It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Transgender Issues Finally Gain Recognition On Capitol Hill

page: 8
12
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pinke

The civil rights comment ... yes, sorry that was sharp, but I don't see how groups like The Black Panthers are so different from extreme feminists, and I do still believe you think all feminists are a hive mind. I'm a feminist and I don't hold most of the views you might think.



EXTEMISM is the key word.

When someone takes a position and refuses to see outside that position, even when presented with data --- that's also EXTREMISM.




posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Pure tripe. We have already shown how huffington post has manipulated info from the story in the OP so why are you insisting on using it as a source? Next did you actually read any of those articles? Most of them deal with things people said in public settings that "hurt someones feelings" like the hotel worker who asked "what are you?" seems a legitimate question really if you are a walking contradiction. Other stories you linked such as the instances with Doctors are already covered under several other laws. Special protections for transgendered are not necessary. Other stories are instances of profiling like the black transsexual who was arrested. I worked at an adult store when I was younger and I couldn't walk out the front door without bumping into a 6ft 8 black tranny "working" the customers. Is it right for police to profile? I don't think so but good luck with laws for that considering every other minority group has been complaining of that since policing began.



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: kaylaluv

Pure tripe. We have already shown how huffington post has manipulated info from the story in the OP so why are you insisting on using it as a source?


WE?

Who is WE?



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

OK "I" . Care to deflect more?



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Here is an example from my own life. I have unconventional tattoo placement and used to have a lot of facial piercings. I get strange looks and reactions from people some times. Ive had bank tellers and waitresses ask me things like "are you a demon" "do you worship the devil" and other crap. I have been denied entry to restaurants because of dress code. Does there need to be special legislature for that? Were my rights violated? Did I knowingly do this to myself (my appearance) and do I accept that? Absolutely. I am aware of the limits I imposed upon myself in regards to employment and such. How is this any different? Before the cries of "its not their choice" while the condition may be true in that instance the actions of altering their appearance is entirely their choice.
edit on 22-11-2015 by NihilistSanta because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Annee

OK "I" . Care to deflect more?


You are the one now deflecting.



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

You didn't make a point to deflect. You literally agreed with bad info like in the OP and that posted by kaylaluv and tried to act like because I used the royal "we" that it was somehow invalidated. Do you have an actual point or are you just part of the cheering section?



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 11:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
Here is an example from my own life. I have unconventional tattoo placement and used to have a lot of facial piercings. I get strange looks and reactions from people some times. Ive had bank tellers and waitresses ask me things like "are you a demon" "do you worship the devil" and other crap. I have been denied entry to restaurants because of dress code. Does there need to be special legislature for that? Were my rights violated? Did I knowingly do this to myself (my appearance) and do I accept that? Absolutely. I am aware of the limits I imposed upon myself in regards to employment and such. How is this any different? Before the cries of "its not their choice" while the condition may be true in that instance the actions of altering their appearance is entirely their choice.


I do think you see your own real world from your own mind perception.

I think you present yourself with intent to create a reaction.

And BTW -- I have been refused entrance to a restaurant for dress code.



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Annee

You didn't make a point to deflect. You literally agreed with bad info like in the OP and that posted by kaylaluv and tried to act like because I used the royal "we" that it was somehow invalidated. Do you have an actual point or are you just part of the cheering section?


Not interested in playing games with you.

Using "WE" instead of "I" ---- is embellishment. Trying to make your perception more then it is.

I agree you agree with your minds perception of your personal experiences.

Whatever is presented to you, you will make it fit your personal perception.



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

Hypothetically: We both show up to a Restaurant at the same time, they tell you that what you are Wearing is against the Dress code and you are not allowed in, they tell me my Sexual orientation/Gender-Identity is not allowed.. can you not see the difference?
edit on 22-11-2015 by Darth_Prime because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 10:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime

Maybe you shouldn't wear a pink triangle pinned to your shirt? I didn't know you were forced to self identify or that it was necessary when procuring a table at a restaurant.



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 11:55 PM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

It isn't, but I've seen people who were assumed to be GLBT from how they looked or other eternal markers get mistreated. It happens.



posted on Nov, 23 2015 @ 08:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

Should we write special protections into our laws for people who look gay but aren't?



posted on Nov, 23 2015 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

Should we write special protections into our laws for people who look black but aren't?

Anyway, please address my previous post if you would like to continue. I'd personally like to have a real and focused discussion on the topic than constantly playing word games with each other.



posted on Nov, 23 2015 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

What is there to address exactly? You made a claim that people make judgements based on appearance. Duh. You answered a question with another question which only illustrated my point further. We will keep going down the list of possible sub groups of humans who may or may not experience future discrimination and be sure to put clear legal wording into all of our laws to address each subgroup. That is what is being proposed here but because you only see it from your side and your interest you refuse to see the correlation or how if we embrace this for one group we embrace it for all even though as American citizens they already are covered /eyeroll.



posted on Nov, 23 2015 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

This post is what I'm referring to.

Frankly we're probably projecting on each other. I'm not American for example. Also the constantly eye rolling and self important snark ... is it getting us anywhere on either side?

If you wanna get back to basics so we can try and actually understand each other we might get somewhere instead of this broad strokes conversation. To do that we need to address the very basics of our opinions and what we both think is going on.

Neither of us can defend opinions we don't hold, and if we continue talking past one another then that's all we're doing. Your call.

Note: No, this isn't a trap. I literally do not know your opinion other than you have a concern that we're going to end up with a heavily litigated society. You paint the conversation in very broad strokes with a lot of reducto ad absurdum. It's making it difficult to actually have a conversation about where trans people sit in society, what legislation is appropriate and what issues actually exist.


edit on 23-11-2015 by Pinke because: Note



posted on Nov, 23 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
We will keep going down the list of possible sub groups of humans who may or may not experience future discrimination and be sure to put clear legal wording into all of our laws to address each subgroup.


Sounds like Equal Rights -- Equal Protection.

Why do we have subgroups? Because some object and do not accept those of subgroups as having Equal Rights.

My mom was a polio victim. We were denied entrance to restaurants and retail stores -- prior to the Disability Act.

People had to be forced by law to treat the disabled Equally.



posted on Nov, 23 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

Purposely missing the point?

Yeah, i wear a pink triangle on my shirt daily, i mean that is our agenda, to indoctrinate everyone to succumb to the PC Liberal progressive GLBTQ+ Agenda, and until you give us special treatment and treat us like Humans.. but special Humans... we will continue to take over your Religion and Country and Freedom..

does that make you feel better?



posted on Nov, 23 2015 @ 12:33 PM
link   
In other news....more than 300 were SHOT in Paris, and there is a literal CALIPHATE being spread in the Mid East, which beheads....rapes...children...and kills Gays by throwing them off of buildings.

But hey, Transgender stuff!



posted on Nov, 23 2015 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

They already belong to one of the main groups of which their sub group derives. Such as man or woman, abled, disabled, (insert religion), race or ethnicity. Just like you stated trans people are covered under the Disability act so no further legislation needed.




top topics



 
12
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join