stopstaaron Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Clearly it wasn't 100 times better. Like I said, your reading ain't so good, but that's OK. Clearly it was. Now, I'm going to cross this bridge and I have no money to give you. Let me go through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Already have a point right here. This is a competition for females who were born females not for males who had a sex change. That point was already addressed by someone else in this thread and you completely avoided his point. By your definition, a transgendered born-female that has a sex change would be eligible to compete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Already have a point right here. This is a competition for females who were born females not for males who had a sex change. And the point we're making is that the "born female" stipulation is highly discriminatory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 What? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are referring to differing XX and XY sex chromosomes, not the total number which is identical at 23 pairs. Same as you and any female too. Yeah, see. I knew it was something like that. Point is it can (probably) be measured genetically. Not being a geneticist, I don't know for sure but I think they can do that. So in other words you can change some of the outer hardware, via surgery etc, but you can't change this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 (edited) And the point we're making is that the "born female" stipulation is highly discriminatory. You can make any requirements discriminatory if you don't meet them.. like age! But requirements are there for a reason no ones stopping him from creating his own pageant Edited March 29, 2012 by stopstaaron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 You can make any requirements discriminatory if you don't meet them.. like age! But requirements are there for a reason Not in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Not in this case. That is your own opinion, not reality Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 That is your own opinion, not reality Nope. As has already been made clear, there's no compelling reason to restrict a beauty contest to women-born women. Oh and this: no ones stopping him from creating his own pageant is hilarious. Like, why didn't Rosa Parks just buy her own damn bus? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 And the point we're making is that the "born female" stipulation is highly discriminatory. Nope, it's common sense. Something society lost a long time ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 is hilarious. Like, why didn't Rosa Parks just buy her own damn bus? That is not even the same thing! That had to do with race, this has to do with a male whom turned themselves into a female via surgery and drugs you are insulting Rosa Parks just for comparing the two and now I am completely finished with you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Nope, it's common sense. Something society lost a long time ago. Tell me, why does it matter in this case? I can understand if we were talking about athletics where there's a real advantage being conferred, but there's no question of fairness at play here. Just bigotry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 That is not even the same thing! Of course it's not. But you're expecting logic and reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Tell me, why does it matter in this case? I can understand if we were talking about athletics where there's a real advantage being conferred, but there's no question of fairness at play here. Just bigotry. People throw around the word bigot at the first whiff of some opinion they disagree with these days. Overused and now near meaningless just like fascist and commie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 That is not even the same thing! That had to do with race, this has to do with a male whom turned themselves into a female via surgery and drugs Gee, thanks Einstein, I didn't realize they were different cases. You've never heard of reductio ad absurdum? Of course you haven't. you are insulting Rosa Parks just for comparing the two and now I am completely finished with you How is that an insult to Rosa Parks? Jesus, you are hilariously stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Of course it's not. But you're expecting logic and reason. Oh yes, here's comes Dur Perfesser to give us what's what. C'mon Shady, we're waiting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Tell me, why does it matter in this case? I can understand if we were talking about athletics where there's a real advantage being conferred, but there's no question of fairness at play here. Just bigotry. Perhaps they feel that having surgically and hormonally created females from males takes away from the integrity of the pageant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 People throw around the word bigot at the first whiff of some opinion they disagree with these days. Overused and now near meaningless just like fascist and commie. Fallacy. I'm using bigot to describe people and attitudes that are bigoted or irrationally prejudicial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Perhaps they feel that having surgically and hormonally created females from males takes away from the integrity of the pageant. Okay now you're just trolling. It's a goddamned beauty contest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 (edited) Tell me, why does it matter in this case? I can understand if we were talking about athletics where there's a real advantage being conferred, but there's no question of fairness at play here. Just bigotry.No. Just business. The Miss Universe Pagent is business that makes money off the sexual desirability of the contentants. Allowing transgender people would undermine that desirability because of the 'yuck' factor that the transgender process induces in the hetrosexual males that are an audiance for such things. You could argue that the the audiance is being unreasonable but we are talking about entertainment here: why should anyone expect anyone else to leave their comfort zone when they are looking for entertainment? Edited March 29, 2012 by TimG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Okay now you're just trolling. It's a goddamned beauty contest. That might be your opinion, it's not others. Beauty is part of it, but not all of it. Like I said, having surgically and hormonally created females from males may take away from the integrity of the process. Calling people bigots and trolls doesn't change that fact. I'm sorry you're so annoyed by other people's views on the subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Tell me, why does it matter in this case? I can understand if we were talking about athletics where there's a real advantage being conferred, but there's no question of fairness at play here. Just bigotry. Actually, someone who has had their body sculpted by a plastic surgeon would have an advantage in a beauty contest as of course they are going to pick and choose what's considered most desirable when being put together - but since plastic surgery isn't disallowed for anyone else, I don't see how it can apply here, either. People throw around the word bigot at the first whiff of some opinion they disagree with these days. Overused and now near meaningless just like fascist and commie. That's the truth. Everyone has to be behind any minority/whatever totally and completely, supporting anything and everything, or they are accused of being a bigot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 No. Just business. The Miss Universe Pagent is business that makes money off the sexual desirability of the contentants. Allowing transgender people would undermine that desirability because of the 'yuck' factor that the transgender process induces in the hetrosexual males that are an audiance for such things. You could argue that the the audiance is being unreasonable but we are talking about entertainment here: why should anyone expect anyone else to leave their comfort zone when they are looking for entertainment? Eactly. I'd argue that adding transgender individuals to the pageant fundamentally changes it. But I think that's probably what this fuss is all about. It's not really about any type of discrimination. Opponents of this just don't really like the fact that pageants still take place. This is their way of destroying them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 (edited) That might be your opinion, it's not others. Beauty is part of it, but not all of it. Like I said, having surgically and hormonally created females from males may take away from the integrity of the process. Calling people bigots and trolls doesn't change that fact. I'm sorry you're so annoyed by other people's views on the subject. Complete nonsense. I think you need to show how exactly a transgendered competitor takes away from the integrity of this T&A fest. Otherwise, its just the same old noise you're famous for. Edited March 29, 2012 by Black Dog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 (edited) No. Just business. The Miss Universe Pagent is business that makes money off the sexual desirability of the contentants. Allowing transgender people would undermine that desirability because of the 'yuck' factor that the transgender process induces in the hetrosexual males that are an audiance for such things. You could argue that the the audiance is being unreasonable but we are talking about entertainment here: why should anyone expect anyone else to leave their comfort zone when they are looking for entertainment? Sorry, but it's about allowing transgendered people to compete, not announcing their transgendered status to the world. After all, they would be competing as women. Edited March 29, 2012 by Black Dog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 That's the truth. Everyone has to be behind any minority/whatever totally and completely, supporting anything and everything, or they are accused of being a bigot. No, one has to at minimum demonstrate their position is based on sound logic and reason, not just a visceral dislike or discomfort of the minority involved. As you pointed out, since other forms of physical enhancement are allowed, the "women born" policy is wholly arbitrary, discriminatory and yes, bigoted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.