Alison, I have heard transgendered people describe their trouble. Many times.
I sympathize. Have you ever heard one who is still troubled even after their alterations?
I have. Many times. Every time I do I can't help but think that gender isn't the only problem they are facing.
And it is heart wrenching. I don't enjoy other people's pain.
And while you slam me for being intolerant, I note that you are so tolerant of my fondness for truth that you wish agony on my children. The epitome of tolerance! As is often the case with those who feign moral superiority.
Fortunately, your wish has been denied. One grown son who is quite happy in his manly skin.
You want me to accept a falsehood.
I want you to accept a fact.
Eliminate the shame of being gender confused. Or gender flexible. Eliminate the shame of being one gender over another. Then you needn't worry over misused pronouns. There would be no agony involved. Folk could simply declare themselves flexible. Or confused. Or in extreme drag.
I see no conflict between being honest and being sympathetic.
I'm not offended that this person wants to be a parent, have a family or look like a man.
What offends me is the twisting of language into lies that we are expected to believe because of some psychobabble and self esteem issues.
This person can call herself anything she wants. I knew a nut who thought he was an alien deposited on Earth to save the world. But he wasn't. He was a nut.
The media and society should not indulge these nuts.
Reality is that this person was born a female and no amount of hormones or language twisting can change that. Her chromosomes are female, therefore she is female. A female in extreme drag. (Do they call it drag when it's a woman?)
Gender is not a choice, it is a fact of nature. As are all the natural mutations between one gender and the other.
How we behave within that gender is another matter. And how we, as a society, treat or judge people who behave differently is an important issue as well.
This woman's choice isn't one I would have made. And that's okay with me. Obviously, she's free to do this and the technology is there to help her.
But please, let's be honest with the language.
A woman who looks like a man gave birth to a beautiful baby girl.
I wish them and the child luck.
I wish we would all learn that labels and language is there to identify things and express thoughts. Not twist reality.
You can't imagine any rationale for "non-transparency"?
During war?
When our citizen soldiers are in harms way?
Or when there are, in fact, people out there who would do use harm?
And newsflash for the nopassword poster. Poor people do get access to nutrition. It's called an EBT card. If they choose not to use it for nutritious food than I don't know what to say. Maybe we can spend billions of dollars creating a "I will decide what you eat Department" and another "I WILL make you eat it Department".
And another thing...
Did any of you see Sean Penn in his pirogue cruising through Iowa, relocating people who are flooded out?
It is a bogus argument from the outset. You can fantasize on how else to spend the money, but you can't make congress agree with you.
Congress voted to spend every dime of that money. Congress voted to go to war. Congress hasn't voted to colonize Mars. And I doubt they would with or without the war in Iraq.
Often times, these arguments are trotted out as though all your streets would be paved and your every one gets a free video game. And I'm not talking about anti-war arguments. I'm talking about, "But for this cause we could spend this money on..." Pick your utopian fantasy to fill in the blank.
Well, it's not the federal governments responsibility to pave your roads or pass out wiis. Or provide free health care.
And BTW...It is not the soldier's responsibility to provide disaster relief at home either. That's what the national guard is for. Or your local fire & rescue. Your local and state taxes pay that bill.
Soldiers are for war. Offense and defense. Not flood control or hurricane relocation.
Besides all that, I agree with ANON, roger, et al.
I have green blogs and political blogs I can go to for serious stuff.
The US dollar has helped more people world wide than any other form of currency.
The OECD calculates U.S. development assistance in 2003 at $16.2 billion—more than double what was given by France, Germany, or any other European nation. Japan is second at $8.9 billion.
Private donations from USers was $33.6 billion in 2000.
America is the largest contributor to the U.N. budget at 22 percent, or $317 million, in 2004. It gives over 56 percent of the World Food Program budget and $72 million and $94 million to the Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization, respectively.
The above commenter is right. They should use Mugabe or the Oil Ticks or some other currency for their money=evil metaphor.
The US currency is not evil. It is the lifeblood to many nations and struggling people.
And EVEN if you don't count the dollars. Where are the rescue ships on that dollar? You know, the ones that brought aid after the tsunami in 2003? The ones that sit off the coast of Burma today? Or the research and development that the US shares with the world?
I sympathize. Have you ever heard one who is still troubled even after their alterations?
I have. Many times. Every time I do I can't help but think that gender isn't the only problem they are facing.
And it is heart wrenching. I don't enjoy other people's pain.
And while you slam me for being intolerant, I note that you are so tolerant of my fondness for truth that you wish agony on my children. The epitome of tolerance! As is often the case with those who feign moral superiority.
Fortunately, your wish has been denied. One grown son who is quite happy in his manly skin.
You want me to accept a falsehood.
I want you to accept a fact.
Eliminate the shame of being gender confused. Or gender flexible. Eliminate the shame of being one gender over another. Then you needn't worry over misused pronouns. There would be no agony involved. Folk could simply declare themselves flexible. Or confused. Or in extreme drag.
I see no conflict between being honest and being sympathetic.
What offends me is the twisting of language into lies that we are expected to believe because of some psychobabble and self esteem issues.
This person can call herself anything she wants. I knew a nut who thought he was an alien deposited on Earth to save the world. But he wasn't. He was a nut.
The media and society should not indulge these nuts.
Reality is that this person was born a female and no amount of hormones or language twisting can change that. Her chromosomes are female, therefore she is female. A female in extreme drag. (Do they call it drag when it's a woman?)
Gender is not a choice, it is a fact of nature. As are all the natural mutations between one gender and the other.
How we behave within that gender is another matter. And how we, as a society, treat or judge people who behave differently is an important issue as well.
This woman's choice isn't one I would have made. And that's okay with me. Obviously, she's free to do this and the technology is there to help her.
But please, let's be honest with the language.
A woman who looks like a man gave birth to a beautiful baby girl.
I wish them and the child luck.
I wish we would all learn that labels and language is there to identify things and express thoughts. Not twist reality.
L
The comment about secrecy during war...
You're kidding, right?
You can't imagine any rationale for "non-transparency"?
During war?
When our citizen soldiers are in harms way?
Or when there are, in fact, people out there who would do use harm?
And newsflash for the nopassword poster. Poor people do get access to nutrition. It's called an EBT card. If they choose not to use it for nutritious food than I don't know what to say. Maybe we can spend billions of dollars creating a "I will decide what you eat Department" and another "I WILL make you eat it Department".
And another thing...
Did any of you see Sean Penn in his pirogue cruising through Iowa, relocating people who are flooded out?
I didn't either.
Congress voted to spend every dime of that money. Congress voted to go to war. Congress hasn't voted to colonize Mars. And I doubt they would with or without the war in Iraq.
Often times, these arguments are trotted out as though all your streets would be paved and your every one gets a free video game. And I'm not talking about anti-war arguments. I'm talking about, "But for this cause we could spend this money on..." Pick your utopian fantasy to fill in the blank.
Well, it's not the federal governments responsibility to pave your roads or pass out wiis. Or provide free health care.
And BTW...It is not the soldier's responsibility to provide disaster relief at home either. That's what the national guard is for. Or your local fire & rescue. Your local and state taxes pay that bill.
Soldiers are for war. Offense and defense. Not flood control or hurricane relocation.
Besides all that, I agree with ANON, roger, et al.
I have green blogs and political blogs I can go to for serious stuff.
Neatorama is my stop of light and fun stuff.
Your propaganda is neither light nor fun.
Lunacy
Kill da wabbit, kill da wabbit:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=LkcMVJuoWZ4
The US dollar has helped more people world wide than any other form of currency.
The OECD calculates U.S. development assistance in 2003 at $16.2 billion—more than double what was given by France, Germany, or any other European nation. Japan is second at $8.9 billion.
Private donations from USers was $33.6 billion in 2000.
America is the largest contributor to the U.N. budget at 22 percent, or $317 million, in 2004. It gives over 56 percent of the World Food Program budget and $72 million and $94 million to the Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization, respectively.
The above commenter is right. They should use Mugabe or the Oil Ticks or some other currency for their money=evil metaphor.
The US currency is not evil. It is the lifeblood to many nations and struggling people.
And EVEN if you don't count the dollars. Where are the rescue ships on that dollar? You know, the ones that brought aid after the tsunami in 2003? The ones that sit off the coast of Burma today? Or the research and development that the US shares with the world?
Crap. Anti-capitalist crap.