- 22,284
- 16,104
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2017
Would you guys date and marry a transgender woman? Serious question.
If she had a penis? how about if she has the surgery?
If she had a penis? how about if she has the surgery?
- 87,768
- 50,183
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
The Rachel Dolezal thread was literally bringing this up.That transracial skit was also making a direct comparison between the idea of being transracial & transgender. The concept of telling someone you are one thing despite your appearance saying otherwise.
We've seen the idea of transracial be committed on social media before, didn't go over too smooth
It was basically ppl are going trans crazy and now white ppl are claiming to be transracial. Atlanta took it to anyone doing it with that black kid being white.
All genius yes.
But on the real it may become a serious problem.
- 147,595
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
dont need to, to let them do them and go on with my business
- 22,284
- 16,104
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2017
What the heck does that have to do with my question?
RustyShackleford
Supporter
- 63,761
- 191,216
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
What the heck does your question have to do with this thread?
- 147,595
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
there are alot of people in the world I wouldn’t date and/or marry
- 22,284
- 16,104
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2017
Seems like this thread switched to transgenders topic. So I figured it was relevant.
- 22,284
- 16,104
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2017
I’m not a hater so I would date one. But only if she had a big penis.
RustyShackleford
Supporter
- 63,761
- 191,216
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
How exactly?
A decent chunk of Dave special was about the transgender community and the controversy surrounding
That is the frame in which this is being discussed. Not like it is some random offshoot discussion
So I don't see how your question fits into that
RustyShackleford
Supporter
- 63,761
- 191,216
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
You need better material
- 22,895
- 26,766
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
I don't think it's ever gonna become a "problem" but we will start to see more & more cases of this & I'm eager to see how society responds to this. Because if people reacted to the Dolezal thing the way they did, then i don't see there being much support although if people are gonna stand on the same morals it should be welcomed.
If someone can say they feel more comfortable being a specific gender, what would be the issue with someone saying the same about race.
- 17,322
- 26,777
- Joined
- May 11, 2017
- 22,284
- 16,104
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2017
I would.
- 147,595
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
to be honest, right now I’m not really worried about that because people rightfully laugh at white people resorting to 23andme to claim they’re something other than white
but what does concern me, is people like Jason whitlock and Marcellus Wiley attacking Kaep’s blackness and claiming he’s not black enough to fight that cause.. or devon Allen having to explain his father is a black man and the historical context of him being able to ‘pass’
- 147,595
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
who is a hater?
and I’m glad or at least hope you’re able to date and/or marry whomever you want
- 87,768
- 50,183
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2007
Don't need to be worried about it. Just seems like a trend that's may just get over that hump of absurdity.
Its being called blackfishing now (so tired of the new labels for everything) but it seems its not going to stop.
As for Kaep, that's a case of colorism in the black community that has been a problem.
As for Devon, that's pretty similar to the rapper Logic. You don't look like or present as a black person. You can definitely pass for white so nobody is going to assume you're white. That's also just been a centuries old thing.
- 15,281
- 16,279
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2006
Might have to use the transracial card next time I get pulled over then.
"Officer despite my appearance, treat me white please"
"Officer despite my appearance, treat me white please"
- 147,595
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
Nothing is new about it.. But considering there is nothing new about, people still resorting to those tactics or people still having this level of ignorance about blackness is disappointing and concerning
look at sage Steele and her comments on Obama.. I expect stupidity.. But not from people who have obviously experienced some things
- 22,895
- 26,766
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
No i'm genuinely interested in how that would go. Like if ya'll popped up at work tomorrow & your white coworker was like i have always viewed myself as a black man & want to be acknowledged as so going forward.... would ya'll just consider him black from that day on?
would it be negative & transphobic to question his feelings? would it bother you if he started to heavily focus in on black culture & demand equal footing with black men?
would it be negative & transphobic to question his feelings? would it bother you if he started to heavily focus in on black culture & demand equal footing with black men?
- 147,595
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
im from the Bahamas we got a lot of Devon Allen’s down here
but if someone legit white tried to say that shh, we having a roast
- 22,895
- 26,766
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
A roast why? i'm not speaking about someone trolling/ trying to get attention, i'm talking about someone who genuinely feels that they relate to black people & black culture more than their current race.
Why is it okay to roast that person, but if that same person came in the very next day & said they identify as a woman suddenly everyone must accept that & not even question it.
- 147,595
- 194,923
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
well to be fair, it depends on the person and how they went about it
a perfect example I can think of is a white kid I knew growing up, who also happens to be gay.. actual white
he doesn’t try to be anything, doesn’t claim to be anything he’s not or at least I’ve never seen him do it.. but he did grow up in a predominantly Black Country and in predominantly black neighborhoods.. and when in college, he pledged sigma.. Whenever the frat does anything I see him heavily involved.. his been a value to any organization I’ve seen him be a part of, whether it was his sports teams, schools or even the church
i don’t think he ever would, but I don’t think he’s trying to be.. he’s just being himself and amongst the black community he feels comfortable
- 438
- 389
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2021
no one can tell me paul wall ain't black
- 32,395
- 26,821
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
I didn't say white people were the only ones making this point
but when a white college educated trans person does it. especially one that calls says Dave is one of her comedy hero's
i think it's fair game to point out the hypocrisy and the racial dynamics at play.
also simply because black trans activists think The Closer is irredeemable transphobia.
how do I know they represent the broader opinion of trans people?
Black college educated activists think defund the police is a great idea,
black voters don't seem to agree.
I don't think I have to completely agree with an argument because a trans person said it.
obviously their perspective is valuable but I don't think it's the final word.
and using it to stifle debate isn't persuasive to anyone who doesn't already agree.
I have no idea if for example Flame Monroe's support of Dave's jokes represent the broad of Black Trans people either, i suspect not. but im not going act like she instantly validates The Closer.
was he ridiculing women's bodies when he said he would tenderize a woman's ******* like chicken cutlets?
Dave whole shtick is he mixes pretty low brow scatological humour,
farcical exaggerated storytelling with occasionally brilliant (YMMV) observational comedy.
he applies this lens to every topic. Are you saying that every minority group should be excluded from Dave shtick or are only trans people? if it's everyone fine, i guess you've always had a low opinion of Dave's comedy. but I don't think I have to agree.
On the TERF thing Michelle Goldberg had a good column that relates to this in the NY Times
I think Dave is pointing out that there is an inherit tension with saying that trans women are completely 100% the same as cis women.
I don't endorse TERF-ism, i think we should do our best as a socitey to accommodate trasn people where ever possible.
but I don't think it's totally out of bounds or crazy for especially and older feminist or a person not deep in the weeds of internecine feminist ideological battles to think
being of female sex assigned at birth has specific consequences that may be elided by denying any difference between transwomen and cis women.
maybe im being too generous but I don't see it as just simple transphobia.
- 32,395
- 26,821
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2006
this Michele Goldberg column has a really good bit on older feminists.
Opinion | The A.C.L.U. Errs on R.B.G. (Published 2021)
A bad tweet reveals a rift over gender and reproduction.
What’s more difficult to discuss is how making Ginsburg’s words gender-neutral alters their meaning. That requires coming to terms with a contentious shift in how progressives think and talk about sex and reproduction. Changing Ginsburg’s words treats what was once a core feminist insight — that women are oppressed on the basis of their reproductive capacity — as an embarrassing anachronism. The question then becomes: Is it?
The case for making the language of reproduction gender-neutral is fairly straightforward. Beatie may have been the first pregnant man that the public was aware of, but he was obviously not the last. If access to birth control, abortion and obstetric care are fraught for women, they can be even more fraught for trans men and nonbinary people, who must contend with discrimination and challenges to their gender identity.
Plenty of activists, especially young ones, find gender-neutral language for reproduction, and the conceptual revolution it represents, liberating. The utopian goal of many feminists, after all, is a society that’s not built around the gender binary, a type of society that, as far as I know, exists nowhere on earth (though many cultures make room for a small number of people who exist outside the male/female dichotomy).
A gender-inclusive understanding of reproduction is in keeping with the goal of a society free of sex hierarchies. It is one thing to insist that women shouldn’t be relegated to second-class status because they can bear children. It’s perhaps more radical to define sex and gender so that childbearing is no longer women’s exclusive domain.
Yet I think there’s a difference between acknowledging that there are men who have children or need abortions — and expecting the health care system to treat these men with respect — and speaking as if the burden of reproduction does not overwhelmingly fall on women. You can’t change the nature of reality through language alone. Trying to do so can seem, to employ a horribly overused word, like a form of gaslighting.
“One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman,” Simone de Beauvoir wrote. You can interpret this to support the contemporary notion of sex and gender as largely matters of self-identification. Or you can interpret it as many older feminists have, as a statement about how the world molds you into a woman, of how certain biological experiences reveal your place in the social order, and how your identity develops in response to gender’s constraints.
The case for making the language of reproduction gender-neutral is fairly straightforward. Beatie may have been the first pregnant man that the public was aware of, but he was obviously not the last. If access to birth control, abortion and obstetric care are fraught for women, they can be even more fraught for trans men and nonbinary people, who must contend with discrimination and challenges to their gender identity.
Plenty of activists, especially young ones, find gender-neutral language for reproduction, and the conceptual revolution it represents, liberating. The utopian goal of many feminists, after all, is a society that’s not built around the gender binary, a type of society that, as far as I know, exists nowhere on earth (though many cultures make room for a small number of people who exist outside the male/female dichotomy).
A gender-inclusive understanding of reproduction is in keeping with the goal of a society free of sex hierarchies. It is one thing to insist that women shouldn’t be relegated to second-class status because they can bear children. It’s perhaps more radical to define sex and gender so that childbearing is no longer women’s exclusive domain.
Yet I think there’s a difference between acknowledging that there are men who have children or need abortions — and expecting the health care system to treat these men with respect — and speaking as if the burden of reproduction does not overwhelmingly fall on women. You can’t change the nature of reality through language alone. Trying to do so can seem, to employ a horribly overused word, like a form of gaslighting.
“One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman,” Simone de Beauvoir wrote. You can interpret this to support the contemporary notion of sex and gender as largely matters of self-identification. Or you can interpret it as many older feminists have, as a statement about how the world molds you into a woman, of how certain biological experiences reveal your place in the social order, and how your identity develops in response to gender’s constraints.
The terf part of the set wasn't the sharpest, he seems to mix gender, when judging from the context he's talking about sex. but I don't think it's like totally out of bound perspective to think.
trans women are women. trans women should use the bathroom they need to use. ect
but think that biological sex is a real thing that impacts people in real ways.
