2 minutes ago, Justfine said:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/tranny

 

 

Origin

1980s: abbreviation of transvestite.

Pay up!

Pay up

Just now, Spidey said:

Origin

1980s: abbreviation of transvestite.

 

tranny¹

(also trannie)

 

NOUN

informal, offensive 

• A transvestite or transgender person.

   

  555

Common term for decades. 

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/tranny

 

Yet another British one

https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/tranny

 

 

Just  to toss another brick thro  dta   winnie....http://www.newsweek.com/rare-condition-causes-girls-become-boys-puberty-374934

 

lol

 

 

 

On 6/19/2018 at 10:39 AM, Bluespunk said:

She should be treated according to her qualifications for the job, not because of who she is.

 

Being qualified for a job is not just having a Uni degree / high school diploma.

 

For example, I could have a degree - but if I am a surly and arrogant arse, why should I expect an employer to give me the job?

I for sure would not employ someone who may throw a hissy fit when something does not suit them.

 

When employing someone, you also need to take the future into consideration - and as LBs do tend (in general) to be somewhat "screwed up in the head", it is a bit of a risk.

If the boss doesn't like ladyboys , he can choose to employ anyone he prefers. No need to mention it in the ad. That's just stupid .

 

 

20 minutes ago, Glorfindal said:

 

Being qualified for a job is not just having a Uni degree / high school diploma.

 

For example, I could have a degree - but if I am a surly and arrogant arse, why should I expect an employer to give me the job?

I for sure would not employ someone who may throw a hissy fit when something does not suit them.

 

When employing someone, you also need to take the future into consideration - and as LBs do tend (in general) to be somewhat "screwed up in the head", it is a bit of a risk.

Discrimination on the basis of being a transgender woman is wrong. 

2 hours ago, Justfine said:

https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/tranny

 

 

Also slang for US and Canadian mechanics short  for transmission or gearbox in British English. Big deal, who cares.

 We've seen on this thread, Justfine, that you can't manage a dictionary or twist the definition to suit your troll, whoops!, post.

 

4 hours ago, DM07 said:

Yes to both!

Cheers!

Unbelievable! What kind of body are you in?

2 hours ago, Get Real said:

Unbelievable! What kind of body are you in?

A human one, how about you?

 

25 minutes ago, Get Real said:

A human one, how about you?

 

Quoting yourself now?

9 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Discrimination on the basis of being a transgender woman is wrong. 

I think you have stated your position at least once. I partially agree with you – no person should be hated or abused or misused.

However, the problem is, your position negates, or simply ignores, all the baggage that comes with being a "transgender woman".

The “scientific” stance until 1974 was that homosexuality was a psychological illness. The pressure to change this position began with gay activists attacking the APA committee that decides what disorders appear in the DSM.

Eventually, some committee members removed homosexuality from the list of mental disorders. The decision was not based on any “science” or even on new studies. It was based on fear, intimidation and political pressure.

The transgender issue has followed this very same pattern. Individuals who believe they are a different sex than that of their biology were once considered psychologically ill. This position was again changed, not due to any “science” or new data being available, but purely due to politics.

Now, although a Thai boss may not be thinking along these lines – he may be thinking “what would the customers say?”
What if the companies main customers were from a nation that has little LBGT understanding? Would it be right to ruin a company (and the livelihoods of the other employees) for the sake of political correctness?

 

31 minutes ago, Glorfindal said:

I think you have stated your position at least once. I partially agree with you – no person should be hated or abused or misused.

However, the problem is, your position negates, or simply ignores, all the baggage that comes with being a "transgender woman".

The “scientific” stance until 1974 was that homosexuality was a psychological illness. The pressure to change this position began with gay activists attacking the APA committee that decides what disorders appear in the DSM.

Eventually, some committee members removed homosexuality from the list of mental disorders. The decision was not based on any “science” or even on new studies. It was based on fear, intimidation and political pressure.

The transgender issue has followed this very same pattern. Individuals who believe they are a different sex than that of their biology were once considered psychologically ill. This position was again changed, not due to any “science” or new data being available, but purely due to politics.

Now, although a Thai boss may not be thinking along these lines – he may be thinking “what would the customers say?”
What if the companies main customers were from a nation that has little LBGT understanding? Would it be right to ruin a company (and the livelihoods of the other employees) for the sake of political correctness?

 

Being opposed to discrimination because of someone’s sexual orientation or if they are transgender is not being pc, it is simply rejecting prejudice. 

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

I completely and absolutely reject any notion that transgender men and women have a mental condition. 

 

Your view that homosexuality is a mental illness is equally repellent. 

 

Views like those fuel discrimination. 

??  Where did I say that? I said it was the "scientific" position. I even used quotes every time I used the word "scientific" - in order to show how much I do not think it valid.

25 minutes ago, Glorfindal said:

??  Where did I say that? I said it was the "scientific" position. I even used quotes every time I used the word "scientific" - in order to show how much I do not think it valid.

Fair enough, my mistake. Though I still disagree with the views you express in your post on pc and why changes in thinking have occurred. 

 

And, of course, I still reject any any notion that a transgender woman or man should be refused a job because they are transgender. 

 

 

 

On 6/18/2018 at 9:45 PM, Bluespunk said:

People have the right to be identified as the gender they know them selves to be. It's not a choice, it's who they are.

 

 

Facts don't care about your feelings. There are only two genders.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/22/journal-transgenderism-not-supported-by-scientific-evidence/

 

However, I reject any any notion that a "transgender" woman or man should be rejected a job because they are transgender too.

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

Facts don't care about your feelings. There are only two genders.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/22/journal-transgenderism-not-supported-by-scientific-evidence/

 

However, I reject any any notion that a "transgender" woman or man should be rejected a job because they are transgender too.

 

 

 

The Daily Caller...not a source I trust. 

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-caller/

 

Just a right wing propaganda rag. 

13 hours ago, duanebigsby said:

My views are objective.

I'm not ignoring biology at all. Biology includes neurology and cellular biology as well.

Our brains play as large a role in gender as genitalia does. It's not as simple as penis=male, vagina=female.

Gender is based on chromosomes - we all knew that until a few years ago.

Type II Woman! Good one! I wonder which kind of woman should I go with tonight: A Type I or a Type II? Let me think...

9 hours ago, Justfine said:

Quoting yourself now?

Yep! I realized I get the best answers then.

15 hours ago, Get Real said:

Unbelievable! What kind of body are you in?

What do you want?

You asked me, if your views make you an ... in my eyes and if this conversation was over?!

I answered both of your questions and now you are butt- hurt?

Have a good weekend!

7 hours ago, Glorfindal said:

Gender is based on chromosomes - we all knew that until a few years ago.

You don't get it do you?

Sex,  male/female is based on chromosomes.

Gender is based on a myriad of other biological phenomenon.

3 hours ago, DM07 said:

What do you want?

You asked me, if your views make you an ... in my eyes and if this conversation was over?!

I answered both of your questions and now you are butt- hurt?

Have a good weekend!

EEeeh? butt-hurt??? What in the world do you mean with that?
As for everything else, you just didn´t make sense. What is this supposed to mean!
The only sentence that makes sense, is have a good weekend! Thanks!

On 6/22/2018 at 2:54 AM, Spidey said:

Nope, "trannie" is an abbreviation of transvestite, completely different to transgender. 

It was a long wheelbase Ford van when I was growing up.

 

22 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

The Daily Caller...not a source I trust. 

 

 

Then click directly on the scientific study link - nothing to do with the Daily Caller.

 

https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/number-50-fall-2016

6 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

Then click on the scientific study link - nothing to do with the Daily Caller.

I did. 

 

Didn’t change any views I hold. 

 

Hardly surprising considering the rag you quoted it in. 

7 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

 

Didn’t change any views I hold. 

 

 

I'm sure you studied the scientific evidence closely in the 7 minutes since it was posted.