one-more-time said: Negative-Travis said: So you were adopted, then? No. I don't even know what made you think that way. So then your parents are selfish and you're arguing against your own existence. Sounds legit. |
| I'm dead. Don't come looking for me. |
ezikialrage said: Post-Josh said: Maybe because straight men are sexually attracted to those who physically appear to be female. When you see someone who physically resembles a woman, you don't think "look at those hot biological traits", or I least I hope you don't. You claim to be attracted to "the correct biology", but how can that possibly hold any meaning? There is no reason to assume a biological female and a transgender female can't look and act (outside of certain biological restrictions) the exact same way. If you can truly understand that, then you'd know that your argument is simply irrational. Why would the OP pictures be relevant to those who are straight? If you are a shallow pan-sexual, bi-sexual or gay who only cared about looks and didn't care about biology then sure the OP pics would be relevant. Would you go out with a woman who happens to look like a male if you are gay? This bit makes it all the more obvious that you have no idea what you're talking about. There is no "just happening" to look like another sex. First of all, she is a he, if he wishes to be identified as such (gender is a social construct, yada yada). Secondly, if he physically resembles a male, then he is a through and through male and yes, I would potentially be sexually attracted to him if I was gay. |
JoshNov 30, 2012 2:01 PM
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
| Fun fact: some biological women are also incapable of reproducing |
Post-Josh said: Just to clarify, did every "straight" male who said no look at the pictures in the OP? Yum. I feel bad for you having to read this thread, professor-salt. I applaud you for not ripping anyone and everyone to shreds, haha. Trust me I'm pretty close to losing my shit. |
one-more-time said: uzu-dragons said: I don't think it's stupid.. for a long time that was the only reason to have a son, and I think the idea of continuing family line is still a popular idea. So, as long as it's a popular trend and people find it acceptable, it's not stupid. No, I don't think so. Is creating a new entity, when just selfish wants are screaming out loud, a respectable act? Don't think so either. Try not to overgeneralize. What you're basically telling me is that you have to real reasons for why it's a bad thing to not want your family and your family name to die out. Starting a family is a serious decision in itself, and no one but you is suggesting that once this kid is born it won't be loved if ONE reason to have it would be to keep the family name going. And you still haven't answered why anyone should be at fault for wanting their own kid. Do all couples who can't procreate but wish to have a duty to adopt? They don't. |
TheAutocrat said: I think most people agree with this now, but I was just saying that I consider gender to be a social construct ie. you develop your gender through social experience, which gender roles heavily influence. You're born a biological male, but you aren't born a "man", you're made into one. Which is relevant to this discussion because if you agree, then there is no reason to believe that a biological male can't be a female on the inside, or vice versa. People choose to get a sex change as to match their sex to their gender, because that's a more comfortable and healthy way to live (I would assume, I can't say I have a deep understanding of this).@Post-Josh: Social construct, elaborate. |
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
| If I loved them then sure, why not. |
 |
Negative-Travis said: So then your parents are selfish and you're arguing against your own existence. Sounds legit. It has nothing to do with me personally. Whose parents aren't selfish? There are no beyond reasons for having a child. It's solely "I want, I need", isn't it? uzu-dragons said: What you're basically telling me is that you have to real reasons for why it's a bad thing to not want your family and your family name to die out. Tried to re-read this one 10times, but still failed to understand what you wanted to say. Starting a family is a serious decision in itself, and no one but you is suggesting that once this kid is born it won't be loved if ONE reason to have it would be to keep the family name going. And you still haven't answered why anyone should be at fault for wanting their own kid. How can I find an aggressive act of imposition as being something praise-worthy? Procreation. That is natural - wanting a kid, right? Something being natural doesn't make it "okay" nor "right". Your ability to procreate doesn't give a license to do so. Do all couples who can't procreate but wish to have a duty to adopt? They don't. If you mean: "Do all couples who can't procreate but wish to, have a duty to adopt?" It is really up to them. There is no difference between your and any other child, besides that it's yours personally. |
| LUL |
one-more-time said: Tried to re-read this one 10times, but still failed to understand what you wanted to say. How can I find an aggressive act of imposition as being something praise-worthy? Procreation. That is natural - wanting a kid, right? Something being natural doesn't make it "okay" nor "right". Your ability to procreate doesn't give a license to do so. If you mean: "Do all couples who can't procreate but wish to, have a duty to adopt?" It is really up to them. There is no difference between your and any other child, besides that it's yours personally. you can't get past a small typo? after 10 tries? let me fix it for you. What you're basically telling me is that you have No real reasons for why it's a bad thing to not want your family and your family name to die out. Under what circumstances then, is it "okay" or "right" to make a kid? And no, that's not I mean since that's a horrendous usage of the comma. |
katsucats said: Amathor said: I think this is surely a cultural mental block that's more like a "fetish" than any real attraction. If you knew a "girl' for 5 years, for example, and had a perfectly normal relationship. You've had sex numerous times, obviously, and found nothing wrong. Then one day she told you she was born a boy. That changes... what? Nothing. You obviously didn't have any problems with your experience in the last 5 years, then all of a sudden it's "disgusting". If it were really disgusting, then you wouldn't be in the situation to begin with.No matter how beautiful/womanly (s)he looks or how great her personality is, I can't imagine having that kind of relationship with a transgender.Its just not appealing. That situation doesn't apply to me since I would never have sex with a girl without discussing the possibility of having a child...but I'll play along... Sure,It might be more of a mental/cultural thing but,In this case, that doesn't make it any less important.Call me old fashion but I want my girl 'all natural' through and through.I definitely get where you are coming from though.What if in the future science has become as advance so as to really make a male into female,being able to ovulate and have kids and all that--would that excuse the fact that she was born male since there is really nothing that separates 'her' from any 'normal' female? some might say yes while others might say no.In any case,whatever the reason may be,I for one prefer things the 'old fashioned' way .It just feels right.Not that I condemn those who don't see it my way.I could care less.I wish for everyone a happy and fulfilled life. |
uzu-dragons said: Under what circumstances then, is it "okay" or "right" to make a kid? Lets not get into this, I'll be repeating my self for the 100th time. Peek in "Are you a parent?" thread, had a similar discussion. And no, that's not I mean since that's a horrendous usage of the comma. Hows that? If there's no comma used, I have to understand it as "they are wishing to have a duty to adopt", isn't it? If that's not so - could you explain? I'm trying to understand the use of comma differences between my native language and English. Isn't there a comma before "but" as well? Otherwise the sentence doesn't make any sense whatsoever. |
| LUL |
| considering i'm a nonbinary trans* person then yeah i would |
 |
| No, because institutionalized marriage is bullshit. I consider myself a straight male, but I wouldn't be against dating someone who is trans. |
| Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. It's treading on territory where you don't belong, and completely disrespecting the fundamentals the ceremony is based on. However non marital relationship contracts for gay couples which offer the exact same legal pros/cons of a real marriage, and for intents and purposes are legally equivalent, should be legal. With that said, I love traps. Guys who want to be girls is just something I like. |
Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. Copyrighted? No, religion does not own marriage. |
| LUL |
Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. It's treading on territory where you don't belong, and completely disrespecting the fundamentals the ceremony is based on. However non marital relationship contracts for gay couples which offer the exact same legal pros/cons of a real marriage, and for intents and purposes are legally equivalent, should be legal. With that said, I love traps. Guys who want to be girls is just something I like. how is gay marriage even relevant to this thread,,,, |
Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. It's treading on territory where you don't belong, and completely disrespecting the fundamentals the ceremony is based on. . >Marriage >Religious >Not socioeconomic |
| The Art of Eight |
one-more-time said: Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. religion does not own marriage. Yeah, because gays and other people stole it from them. Why do you even want to partake in a religious ceremony, where the religion itself says that you should be sent to hell for doing that? |
professor-salt said: Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. It's treading on territory where you don't belong, and completely disrespecting the fundamentals the ceremony is based on. However non marital relationship contracts for gay couples which offer the exact same legal pros/cons of a real marriage, and for intents and purposes are legally equivalent, should be legal. With that said, I love traps. Guys who want to be girls is just something I like. how is gay marriage even relevant to this thread,,,, "Would you marry a transgender/transsexual?" |
Caze said: one-more-time said: Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. religion does not own marriage. Yeah, because gays and other people stole it from them. Why do you even want to partake in a religious ceremony, where the religion itself says that you should be sent to hell for doing that? Ever heard of a secular civil ceremony marriage? |
| The Art of Eight |
dankickyou said: Caze said: one-more-time said: Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. religion does not own marriage. Yeah, because gays and other people stole it from them. Why do you even want to partake in a religious ceremony, where the religion itself says that you should be sent to hell for doing that? Ever heard of a secular civil ceremony marriage? Yeah, and it's not a real marriage. That's one option when I said; "non marital relationship contracts for gay couples which offer the exact same legal pros/cons of a real marriage, and for intents and purposes are legally equivalent" |
Caze said: dankickyou said: Caze said: one-more-time said: Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. religion does not own marriage. Yeah, because gays and other people stole it from them. Why do you even want to partake in a religious ceremony, where the religion itself says that you should be sent to hell for doing that? Ever heard of a secular civil ceremony marriage? Yeah, and it's not a real marriage. That's one option when I said; "non marital relationship contracts for gay couples which offer the exact same legal pros/cons of a real marriage, and for intents and purposes are legally equivalent" What is real marriage?A nice dress and a priest? Also it's not the religion that says that, it's some religious bigots that think that anything not "normal" is against their religion. Why homosexuals would want a religious ceremony?Because they may want our God's blessings?Just like any religious person. |
ssjokgDec 1, 2012 6:39 AM
Caze said: professor-salt said: Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. It's treading on territory where you don't belong, and completely disrespecting the fundamentals the ceremony is based on. However non marital relationship contracts for gay couples which offer the exact same legal pros/cons of a real marriage, and for intents and purposes are legally equivalent, should be legal. With that said, I love traps. Guys who want to be girls is just something I like. how is gay marriage even relevant to this thread,,,, "Would you marry a transgender/transsexual?" That has nothing to do with gay marriage And people, please, don't turn this into a gay marriage thread. |
professor-salt said: I am pretty sure that he has the same thoughts about trans* too.Caze said: professor-salt said: Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. It's treading on territory where you don't belong, and completely disrespecting the fundamentals the ceremony is based on. However non marital relationship contracts for gay couples which offer the exact same legal pros/cons of a real marriage, and for intents and purposes are legally equivalent, should be legal. With that said, I love traps. Guys who want to be girls is just something I like. how is gay marriage even relevant to this thread,,,, "Would you marry a transgender/transsexual?" That has nothing to do with gay marriage And people, please, don't turn this into a gay marriage thread. |
My-o said: i would'nt really like same gender marriage as its the cause of mental disorder among people and its "unusual" Take a long look in the mirror and contemplate your life...you just said the dumbest thing that has ever graced this forum. May God have mercy on your soul. |
| The Art of Eight |
My-o said: i would'nt really like same gender marriage as its the cause of mental disorder among people and its "unusual" I really fail to see how trans people getting married affects your lives.You lose money or rights or something.As far as humanity is concerned you are the one with the mental disorder. |
My-o said: i would'nt really like same gender marriage as its the cause of mental disorder among people and its "unusual" How fucking hard is it to understand the difference between being trans* and being gay |
professor-salt said: My-o said: i would'nt really like same gender marriage as its the cause of mental disorder among people and its "unusual" How fucking hard is it to understand the difference between being trans* and being gay Instead of asking that, since they do believe that gay=trans=mental=7sins ,shouldnt you ask about why they think of you as crazy people? |
Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony Hahahahaha Learn2history |
Caze said: Marriage is a religious ceremony, and I think gay marriage of any sort should be flat out illegal. It's treading on territory where you don't belong, and completely disrespecting the fundamentals the ceremony is based on. However non marital relationship contracts for gay couples which offer the exact same legal pros/cons of a real marriage, and for intents and purposes are legally equivalent, should be legal. No. Marriage is a civil institution (in the US at least) and religion never has owned the word “marriage”. If you say religion owns the word “marriage” what about all of the straight married couples that don’t believe in a one-god or any religion? Well guess what they are legally married, so religion had no part in it. In the US there is such a thing as separation of church and state. Civil Unions (again in the US) don’t give the same protection/rights as marriage (such as hospital visitation/condition updates/decisions etc. rights, health insurance/leave/bereavement leave, joint taxes, if a spouse dies you don’t have to fight to keep your home, spouses social security/pension etc. I could go on and on; however, this is just a taste of how important marriage is for same-sex couples). In the US an officiate to the state/government has to sign the marriage license (that you have to get from the courthouse) to have the marriage legal. Even if you have a church wedding the one who performs it must be an officiate to the state otherwise it’s not legal in the eyes of the government. This is why a lot of people don’t have church/religious weddings in the US, because you can get married at home, at the courthouse, at a hotel etc. |
danmari said: Alrighty, lemme see if I can word this in the least-offensive way possible. I feel like I'd be more apt to parent my own kid and if I were to adopt I'd essentially feel like I'm babysitting for 18 years. Not to mention that in my mind, since adoption costs money (and quite a bit, at that) I'm essentially buying a second-hand child, and that's fucked up. In a roundabout sort of way, adoption encourages the idea that it's OK to procreate when you don't yet have the means to care for your offspring because there will always be some family willing to take in your kid and absolve you of all responsibility. As for potentially marrying an infertile woman: if she knew she was and she didn't tell me until the day before our wedding or something along those lines, I'd drop her on the spot for keeping something that significant hidden. if, on the other had, she didn't know about some genetic mutation (which would be somewhat odd but could happen, I suppose) I couldn't really fault her for it and I'd (we'd?) try and figure out some way to make a kid like with DNA samples and a surrogate or something. I obviously can't tell you exactly what I'll do for any given situation but I couldn't marry a trans* woman just because I know that the potential for kids was never there. I do think adoption is a great thing and the people who do it and do it well are some pretty bitchin' folks, but I don't think I'd be able to put all of my heart into raising and adopted child vs. my own. I hope that covers everything. And every time you said "bio-woman", I thought of a cyborg chick and it made me chuckle. Also: My-o said: What the actual fuck?i would'nt really like same gender marriage as its the cause of mental disorder among people and its "unusual" |
| I'm dead. Don't come looking for me. |
| Hahahaha funny topic ..fuuuuuuuuuu..... If she were like super hot then yes i would |
My-o said: i would'nt really like same gender marriage as its the cause of mental disorder among people and its "unusual" WTF????? No, Homosexuality is not a mental disorder (go educated yourself and stop being a bigot). By the way you have a yuri profile picture, so you don’t seem to have a problem with lesbians. |
Sora_N said: My-o said: i would'nt really like same gender marriage as its the cause of mental disorder among people and its "unusual" WTF????? No, Homosexuality is not a mental disorder (go educated yourself and stop being a bigot). By the way you have a yuri profile picture, so you don’t seem to have a problem with lesbians. LOLOLOL! Typical. Some dude says that homosexuality is a mental disorder but he's OK with lesbians. The hypocrisy is so ironic. |
| 1. Like every thread based on peoples' life choices it ends up having debates about religion. 2. I won't say I would but I also won't say I wouldn't, I prefer a marrying a female but if I do love a girl and she happened to be a trans (that is only if I really can't tell her apart from a guy) then I will probably still stay with her. (I really don't like "What if" questions and I still don't know if I want to get married or not.) 3.off topic is there anyway to see if you have already posted in a thread? because I can't remember if I already posted here or not. |
  |
| I guess it wouldnt matter too much , to me. I would have to know the person to determine if i would say yes or no. i prefer straight, so its like i said, i have to know the person to decide. If the person wanted to change genders, it probably means they felt they could relate at the base level to being the other gender. besides physical differances between genders, there isnt alot that separates people. |
Ginko13May 3, 2014 6:17 PM
| I don't think I would. Even if that person presently is the opposite sex, the fact that it wasn't like this for the whole time... ugh... No offence, but in all honesty, and that's something to be expected in a relationship, I couldn't bring myself to do that. Or even stay in the relationship. ~.~ Failures said: I wouldn't have allowed myself to get to a point in the relationship without knowing ahead of time. If they lied about it up until that point, then l probably wouldn't because they kept such a big issue to themselves for so long without being honest about it with me. I don't think I can marry someone who would hide their very identity from me in fear I might reject them. I would have respected them more if they are upfront about it. At the very least, when the relationship begins and is accepted by both parties. l don't have a problem with transgenders/transsexuals, but I do have a problem with someone who is intentionally dishonest. +1 |
| Yes I would. Btw there's a lot of ignorance in this thread. |
"I will close my eyes and let the darkness be the light that guides me through the path of chaos"    Call me the Jelly Factory. I'm the world's largest producer of jelly. |
| No. Albeit the idea of marriage isn't very appealing in the first place. |
professor-salt said: Birth sex doesn't matter. A person who identifies as female is female. so i should see those trans: |
| . |
More topics from this board
» What do you think about online friendship?Mehwish_999 - Apr 21 |
41 |
by ShimmyShimmur
»»
45 minutes ago |
|
» 2023-2024 NBA Season Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )deg - Jun 18, 2023 |
668 |
by Hitagi__Furude
»»
2 hours ago |
|
» (Personality) Try to paste 3 different statements that matter to youIpreferEcchi - Yesterday |
14 |
by R-unknown
»»
2 hours ago |
|
» Do you enjoy nature?Kamikaze_404 - Today |
23 |
by Rhaelynne
»»
3 hours ago |
|
» I got spooked by a water bottletsukareru - 10 hours ago |
11 |
by Adverrito
»»
3 hours ago |