'gender debate' :cool:
Pretty flimsy. I'm sorry I followed you down this rabbit hole. Post 190 is the one you need to digest.
As for the law of the land, The Gender Recognition Act of 2004 makes no requirement for sex reassignment surgery to have taken place in order to receive a Gender Recognition Certificate.
And I repeat, female is not an identity. It is a biological reality.
I have already said that I accept that trans people feel dysphoria, but a female 'feeling' male does not change their body into a male body.
So it is easier to disregard everything I have said. Of course your gender is an identity and biology does not always match with that and sometimes there are conflicts within biology. It is researched and proven so its a bit tricky to argue against it.
we're talking about gender and because only 1 gender can commit that offense and its defined by the use of a penis. the person in the story like me has a penis so it doesnt matter what anyone says in the eyes of the law gets treated like a man. sexual organs can define what a person is thats what i'm saying
Laws are constructed by society so despite selecting a ridiculous comparison you are miles away in your train of thought.
I'm saying it's something only the male sex can do which is defined by having a penis. I'm not actually trying to complicate the discussion. Just stating that any man can rape and no female can do so and can only be done so with a penis.
I'm stating this to show that I'm leaning towards thinking of this person as currently more male than female, at least where this person in the story is at this stage of their change. I dont see why people should get emotive. I've put forward a reasonable scientific/what the law of the land says explanation to my view on this 'gender debate' :cool:
How about I define you as a woman James, would that be okay?. Is it okay for someone else to define who you are?
How about I define you as a woman James, would that be okay?. Is it okay for someone else to define who you are?
On what basis would you be doing so? Assuming I'm a male with the bits intact and dont view myself as a woman I dont see how you could.
There is a perfectly reasonable opinion to be had with the person in the story however because they still have a penis even though they consider themselves a female
whether homosapien or animal only a male of the species can rape because they have a penis. it is one major characteristic that does define the male differently from the female. the penis makes all the difference i know it sounds unusual perhaps stupid but its true! as long as they have the ability to do something which only 1 sex can do so that still makes them part of that particular sex.
On what basis would you be doing so? Assuming I'm a male with the bits intact and dont view myself as a woman I dont see how you could.
There is a perfectly reasonable opinion to be had with the person in the story however because they still have a penis even though they consider themselves a female
whether homosapien or animal only a male of the species can rape because they have a penis. it is one major characteristic that does define the male differently from the female. the penis makes all the difference i know it sounds unusual perhaps stupid but its true! as long as they have the ability to do something which only 1 sex can do so that still makes them part of that particular sex.
I dunno.....it could be anything you like really because I dont have to consider research on the subject any more than you do. Take your pick....but I still reserve my right to defnine you.
Sigh. I attend Leeds University and know Alexis and while I'm not the biggest fan of her attitude sometimes some of the comments here have been rather nasty. For those asking whether she passes off as a woman, she does wear male clothes a lot of the time but still manages to pass off as a female to the majority of people despite having just started her transition. I also cannot blame the girls though. 2 girls at Fruity, an event where people generally consume lots of alcohol, will obviously have different first thoughts than "Oh, a trans* woman who can come in" and will have immediately have reacted to keep her out. There are 2 gender neutral toilets at the students union but none of them are where Fruity is, down in the basement, and there is a no pass out policy at Fruity so you are forced to use gendered toilets.
These are the unfortunate situations that occur. In a club situation one of the girls could have been having a wee in a cubicle. Door not locked for whatever reason. Alexsis could have opened door and you have a situation where a woman is having a wee and someone they think is a man has opened the door on her. Cue the woman and her mate pushing, who they believe to be a man out. An understandable misunderstanding.
I think you'll find that the bloke in question is, in fact, a bloke.
It's a matter of very simple human biology.
If only things were really that simple.
If we ignore the complexities of biochemistry for a second, would you actually, in the real world, refer to a trans female as a "bloke" if you met and spoke with them?
These are the unfortunate situations that occur. In a club situation one of the girls could have been having a wee in a cubicle. Door not locked for whatever reason. Alexsis could have opened door and you have a situation where a woman is having a wee and someone they think is a man has opened the door on her. Cue the woman and her mate pushing, who they believe to be a man out. An understandable misunderstanding.
Or it could be as stated in the OP, transphobia and an assault.
Comments
yes it would seem that way? but is what i said actually incorrect? you should at least state how so
Pretty flimsy. I'm sorry I followed you down this rabbit hole. Post 190 is the one you need to digest.
As for the law of the land, The Gender Recognition Act of 2004 makes no requirement for sex reassignment surgery to have taken place in order to receive a Gender Recognition Certificate.
So it is easier to disregard everything I have said. Of course your gender is an identity and biology does not always match with that and sometimes there are conflicts within biology. It is researched and proven so its a bit tricky to argue against it.
Are you serious with this?
Transexuals are not perverts for goodness sake, i really really dislike the association you make.
Why shouldn't a male accept a f2m transsexual using a male toilet facility? What do you think will happen, seriously?
Laws are constructed by society so despite selecting a ridiculous comparison you are miles away in your train of thought.
Exactly Seaborn
Yes because id go in a cubical and so would they. If the ladies had cubicals instead of urinals then there would be no problem......oh wait
How about I define you as a woman James, would that be okay?. Is it okay for someone else to define who you are?
Doubtful....you are the last person she would be interested in.
With bated breath.
On what basis would you be doing so? Assuming I'm a male with the bits intact and dont view myself as a woman I dont see how you could.
There is a perfectly reasonable opinion to be had with the person in the story however because they still have a penis even though they consider themselves a female
whether homosapien or animal only a male of the species can rape because they have a penis. it is one major characteristic that does define the male differently from the female. the penis makes all the difference i know it sounds unusual perhaps stupid but its true! as long as they have the ability to do something which only 1 sex can do so that still makes them part of that particular sex.
I dunno.....it could be anything you like really because I dont have to consider research on the subject any more than you do. Take your pick....but I still reserve my right to defnine you.
Brain sex does not exist.
I used the word "bloke" because the "bloke" in question is... a bloke.
My question was how this became a discussion about rape?
Trust Matt not to get it lol.
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showpost.php?p=64447360&postcount=169
Ahh well if a blog says you are right then that's that then.
Post 142 was the first to bring it up, credit where credit's due.
Of course she is not.
Whoops.
I think you'll find that the bloke in question is, in fact, a bloke.
It's a matter of very simple human biology.
If only things were really that simple.
If we ignore the complexities of biochemistry for a second, would you actually, in the real world, refer to a trans female as a "bloke" if you met and spoke with them?
Or it could be as stated in the OP, transphobia and an assault.