Why must I prove that I am me to pay my bills over the phone?Do strangers call to pay my bills?If they do, why don't you let them?
0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 03:09:53 PMQuote from: hykeaswell on September 22, 2009, 03:03:34 PMhttp://etransgender.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=510QuoteIn addition, the study remains to be replicated by other researchers, which will not be easy. It was performed by dissecting the autopsied brains of transsexuals, homosexual men, heterosexual men and heterosexual women. Because transsexuality is rare, it took the scientists 11 years to collect six transsexual brains.Hardly conclusive evidence, far from it in fact. True, but to say that it is untrue what he finds is impossible too based on this research. You cannot dismiss it. Asking for further research is another thing. But I guess you'll find that a waste of money.This same Swaab is also working with aspies btw.
Quote from: hykeaswell on September 22, 2009, 03:03:34 PMhttp://etransgender.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=510QuoteIn addition, the study remains to be replicated by other researchers, which will not be easy. It was performed by dissecting the autopsied brains of transsexuals, homosexual men, heterosexual men and heterosexual women. Because transsexuality is rare, it took the scientists 11 years to collect six transsexual brains.Hardly conclusive evidence, far from it in fact.
http://etransgender.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=510
In addition, the study remains to be replicated by other researchers, which will not be easy. It was performed by dissecting the autopsied brains of transsexuals, homosexual men, heterosexual men and heterosexual women. Because transsexuality is rare, it took the scientists 11 years to collect six transsexual brains.
Quote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 03:55:21 PMQuote from: numa numa on September 22, 2009, 03:32:47 PMwow, an example of stupidity, probably thought up by someone who's not even gay/trans themselves, but what the hell, let's make a big Daily Mail fiasco about it Actually they legally have to do it, thanks to Stonewall's lobbying. Does it really matter who the person guarding the Queen fucks, is attracted to or identifies as? I mean, as long as he/she doesn't go and rape her in a bush somewhere in the garden, then do we really fucking care?
Quote from: numa numa on September 22, 2009, 03:32:47 PMwow, an example of stupidity, probably thought up by someone who's not even gay/trans themselves, but what the hell, let's make a big Daily Mail fiasco about it Actually they legally have to do it, thanks to Stonewall's lobbying.
wow, an example of stupidity, probably thought up by someone who's not even gay/trans themselves, but what the hell, let's make a big Daily Mail fiasco about it
Quote from: hykeaswell on September 22, 2009, 03:22:57 PMQuote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 03:09:53 PMQuote from: hykeaswell on September 22, 2009, 03:03:34 PMhttp://etransgender.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=510QuoteIn addition, the study remains to be replicated by other researchers, which will not be easy. It was performed by dissecting the autopsied brains of transsexuals, homosexual men, heterosexual men and heterosexual women. Because transsexuality is rare, it took the scientists 11 years to collect six transsexual brains.Hardly conclusive evidence, far from it in fact. True, but to say that it is untrue what he finds is impossible too based on this research. You cannot dismiss it. Asking for further research is another thing. But I guess you'll find that a waste of money.This same Swaab is also working with aspies btw.I would be happy for more research to be done, though the fact it took 11 years to find 6 brains kind of shows that transexuals are bullshitting for the most part. Looks like a result of the operation rather than anything else.
Quote from: Miss Bint on September 22, 2009, 03:58:19 PMQuote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 03:55:21 PMQuote from: numa numa on September 22, 2009, 03:32:47 PMwow, an example of stupidity, probably thought up by someone who's not even gay/trans themselves, but what the hell, let's make a big Daily Mail fiasco about it Actually they legally have to do it, thanks to Stonewall's lobbying. Does it really matter who the person guarding the Queen fucks, is attracted to or identifies as? I mean, as long as he/she doesn't go and rape her in a bush somewhere in the garden, then do we really fucking care?No. But according to Stonewall et al, it really matters. Despite there being no real evidence that gay people are significantly disadvantaged in seeking employment, its harder even today for black people by miles. For one, the interviewer knows. Same with disabled people.
Quote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 03:55:21 PMApart from you want the right to choose your gender and the social role that goes with it - that is an extra privelege in itself. well, no. I don't want the right to "choose my gender." but even if that was the case, you have that right too. You can live as a man or woman just as much as I can.
Apart from you want the right to choose your gender and the social role that goes with it - that is an extra privelege in itself.
Quote from: numa numa on September 22, 2009, 03:58:35 PMQuote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 03:55:21 PMApart from you want the right to choose your gender and the social role that goes with it - that is an extra privelege in itself. well, no. I don't want the right to "choose my gender." but even if that was the case, you have that right too. You can live as a man or woman just as much as I can.Quite blatently you do want that right. As I have said umpteen times, I would rather the government spent its time and money guaranteeing my rights in the first place, rather than your right to lead a certain lifestyle choice.
Quote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 04:01:32 PMQuote from: Miss Bint on September 22, 2009, 03:58:19 PMQuote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 03:55:21 PMQuote from: numa numa on September 22, 2009, 03:32:47 PMwow, an example of stupidity, probably thought up by someone who's not even gay/trans themselves, but what the hell, let's make a big Daily Mail fiasco about it Actually they legally have to do it, thanks to Stonewall's lobbying. Does it really matter who the person guarding the Queen fucks, is attracted to or identifies as? I mean, as long as he/she doesn't go and rape her in a bush somewhere in the garden, then do we really fucking care?No. But according to Stonewall et al, it really matters. Despite there being no real evidence that gay people are significantly disadvantaged in seeking employment, its harder even today for black people by miles. For one, the interviewer knows. Same with disabled people. It does matter if a person is not being hired because of their sexuality or gender identity. That is discrimination.
Quote from: Miss Bint on September 22, 2009, 04:03:38 PMQuote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 04:01:32 PMQuote from: Miss Bint on September 22, 2009, 03:58:19 PMQuote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 03:55:21 PMQuote from: numa numa on September 22, 2009, 03:32:47 PMwow, an example of stupidity, probably thought up by someone who's not even gay/trans themselves, but what the hell, let's make a big Daily Mail fiasco about it Actually they legally have to do it, thanks to Stonewall's lobbying. Does it really matter who the person guarding the Queen fucks, is attracted to or identifies as? I mean, as long as he/she doesn't go and rape her in a bush somewhere in the garden, then do we really fucking care?No. But according to Stonewall et al, it really matters. Despite there being no real evidence that gay people are significantly disadvantaged in seeking employment, its harder even today for black people by miles. For one, the interviewer knows. Same with disabled people. It does matter if a person is not being hired because of their sexuality or gender identity. That is discrimination.Well you just don't tell the employer at interview, its not rocket science. If they sack you for it, then its easy to screw them over at an employment tribunal anyway. Actively going out to delibrately hire someone because they are gay is outrageous imo. Give that treatment to disabled people instead, its a far fairer use of it.
Quote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 04:03:49 PMQuote from: numa numa on September 22, 2009, 03:58:35 PMQuote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 03:55:21 PMApart from you want the right to choose your gender and the social role that goes with it - that is an extra privelege in itself. well, no. I don't want the right to "choose my gender." but even if that was the case, you have that right too. You can live as a man or woman just as much as I can.Quite blatently you do want that right. As I have said umpteen times, I would rather the government spent its time and money guaranteeing my rights in the first place, rather than your right to lead a certain lifestyle choice. I'm glad you've admited it at least. It's all ME ME ME with hadron. Fuck everyone else and their problems
Seriously dude, what the fuck are trans people taking away from autistic people by trying to make society more accepting and tolerant? (which incidentally is the same thing every group that's been discriminated does, and continues to do even after they have all their rights on paper - women, black people, gay people)
Quote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 04:06:19 PMQuote from: Miss Bint on September 22, 2009, 04:03:38 PMQuote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 04:01:32 PMQuote from: Miss Bint on September 22, 2009, 03:58:19 PMQuote from: Christopher McCandless on September 22, 2009, 03:55:21 PMQuote from: numa numa on September 22, 2009, 03:32:47 PMwow, an example of stupidity, probably thought up by someone who's not even gay/trans themselves, but what the hell, let's make a big Daily Mail fiasco about it Actually they legally have to do it, thanks to Stonewall's lobbying. Does it really matter who the person guarding the Queen fucks, is attracted to or identifies as? I mean, as long as he/she doesn't go and rape her in a bush somewhere in the garden, then do we really fucking care?No. But according to Stonewall et al, it really matters. Despite there being no real evidence that gay people are significantly disadvantaged in seeking employment, its harder even today for black people by miles. For one, the interviewer knows. Same with disabled people. It does matter if a person is not being hired because of their sexuality or gender identity. That is discrimination.Well you just don't tell the employer at interview, its not rocket science. If they sack you for it, then its easy to screw them over at an employment tribunal anyway. Actively going out to delibrately hire someone because they are gay is outrageous imo. Give that treatment to disabled people instead, its a far fairer use of it. NO. Positive discrimination is retarded altogether. Not just when it doesn't suit you. Hiring me becuase I'm aspie would be just as bad as hiring me because I'm trans, and I w0uldn't want either. And with facebook etc, it's quite easy for employers to find out someone's gay. Having a wedding picture of you and your husband on your desk, talking to colleagues about your life at breeak etc