ESPYs thread (1 Viewer)

[T J]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

They are abnormal. Deal with it and stop trying to impose your opinions on everyone else.

 

[T J]

So now if you don't like trannies you're "transphobic".Bwaaaaahahahaha

How is that any different from someone who doesn't like homosexuals being homophobic?The fact you're laughing about it like one is ridiculous and one isn't is part of the problem, you don't even see them as normal people but as freaks, or subhuman. That's why there is so much violence towards transgender individuals, because people decide in their heads what is "normal" and feel just fine demonizing, mocking, or even hating those who don't fit that criteria. Its arrogant, and frankly its dangerous.

Normal adjective1.conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.

Transphobia (or much less commonly transprejudice) is a range of antagonistic attitudes and feelings against transsexuality and transsexual or transgender people, based on the expression of their internal gender identity (see Phobia Terms for prejudice).https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia

And?

 

[Ditka Butkus]

So now if you don't like trannies you're "transphobic".

Bwaaaaahahahaha

How is that any different from someone who doesn't like homosexuals being homophobic?

The fact you're laughing about it like one is ridiculous and one isn't is part of the problem, you don't even see them as normal people but as freaks, or subhuman. That's why there is so much violence towards transgender individuals, because people decide in their heads what is "normal" and feel just fine demonizing, mocking, or even hating those who don't fit that criteria. Its arrogant, and frankly its dangerous.

Normaladjective

1.

conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.

Transphobia (or much less commonly transprejudice) is a range of antagonistic attitudes and feelings against transsexuality and transsexual or transgender people, based on the expression of their internal gender identity (see Phobia Terms for prejudice).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia

So... what dose that have to do with the fact that transgender does not meet the definition of normal?

It was raised in the OP in case you didn't catch it. Since you were throwing around definitions it seemed appropriate.

Great...I'll keep my eyes open for someone with that disorder.

 

[T J]

So now if you don't like trannies you're "transphobic".Bwaaaaahahahaha

How is that any different from someone who doesn't like homosexuals being homophobic?The fact you're laughing about it like one is ridiculous and one isn't is part of the problem, you don't even see them as normal people but as freaks, or subhuman. That's why there is so much violence towards transgender individuals, because people decide in their heads what is "normal" and feel just fine demonizing, mocking, or even hating those who don't fit that criteria. Its arrogant, and frankly its dangerous.

Normal adjective1.conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.

Transphobia (or much less commonly transprejudice) is a range of antagonistic attitudes and feelings against transsexuality and transsexual or transgender people, based on the expression of their internal gender identity (see Phobia Terms for prejudice).https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia

And?

You're a hateful bigot?

And you're an elitist #######?

 

[avoiding injuries]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

 

[squistion]

So now if you don't like trannies you're "transphobic".

Bwaaaaahahahaha

How is that any different from someone who doesn't like homosexuals being homophobic?

The fact you're laughing about it like one is ridiculous and one isn't is part of the problem, you don't even see them as normal people but as freaks, or subhuman. That's why there is so much violence towards transgender individuals, because people decide in their heads what is "normal" and feel just fine demonizing, mocking, or even hating those who don't fit that criteria. Its arrogant, and frankly its dangerous.

Normaladjective

1.

conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.

Transphobia (or much less commonly transprejudice) is a range of antagonistic attitudes and feelings against transsexuality and transsexual or transgender people, based on the expression of their internal gender identity (see Phobia Terms for prejudice).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia

So... what dose that have to do with the fact that transgender does not meet the definition of normal?

It was raised in the OP in case you didn't catch it. Since you were throwing around definitions it seemed appropriate.

Great...I'll keep my eyes open for someone with that disorder.

A mirror will suffice.

 

[T J]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Hypocrites

 

[Politician Spock]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

It's far better than "freak".

 

[Ditka Butkus]

So now if you don't like trannies you're "transphobic".

Bwaaaaahahahaha

How is that any different from someone who doesn't like homosexuals being homophobic?

The fact you're laughing about it like one is ridiculous and one isn't is part of the problem, you don't even see them as normal people but as freaks, or subhuman. That's why there is so much violence towards transgender individuals, because people decide in their heads what is "normal" and feel just fine demonizing, mocking, or even hating those who don't fit that criteria. Its arrogant, and frankly its dangerous.

Normaladjective

1.

conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.

Transphobia (or much less commonly transprejudice) is a range of antagonistic attitudes and feelings against transsexuality and transsexual or transgender people, based on the expression of their internal gender identity (see Phobia Terms for prejudice).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia

So... what dose that have to do with the fact that transgender does not meet the definition of normal?

It was raised in the OP in case you didn't catch it. Since you were throwing around definitions it seemed appropriate.

Great...I'll keep my eyes open for someone with that disorder.

A mirror will suffice.

very clever, but incorrect.

 

[Chemical X]

Sorry, just stressed. Last night felt good to release. Apologize to all the victims.

Dont sweat it. I feel bad for contributing. It was a great rant fwiw.

this is step down from General Lee vs General Grant

 

[Ditka Butkus]

So lets get this straight....If anybody disagrees with the so- called tolerant ones in this thread you are a bigot or purveyor of hate.

 

[squistion]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

So lets get this straight....If anybody disagrees with the so- called tolerant ones in this thread you are a bigot or purveyor of hate.

Most people have you on ignore so it's all good bro.

I highly doubt that..If they do they are just plain sad and or silly.

 

[T J]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

 

[HellToupee]

So now if you don't like trannies you're "transphobic".

Bwaaaaahahahaha

How is that any different from someone who doesn't like homosexuals being homophobic?

The fact you're laughing about it like one is ridiculous and one isn't is part of the problem, you don't even see them as normal people but as freaks, or subhuman. That's why there is so much violence towards transgender individuals, because people decide in their heads what is "normal" and feel just fine demonizing, mocking, or even hating those who don't fit that criteria. Its arrogant, and frankly its dangerous.

Normal

adjective

1.conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.

Deviant

1. departing from usual or accepted standards, especially in social or sexual behavior.

 

[Christo]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

 

[HellToupee]

I don't see the big deal if a person feel the need to do this. Are they odd? Yes . Do they deserve to be treated the same as everyone else. Sure.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

So now if you don't like trannies you're "transphobic".

Bwaaaaahahahaha

How is that any different from someone who doesn't like homosexuals being homophobic?

The fact you're laughing about it like one is ridiculous and one isn't is part of the problem, you don't even see them as normal people but as freaks, or subhuman. That's why there is so much violence towards transgender individuals, because people decide in their heads what is "normal" and feel just fine demonizing, mocking, or even hating those who don't fit that criteria. Its arrogant, and frankly its dangerous.

Normal

adjective

1.conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.

Deviant

1. departing from usual or accepted standards, especially in social or sexual behavior.

Oh geezus.. you better duck.

 

[T J]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

 

[Christo]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

Like I said, a tolerant person does not call others freaks--which is what you've done repeatedly.

 

[T J]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

Like I said, a tolerant person does not call others freaks--which is what you've done repeatedly.

I said that about Bruce Jenner specifically. And I've said it in another thread as well. I can tolerate him because he has the right to do whatever the heck he wants, but he does indeed repulse me.

 

[Politician Spock]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

Like I said, a tolerant person does not call others freaks--which is what you've done repeatedly.

I said that about Bruce Jenner specifically. And I've said it in another thread as well. I can tolerate him because he has the right to do whatever the heck he wants, but he does indeed repulse me.

Should have stopped with the bolded.

 

[Christo]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

Like I said, a tolerant person does not call others freaks--which is what you've done repeatedly.

I said that about Bruce Jenner specifically. And I've said it in another thread as well. I can tolerate him because he has the right to do whatever the heck he wants, but he does indeed repulse me.

You really aren't grasping the concept.

 

[squistion]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

Like I said, a tolerant person does not call others freaks--which is what you've done repeatedly.

I said that about Bruce Jenner specifically. And I've said it in another thread as well. I can tolerate him because he has the right to do whatever the heck he wants, but he does indeed repulse me.

Transphobia (or much less commonly transprejudice) is a range of antagonistic attitudes and feelings against transsexuality and transsexual or transgender people, based on the expression of their internal gender identity (see Phobia Terms for prejudice). Researchers describe transphobia as emotional disgust, fear, anger or discomfort felt or expressed towards people who do not conform to society's gender expectations,[1][2] and say that although it is an aspect of homophobia,[3][4] and is similar to racism and sexism, those attitudes are becoming generally unacceptable in modern society, whereas significantly more individuals still maintain transphobic views without fear of censure.[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transphobia

 

[Ditka Butkus]

So I guess we won't be seeing anymore comedies where men dress up like women.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

57 posts in this thread to tell us all about what you tolerate? LOL

 

[Hoh]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

Obviously? Hardly, unless you are simply seeing what you want to see. Your statement is mere opinion.

 

[Chemical X]

So I guess we won't be seeing anymore comedies where men dress up like women.

only if they are black and donning the fat suit

 

[Politician Spock]

So I guess we won't be seeing anymore comedies where men dress up like women.

We've come a long way since Bosom Buddies.

 

[Hoh]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

Obviously? Hardly, unless you are simply seeing what you want to see. Your statement is mere opinion.

Yeah, "abnormal" is used as a compliment all the time.

it's typically neither a compliment or an insult. I have had a head full of white hair since I was in my late 20's. That's abnormal.

 

[Politician Spock]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

Obviously? Hardly, unless you are simply seeing what you want to see. Your statement is mere opinion.

Yeah, "abnormal" is used as a compliment all the time.

Everyone has something abnormal about them. If they didn't, they'd be a perfect human.

 

[squistion]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

Obviously? Hardly, unless you are simply seeing what you want to see. Your statement is mere opinion.

Yeah, "abnormal" is used as a compliment all the time.

it's typically neither a compliment or an insult. I have had a head full of white hair since I was in my late 20's. That's abnormal.

Sorry, but you are one of the few people who would not find being called abnormal an insult. It is generally considered an insult, like "deviant" which HellWig used above.

 

[Hoh]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

Obviously? Hardly, unless you are simply seeing what you want to see. Your statement is mere opinion.

Yeah, "abnormal" is used as a compliment all the time.

it's typically neither a compliment or an insult. I have had a head full of white hair since I was in my late 20's. That's abnormal.

Sorry, but you are one of the few people who would not find being called abnormal an insult. It is generally considered an insult, like "deviant" which HellWig used above.

Fine. Statistical anomaly then. Until such time all verbal and written speech is banned by the sensitive.

 

[HellToupee]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

Obviously? Hardly, unless you are simply seeing what you want to see. Your statement is mere opinion.

Yeah, "abnormal" is used as a compliment all the time.

it's typically neither a compliment or an insult. I have had a head full of white hair since I was in my late 20's. That's abnormal.

Sorry, but you are one of the few people who would not find being called abnormal an insult. It is generally considered an insult, like "deviant" which HellWig used above.

I saw Neil Patrick Harris in Hedwig. Fantastic show & performance

 

[Ditka Butkus]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

Obviously? Hardly, unless you are simply seeing what you want to see. Your statement is mere opinion.

Yeah, "abnormal" is used as a compliment all the time.

it's typically neither a compliment or an insult. I have had a head full of white hair since I was in my late 20's. That's abnormal.

Sorry, but you are one of the few people who would not find being called abnormal an insult. It is generally considered an insult, like "deviant" which HellWig used above.

Is it ok to be ok with being called abnormal when it is in regards to having an abnormally large penis.

 

[squistion]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

Obviously? Hardly, unless you are simply seeing what you want to see. Your statement is mere opinion.

Yeah, "abnormal" is used as a compliment all the time.

it's typically neither a compliment or an insult. I have had a head full of white hair since I was in my late 20's. That's abnormal.

Sorry, but you are one of the few people who would not find being called abnormal an insult. It is generally considered an insult, like "deviant" which HellWig used above.

I saw Neil Patrick Harris in Hedwig. Fantastic show & performance

Yeah and you have Charles Nelson Reilly as your avatar. What a gay rights champion you are!

 

[Politician Spock]

Can I get a definition of "acceptance" please? I'm going to extend Jenner every courtesy that I would to anyone else. I'm going to offer no preferential treatment one way or the other. In that way I am accepting. But if you want me to call Jenner a woman..well..sorry, can't do it. In my opinion he's a man with something out of the ordinary going on in his brain. It happens. It's not evil, it's not angelic, it's just outside of the norm. Right now it seems that it takes some plastic surgery and whatnot for him to achieve inner peace. Perhaps one day medical science will have less drastic solutions, but until that day comes let him live. So I guess the latter portion of this post makes me unaccepting..?

I don't think Jenner is insulted by you calling Jenner a man. It's certainly a justified label biologically. And nothing about it reflects an attitude of unacceptance.

But things like "freak", "serious psychological issues", and other derogatory labels aren't justified, and are nothing but expressions of ones negativity towards Jenner, or the transgenders those words are being directed at. They are clearly word choices of people who do NOT accept transgenders.

I hear you man. But I think people in this thread are getting too sensitive about words. I get that "freak" can have negative connotations even though it can also used to simply describe something out of the ordinary. So out of respect I try to avoid using the word. Let's say you get your way and the word freak is no longer used, and is instead replaced with abnormal, out of the ordinary, or something to that affect. We can agree that transgenderism is not usual, yes? My point is, how long until the new term becomes perceived as hateful due to a certain amount of overzealousness from those determined to stamp out hate, real or perceived? I will try very hard not throw out terms like freak, if you can also try not to throw around terms like hate or bigot so easily. Does that seem fair?And that last statement isn't intended to single you out in the least. I'm trying to be broad (giggles) with that point.

All I care about now is what is causing transgender kids to kill themselves. If certain words contribute to that today, then I'll fight to against them being used.

You are completely right that in the future words that are not derogatory today can become derogatory over time. When that happens then we should do something about that when it happens. Today, calling them "abnormal" I think is okay. That may change in the future.

If people would just change their negative attitudes, then words wouldn't become the projection of the negative attitudes. The issue of words becoming negative isn't a result of the words themselves. It's because the people who use words can be #######s.

"Abnormal" may be correct in a strict literal context, but it has a pretty negative connotation. And people choosing that word to refer to transsexuals obviously are using it as a pejorative.

Obviously? Hardly, unless you are simply seeing what you want to see. Your statement is mere opinion.

Yeah, "abnormal" is used as a compliment all the time.

it's typically neither a compliment or an insult. I have had a head full of white hair since I was in my late 20's. That's abnormal.

Sorry, but you are one of the few people who would not find being called abnormal an insult. It is generally considered an insult, like "deviant" which HellWig used above.

Is it ok to be ok with being called abnormal when it is in regards to having an abnormally large penis.

I can't speak for society at large, but I always take it as a compliment.

 

[squistion]

Is it ok to be ok with being called abnormal when it is in regards to having an abnormally large penis.

I think that would only be of interest to you and Eminence.

 

[HellToupee]

Yeah and you have Charles Nelson Reilly as your avatar. What a gay rights champion you are!

Um the problem with CNR is?

Do I have to acknowledge every actors/performers sexuality that I like? Am I not allowed to like gay performers??

I'm going to see Joe Jackson in October in Boston.

Bob Mould . Love the guy's solo & Husker Du stuff

Stephen Patrick Morrissey. In my top 3 performers of all-time . Although he might just be asexual

 

[squistion]

Yeah and you have Charles Nelson Reilly as your avatar. What a gay rights champion you are!

Um the problem with CNR is?Do I have to acknowledge every actors/performers sexuality that I like? Am I not allowed to like gay performers??

I'm going to see Joe Jackson in October in Boston.

Bob Mould . Love the guy's solo & Husker Du stuff

Stephen Patrick Morrissey. In my top 3 performers of all-time . Although he might just be asexual

The problem is referring to homosexuals or the transgender as deviant. Completely accurate as a dictionary meaning, but insulting and pejorative to those in that minority when they are called that.

 

[T J]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

Like I said, a tolerant person does not call others freaks--which is what you've done repeatedly.

I said that about Bruce Jenner specifically. And I've said it in another thread as well. I can tolerate him because he has the right to do whatever the heck he wants, but he does indeed repulse me.

Should have stopped with the bolded.

No, I shouldn't have. He repulses me. And not just a little. A LOT.I'm frankly sick and tired of certain people in this thread trying to tell me how I should feel, what I should say and how I shoukd say it. I am absolutely not a fan and I'm gonna keep saying it 'cause I want to be the scratchy nails on a chalkboard and just get under the skin of multiples of you. I want you to keep on in the thread and so will I because I don't care. I just flat out don't. I do not and will not support it or him in particular and it's my honest opinion, and I've said it previously in this thread, that people that kill themselves are an example of survival of the fittest - natural selection. It's been going on for as long as man has been around. It sucks, but it happens (cue the "why don't you kill yourself" comments). I am just sick of some of your arguments. There are those of us who want no part of it so if you don't like it, too effing bad.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

Like I said, a tolerant person does not call others freaks--which is what you've done repeatedly.

I said that about Bruce Jenner specifically. And I've said it in another thread as well. I can tolerate him because he has the right to do whatever the heck he wants, but he does indeed repulse me.

Should have stopped with the bolded.

No, I shouldn't have. He repulses me. And not just a little. A LOT.

why?...

 

[sports_fan]

transgender cats?

 

[T J]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

Like I said, a tolerant person does not call others freaks--which is what you've done repeatedly.

I said that about Bruce Jenner specifically. And I've said it in another thread as well. I can tolerate him because he has the right to do whatever the heck he wants, but he does indeed repulse me.

Should have stopped with the bolded.

No, I shouldn't have. He repulses me. And not just a little. A LOT.

I think maybe she turns you on a little bit and you hate yourself for it.

I've heard stupid and I've heard really stupid. This one falls into the latter.

 

[T J]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

Like I said, a tolerant person does not call others freaks--which is what you've done repeatedly.

I said that about Bruce Jenner specifically. And I've said it in another thread as well. I can tolerate him because he has the right to do whatever the heck he wants, but he does indeed repulse me.

Should have stopped with the bolded.

No, I shouldn't have. He repulses me. And not just a little. A LOT.

why?...

No reason. Just to emphasize a point.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

transgender cats?

I think that may be ch-ats.

 

[T J]

You know what? I've re-considered. I'm getting pissed and no longer care to be part of this. I'll make us all happier and leave this thread.

 

[Politician Spock]

The most vocal supporters in this thread are also the most intolerant.

Yes, how dare we be intolerant of the transphobes intolerance towards those who are transgender.

See, this is what you don't seem to understand. I think I and others tolerate it just fine. We don't like it or and certainly don't support it, but you folks seem to want us to support it and think it's a-ok. It's not enough that we tolerate it? You want us to like it too? Seriously. They can do whatever they want and I'm ok with it. But if I think it's weird, I'm a hateful bigot? People that think that can go screw themselves.

Tolerate? I don't think that's the right word for how you've conducted yourself in this thread. A tolerant person does not call others freaks.

I can tolerate "abnormal" people and their right to be one. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. That's the the part that's hard for my opposition in this thread to understand.

Like I said, a tolerant person does not call others freaks--which is what you've done repeatedly.

I said that about Bruce Jenner specifically. And I've said it in another thread as well. I can tolerate him because he has the right to do whatever the heck he wants, but he does indeed repulse me.

Should have stopped with the bolded.

No, I shouldn't have. He repulses me. And not just a little. A LOT.I'm frankly sick and tired of certain people in this thread trying to tell me how I should feel, what I should say and how I shoukd say it. I am absolutely not a fan and I'm gonna keep saying it 'cause I want to be the scratchy nails on a chalkboard and just get under the skin of multiples of you. I want you to keep on in the thread and so will I because I don't care. I just flat out don't. I do not and will not support it or him in particular and it's my honest opinion, and I've said it previously in this thread, that people that kill themselves are an example of survival of the fittest - natural selection. It's been going on for as long as man has been around. It sucks, but it happens (cue the "why don't you kill yourself" comments). I am just sick of some of your arguments. There are those of us who want no part of it so if you don't like it, too effing bad.

No one is telling you how to feel. They're telling you that sharing how you feel makes you a bigot. Part of being a civil human being is sharing the good of what you think and feel, and keeping the bad to yourself.

 

[squistion]

You know what? I've re-considered. I'm getting pissed and no longer care to be part of this. I'll make us all happier and leave this thread.

Go Peens!

 

[Limp Ditka]

TJ, wait...