Music Banter - Missing Posters Bulletin Board

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)

- Announcements, Suggestions, & Feedback (https://www.musicbanter.com/announcements-suggestions-feedback/)

- - Missing Posters Bulletin Board (https://www.musicbanter.com/announcements-suggestions-feedback/77950-missing-posters-bulletin-board.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marie Monday (Post 2189736)

Nobody is claiming the universe isn't ****ed up. Especially the comparison to cults is problematic. Together with the remark about transitioning back, you're saying that the state of being trans is an inherently negative state of being confused/troubled about your identity, not feeling right in your own skin. It implies there's something 'wrong' with trans people, while being trans is simply having a gender that doesn't correspond to your birth sex. There's nothing wrong with that in itself, implying otherwise is problematic.

I appreciate that your tone is more respectful in this post though, consider this an honest attempt at coming to a better mutual understanding.

Thank you for bringing additional clarity to it. I don't think of the issue as a positive/negative thing...cause being "something" isn't good or bad, and I don't agree with society's definitions of "good" or "bad" in a lot of ways either. I follow the experiences and discussions from people like Counterpoints on YT and work with some people who transitioned who have engaged me with their experiences (and those are some pretty long stories in and of themselves). So it's kinda annoying when Bat and Frown take my attempt to explain something and then define it as transphobic even though I'm trying to define a broader issue with human society's relationship with biology. But I get the language context even if it doesn't really fit what I was trying to say.

And Frown, one last thing for you - being straight is a "condition". Having schizophrenia is a "condition". Having a "condition" is just a catch all term in the context of what I was talking about, which could be applied to anything.

Well let's be clear, I define it as transphobic too, just maybe unintentionally so. I didn't mean 'negative' in the sense of a moral statement btw, but as in having a negative impact. As Frown said more clearly, a deficiency or a disease.

Anyway, I'll try to shut up now

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater (Post 2189721)

Lol you are such a sore loser. I don't get you at all anymore.

I literally did apply it to people with asthma, seeing as I was born with it. It's a condition I didn't ask for. I also applied it to people whose brain chemistries tend to push them into cult-like behavior in churches or organizations that are similar.

Those are all hallmarks of the inadequacies of our DNA and development in the womb. The point was that being trans is a condition / state of being that said person didn't ask for, and one that's not really treatable in the truest sense because even when people transition, you get those who, for example, want to go back to the sex they already changed from. I know people who don't feel right in their own skin regardless of what surgeries or therapies they undergo, regardless of any other factor.

You may not think of it as such, but I'm empathetic towards those who deal with those issues them because i recognize that we live in a world that can't really help them one way or the other, but maybe not ridiculously far off from being able to. Our methods are inadequate and society is weak and biased and unwilling to deal with that kind of complexity.

You can choose to disagree with the fact that we live in a ****ed up universe. But I didn't deserve to be banned for explaining myself. If that crossed a line of some kind, then I apologize.

Bro I'll be %100 honest i don't buy it at all if you're trying to spin the trans joke you made as social commentary we were supposed to pick up on our expand on... The universe already owned them? That's just a diss plain and simple and whether you think it warranted a ban or not at least own that and don't try to gaslight is into thinking you were making some serious point. Honestly that's an insult to our intelligence lol.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland (Post 2189734)

To add to that, I'll lay out the line you crossed for the sake of clarity and as a final warning.

Saying that transgender people are genetically deficient is transphobic. Do not say that **** on this forum.

Saying that being transgender is a "condition" that needs to be "treated" like a disease is transphobic. Do not say that **** on this forum.

You were banned for saying transphobic **** after being told not to and it will happen again if you post these things. This is not up for debate.

the condition/treatment thing seems like semantics to me....i could see how "condition" might be an offensive sounding term but whatever you wanna call it they are often receiving some form or another of "treatment" for it in the form of hormones/surgery/etc. I know that's not a requirement for being trans but it is the most common scenario...

Of course many trans people choose to change their sex, but this implies that it's their trans-ness that is wrong and needs to be treated. That's being implied beyond semantics

Don't confuse my warning above as a request to stop this discussion. You guys are free to discuss this if you want but Antis on thin ice with this subject and the rest of you (Bats) aren't getting free passes to hurl insults at Ant.

Tread lightly. I'll be watching.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb (Post 2189742)

Well yeah it was a joke. Every trans person I know told me the therapies and surgeries suck. It's not a cakewalk. That's the joke - it's like a trial from the universe and they didn't ask for it. The thing around Chapelle's friend and the trans community's interactions there was what drove my original comment because there's an irony in their lack of empathy over a trans comedian's experiences over Twitter when they already know how hard it is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marie Monday (Post 2189746)

Of course many trans people choose to change their sex, but this implies that it's their trans-ness that is wrong and needs to be treated. That's being implied beyond semantics

In a lot of cases they want to transition but the circumstances just aren't ideal to make the jump. It's not a bad thing to do it or not do it, but you already agree with that.

Um, I would have to take issue with any sexual orientation/choice being a "condition". That presupposes treatment to in most cases change or overcome the condition, making it almost always a negative thing. Someone would say "how's the cancer?" or maybe "how's your mental health" or somesuch, but I doubt anyone's said any of these three - "How's your straightness/heterosexuality?", "How's your homosexuality/lesbianism" or "How's your transhood?" (not sure if that's a word but you know what I mean).

When you call something a condition you've pretty much immediately implied there's a problem. Happiness is not a condition. Laziness is not a condition. Paralysis is a condition, so is measles. I think the definition of condition to include straight people (in an attempt to perhaps justify characterising people who are trans as having a condition) is disingenuous at best, maybe what you people call a strawman? Never quite understood that word really. But certainly the sort of thing that makes it look like an attempt at backtracking and retro-justification.

Just how I see it, but what do I know?

Is it the worm thing or can I literally not impugn his honesty?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 2189751)

Is it the worm thing or can I literally not impugn his honesty?

It was the worm thing.