American transwoman marries Thai woman, fueling hopes for future of same sex marriage (video)

[Jingthing]

10 minutes ago, Kevin Taylor said:

I don't get it. Why not stay a man if you like women.

Because some people are trans and that's independent of what gender(s) they're attracted to. 

[patman30]

On 6/8/2023 at 8:28 AM, Jingthing said:

The word also means HATE.

You're allowed opinions.

You're allowed to hate.

The dictionary disagrees with you.
doesn't mention "hate"
dislike, disrespect but not "hate"

[Jingthing]

5 minutes ago, patman30 said:

The dictionary disagrees with you.
doesn't mention "hate"
dislike, disrespect but not "hate"

Uh huh. Sure thing.

 

Transphobia: What It Is and What To Do About It? (webmd.com)

Transphobia describes someone who has hate, fear, or disgust for transgender people or anyone who does not fit into the male/female gender binary.

 

transphobia - definition and meaning (wordnik.com)

Fear or hatred of transsexuality.

 

 

Transphobia definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary (collinsdictionary.com)

transphobia

(trænzfoʊbiə )

UNCOUNTABLE NOUN

Transphobia is fear or hatred of transgender people.

 

Edited June 9, 2023 by Jingthing

[patman30]

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Uh huh. Sure thing.

 

Transphobia: What It Is and What To Do About It? (webmd.com)

Transphobia describes someone who has hate, fear, or disgust for transgender people or anyone who does not fit into the male/female gender binary.

 

transphobia - definition and meaning (wordnik.com)

Fear or hatred of transsexuality.

 

 

as i said the DICTIONARY disagrees with you.
regardless what authors opinions may be in the articles you read.

Edited June 9, 2023 by patman30

[bignok]

26 minutes ago, Kevin Taylor said:

I don't get it. Why not stay a man if you like women.

Or Thai men who dress as women.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, patman30 said:

as i said the DICTIONARY disagrees with you.

Collins is a dictionary. Give it up.

[BangkokReady]

On 6/7/2023 at 10:12 AM, Pouatchee said:

Geeeez  used to be lgbtq.... are they going to go through the whole alphabet? or discover a new alien sex gene?

Essentially, they're expanding it to cover as many groups as possible that don't come under the definition "heterosexual".  This then gives them an advantage in the Oppression Olympics as they can claim all the collective oppression of every group within LGBT.

[Pouatchee]

3 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

Essentially, they're expanding it to cover as many groups as possible that don't come under the definition "heterosexual".  This then gives them an advantage in the Oppression Olympics as they can claim all the collective oppression of every group within LGBT.

good way of seeing things... i am sure they would not find your comment as funny as did still smiling while writing this

[BangkokReady]

On 6/7/2023 at 4:44 PM, AndyFoxy said:

On 6/7/2023 at 4:09 PM, PremiumLane said:

you can keep stomping your feet and being triggered, but facts don't care about your feels. Gender and sex are different, not my fault you are too smooth brained to understand this. 

 

Unfortunately for you, you are wrong and deep down, I think you know it.....just can't admit it.

They aren't even clued up on their own talking points:

 

Quote

No, they are a female in terms of gender - sex and gender are not the same.

 

Sex is different to gender, in the new way of seeing things, sure, but female is sex not gender.

 

A trans woman is not female.  You cannot change your sex.

[BangkokReady]

On 6/8/2023 at 10:18 AM, Jingthing said:

It isn't.

A trans woman marries a cisgender woman.

Sorted it for you.

Surely "A trans woman marries a woman." describes it perfectly?  Why the need to shoe-horn "cis" into it?  It's redundant.  Unless you're injecting something political into it?

[KhunLA]

I'm still at a loss, of how is this "hope for same sex marriage"

 

A male, married a female ... that's it, and that's.  Has absolutely nothing to do with same sex.  What they think or want to think they are or want to be is irrelevant.  In the eyes of TH law, a man married a woman.

 

Nothing is different, except the optics.  They could dress up as a clown and a rabbit, and it would still be a male human, marrying a female human.  Legal in TH.

[BangkokReady]

On 6/8/2023 at 6:54 AM, Pouatchee said:

Maybe if you put your reading glasses on and read my original op and actially understood it we wouldnt be locking antlers. but a wanna be alpha always has trouble with humility, in my experience

Unfortunately, you won't get any sense out of some people on this issue.  There are basically two types of people in their mind when it comes to discussing LGBT: pro-LGBT people who completely agree with them and right-wing, Nazi, White Supremacists who are lying because they hate trans people, with nothing in-between.

 

Their minds cannot allow them to accept that any rational normal person might have a valid concern on any of this.

 

Even if you put together a solid argument, with evidence to back it up, once they see they are beat they will start saying that you're being aggressive and trolling.  Then they pick up their toys and run home because they don't want to play anymore.

 

It's all simply too ideological and the cognitive dissonance kicks in.

[BangkokReady]

2 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

I'm still at a loss, of how is this "hope for same sex marriage"

Clicks...

[KhunLA]

19 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

... basically two types of people in their mind when it comes to discussing LGBT: pro-LGBT people who completely agree with them and right-wing, Nazi, White Supremacists who are lying because they hate trans people, with nothing in-between.

Disagree with that, I think.

 

I consider myself way in between, pro everybody, anybody, anything ... I just hate the lobbying special interest groups.  From 'non heterosexual' groups (alphabet thing is just getting too silly now), to BLM, God, to Right/Left, Rep/Dem, women/abortion rights, anti gun or gun right,  Christian/Devil...anti vax/vax'd, masked/unmasked, pick a topic.

 

Seems you have to be either or, not allowed to think for yourself, have a middle ground.

 

Labels & divisionary tactics of 'everyone'.  I'm starting to completely ignore news, OK, op-eds as news simply doesn't exist anymore.  I actually get most of the news from AN.

 

Only other source I read is RTNews, with a small grain of salt.

Edited June 9, 2023 by KhunLA

[BangkokReady]

10 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Seems you have to be either or, not allowed to think for yourself, have a middle ground.

 

Labels & divisionary tactics of 'everyone'.  I'm starting to completely ignore news, OK, op-eds as news simply doesn't exist anymore.  I actually get most of the news from AN.

They don't want regular people, who have supported various "movements" for many years, to start thinking for themselves and questioning things.  If normies suddenly start saying "Hang on, this is all starting to get a bit silly and I'm not sure if this is positive anymore", then these groups might stop getting whatever they want automatically in the name of "progressiveness".

 

Dissenters need to be labelled and silenced.  It's all very 1984.

[Pouatchee]

1 hour ago, BangkokReady said:

Even if you put together a solid argument, with evidence to back it up, once they see they are beat they will start saying that you're being aggressive and trolling.  Then they pick up their toys and run home because they don't want to play anymore.

 

It's all simply too ideological and the cognitive dissonance kicks in.

so far, i agree with what you are saying. i do not generally like mainstream tv. however, sometimes we learn things from some shows. for example... i knew nothing of the   tbgl existence until watching south park episode where fat ass declares himself transgender.

 

 

 

here, in thailand it wasn't discussed until very recently. before that, katoeys and gays and lesbians and bi were the normal norm. i never would have had an opinion about neutral gender/transgender toilets had i not watched that episode. i think that as humans (neutral-genderless humans included) the race is making identification more and more complicated. i bet that the rising amount of people identifying themselves to some of the letters of lgbqwertyb+/- 3 is proportionate to the amount of people discovering god, allah, and all the other deities under the sun right now.

 

as you say clint, no in between. humans are taking the norm- out of normal. glad my neptunian parents put me up for adoption

 

 

Edited June 9, 2023 by Pouatchee

[CG1 Blue]

On 6/8/2023 at 4:18 AM, Jingthing said:

It isn't.

A trans woman marries a cisgender woman.

Sorted it for you.

I know you feel this word 'cisgender ' is important. But it really isn't necessary.

 

You wrote: "A trans woman marries a cisgender woman"

 

What is wrong with saying this? "A trans woman marries a woman."

 

Why should women be relabled? Did they ask to be relabled? 

 

[BangkokReady]

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

What is wrong with saying this? "A trans woman marries a woman."

They don't like that the trans woman needs a prefix while the woman does not.

[Jingthing]

2 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

I know you feel this word 'cisgender ' is important. But it really isn't necessary.

 

You wrote: "A trans woman marries a cisgender woman"

 

What is wrong with saying this? "A trans woman marries a woman."

 

Why should women be relabled? Did they ask to be relabled? 

 

It is useful here when numerous people have obnoxiously described her as being a bloke. It's a method of CLARIFICATION.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

They don't like that the trans woman needs a prefix while the woman does not.

They? Who are they?

[BangkokReady]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

They? Who are they?

The people that want "cisgender" to be a thing.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

The people that want "cisgender" to be a thing.

You're POV is transparently hostile. As I've evidenced it's a useful word sometimes. End of.

[BangkokReady]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

You're POV is transparently hostile.

I'm not in the slightest bit hostile.

 

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

As I've evidenced it's a useful word sometimes.

It's a completely redundant word.  it's purely political/ideological.

 

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

End of.

I'm afraid you don't get to shut down discussions, as much as you want to.

 

If anyone is being hostile, it's you.

Edited June 9, 2023 by BangkokReady

[CG1 Blue]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

It is useful here when numerous people have obnoxiously described her as being a bloke. It's a method of CLARIFICATION.

But you clarified one person by saying 'Trans woman'. You don't need to clarify other person, the woman. As I said before, women don't need to be relabled. They're just women. 

[Jingthing]

43 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

But you clarified one person by saying 'Trans woman'. You don't need to clarify other person, the woman. As I said before, women don't need to be relabled. They're just women. 

No. It's just a word. It was useful in the context of this news story.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, BangkokReady said:

I'm not in the slightest bit hostile.

 

It's a completely redundant word.  it's purely political/ideological.

 

I'm afraid you don't get to shut down discussions, as much as you want to.

 

If anyone is being hostile, it's you.

I'm telling you how I perceived it. Hostile. You don't get to dictate how your rhetoric is perceived by readers.

[Scott]

An inflammatory post has been removed.  Please stay on topic.  

 

[Maestro]

Removed an off-topic post.

[glegolo18]

15 hours ago, Kevin Taylor said:

I don't get it. Why not stay a man if you like women.

Probably because they just like to play with dolls not footballs, and dress in girli-clothes and not mens clothes... Nature is not always nice to us humans....

[jacko45k]

11 minutes ago, glegolo18 said:

Probably because they just like to play with dolls not footballs, and dress in girli-clothes and not mens clothes... Nature is not always nice to us humans....

And make a complete and utter mess of reverse parking?