Becoming disabled by choice, not chance: ‘Transabled’ people feel like impostors in their fully working bodies

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Honestly? Yes. I would probably advise against it, because what the funk are you doing, but at the same time I have always preferred to live and let live.

 

But that isn't what this is. This is presenting it as a social movement, debasing debatably similar (but much more valid) things such as transgender rights, as well as spitting in the face of those who actually are disabled, by presenting itself as a matter of ability, rather than a matter of choice.

It's all a matter choice. Neither I nor the right is the one debating if these body modification movements are a matter of choice.

 

What's happened here is people have conflated transgendered rights with a completely unrelated LGB movement due solely to the social conservatives disliking both groups. And these false equivalency has opened doors to all sorts of lunacy. 

 

Before Tom starts chest thumping for the infallibility of the liberals, it's not just this transable crap, the movement has steadily been adding more letters to it, such as Q, A, I, + 

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

You keep equating this to being transgender. That simply isn't an apt comparison.

 

There is a very clear line between the two and if you can't see it it is because you are refusing to for the sake of your tirade.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'm sure you'd find support for that statement in a lot of places. Because that statement covers any form of cosmetic surgery as well. It's a horrible form of equivilance as a result because it's incredibly vague.

 

If you asked "Should a person be allowed to make consensual body modifications, including maiming oneself, without overwhelming public stigma?" you wouldn't get the same level of support because the specifics turn it into a completely different

 

I fully admit there are insane liberals. Just as there are insane conservatives. I take objection to you using liberal as if it's a dirty word as if all those who have a liberal ideology believe the same kind of bullshit as the regressive left say. It's the same as if I were to say you are one of the evangelical relgious nutjobs because you happen to be right aligned. It's unfair and provocative.

 

I want you to divorce the idea that the idiotic sheet some liberals do is because they are liberal, as opposed to them just being funking idiots or insane as is the case for the body modification. That is what I take objection to, your insistence on slandering an entire half of the poltiical spectrum because of the actions of a handful of people. Because I know that you should be intellegent enough not to believe it.

 

This is kind of a sidetrack; But do you actually think that I'm one of those sorts of liberals? For reference I don't think that all those with conservative views are evil fucks. I actually embrace a lot more conservative views than I used to as a result od discussion with my fellows at university. I believe this has been reflected in some of my evolved viewpoints over the past few years. So I find the idea that you think I'd be, and involve myself with a bunch of people who believe this sheet is anything other than a sign of mental illness really strange?

Isn't cutting a penis into 3rd and folding it into a pseudo-vagina "body mutilation" or is that acceptable body mutilation? 

 

Well you'd be wrong there Tom, because I'm an agnostic, who was once Hindu and once Catholic, but never an evangelical. You calling me a right wing evangelical is debatable in the first, and completely false in the latter.

 

I'm not saying that supporting Transable is the liberal mainstream, but they're certainly a major reason why it's been lent credence in the recent years. I'm calling out the liberals for giving encouragement to a bullshit movement. Just as I'd call out the right for giving encouragement to Nazis

You keep equating this to being transgender. That simply isn't an apt comparison.

 

There is a very clear line between the two and if you can't see it it is because you are refusing to for the sake of your tirade.

enlighten me

 

The problem with Transgenderism is there is no clear Buck stops here with it.

 

There is one with LGB with the next and only logical steps being legalizing Incest, and maybe legalizing polygamy. The precedent of consulting adults doesn't give much wiggle room.

 

But if you're gonna legalize, "my body is wrong for me" there's a lot you can go and argue for

 

edit:

 

For example, there's a real case you can make that people like me in the Trumpian wing of America supporting an immigration restriction can lead to emboldening of Nazis and calls for racial purity.

[Sunshine Jesse]

Isn't cutting a penis into 3rd and folding it into a pseudo-vagina "body mutilation" or is that acceptable body mutilation? 

 

Well you'd be wrong there Tom, because I'm an agnostic, who was once Hindu and once Catholic, but never an evangelical. You calling me a right wing evangelical is debatable in the first, and completely false in the latter.

 

I'm not saying that supporting Transable is the liberal mainstream, but they're certainly a major reason why it's been lent credence in the recent years. I'm calling out the liberals for giving encouragement to a bullshit movement. Just as I'd call out the right for giving encouragement to Nazis

enlighten me

 

The problem with Transgenderism is there is no clear Buck stops here with it.

 

There is one with LGB with the next and only logical steps being legalizing Incest, and maybe legalizing polygamy. The precedent of consulting adults doesn't give much wiggle room.

 

But if you're gonna legalize, "my body is wrong for me" there's a lot you can go and argue for

 

edit:

 

For example, there's a real case you can make that people like me in the Trumpian wing of America supporting an immigration restriction can lead to emboldening of Nazis and calls for racial purity.

The difference is that Nazis hurt other people and this is about giving people the right to hurt themselves.

 

It's about freedom.

[Aerion Brightflame]

Before Tom starts chest thumping for the infallibility of the liberals,

 

I'm not taking cheap shots

 

I'm sorry?

 

Directing an attack, at me for something I am not doing in this thread is not a cheap shot? I have made no comments on the issue of transgenderism in this thread, and I have not tried to pass liberals off as infallable. My initial post was in reponse to taking a shot at my nation (Which still confuses me because the nation to the right of Europe whom has had a Tory government for 8 years now and recently gave a big middle finger to what you'd class as the liberal attiude in the form of Brexit is now a bastion of liberal ideals? Not like the socialist scandinavian nations?), and my second one in reponse to a very shitty equvilance that even admits I don't agree with all liberal views?

 

Or do we just have different definitions of cheap shots here?

 

Isn't cutting a penis into 3rd and folding it into a pseudo-vagina "body mutilation" or is that acceptable body mutilation? 

 

Well you'd be wrong there Tom, because I'm an agnostic, who was once Hindu and once Catholic, but never an evangelical. You calling me a right wing evangelical is debatable in the first, and completely false in the latter.

 

I'm not saying that supporting Transable is the liberal mainstream, but they're certainly a major reason why it's been lent credence in the recent years. I'm calling out the liberals for giving encouragement to a bullshit movement. Just as I'd call out the right for giving encouragement to Nazis

 

I don't have an opinion on the issue of transgenderism in relation to this, solely because I know too many such individuals through this website that I can form no objection opinion on it. If you pressed me on the issue I would not consider it comparable to self mutlation with the intention of becoming non abled bodied, but frankly I would rather not comment upon it.

 

Forgive this, but Jesus funking Christ can you not read?

 

I fully admit there are insane liberals. Just as there are insane conservatives. I take objection to you using liberal as if it's a dirty word as if all those who have a liberal ideology believe the same kind of bullshit as the regressive left say. It's the same as if I were to say you are one of the evangelical relgious nutjobs because you happen to be right aligned. It's unfair and provocative.

 

Read. The. Line. It was HYPOTHETICAL. The entire point of it that statement was to say that if I did call you that it would be outrageous and false. And paint a narrative and belief system in you that was inaccurate and too extreme. And to highlight that you insist on doing the same to anyone who has some kind of left wing viewpoint at somepoint or another on this site. And that you shouldn't precisely because it's dumb, unfair and libelous.

 

Your third point is probably true, but I do not think it warrants the disdaining term in which you use 'liberals'. I think additionally there are more productive things to do than to just blame liberals and that's to acknowledge the origon of transablism as a mental health condition and seek to address that rather seek a need to form blame. Whether transgenderism is apart of that is a seperate issue to the issue of transablism is it's own debate in my eyes.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'm sorry?

 

Directing an attack, at me for something I am not doing in this thread is not a cheap shot? I have made no comments on the issue of transgenderism in this thread, and I have not tried to pass liberals off as infallable. My initial post was in reponse to taking a shot at my nation (Which still confuses me because the nation to the right of Europe whom has had a Tory government for 8 years now and recently gave a big middle finger to what you'd class as the liberal attiude in the form of Brexit is now a bastion of liberal ideals? Not like the socialist scandinavian nations?), and my second one in reponse to a very shitty equvilance that even admits I don't agree with all liberal views?

 

Or do we just have different definitions of cheap shots here?

 

I don't have an opinion on the issue of transgenderism in relation to this, solely because I know too many such individuals through this website that I can form no objection opinion on it. If you pressed me on the issue I would not consider it comparable to self mutlation with the intention of becoming non abled bodied, but frankly I would rather not comment upon it.

 

Forgive this, but Jesus funking Christ can you not read?

 

 

Read. The. Line. It was HYPOTHETICAL. The entire point of it that statement was to say that if I did call you that it would be outrageous and false. And paint a narrative and belief system in you that was inaccurate and too extreme. And to highlight that you insist on doing the same to anyone who has some kind of left wing viewpoint at somepoint or another on this site. And that you shouldn't precisely because it's dumb, unfair and libelous.

 

Your third point is probably true, but I do not think it warrants the disdaining term in which you use 'liberals'. I think additionally there are more productive things to do than to just blame liberals and that's to acknowledge the origon of transablism as a mental health condition and seek to address that rather seek a need to form blame. Whether transgenderism is apart of that is a seperate issue to the issue of transablism is it's own debate in my eyes.

I'm disagreeing with your hypothetical. It would not be outrageous at all, but rather a fair point. I would refute such a claim by saying the travel ban is due to non-cooperation from those 7 nations in the face of terrorist infiltration, and not an ethnic one. But you calling out the right for being in lock step wouldn't be wrong.

 

Don't move the goal post here to claim the victim. The original post was Ain lamenting how lefty the American campus left had become. I followed through on that saying, forget foreign friends, there's friends in my state itself that I cannot explain NOVA to. 

 

Relative to America, even the UK, is quite socially out there. There's no point discussing Skandies. It's a forgone point.

 

I guess we do have different views of "pot shots" 

 

I'd say it's a fairly valid shot given your attempts to defend the left from the cockbullshittery of the regressive left. "Look guys, it's not us, it's them" pushes too much blame off the left and the more liberal government for cultivating this festering far left movement. Yes, you've called out the regressive left, which is why I didn't say "Before Tom starts chest thumping for the infallibility of Tom"

The difference is that Nazis hurt other people and this is about giving people the right to hurt themselves.

 

It's about freedom.

Nazis was a completely different point about enabling the fringes

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

God forbid I support the right for people to be free to do whatever they want to their own bodies.

 

The human body isn't sacred. Happiness is more important than any societal ideal for what one's body should look like.

 

What makes "our bodies" ours? A body's just a vessel, that is here and subject to the governance of our conscience for reasons beyond us. There are many who feel at their happiest when they relinquish a sense of ownership of the bodies and even the minds they happen to inhabit, instead entrust these things to someone else or to an external force or cause, often in solidarity with others who've done the same. 

[a bad post]

Isn't cutting a penis into 3rd and folding it into a pseudo-vagina "body mutilation" or is that acceptable body mutilation? 

 

Well you'd be wrong there Tom, because I'm an agnostic, who was once Hindu and once Catholic, but never an evangelical. You calling me a right wing evangelical is debatable in the first, and completely false in the latter.

 

I'm not saying that supporting Transable is the liberal mainstream, but they're certainly a major reason why it's been lent credence in the recent years. I'm calling out the liberals for giving encouragement to a bullshit movement. Just as I'd call out the right for giving encouragement to Nazis

enlighten me

 

The problem with Transgenderism is there is no clear Buck stops here with it.

 

There is one with LGB with the next and only logical steps being legalizing Incest, and maybe legalizing polygamy. The precedent of consulting adults doesn't give much wiggle room.

 

But if you're gonna legalize, "my body is wrong for me" there's a lot you can go and argue for

 

edit:

 

For example, there's a real case you can make that people like me in the Trumpian wing of America supporting an immigration restriction can lead to emboldening of Nazis and calls for racial purity.

Quite frankly I don't understand what's wrong with polygamy. I mean if 3 or more consenting adults decide they want to have a relationship like that were's the danger. It's like they're hurting anyone, or causing any problems. If I'm going to be perfectly honest I don't see why you're throwing such a fit over this either. If somebody wants to mutilate themselves because they feel like who's honestly going to stop them, and who are they hurting? I mean if you're worried how to it will affect disabled people, like veterans, you just have include clauses in insurance that excludes self-harm, not that hard.

 

I do take issue with the fact that you're saying that transgenderism "opened the door" to all this. First of all, not all transgender people require or get genital surgery. Second of all, circumcision has been a thing that we accepted as a society since forever, so are we going to say that circumcision opened the door to this too. 

 

Also, I'd like to mention since clovergender was brought up in the thread that it's a fake thing made up by people at 4chan to delegitimize the LGBT movement.

 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Quite frankly I don't understand what's wrong with polygamy. I mean if 3 or more consenting adults decide they want to have a relationship like that were's the danger. It's like they're hurting anyone, or causing any problems. If I'm going to be perfectly honest I don't see why you're throwing such a fit over this either. If somebody wants to mutilate themselves because they feel like who's honestly going to stop them, and who are they hurting? I mean if you're worried how to it will affect disabled people, like veterans, you just have include clauses in insurance that excludes self-harm, not that hard.

 

I do take issue with the fact that you're saying that transgenderism "opened the door" to all this. First of all, not all transgender people require or get genital surgery. Second of all, circumcision has been a thing that we accepted as a society since forever, so are we going to say that circumcision opened the door to this too. 

 

Also, I'd like to mention since clovergender was brought up in the thread that it's a fake thing made up by people at 4chan to delegitimize the LGBT movement.

1) problem with Poly is tax code and deductions

 

2) yeh, but usually castration isn't celebrated in society. While transition isn't required, it does beg the question what's the goal of trangenderism if not to be as similar to the desired gender as possible

 

3) Late, we already pointed out that clovergender was a thing people made up, but it was also shown in this thread that people do feel a different age than their biology would imply. Which age are those people? 4ch trolls may have used it to mock the T community, but it's a valid question to ask why they don't get any rights

[Aerion Brightflame]

I'm disagreeing with your hypothetical. It would not be outrageous at all, but rather a fair point. I would refute such a claim by saying the travel ban is due to non-cooperation from those 7 nations in the face of terrorist infiltration, and not an ethnic one. But you calling out the right for being in lock step wouldn't be wrong.

 

What... what does the travel ban have anything to do with this thread? That's got nothing to do with my hypothetical at all my hypothetical was about how just labeling someone as something they aren't to discredit them has no place here?

 

 

Don't move the goal post here to claim the victim. The original post was Ain lamenting how lefty the American campus left had become. I followed through on that saying, forget foreign friends, there's friends in my state itself that I cannot explain NOVA to. 

 

Relative to America, even the UK, is quite socially out there. There's no point discussing Skandies. It's a forgone point.

I'm claiming the victim because you labelled my nation as believers in this kind of sheet. Which is hilarious because despite the funking immense amount of stigma around mental health issues, and the general underfunding of such treatment centres, you think we also manage to readily accept transablism? Like we go 'funk you and your crippling depression, you've got no reason to be miserable. By the way, this is Bob, he thinks he should have been in a wheel chair since birth so he broke his own spine, and he makes just a darling chocolate triffle'.

 

We are a fairly reserved nation. Just becaue we have some things you'd view as extreme left, (Like out guns laws) doesn't mean we are anywhere near fostering, or even beginning to foster this kind of attitude. This sheet would be out of place in my uni, and hilariously enough the university actually banned someone from speaking at an event because of anti-trans viewpoints a year or two before I joined. Your post read to me not as a statement of 'they are more left than us', but as 'they believe this sheet' partially because you claimed transabilism was a common viewpoint here. If you meant to say 'they are more left than us' you should have written that, not added add inflamatory flourishes.

 

I'd say it's a fairly valid shot given your attempts to defend the left from the cockbullshittery of the regressive left. "Look guys, it's not us, it's them" pushes too much blame off the left and the more liberal government for cultivating this festering far left movement. Yes, you've called out the regressive left, which is why I didn't say "Before Tom starts chest thumping for the infallibility of Tom"

 

And I will refute that having left alligned views means I have anything to do with the idiocy of the regressive left. In the case of non organised or non hierarical groups I view those whom I feel have rational interperations of there viewpoints have no reponsibility over the actions and behavoir of those at the extreme fringes. Because the extreme fringes I find are usually populated with those incapable of defending there own stances in an adequate manner, and thus it's indicative of a lack of suitable grounding in opinion.

 

I will also refute the idea of it being a valid shot. This is debates. There shouldn't be shots fired at all. Because we are attempting to have cordial discussion, for which there should be no need to fire shots in the first place. I would greatly appreciate it if you didn't 'fire shots' in debates.

 

Again, I just want you to stop using 'liberals' as a dirty word. I'm tired of seeing you use it as if it's an actual argument, and I'm tired of seeing you use it to dismiss all the concerns of the left. People don't believe sheet without some kind of basis for it, it would be far better for you to try and emphasis and understand that basis than to dismiss them like the regressive left dismissed everyone who didn't believe there bull with the terms 'racist' and 'bigot'. It may as well make you equivilant.

 

But you know what Winter, funk it you win. I'm tired, I don't want to argue minutae with you anymore. You are deadset in your view of how the UK is apparently despite my instance to the contrary, and you clearly think that taking what I'd view as ad homien attacks at me and my country are justified, so there's nothing else I can do but voice my concerns and hope you take them on board. I know you won't, because I've said them all before to no avail, but what the hell.

[Delibirb]

I realize the tone has shifted somewhat and as such I'm a bit late, but I'd like to quickly say that medical procedures are not comparable to body mutilation. Transitional surgeries and the like are by definition surgeries, and are done professionally, with thought and proper tools. Blinding yourself with cleaning supplies and cutting your arm off with a cleaver is self harm. It's illogical, improperly considered and done unsafely, and cannot be encouraged.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

I realize the tone has shifted somewhat and as such I'm a bit late, but I'd like to quickly say that medical procedures are not comparable to body mutilation. Transitional surgeries and the like are by definition surgeries, and are done professionally, with thought and proper tools. Blinding yourself with cleaning supplies and cutting your arm off with a cleaver is self harm. It's illogical, improperly considered and done unsafely, and cannot be encouraged.

Amputations are by definitions surgeries, and can be done professionally. You could get a safe amputation from a medical profession. If your point is that people shouldn't be lopping off limbs in their garage, I don't think you're find much disagreement

 

Stuff

 

Holy sheet mate, the entire point of the post I made to Ain was one that even you have agreed with. The UK's center is left shifted relative to the US's. There is more tolerance among more age groups for social movements like less restrictions on abortion and acceptance of transgenderism. Canada and the UK have passed laws that even liberals in America would balk at.

 

In the context of decrying the massive blueshift in my state, it should have been pretty clear that it was the first not the latter. I can't help it if you read too deep into it. No I don't think that England is full of transableists. I do think that the UK is more likely to be socially ambiguous than the US. This can certainly be seen by the travel warning they issues to people traveling to North Carolina post HB2

 

This is fair, but from an American perspective, much of the UK's policy does occupy a social fringe

 

This is General

 

Liberal has become a dirty word as the left has embraced the leftists. Liberal does not describe JFK or the anti-war protesters of Vietnam. The American left has abandoned liberalism to pander to the leftist thugs like Antifa. It's on you (as in self-proclaimed moderate liberals) to make it not a toxic word by excising the fringes.

 

Not really? I'm incredibly grateful for UKIP for what they've done. I don't think my country could have made choice it did in November without the boldness of Brexit. I don't have anything against the UK other than to note that they're even more left shifted than liberal America, and therefore unstable for an American Centrist like me.

 

Actually, it's unfair of me to paint the US as hopeless given that SCOTUS has not heard the trans-rights case this year, and they may put a stop to it all. But given even the POTUS hairbrainedly embracing the Q community, it's unlikely that this madness is gonna stop anytime soon

[a bad post]

Holy s*** mate, the entire point of the post I made to Ain was one that even you have agreed with. The UK's center is left shifted relative to the US's. There is more tolerance among more age groups for social movements like less restrictions on abortion and acceptance of transgenderism. Canada and the UK have passed laws that even liberals in America would balk at.

 

In the context of decrying the massive blueshift in my state, it should have been pretty clear that it was the first not the latter. I can't help it if you read too deep into it. No I don't think that England is full of transableists. I do think that the UK is more likely to be socially ambiguous than the US. This can certainly be seen by the travel warning they issues to people traveling to North Carolina post HB2

 

This is fair, but from an American perspective, much of the UK's policy does occupy a social fringe

 

This is General 

 

Liberal has become a dirty word as the left has embraced the leftists. Liberal does not describe JFK or the anti-war protesters of Vietnam. The American left has abandoned liberalism to pander to the leftist thugs like Antifa. It's on you (as in self-proclaimed moderate liberals) to make it not a toxic word by excising the fringes. 

 

Not really? I'm incredibly grateful for UKIP for what they've done. I don't think my country could have made choice it did in November without the boldness of Brexit. I don't have anything against the UK other than to note that they're even more left shifted than liberal America, and therefore unstable for an American Centrist like me.

Actually, it's unfair of me to paint the US as hopeless given that SCOTUS has not heard the trans-rights case this year, and they may put a stop to it all. But given even the POTUS hairbrainedly embracing the Q community, it's unlikely that this madness is gonna stop anytime soon

Point is taken on poly, I disagree, but there's no reason to push the issue further. Well to address your point on clovergender not having rights is because it's just pedophilia. Like it's literally just straight up pedophilia. As for trans people, I mean gender is a construct of the society and the mind, so it can be different from person to person. It's all about being comfortable in your own body.

 

Now to address the quote above. You have repeatedly used ad hominem attacks on the UK (and to a lesser degree Canada) and Aerion and now you're basically hitting him with you mad. Also, you really have no basis for your assumption that these two areas would be or would not be majority accepting of other far left proposals. You're really just basing most of what you're saying as your own assumptions being actual fact. You seem to view any liberal idea that you don't like as being hopeless. 

 

I really don't get why it's on moderate liberals to make liberal not a dirty word. I don't see you calling out pro-lifers or alt-right people for bombing plan parenthoods or supporting nazi ideology. You judge left-leaning movements by their fringe parts, but expect others to judge right-leaning movements by their majority.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Point is taken on poly, I disagree, but there's no reason to push the issue further. Well to address your point on clovergender not having rights is because it's just pedophilia. Like it's literally just straight up pedophilia. As for trans people, I mean gender is a construct of the society and the mind, so it can be different from person to person. It's all about being comfortable in your own body.

 

Now to address the quote above. You have repeatedly used ad hominem attacks on the UK (and to a lesser degree Canada) and Aerion and now you're basically hitting him with you mad. Also, you really have no basis for your assumption that these two areas would be or would not be majority accepting of other far left proposals. You're really just basing most of what you're saying as your own assumptions being actual fact. You seem to view any liberal idea that you don't like as being hopeless. 

 

I really don't get why it's on moderate liberals to make liberal not a dirty word. I don't see you calling out pro-lifers or alt-right people for bombing plan parenthoods or supporting nazi ideology. You judge left-leaning movements by their fringe parts, but expect others to judge right-leaning movements by their majority.

And transable is about being comfortable in your body. While that penis may bother some, the entire left leg bothers others. There's many societal constructs we don't applaud Elly

 

How many times do you guys want me to repeat this. In context w/ the discussion I was having we were lamenting how it was hard to explain some of the social oddities of the US to foreign friends

 

I contrasted his statement by claiming, it's even hard to explain to people in the same state, let alone someone more distanced from the bullshit America pushes. And then noted that it was likely that the UK and Canada would be more accepting than even the us to the more feeling based arguments.

 

You haven't been paying attention then. I've condemned and pushed for them to be excised. At times even against the position of the POTUS  

[Delibirb]

You haven't been paying attention then. I've condemned and pushed for them to be excised. At times even against the position of the POTUS  

Yes, you have indeed, that portion of the comment was incorrect. But you've also been hypocritically doing what was described in the very next sentence: Expecting, in fact demanding, "your side" be judged based on its majority while not offering the same respect to "their side." Your bias is abundantly clear.

 

What's unclear is whether you believe you're considering both sides fairly or, worse, refusing to consider that you may not be.

 

But this line of conversation is quite off topic. You can pursue my reasoning/earn my apologies elsewhere should you like. In regards to the topic at hand:

 

Amputations are by definitions surgeries, and can be done professionally. You could get a safe amputation from a medical profession. If your point is that people shouldn't be lopping off limbs in their garage, I don't think you're find much disagreement

Given the OP was in regards a man literally cutting his own hand off for this desire, I would think that the validity of garage amputations is where the disagreement would be.

 

If there is legitimate, thought out, professional surgery involved, it is essentially cosmetic surgery and much more acceptable, particularly in regards to the mental stability of the patient. Such surgeries are scheduled weeks in advance/they require preparation, giving the patient good time to mull over whether this truly is a decision made with a sound mind or not. Taking off one's own limb with a power tool, blinding oneself with household chemicals on a whim; that is where the trouble is, the mental instability that needs to be looked into.

 

If everyone is in agreement with that, as you said, there really isn't a debate here anymore.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Yes, you have indeed, that portion of the comment was incorrect. But you've also been hypocritically doing what was described in the very next sentence: Expecting, in fact demanding, "your side" be judged based on its majority while not offering the same respect to "their side." Your bias is abundantly clear.

 

What's unclear is whether you believe you're considering both sides fairly or, worse, refusing to consider that you may not be.

Bernie getting 43%  of the vote in the democratic primary suggests it's not a tiny part. When David Duke gets 43% of a GOP race, get back to me. Richard funking Spencer couldn't get 100 people to his Nazi townhall. Then CNN aired his exploits TV for a week straight and now people know about him.

 

They're not equal despite the media trying to make them out to be. 

 

---

 

No there isn't. As brightflame suggested, the slippery slope of transgenderism likely merits it's own topic

[VCR_CAT]

I mean, it's legal sure. Intentional self-infliction is legal, you just shouldn't be able to cash in on insurance for it (because that's just a whole nother slough of problems). Intentional removal of limbs won't become a thing until a mechanical prosthetic is good enough to be as good as the real thing if not better, though we are a VERY long way from that, and it's hard to say if people would be allowed to intentionally go for that kind of surgery because of how far off that would be.

 

I think if becomes socially acceptable is the question? Which like, something like this would probably never become common enough for anyone to even consider putting a label on it, because generally almost everyone is happy to have their more important limbs and parts in functioning order, and the idea that "some people aren't comfortable with some of their limbs" is just silly and baseless. We're kinda biologically programmed to want to have our bodies in functional order. If someone's willing to inflict harm upon themselves just at their home for cosmetic purposes, and goes so far as to cut off their own hand to do it, that's not something that should be deemed socially acceptable; that's something that requires the attention of a psychiatrist.

 

As for the socially acceptable part, I don't think I could respect someone who wanted to become physically impaired to a significant degree just for cosmetic purposes. Because it kind of is insulting for the people that suffered with those same impairments for reasons outside of their control. It trivializes their impairment as a fashion statement rather than a life-changing difference.

 

 

 

Bernie getting 43%  of the vote in the democratic primary suggests it's not a tiny part. When David Duke gets 43% of a GOP race, get back to me. Richard funking Spencer couldn't get 100 people to his Nazi townhall. Then CNN aired his exploits TV for a week straight and now people know about him.

 

They're not equal despite the media trying to make them out to be. 

 

It's funny to me that you're called out for not offering one side the same respect that you demand for "your side" and then go about equating people that support Bernie Sanders to nazis. All you're really doing is making that bias more and more apparent.

 

also

 

 

No there isn't. As brightflame suggested, the slippery slope of transgenderism likely merits it's own topic

 

There's a reason a slippery slope is a logical fallacy, and you should probably look into it.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

It's funny to me that you're called out for not offering one side the same respect that you demand for "your side" and then go about equating people that support Bernie Sanders to nazis. All you're really doing is making that bias more and more apparent.

 

also

 

 

 

There's a reason a slippery slope is a logical fallacy, and you should probably look into it.

Stop grandstanding VCR, you're not good at it. If one is to call out the regressive left from the more centrist left. The best split it to separate out Bernie voters from Hillary Voters. But fine, more people show up for their Antifa riots than did for Spencer's little bullshit show. It's still not equal no matter how you split it.

 

"The argument is fallacious when it is assumed that a certain action behaves with positive feedback without any prior evidence or logical reasoning that it does, but if evidence of a positive feedback mechanism is found, the slippery slope argument may be an accurate description."

 

Educate yourself. Very few things in life are absolute.

 

To reiterate. The idea made for same sex marriage and general LGB tolerance. Two consenting adults making a life choice. No detriment has been shown to spawn from such a union. Liberty is preserved. The furthest this line of thinking can justify is incest between two consenting adults. Even polygamy is unlikely as Obergefel was talking about union of two individuals

 

Trans is fare more obscure. Going along the lines of my mind disagrees with my body. My mind is superior here, and it's verdict is the valid one. This would open the doors for legal arguments to be made for things such as transagism, transableism, and clovergender. 

 

LGB and T do not have the same legal implications.