Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Peregrine wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Suddenly having a different opinion = hate?

It is when the "different opinion" is:

1) Expressed in an offensive manner (calling someone a 'freak').

and

2) Completely and objectively wrong.

LOL, so If I said 2+2=5, that would be hateful?

As to your first point, I really don't see what all the fuss is about. I'm pretty sure I used the term in the correct context.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/freak

 Peregrine wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
you guys are making me agree with Peregrine a lot in this thread and that is just not cool.

I love you too.

Now kiss and 'freak' out the phobes...

 SickSix wrote:
LOL, so If I said 2+2=5, that would be hateful?

Note the "and" in that statement.

As to your first point, I really don't see what all the fuss is about. I'm pretty sure I used the term in the correct context.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/freak

Sigh. Do you really not understand how "freak" has a connotation beyond the literal dictionary definition? Please stop hiding behind the dictionary, if you're going to be blatantly offensive to people at least have the courage to take responsibility for your actions.

 SickSix wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Suddenly having a different opinion = hate?

It is when the "different opinion" is:

1) Expressed in an offensive manner (calling someone a 'freak').

and

2) Completely and objectively wrong.

LOL, so If I said 2+2=5, that would be hateful?

As to your first point, I really don't see what all the fuss is about. I'm pretty sure I used the term in the correct context.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/freak

LOL, so if you said 2+2=5, that would a) have nothing to do with calling someone, in fact millions of people, a derogatory term, in a manner meant to demean them, and b) demonstrate for the rest of the class that you can't even defend your prejudice with anything amounting to logic or a reasoned argument.


As for your dictionary 'defense'.
Synonyms
abnormality, anomaly, monster, monstrosity

Yeah, still going with an insult here...

We can post the british dictionary and argue the slang meaning of a certain F** word for cigarettes, but that doesn't change the fact that it is hateful language.

Or we can talk about the old meaning of the swastika and how that makes people who are offended by it stupid...

BAM! Godwin!

 d-usa wrote:
We can post the british dictionary and argue the slang meaning of a certain F** word for cigarettes, but that doesn't change the fact that it is hateful language.

Or we can talk about the old meaning of the swastika and how that makes people who are offended by it stupid...

BAM! Godwin!

Now think of a way to Draigo this thread.

You're on a roll brah!

Labeling people makes it easy to dismiss them, it is easier than to give it serious thought.

A person has a right to lazy thinking, not recommended perhaps and <gasp> has consequences.

If you throw that opinion out there take your lumps and be happy of being "true" to yourself. Unless you were trolling and then being defensive just looks silly.

But no other citizen has any right to interfere with what a person does to themselves. (We will not talk further on meddling courts and politicians).

Think really hard before anyone says otherwise.

Self empowerment is harder to get settled than most would think. That is why so many people go crazy on gun control: they need a crutch to feel empowered enough to say "back-off".

A citizen has a right to civil disobedience when the rules do not make sense and are not just, by all bloody means: break them just do no harm to others. It usually as demonstrated, show to the world how stupid the situation is.

Political correctness is dead. Be decent to one another is what we got left.

I remember being asked by a friend once "Do you think I am gay?" and the best answer I could give was "You are able to love someone for who they are, rather than be prejudiced by what sex they are."

Stop the prejudice.

 d-usa wrote:

BAM! Godwin!

I didn't even see it coming. Well done.

 Peregrine wrote:
Sigh. Do you really not understand how "freak" has a connotation beyond the literal dictionary definition? Please stop hiding behind the dictionary, if you're going to be blatantly offensive to people at least have the courage to take responsibility for your actions.

Why would you expect anything but cowardice from someone who attacks a subordinate group?

 Cheesecat wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Sigh. Do you really not understand how "freak" has a connotation beyond the literal dictionary definition? Please stop hiding behind the dictionary, if you're going to be blatantly offensive to people at least have the courage to take responsibility for your actions.

Why would you expect anything but cowardice from someone who attacks a subordinate group?

Nice job there Mr. Bigot.

I always find using the dictionary fun.

But you have all done a wonderful job proving my original point. Thanks.

Yes, I do think transgenders are freaks of nature. However, as I have said, and you bleeding heart narrow minded people keep missing, is that I really don't care
how people chose to live their lives as long as they don't infringe on me.

I'm a diehard social libertarian. That doesn't mean I don't think some people are freaks. That means I think under the eyes of the law/government/social compact I think they should be treated fairly as anyone else. That does not mean I have to be nice to them.

 SickSix wrote:
Yes, I do think transgenders are freaks of nature.
...
That does not mean I have to be nice to them.

Just keep digging that hole even deeper.

 SickSix wrote:
[I'm a diehard social libertarian. That doesn't mean I don't think some people are freaks. That means I think under the eyes of the law/government/social compact I think they should be treated fairly as anyone else. That does not mean I have to be nice to them.

No, it doesn't. But when you go around calling people freaks, you shouldn't complain when people tell you that's an obnoxious thing to do. Freedom of expression doesn't mean freedom from consequences. Some uses of freedom are still dumb.

Interesting site that I came across today that made me think of this thread:

http://users.humboldt.edu/mstephens/hate/hate_map.html#

My state is freaking DEAD for pretty much all hate, not sure if we're nice out here or if we just don't use twitter.

That's what I was thinking too.. we are not a heavy twitter using place. and our population is not as dense as back east.


And too my fellow libertarians, and the haters. You can dislike people all you want, you can even call them names and wish bad things upon them. That is your right to do so in every day life in the USA, that is part of freedom. Off-topic Forum on a gaming website not so much, it is a privately held club open to the public, and they can dis-invite you.

As you said, you do not care, why do you keep coming back to this thread to continue to post about it?

Use your brain, and be tolerant as you claim to be. It is not hurting you any.

d-usa wrote:Interesting site that I came across today that made me think of this thread:

http://users.humboldt.edu/mstephens/hate/hate_map.html#

Wait, Utah is completely lacking in homophobic tweets? How does that work?

Also, queer isn't considered a homophobic term anymore. They took it back. It's the Q in LGBTQ.

 azazel the cat wrote:

d-usa wrote:Interesting site that I came across today that made me think of this thread:

http://users.humboldt.edu/mstephens/hate/hate_map.html#

Wait, Utah is completely lacking in homophobic tweets? How does that work?

Also, queer isn't considered a homophobic term anymore. They took it back. It's the Q in LGBTQ.

I'm pretty sure queer can still be used as a homophobic slur that being said it is sometimes used non-derogatorily like in queer theory, queer (as in strange), etc it depends on the context.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

SickSix wrote:This kowtowing to every single freak out there and then guilting the majority with political correctness bull crap is going to destroy western civilization.

if this article were about a black man, would you have used the phrase "kowtowing to a n***** "? If it were about a homosexual, would you have used the phrase "kowtowing to a f***** "?

Please refrain from using slurs and derogatory, judgement-laded terms when describing transgendered people.

Well his use of the word freak does actually fit the definition of freak according to the dictionary definition of freak which is "A thing or occurrence that is markedly unusual or irregular:"

Transgendered are something that is noticeably unusual.

Surely the point of a good quality transgender is that it isn't noticeably unusual.

 purplefood wrote:
It does raise an interesting point.
Why are people allowed to be incredibly rude to transgendered people and yet others are not allowed to be rude concerning a religion...
It's probably about time the MODs locked this...

Why is anyone allowed to be rude to anyone or anything? Why do special snowflakes get unfair protection?

I do not get why the same protection isn't applied to everyone fairly.

As was well-described earlier in the thread, even if we're talking about chromosomal or physical SEX (as opposed to gender, which is more fluid and has to do with identity and societal conventions), nature has a lot more variety than just male/female.

Its not the body that is the problem. Its the mind. A stay in a correctional institution would work wonders for it, as would developing new treatments which don't involve invasive surgery.

Putting the text below the photo might have more impact... Scroll past the hot girl, then BAM. Ye, bet you didn't realise she was trans. Although I bet allot of people wouldn't realise.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Also, queer isn't considered a homophobic term anymore. They took it back. It's the Q in LGBTQ.

Context dear boy, context. Allot of words can be offensive in context.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Its not the body that is the problem. Its the mind. A stay in a correctional institution would work wonders for it, as would developing new treatments which don't involve invasive surgery.

This is a really bad joke, right?

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Thanks Sig, you had to go and make me agree with Peregrine

I made two people happy with a single post then - I'm awesome!

My point is: Peregrine's post is just a perfect example of hypocrits at work. You feel offended when people do not happily embrace any sort of life style and claim that they are intolerant but at the same time, are unwilling to tolerate those people's opinions...which is a textbook definition of hypocrisy.

I am fine with them living how they want, it's their very own choice and if they want to get some boobs, sure, why not, as long as I'm not paying for it. It's their choice after all.

You cannot, however, force me to think that one should praise them for finding their "true gender", because I don't believe in that transgender stuff. They need psychological, not surgical help, and by happily praising their choice to go visit Dr. Boob, you automatically despite those who actively seek (and find!) psychological help with their issue.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Its not the body that is the problem. Its the mind. A stay in a correctional institution would work wonders for it, as would developing new treatments which don't involve invasive surgery.

This is a really bad joke, right?

From a biological point of view, there is alot more at risk with invasive surgery. Its more ideal to prefer a treatment with avoids it, if at all possible (should be the same for any sort of non-life threatening condition). I can take a blood sample from anyone and discover their true sex. Of course, there are legitimate problems with the sex chromosomes, but they are abnormalities. Now if someone does not display this sort of deformation then...logically, its mental and not biological.

Assuming your looking at it from an unbiased point of view.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
And even the Kinsey scale isn't considered the best measure any more.

What is the best measure now? In my sociology course we talked about how sexuality isn't as black and white as some might believe and that the barriers between homosexuality, heterosexuality and bisexuality can be quite fluid.

Well, for one thing, the Kinsey Scale doesn't take into account asexuality or autoeroticism.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Its not the body that is the problem. Its the mind. A stay in a correctional institution would work wonders for it, as would developing new treatments which don't involve invasive surgery.

This is a really bad joke, right?

From a biological point of view, there is alot more at risk with invasive surgery. Its more ideal to prefer a treatment with avoids it, if at all possible (should be the same for any sort of non-life threatening condition). I can take a blood sample from anyone and discover their true sex. Of course, there are legitimate problems with the sex chromosomes, but they are abnormalities. Now if someone does not display this sort of deformation then...logically, its mental and not biological.

Assuming your looking at it from an unbiased point of view.

One really funny thing about how the brain works, is that a lot of mental issues can stem from hormonal issues caused by one's biology.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Thanks Sig, you had to go and make me agree with Peregrine

I made two people happy with a single post then - I'm awesome!

My point is: Peregrine's post is just a perfect example of hypocrits at work. You feel offended when people do not happily embrace any sort of life style and claim that they are intolerant but at the same time, are unwilling to tolerate those people's opinions...which is a textbook definition of hypocrisy.

Being tolerant of the intolerant doesn't always work out that great though, sometimes the intolerant deserve getting lambasted. Also relativism doesn't work as it implies people, societies, etc can't be wrong as there's no absolute truth or validity despite there being plenty of evidence that they

can do wrong things.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Thanks Sig, you had to go and make me agree with Peregrine

I made two people happy with a single post then - I'm awesome!

My point is: Peregrine's post is just a perfect example of hypocrits at work. You feel offended when people do not happily embrace any sort of life style and claim that they are intolerant but at the same time, are unwilling to tolerate those people's opinions...which is a textbook definition of hypocrisy.

I am fine with them living how they want, it's their very own choice and if they want to get some boobs, sure, why not, as long as I'm not paying for it. It's their choice after all.

You cannot, however, force me to think that one should praise them for finding their "true gender", because I don't believe in that transgender stuff. They need psychological, not surgical help, and by happily praising their choice to go visit Dr. Boob, you automatically despite those who actively seek (and find!) psychological help with their issue.

How is that?

If I congratulate a batsman's performance in cricket, I am not despising people who prefer to play football.

One really funny thing about how the brain works, is that a lot of mental issues can stem from hormonal issues caused by one's biology.

Possibly, but chopping up the body shouldn't be the right way to fix that. Check the chromosomes for true sex, then issue hormone therapy to better align towards the correct (genetic) sex, Finish up with psychological counseling.

Being tolerant of the intolerant doesn't always work out that great though, sometimes the intolerant deserve getting lambasted. Also relativism doesn't work as it implies people, societies, etc can't be wrong as there's no absolute truth or validity.

Intolerance of intolerance only preaches and spreads hate. Those same people are just as big a hatemonger as those they hate.

 Fafnir wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
And even the Kinsey scale isn't considered the best measure any more.

What is the best measure now? In my sociology course we talked about how sexuality isn't as black and white as some might believe and that the barriers between homosexuality, heterosexuality and bisexuality can be quite fluid.

Well, for one thing, the Kinsey Scale doesn't take into account asexuality or autoeroticism.

Well there's debate whether asexuality is a form of sexuality also the scale has been updated a bit as you add an "X" for asexual, that being said you're right that it doesn't deal with auto-eroticism.

 Kilkrazy wrote:


How is that?

If I congratulate a batsman's performance in cricket, I am not despising people who prefer to play football.

The analogy doesn't fit imo. The thing is that "transgender" issues come up, very rarely, but they do exist, and in media and public belief, the right way is to just slap some boobs on and pretend you're a female (or vice versa). At the same time, what should those people think that do not want to follow that way and look for constructive aka psychological help? According to the general belief, they should perceive their way as wrong as "all other" (not the case, just perspective / subjective perception at that point) do sth. else.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

One really funny thing about how the brain works, is that a lot of mental issues can stem from hormonal issues caused by one's biology.

Possibly, but chopping up the body shouldn't be the right way to fix that. Check the chromosomes for true sex, then issue hormone therapy to better align towards the correct (genetic) sex, Finish up with psychological counseling.

So, going by that logic, women with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome should undergo psychological counseling, as they do have a Y chromosome.