What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

LGBT, LGBTQ, LGBT+ Thread (6 Viewers)

Stop using your emotions as a source to spew misinformation and/or lies and become better informed instead and argue from a position of FACT.  Need I remind you you're the same guy who said that gay people had no civil rights either, despite the SCOTUS actually ruling on it.


I never said that. And living in California and knowing the legal rights of LGBT+ folks here in this state, I would never say that. Please quit repeating that lie.

 
I never said that. And living in California and knowing the legal rights of LGBT+ folks here in this state, I would never say that. Please quit repeating that lie.


Is it a lie if you said it?  Because you did.  A bunch of us read it.  If you quit lying, we'll quit telling you that you lied.  Deal?

 
Link?

I never said that. I'll hang up and listen.   :coffee:


LOL.  A bunch of us have verified that you did in fact say it.  The last time I called you out I asked you to post a link if you really wanted to show you didn't say it.  You declined.  I'll pass.  But when a bunch of people all saw it, it's kind of hard to deny it happened.  You do you though.

 
LOL.  A bunch of us have verified that you did in fact say it.  The last time I called you out I asked you to post a link if you really wanted to show you didn't say it.  You declined.  I'll pass.  But when a bunch of people all saw it, it's kind of hard to deny it happened.  You do you though.


Nope, nobody verified it. Not with a link and several people quoted what I actually did say at the time, which was not me saying that "gay people had no civil rights" in this country, which I wouldn't say, living in California and knowing the rights of LGBT+ folks in this state.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
John123 said:
Not exactly on topic, but tangential and scary when people in the sciences make the statements they do in this article:

https://dailybruin.com/2022/04/17/ucla-supplies-free-menstrual-products-in-restrooms-regardless-of-gender
If there's anything we learned in the past few years, it's that a very large number of people will choose ideology/religion if you give them a choice between science and ideology/religion.  This is a human nature thing, not a partisan thing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What are everyone’s thoughts on housing transgender women in woman’s prisons?  
I think there needs to be more investigation of each prisoner that requests this. The transition has to be physically complete. The prisoner needs to undergo psychological evaluation. But if they pass all of that I’m for it. 

 
I never said that. And living in California and knowing the legal rights of LGBT+ folks here in this state, I would never say that. Please quit repeating that lie.
I noticed that you ignored the first paragraph of my post. I'm demanding that you back up your claim about the 60s 70s and 80s considering homosexuality mentally ill.

Or, conversely, stop making verifiably false claims and statements that is done simply to push The Message.  In other words, follow the science.

And yes, you did say gay people did not have any rights.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
even if they are post-op fully transitioned?
I'm open to arguments on fully post-op people.  My main concern is putting men who are known to be criminals in an enclosed, captive environment with women.  The potential for rape and the like are obviously greatly reduced if we're talking about males who have had bottom surgery.

 
I'm open to arguments on fully post-op people.  My main concern is putting men who are known to be criminals in an enclosed, captive environment with women.  The potential for rape and the like are obviously greatly reduced if we're talking about males who have had bottom surgery.


How would you avoid this?  Would you create a separate prison for transgenders and nonbinary prisoners?

 
I didn’t say you couldn’t have an opinion. What I wrote is that you shouldn’t have a say on what actually happens. That also is an opinion (it’s mine.) Your opinion matters but it shouldn’t be able to affect what happens; neither should mine. 
The position I’m taking here is a libertarian one that I think most Americans are comfortable with: everyone gets to decide their own medical decisions. I’m just extending it to minors (with their parents’ approval.) 
Wrong again.  What if a parent decided he will not educate his kid.  For whatever reason(not talking about home schooling.).

Maybe he's a farmer and has already decided his kid doesn't need any education because he just wants the kid to work the farm.  I get a say in that.  I get to elect people who will force that parent to educate their child.

Again, this whole you don't get a say because you don't live it is wrong.  Completely.  

You're right i don't get to decide directly.  But I am completely in my right to elect people who agree with  my point of view.  Just as you are. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
How would you avoid this?  Would you create a separate prison for transgenders and nonbinary prisoners?


I would handle it the same way some of us have proposed handling trans in sports.  The criminal gets to "play" with their biological sex.  As Ivan mentioned, we could have a discussion about fully post-op trans but otherwise they are housed in the facility with their biological sex.  This is one of the reasons confusing sex and gender is a problem.  It opens up all sorts of ambiguities that don't need to exist. 

 
Wrong again.  What if a parent decided he will not educate his kid.  For whatever reason(not talking about home schooling.).

Maybe he's a farmer and has already decided his kid doesn't need any education because he just wants the kid to work the farm.  I get a say in that.  I get to elect people who will force that parent to educate their child.

Again, this whole you don't get a say because you don't live it is wrong.  Completely.  

You're right i don't get to decide directly.  But I am completely in my right to elect people who agree with  my point of view.  Just as you are. 
WI v. Yoder
 

 
Wrong again.  What if a parent decided he will not educate his kid.  For whatever reason(not talking about home schooling.).

Maybe he's a farmer and has already decided his kid doesn't need any education because he just wants the kid to work the farm.  I get a say in that.  I get to elect people who will force that parent to educate their child.

Again, this whole you don't get a say because you don't live it is wrong.  Completely.  

You're right i don't get to decide directly.  But I am completely in my right to elect people who agree with  my point of view.  Just as you are. 
One small matter, working a family farm is one of the more complex small businesses there happens to be.  Farmers need formal education covering not just agronomics and potentially animal husbandry, but in economics, finance, tax law and legal compliance with a myriad of state and federal regulations from the environmental to food safety.  Want to work and keep the family farm, off the university you go.

 
I would handle it the same way some of us have proposed handling trans in sports.  The criminal gets to "play" with their biological sex.  As Ivan mentioned, we could have a discussion about fully post-op trans but otherwise they are housed in the facility with their biological sex.  This is one of the reasons confusing sex and gender is a problem.  It opens up all sorts of ambiguities that don't need to exist. 


Ivan's concern seemed to be avoiding or limiting sexual assaults in our prisons. I agree with him that this is important. I'm just not sure how putting what you call "biological men" who look, to varying degrees, like cisgender women in a prison with a bunch of men who don't have regular access to cisgender women would eliminate or limit sexual assaults. If anything, I'd expect it to significantly increase the frequency of sexual assaults.

 
Ivan's concern seemed to be avoiding or limiting sexual assaults in our prisons. I agree with him that this is important. I'm just not sure how putting what you call "biological men" who look, to varying degrees, like cisgender women in a prison with a bunch of men who don't have regular access to cisgender women would eliminate or limit sexual assaults. If anything, I'd expect it to significantly increase the frequency of sexual assaults.


Maybe.  Should have thought of that before they decided to commit prison level crimes.  But, much like sports, trans females have a physical advantage over cis females and it's not fair to subject those females to that environment.  The alternative would be to do what some have proposed regarding males/females in sports and locker rooms - stop differentiating at all.  We can just build one big prison and house everyone together. 

 
Maybe.  Should have thought of that before they decided to commit prison level crimes.  But, much like sports, trans females have a physical advantage over cis females and it's not fair to subject those females to that environment.  The alternative would be to do what some have proposed regarding males/females in sports and locker rooms - stop differentiating at all.  We can just build one big prison and house everyone together. 
Agreed.  Also, men's prisons already have ways of dealing with people who need to be placed in protective custody.  It seems like we should be able to accommodate men who live as women using those procedures.

Ideally we would make some significant reforms to prisons that take the issue of prison rape seriously.  But (a) I don't know enough to have strong opinions about what sort of reforms might work, and (b) I'm really confident that housing (probably) violent and heterosexual men in an institutional setting with women is not consistent with taking the issue of prison rape seriously, and (c) we have a good-enough solution (protective custody) available already.

 
Maybe.  Should have thought of that before they decided to commit prison level crimes.  But, much like sports, trans females have a physical advantage over cis females and it's not fair to subject those females to that environment.  The alternative would be to do what some have proposed regarding males/females in sports and locker rooms - stop differentiating at all.  We can just build one big prison and house everyone together. 


Yeah, I am sure that would work.  :coffee:

 
Maybe.  Should have thought of that before they decided to commit prison level crimes.  But, much like sports, trans females have a physical advantage over cis females and it's not fair to subject those females to that environment.  The alternative would be to do what some have proposed regarding males/females in sports and locker rooms - stop differentiating at all.  We can just build one big prison and house everyone together. 


I see. So is it fair to say that you (and apparently Ivan) don't actually care very much about reducing sexual assaults in our prisons, you only care about who is getting assaulted? Or to put it another way, is it fair to say that you think transgender criminals deserve to be punished more severely than cisgender criminals who commit the same crime?

Sorry if you think this is inflammatory, but it seems like an obvious consequence of the policy you are advocating and your rationale for it in the bolded above.

Regarding the alternatives: obviously the one you proposed would be a worst case scenario for preventing sexual assaults and pregnancies in prisons. Two other ideas for your consideration:

1. Create a third prison in each state for transgender/nonbinary convicts, or ...

2. Assign trans prisoners to prisons based on their gender identity rather than their genitalia and birth, put another couple hundred thousand dollars in every state budget to provide added security to prevent sexual assaults by said trans prisoners, and stop acting like a couple people having (hopefully consensual) sex in prison is anything new or horrifying.

 
Maybe.  Should have thought of that before they decided to commit prison level crimes.  But, much like sports, trans females have a physical advantage over cis females and it's not fair to subject those females to that environment.  The alternative would be to do what some have proposed regarding males/females in sports and locker rooms - stop differentiating at all.  We can just build one big prison and house everyone together. 
Marijuana possession can be a prison level offense as are car thefts and snatch and grabs. Is rape and buggery of trans-males by cis-males an official part of the sentence for these offenses or just icing on the cake? Seems awful inhumane to think it wise to subjugate trans-males to this form of abuse. 

 
I see. So is it fair to say that you (and apparently Ivan) don't actually care very much about reducing sexual assaults in our prisons, you only care about who is getting assaulted? Or to put it another way, is it fair to say that you think transgender criminals deserve to be punished more severely than cisgender criminals who commit the same crime?


I'm going to respond to this and be done with this tangent.  If Ivan wants to continue with you so be it.  There's a reason I limit my engagement with you.  My response to the above is that my first priority, and this applies to most situations, is to not make the situation worse.  There is already sexual assault in prison.  I'd love for prisons to eliminate that but we all know it's a fact of life as prison life is currently constructed.  Putting physically superior, biological males, in all women's prisons without changing anything else is a recipe for disaster.  I feel empathy for legit transgender prisoners but they knew the deal when they committed the crime.

 
I'm going to respond to this and be done with this tangent.  If Ivan wants to continue with you so be it.  There's a reason I limit my engagement with you.  My response to the above is that my first priority, and this applies to most situations, is to not make the situation worse.  There is already sexual assault in prison.  I'd love for prisons to eliminate that but we all know it's a fact of life as prison life is currently constructed.  Putting physically superior, biological males, in all women's prisons without changing anything else is a recipe for disaster.  I feel empathy for legit transgender prisoners but they knew the deal when they committed the crime.


Why is this a "recipe for disaster," but putting a few people (who are likely physically inferior due to hormone treatment) in a prison with a population comprised almost entirely of these "physically superior biological males" is somehow not? It seems to me that if your intent is to limit sexual assaults in prison, or at least not make the situation worse, that's the absolute worst thing you could do.

I'm sorry if you think I'm harping on something or being unfair, but you and others have claimed that you want to prevent sexual assaults in prison while advocating for policies that would almost certainly do the exact opposite. So I think it's more than fair to ask for clarification.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can you legally send state prisoners out of state? Seems like a couple of trans prisons that housed all of the states trans prisoners would solve this issue. One for trans women and one for trans men. 

But this would probably lead to lawsuits because everything leads to lawsuits. 

But yeah, you cant put a fully post op trans woman in a mans prison. That would be cruel. 

 
Can you legally send state prisoners out of state? Seems like a couple of trans prisons that housed all of the states trans prisoners would solve this issue. One for trans women and one for trans men. 

But this would probably lead to lawsuits because everything leads to lawsuits. 

But yeah, you cant put a fully post op trans woman in a mans prison. That would be cruel. 


No, not unless it is a federal crime. 

 
Agreed.  Also, men's prisons already have ways of dealing with people who need to be placed in protective custody.  It seems like we should be able to accommodate men who live as women using those procedures.

Ideally we would make some significant reforms to prisons that take the issue of prison rape seriously.  But (a) I don't know enough to have strong opinions about what sort of reforms might work, and (b) I'm really confident that housing (probably) violent and heterosexual men in an institutional setting with women is not consistent with taking the issue of prison rape seriously, and (c) we have a good-enough solution (protective custody) available already.


This is (obviously) way outside the topic, but another solution (which you hinted at) is to just have better, more humane prisons. 

But I reckon that's for another thread.

 
This is (obviously) way outside the topic, but another solution (which you hinted at) is to just have better, more humane prisons. 

But I reckon that's for another thread.
Yep.  We incarcerate way too many people for way too long, in settings that seem inhumane to me, as you put it.  But that goes way beyond the scope of this one particular discussion.

 
Wrong again.  What if a parent decided he will not educate his kid.  For whatever reason(not talking about home schooling.).

Maybe he's a farmer and has already decided his kid doesn't need any education because he just wants the kid to work the farm.  I get a say in that.  I get to elect people who will force that parent to educate their child.

Again, this whole you don't get a say because you don't live it is wrong.  Completely.  

You're right i don't get to decide directly.  But I am completely in my right to elect people who agree with  my point of view.  Just as you are. 
Apparently there are some challenges to your comments about farming. I don’t know enough about that subject to offer my thoughts. 
What I WILL say is that I think there is a big difference between the issue of public concerns and private medical decisions. Earlier, @Ramblin Wreck challenged me on this same issue by pointing out that I was in favor of mandatory vaccines, which seemed to be a contradiction. 
But it isn’t, the principle is the same. I want the government to act when public health, public safety, public education are the subject matter: that would cover both vaccines and school attendance. But I DON’T want the government to act when it’s a private matter that has no effect on the public, which would cover transition surgery and the like. That’s my thinking. 

 
This is (obviously) way outside the topic, but another solution (which you hinted at) is to just have better, more humane prisons. 

But I reckon that's for another thread.


I could not agree more...I am very law and order but not sure when it became OK to have prisons turn into Escape from New York.

 
Thats a good read. 

I found the first comment interesting.

"It seems unfortunate to me that, in respectable company, people can't ALSO propose treatments that may make the mind more in line with the body -- rather than only considering cutting up the body to be more like the mind.

For example, it seems plausible that a young male who wants to become a female might have the mismatch resolved with more testosterone and other hormones -- which could lead to feeling right in a male body. Hormones, as is well known, impact thought processes and brain development as well as bodies."

That should be a valid topic of discussion and would obviously be shouted down in most circles as conversion therapy.

 
Apparently there are some challenges to your comments about farming. I don’t know enough about that subject to offer my thoughts. 
What I WILL say is that I think there is a big difference between the issue of public concerns and private medical decisions. Earlier, @Ramblin Wreck challenged me on this same issue by pointing out that I was in favor of mandatory vaccines, which seemed to be a contradiction. 
But it isn’t, the principle is the same. I want the government to act when public health, public safety, public education are the subject matter: that would cover both vaccines and school attendance. But I DON’T want the government to act when it’s a private matter that has no effect on the public, which would cover transition surgery and the like. That’s my thinking. 
So you support transition surgeries always being 100% out of pocket? 

 
Thats a good read. 

I found the first comment interesting.

"It seems unfortunate to me that, in respectable company, people can't ALSO propose treatments that may make the mind more in line with the body -- rather than only considering cutting up the body to be more like the mind.

For example, it seems plausible that a young male who wants to become a female might have the mismatch resolved with more testosterone and other hormones -- which could lead to feeling right in a male body. Hormones, as is well known, impact thought processes and brain development as well as bodies."

That should be a valid topic of discussion and would obviously be shouted down in most circles as conversion therapy.
People who use terms like "conversion therapy" in this discussion can be safely ignored.

If you're ever diagnosed with depression, social anxiety disorder, schizophrenia, or any other mental illness, there's an extremely high chance that conversion therapy will be the first course of treatment.  Obviously prescription drugs are quick and easy go-to treatments for most people as well, but generally speaking the first best course of treatment is to talk people out of whatever rut their brain is stuck in.  That works for some people and doesn't work for others.  Figuring out a way to make somebody happy with as little medical intervention as possible is usually seen as the ideal outcome for things like this though. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I can only speak for the young person in my family that is currently transitioning but they have been through many therapy sessions for 4-5 years now since they started their journey. They struggled initially to figure out what they were feeling about themselves and then came out to some friends and siblings at 15. There was no instantaneous change in appearance or in how they lived their life but slowly they started to become more confident in what was happening and started a full blown transition. Now at nearly 19 they are doing hormone treatments and longer term looking at reassignment. Telling the dad was the toughest challenge but the whole family, extended as well, is supportive and on board. All this while still going to therapy along the way. So yes, mental and emotional needs have to be considered as long as the therapy is open minded about any possibility whether an emotional flight of fancy or a true sense of self as different than currently composed. Trans is real and cant be squashed as Only a mental issue.

 
I can only speak for the young person in my family that is currently transitioning but they have been through many therapy sessions for 4-5 years now since they started their journey. They struggled initially to figure out what they were feeling about themselves and then came out to some friends and siblings at 15. There was no instantaneous change in appearance or in how they lived their life but slowly they started to become more confident in what was happening and started a full blown transition. Now at nearly 19 they are doing hormone treatments and longer term looking at reassignment. Telling the dad was the toughest challenge but the whole family, extended as well, is supportive and on board. All this while still going to therapy along the way. So yes, mental and emotional needs have to be considered as long as the therapy is open minded about any possibility whether an emotional flight of fancy or a true sense of self as different than currently composed. Trans is real and cant be squashed as Only a mental issue.
,Good to hear this person has waited until 19 to make these changes.  He/she is an adult and can do what he/she wants.  

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top