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.

Here is an article some time ago where Bruce Jenner denies that he is transitioning to a Female:
http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/bruce-jenner-denies-he-planning-transition-female131213/#gs.g1f0nyg

And another:
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20788629,00.html

 Ustrello wrote:
Or if you two literally just google it she is saying she isn't. But that would be too difficult I guess.

Eh, 50/50. Three of the top searches say yes, but actually digging Snopes says no.

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/jennergender.asp

Yeah and I am seeing much more than one source. But keep on plugging that agenda there md

 Ustrello wrote:
But keep on plugging that agenda there md

What agenda might that be, sir?

Ladies lets play nice. We can all discuss this while being polite, even if you are all wrong except me.

Who isn't being polite?

It should be noted by all that providing sources is not an auto win.

Your sources also need to be credible.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Eh, 50/50. Three of the top searches say yes, but actually digging Snopes says no.

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/jennergender.asp

I read those "sources" like




Like I said, we now know everything we need to know about mdlbuilder, and should move on to a better topic.

 Ouze wrote:


Like I said, we now know everything we need to know about mdlbuilder...

And what is that exactly?

I have no idea what you're talking about.

And I have no clue where you have gotten the idea that anybody has called teansgender people perverts.

Cause alot of people are equating men who wantto go into the womens bathroom/locker room are perverts.

Care to quote that, because I am not recalling ever reading that.

I do however recall the discussion about *straight* men dressing in drag (and some not even going that far) going into changing rooms/bathrooms under the false pretense of claiming they have a right to be there....and carrying out perverted activities.

 TheMeanDM wrote:
Care to quote that, because I am not recalling ever reading that.

I do however recall the discussion about *straight* men dressing in drag (and some not even going that far) going into changing rooms/bathrooms under the false pretense of claiming they have a right to be there....and carrying out perverted activities.

It's been quoted several times in the last page alone that transgender people are potential rapists.

Mdlbuildr wrote:
Men are more powerful than women. A Transgender Female has male hormones (for the most part) and is not biologically a female. Therefore they can, and in some instances will overpower someone they may feel they can.

I'm sure I can find more instances of such sweeping generalizations over the last 17 odd pages, but you don't seem to be reading like, the last 2 hours, so why waste my time? I mean, I can lead you to water, but I can't make you thirsty... that doesn't mean the water isn't there.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
It should be noted by all that providing sources is not an auto win.

Your sources also need to be credible.

What is a credible source? You need to be a lot more specific.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:

 TheMeanDM wrote:
Care to quote that, because I am not recalling ever reading that.

I do however recall the discussion about *straight* men dressing in drag (and some not even going that far) going into changing rooms/bathrooms under the false pretense of claiming they have a right to be there....and carrying out perverted activities.

It's been quoted several times in the last page alone that transgender people are potential rapists.

Mdlbuildr wrote:
Men are more powerful than women. A Transgender Female has male hormones (for the most part) and is not biologically a female. Therefore they can, and in some instances will overpower someone they may feel they can.

I'm sure I can find more instances of such sweeping generalizations over the last 17 odd pages, but you don't seem to be reading like, the last 2 hours, so why waste my time? I mean, I can lead you to water, but I can't make you thirsty... that doesn't mean the water isn't there.

According to D-USA we are all potential rapists.

I have no idea what you mean with your water anology.

If you don't know, why do you keep offering the sources you do?

Mdlbuildr wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
It should be noted by all that providing sources is not an auto win.

Your sources also need to be credible.

What is a credible source? You need to be a lot more specific.

If you don't understand that when we google the first sentence from your source that Caitlyn Jenner is transitioning, some of which are from such reputable sources as alien-earth.com and ReportQuickly.com. which has a disclaimer at the bottom saying anything on the page is a work of satire, then you have have issues that are beyond the scope of Dakka Dakka's OT to resolve.

Your arguments in this thread are the sewer water of the OT.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If you don't know, why do you keep offering the sources you do?

I do know, but apparently some don't.

I wasn't the one calling a source into question. So a more complete description is required by the person calling it into question.

Mdlbuildr wrote:
I wasn't the one calling a source into question. So a more complete description is required by the person calling it into question.

The onus isn't on us to eat the poop brownies you are serving so we can assure you they are, in fact, turds with icing on them.

Actually it's up to you to find and offer good quality sources that support your argument.

The more you offer bad quality sources, the more it undermines your argument.

It isn't other people's job to help you construct a better argument with better sources.

 Frazzled wrote:

Very few. Which leads to the question, why is this suddenly an issue.
However, a better question should be, in light of that, how do we address the issues as inexpensively as possible while addressing others' concerns. I'd start with new schools or ones undergoing retrofit redesign with full use of curtains and FREAKING MORE PRIVATE RESTROOMS FOR EVERYONE. Seriously, we are decades by Da COmmies here. MR. PRESIDENT WE CANNOT FALL BEHIND THE ROOSKIES AND HAVE A STRATEGIC RESTROOM DOOR GAP!!!

For existing ones, a minimal retrofit of showers with individual curtains and perhaps some curtain sectioning in the locker area would do it as well. Plus for those who are self conscious with body issues-this would be a boon.

IMO, the reason why it's suddenly an issue is because, prior to this spate of laws being introduced and passed, we had the "old" bathroom laws. AFAIK, those laws were very loose and held people to a standard which they'd be held to outside of a public restroom. There was really nothing to stop a manly man from entering the women's room and while a store may ask that person to leave, often times, no real law was broken right? Now, if that same situation occurs, but instead of merely entering the women's room because the men's is full up and hopping into a stall, that man has his snake out and it doing the Running Man and generally helicoptering or gyrating in the direction of women in there.... he's broken laws in that case.

Under these older laws, Trans people were generally "safe" from reprisal because as others have noted, they are in an extremely vulnerable position, socially. They could generally use what I call the "Duck Rule" (If it looks like a duck and talks like a duck...) and enter the facilities that they best looked like.




Ohh... and to answer a random question from a few pages back: the last time I, as a male, wanted to enter a women's locker room was in/around high school.... However, I will caveat this by saying that this desire was gained from watching a particular variety of film, if ya know what I mean I think it goes without saying that I never did follow through on that. Well, except for those times when I was on the football team, and we'd be the visiting team... they always stuck us in the girls locker rooms, but by that point they were empty of everyone else but us.

I don't think anyone understood my question.

I'm not asking if my sources are credible. I'm asking what a credible source is.

Someone up there said that posting an article isn't an auto win. The source has to be credible. What' is a credible source?

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me this supposed agenda I have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Actually it's up to you to find and offer good quality sources that support your argument.

The more you offer bad quality sources, the more it undermines your argument.

It isn't other people's job to help you construct a better argument with better sources.

I've been around these forums long enough to know that a source is deemed invalid if someone here disagrees with the position of that source.

So again, what is a credible source?

Some pointers:

1. Don't be a satirical website.
2. Don't be a story that uses a satirical website as the primary source.
3. Don't be an editorial.

As a start.

I'd have thought all of that would be obvious, but now that we've got THAT out of the way, hopefully we can move forward?

 d-usa wrote:
Some pointers:

1. Don't be a satirical website.
2. Don't be a story that uses a satirical website as the primary source.
3. Don't be an editorial.

As a start.

This. Also, anything that ends in .com should be taken with a grain of salt. .org is generally okay, although double check their content/sources for bias too.

 Alpharius wrote:
I'd have thought all of that would be obvious, but now that we've got THAT out of the way, hopefully we can move forward?

Someone criticized one of my sources because it was FOX News.

Then someone said that what I posted was debunked at which point I posted a couple of article back when sources and Bruce himself said he was not transitioning to a woman. And then he did.

Now he is denying that he is transitioning back to being a man according to some people here because of their sources.

I've been told here that because I call Bruce Jenner, Bruce (since, as far as I read, he is indeed going to be Bruce again), everything there is to know about me is on the table and I have an agenda.

I have no idea what's going on...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Some pointers:

1. Don't be a satirical website.
2. Don't be a story that uses a satirical website as the primary source.
3. Don't be an editorial.

As a start.

This. Also, anything that ends in .com should be taken with a grain of salt. .org is generally okay, although double check their content/sources for bias too.

Sorry, I have D-USA on ignore...

And that is far from any help as per what someone said about Fox News...

You're either being massively dishonest, or things I can't say due to rule #1.

Give it a rest.

I'm sad that the ignore button was able to physically overpower me...

 MrDwhitey wrote:
You're either being massively dishonest, or things I can't say due to rule #1.

Give it a rest.

Sorry, pal.

I am being called out on all kinds of things and am trying to have a reasonable discussion. There is an ignore function. Feel free to use it if you don't want to read what I have to say.

I am not being rude, impolite or offending anyone with what I am saying. I am trying to understand the rules of engagement here. It is very difficult.

 Frazzled wrote:

Well when you got people calling you a rapist, a perv, not your true gender etc I am sure it gets to you.

Thats why they need to share their stories.

Hi.

It's not fun.

It makes me feel disconnected from the rest of you and that the words "people" and "folks" when they come after the word "trans" don't mean those things to the people writing them.

You know how when you're reading a news article about a generalised un-named person, and it's okay to make fun or mock them, or speculate on their reasoning...

it makes me feel like that person. A discussion topic, not an actual human who's just trying to do the same as everyone else.

This is why I don't speak for others outside of talking about facts or general statements, nor do I pretend I have ideas how to keep both sides happy.

BC, have you had issues in locker rooms or bathrooms? If so how would a change in law have helped (or other policy).

obviously you don't have to answer.


EDIT: with that new avatar I'm going to have to start calling you MM the Manic Machete!