Rayman Pirate-Community

no

It's not even the current poll yet.

Yes

no

Someone make it the poll then

Adsolution wrote:no

Excuse me but as a dude it is a surprise I'd rather not want to have any time soon.

Will ye whisht a while, the current poll's not even over yet!

Also Inco, I thought you were above all that anyway?

I am, I try to put myself into the shoes of a random dude for the sake of conversation, I'll also add that being above that doesn't prevent me from having an opinion on the topic, like, I can, easily, imagine the distress of a dude upon being told that his girlfriend was a man.

incognito wrote:like, I can, easily, imagine the distress of a dude upon being told that his girlfriend was a man.

You're saying that as if it's some objective, underlying truth. For the sake of dialogue, I want you to answer the following:



- From your own point of view, what determines the sex and/or gender of a person (not the root cause, but the mental/physical traits they currently possess)?

- Why those things?

- For the sake of this next question, let's assume that all transgender people have undergone both hormone therapy and SRS, and are indistinguishable from a cis person of that gender -- In your perception of an ideal world, are transgender people seen wholly as the gender the associate with, and does that include no longer being "obligated" to reveal their past to their spouse unless for medical reasons?

- If someone was born with a severe facial deformity and underwent extensive procedures to have a new face constructed for them throughout their childhood, on an ethical level (ignoring the stigma surrounding sex and gender), are they any more or less "obligated" to tell their spouse about this pastime than a transgender person would be about their transition?

It's not a matter whether they are obligated or not to tell their husband/wife about their gender change, because they do not feel comfortable or what. It's just that keeping secret such a big aspect of your personality, in a couple life, is not sane.

Well, I wouldn't engage into a relationship with a trans anyway, but if she would have told me since the beginning that she was a trans, it wouldn't be a big issue. But if I had to learn it after many time of relationship, it would very likely end with a well placed and well deserved punch in the face.

It is hard for some straight people to understand how you can live with a trans person, so I assume it is hard for trans to understand why straight people want to stay straight, no matter the hormone therapies and surgical operations. But it is like that.

PluMGMK wrote:Also Inco, I thought you were above all that anyway?

Do you also think he contradicts himself all the time currently?

Finally, just the kind of dialogue I was wating for in my uncomfortable wood computer chair.

Adsolution wrote: - From your own point of view, what determines the sex and/or gender of a person (not the root cause, but the mental/physical traits they currently possess)

The gender of a person, is first biologically determinated by the X and Y chromosomes, and the presence of specific organs in their body, such as a womb to be able to carry a child before birth. After that, it is by the traits of that person, if one is encline to certain tendencies, such as sexual orientation. Not being okay with a part of yourself is something usual, it is like being unhappy of being blonde, and dye hairs to be red, but they have to be repeatedly dyed in order to stay red, and that subsequently makes of it a blonde redhead. For some reason their name came to my mind, don't ask.
But as things are, what differentiates the "gender specific behavior" is just the majority adopting a certain behavior, things can be as well opposed in some cases.

Adsolution wrote:- Why those things?

I don't get this one.

Adsolution wrote:- For the sake of this next question, let's assume that all transgender people have undergone both hormone therapy and SRS, and are indistinguishable from a cis person of that gender -- In your perception of an ideal world, are transgender people seen wholly as the gender the associate with, and does that include no longer being "obligated" to reveal their past to their spouse unless for medical reasons?

In my perception of the ideal world we would all live with bodysuits and helmets, both of them making gender indistinguishable, if even having one, but whatever, I can't really say, I mean, it ain't the groundbreaking question I ask myself upon waking up, I can put myself in the mind of someone revealing the biggest secret ever held and in the mind of the one hearing it, from both sides, there's always apprehension and doubt, but if I had to be personal on this one, I'd say that I wouldn't like being told that after a long time.

Adsolution wrote:- If someone was born with a severe facial deformity and underwent extensive procedures to have a new face constructed for them throughout their childhood, on an ethical level (ignoring the stigma surrounding sex and gender), are they any more or less "obligated" to tell their spouse about this pastime than a transgender person would be about their transition?

It is way less damaging for a relationship if you ask me, the reaction of the partner has way less probabilities to be reject, it is, however, a duty if procreation is planned, as the deformity could affect the child.

LoveMetal wrote:

PluMGMK wrote:Also Inco, I thought you were above all that anyway?

Do you also think he contradicts himself all the time currently?

It's just the matter of understanding to live with three personalities in your mind and as the leader do your best to keep everyone calm, under control and satisfied.
I'd also add that my contradiction here is purely due to the interest of developing a long conversation on the forums, which hasn't been done since a long time now.
You'd also better explain me why not being concerned by these issues prevents me in any way to talk about them, since it is what you seem to imply.

incognito wrote:The gender of a person, [...] redhead.

Inco says something serious and sensible, that's unexpected.

incognito wrote:In my perception of the ideal world we would all live with bodysuits and helmets

Oh well, it didn't last long...

incognito wrote:It is way less damaging for a relationship if you ask me

Mhhhh, still ok.

incognito wrote:It's just the matter of understanding to live with three personalities in your mind and as the leader do your best to keep everyone calm, under control and satisfied.

God fucking dammit, he posted it again!

incognito wrote:You'd also better explain me why not being concerned by these issues prevents me in any way to talk about them, since it is what you seem to imply.

What? My post was just ironic.

Right, seemingly the quicker I get the new poll up, the better! I'll do that in a few moments. Meanwhile here's a screenshot of the previous one because I'm sick and tired of writing uninformative summaries:

LoveMetal wrote:Inco says something serious and sensible, that's unexpected.

Waaaay to much

LoveMetal wrote:

incognito wrote:In my perception of the ideal world we would all live with bodysuits and helmets

Oh well, it didn't last long...

Equilibrium, I have a reputation to preserve after all, but you're so uninvited to my birthday party, in IncoWorld, you have to wear the adequate clothes.
It is like a japanese school, but without the japanese cause an Incog has to be at a minimum 1.70m tall, which is unfortunately, taller than you. The file below explains it very well.

One time, a trans person jumped out my closet and said 'ooga booga' and I pee'd all over the floor. That's my experience with them.

I don't think it's an obligation, as long as you love someone as they are the fact that they used to be of a different gender shouldn't make a difference.
Though while I do think it's totally up to the transgender person to decide whether to tell their partner or not, it does seems like a good idea to tell them anyway. I would think ideally a transgender person would want to be in a relationship with someone who accepts them for who they are and not with a transphobe, so I don't see a downside to telling them initially.
If you're ok with keeping it a secret during your entire relationship then that avoids the problem but I'd think that might be somewhat mentally unhealthy, especially if you found out your partner was transphobic.

"Obligated" is such a shitty word choice, did I come up with that? Fuck.

I think if we're talking privates then yeah, you should absolutely tell them for obvious reasons. But if we're talking about this scenario

Mario wrote:- For the sake of this next question, let's assume that all transgender people have undergone both hormone therapy and SRS, and are indistinguishable from a cis person of that gender -- In your perception of an ideal world, are transgender people seen wholly as the gender the associate with, and does that include no longer being "obligated" to reveal their past to their spouse unless for medical reasons?

I don't think it would be a necessarily wrong thing to keep it temporarily in the background, but it should probably still be brought up at some point. The only reason I can think of why you wouldn't do so is because you're under the impression they would prejudice you, be turned off by it, or react like a dicklord to finding out. That's fine if you're still gauging what kind of person they are, but that shouldn't carry over into the actual relationship. There should be enough trust in the relationship to be comfortably open and honest about yourself, which isn't something limited to this topic.

And also there's a conversation to be had about infertility there, what if said partner wants kids and dislikes adoption? It's important to properly communicate about those sorts of things.

LoveMetal wrote:Well, I wouldn't engage into a relationship with a trans anyway, but if she would have told me since the beginning that she was a trans, it wouldn't be a big issue. But if I had to learn it after many time of relationship, it would very likely end with a well placed and well deserved punch in the face.

That's a pretty bizarre follow-up statement to saying it's more about the dishonesty of it. Certainly there's a conversation to be had about why she didn't tell you before, but I don't see any reason why that would kick the relationship in the gutter. Up to that point you've been attracted on a personal and sexual level, you've been sticking your dick in her and getting along, so why would this be a cause for outrage? What would actually -change- about your being together, other than you talking yourself into perceiving this as somehow being wrong now?

The idea that a successful relationship would entirely fall apart simply over you being unable to get over them being biologically male ssseeeemmmssss unlikely, Rayman. Or if that did happen, it was probably a pretty deadass relationship in the first place.

incognito wrote:In my perception of the ideal world we would all live with bodysuits and helmets, both of them making gender indistinguishable, if even having one, but whatever, I can't really say, I mean, it ain't the groundbreaking question I ask myself upon waking up, I can put myself in the mind of someone revealing the biggest secret ever held and in the mind of the one hearing it, from both sides, there's always apprehension and doubt, but if I had to be personal on this one, I'd say that I wouldn't like being told that after a long time.

hangh you were so close to making a decent response but opted for being a gay retard again midway

Well that's a very interesting question! While I think Ad makes some valid points, I voted yes, and I'll try to explain why.

First of all, there's the whole debate about the definition of gender (in this post I'll use the word gender in its traditional meaning, as a synonym for sex). The argument I often hear is that because there are cases of people with ambiguous gender (e.g. hermaphrodites) or whose genitalia do not correspond to their chromosomes (e.g. Swyer syndrome, or XY females), then we can't use genotype or genitalia to determine gender and everyone can be whatever they want. I call bullshit on that. While I acknowledge that intersex people are a thing and that they do not really fit within the two usual genders, it is important to keep in mind that cases in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female, are extremely rare: around 0.018% according to Leonard Sax. In the end, they're just an exception to the rule, and for the huge majority of people the sex chromosome and the private parts they were born with are both perfectly fine criteria to determine their gender. In fact, if you're XX and born with female genitalia, you're a woman, if you're XY and born with male genitalia, you're a man. Only if you don't fit within one of these categories will I grant you that there's more to it.

I completely understand that some people do not fit confortable with their actual gender and identify with the other one (or even something else). But I wish I were rich and that still doesn't make me Bill Gates. Not does your neighbour identifying as a cat (look up otherkin) make them one (it doesn't take a biology expert to figure it out). That's why I'd hate for someone to tell me they're a woman when they're just a man dressed as a woman, potentially under hormonal treatment and having undergone surgery but as far as I know we're nowhere close to being able to turn a man into a functional female, and vice and versa. Some people may not give a shit that you're originally a man and care much more about the way you feel about yourself, and be satisfied with your external appearance, but it's basic tolerance to accept that others might not feel the name, therefore lying to them or omitting to mention this information is badly unethical. And no, those people are not transphobic, just like someone attracted to men is not necessarily misogynistic; people have the right to be attracted to whoever they want.

Keane brought up the issue of infertility, which could be a major problem to some and should therefore be mentioned. But overall, in the prospect of a long-term relationship, it's just a question of trust, and the question boils down to another, simple one: should people hide major facts about their lives from their partners? I don't believe so.

Now to address a couple other points:

Adsolution wrote:If someone was born with a severe facial deformity and underwent extensive procedures to have a new face constructed for them throughout their childhood, on an ethical level (ignoring the stigma surrounding sex and gender), are they any more or less "obligated" to tell their spouse about this pastime than a transgender person would be about their transition?

I believe they are. I can't imagine how I'd feel if said deformity was hereditary and I only found out after fathering a deformed kid.

Adsolution wrote:For the sake of this next question, let's assume that all transgender people have undergone both hormone therapy and SRS, and are indistinguishable from a cis person of that gender -- In your perception of an ideal world, are transgender people seen wholly as the gender the associate with, and does that include no longer being "obligated" to reveal their past to their spouse unless for medical reasons?

Well, you raise a good point. Like I said earlier, to the best of my knowledge hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery aren't anywhere close to replicating a functional body. But let's assume we managed to completely turn a man into a woman, and vice and versa. Because the human body is so complex, I have a feeling the only way would be through genetic modification, and that would mean transgender people whose genotype match their body, and they would match the genotype criterion I mentioned earlier. So I might want to relax my categorization to the following: if you're XX and have actual female genitalia, you're a woman, if you're XY and have actual male genitalia, you're a man. But that's science fiction at the moment.

incognito wrote:In my perception of the ideal world we would all live with bodysuits and helmets, both of them making gender indistinguishable, if even having one, but whatever, I can't really say, I mean, it ain't the groundbreaking question I ask myself upon waking up, I can put myself in the mind of someone revealing the biggest secret ever held and in the mind of the one hearing it, from both sides, there's always apprehension and doubt, but if I had to be personal on this one, I'd say that I wouldn't like being told that after a long time.

Sometimes, I think we're a bit hard on inco. He's actually a funny, likeable guy, and I don't want him to feel constantly bashed. But then, he comes up with yet another enormity, and he gives me no choice but this: .

nr0r wrote:One time, a trans person jumped out my closet and said 'ooga booga' and I pee'd all over the floor. That's my experience with them.

Please don't pollute an interesting conversation with nonsense. We're all for a good laugh, but I can't say this reached new heights on the funny scale.

I suppose I hadn't considered all of the other factors that might turn someone off a relationship with a transgender other than the innate quality of being transgender (such as being not fully transitioned or infertile) so I suppose it was quite rash for me to assume anyone who wouldn't want to be in that kind of relationship had to be transphobic.
Hmm, I might have to think a little longer about this one...

Ambidextroid wrote:I would think ideally a transgender person would want to be in a relationship with someone who accepts them for who they are

If all a trans woman sees herself as is a woman, then technically, her partner seeing her as a woman would do the job perfectly.

Hunchman801 wrote:Not does your neighbour identifying as a cat (look up otherkin) make them one (it doesn't take a biology expert to figure it out). That's why I'd hate for someone to tell me they're a woman when they're just a man dressed as a woman, potentially under hormonal treatment and having undergone surgery.

That analogy doesn't work, because this either implies said neighbour is capable of passing as a cat in nearly every perceivable way, which is essentially impossible, or that trans women (for example) aren't capable of passing as women in nearly every perceivable way, something which is actually possible and not that uncommon. If you had a cat and all its life you never questioned whether it really was a cat (why would you if it looked and acted just like a cat?) and found out later that it actually had a dog's DNA, would you be outraged solely because this thing that gave you what you wanted from a cat had dog DNA? Would you now call it a cat or a dog? If all components exclusive to a dog were removed and all components exclusive to a cat added to it in with the chromosomes and DNA remaining unchanged, isn't the cat/dog classification at this point rendered functionally useless unless specifically referring to DNA and chromosomes, which no one actually cares about (until they decide to start getting unreasonably defensive over their sexuality) given that they have absolutely no effect on our day-to-day lives?

Hunchman801 wrote:but as far as I know we're nowhere close to being able to turn a man into a functional female, and vice and versa

Is a "functional" female someone capable of reproducing, therefore making a biological female who happens to be infertile for whatever reason not a functional female? Given that infertility (including biological infertility) isn't exclusive to transgenderism, it can't aid in determining sex unless we entertain the idea that a woman who can't give birth could, for that reason, be considered a man, or at least not a woman.

That being said, transgenderism also isn't exclusive to infertility; the first SRS ever performed included a successful, functional transplant of the female reproductive system. The patient died four years later not least of all because it was an experiment in the 30's, but transgender women have indeed gotten pregnant the traditional way and given birth to normal children. The full transplant isn't practiced or considered safe (yet), but it's been done before.

Hunchman801 wrote:But overall, in the prospect of a long-term relationship, it's just a question of trust, and the question boils down to another, simple one: should people hide major facts about their lives from their partners? I don't believe so.

If it makes virtually no difference in the other person's life, then I don't think it matters, because it making virtually no difference, by definition, makes it unnecessary information. Does not telling someone despite it possibly making no difference indicate a worrying lack of trust? Possibly, but not unconditionally. It could just be something the person wants to forget, and your partner has no right to that information anymore than they do something as basic as your phone password in that context - but who knows, I'm sure some relationships out there demand for even basic levels of privacy to be dismantled.

Hunchman801 wrote:I believe they are. I can't imagine how I'd feel if said deformity was hereditary and I only found out after fathering a deformed kid.

I actually meant to exclude the possibility of it being hereditary, but introducing it apparently still produces some interesting answers.

Hunchman801 wrote:Like I said earlier, to the best of my knowledge hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery aren't anywhere close to replicating a functional body. But let's assume we managed to completely turn a man into a woman, and vice and versa. Because the human body is so complex, I have a feeling the only way would be through genetic modification, and that would mean transgender people whose genotype match their body, and they would match the genotype criterion I mentioned earlier. So I might want to relax my categorization to the following: if you're XX and have actual female genitalia, you're a woman, if you're XY and have actual male genitalia, you're a man. But that's science fiction at the moment.

Scientific and social definitions aren't one and the same of course, and while you could argue that the scientific one is the one that matters, I would argue the opposite in most instances, since I don't know exactly what a genotype is, and that apparently doesn't have any affect on me being able to tell if someone's a man or a woman by interacting with them.

What if it did though and, against all odds, the person who I thought was a woman I was talking to had a male genotype(?)? This is where the decision making process comes in regarding the most productive course of action, and it would by definition be discriminatory to not take her own sense gender identity into account there, not to mention socially counterproductive.



Who is it good for?


Envisioning a society that views transgenderism and sex in what I see as the most pragmatic way possible leads me to voting No in this poll. To me, it is everyone else's problem. Society can change, and those who feel strongly enough should try and change it in this way, because it would be better for everyone. It removes a pointless stigma, even at the very least allowing the super small percentage of people affected by it to lead happy lives. It's easy for people to prioritise their own interests over others' despite the fact they themselves would not want to be in such an awful situation, but it's also reasonable, as it's impossible for every person to focus on every issue humanity is facing at once.