Current Events > Should women(trans) Let you know before hooking up?

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10
Dragonblade01 08/25/19 2:52:27 AM #51:	SH_expert44 posted... Dragonblade01 posted... SH_expert44 posted... They should be required by law to let them know before hand. Why? If you find out, all you have to say is no and leave. Seems much better than legally requiring people to divulge private information on a date. For safety and peace of mind. People should also divulge things like if they have ever been convicted of a sex crime, or if they have and STD or ongoing pregnancy. You can also talk to your doctor about it for more information. I agree that it would be safer at the moment for transgenders to be open about it, but that doesn't mean they should be legally obligated to do it. And the only thing on that list that I might agree people should be legally obligated to reveal is if they have an STD, because that is a medical issue that could be transferred to their partner. StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... This implies people have an obligation to disclose something. Transgenders have no such obligation. And why dont they? Because nobody is required to tell the person they're dating whether they're cis, trans, or what's between their legs. If you're that concerned about it, you should ask them. You shouldn't assume they'll just reveal private information right out the gate. <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:926516276] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>SH_expert44 posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>SH_expert44 posted...</cite> <quote>They should be required by law to let them know before hand.</quote> Why? If you find out, all you have to say is no and leave. Seems much better than legally requiring people to divulge private information on a date.</quote> For safety and peace of mind. People should also divulge things like if they have ever been convicted of a sex crime, or if they have and STD or ongoing pregnancy. You can also talk to your doctor about it for more information.</quote> I agree that it would be safer at the moment for transgenders to be open about it, but that doesn't mean they should be legally obligated to do it. And the only thing on that list that I might agree people should be legally obligated to reveal is if they have an STD, because that is a medical issue that could be transferred to their partner. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>This implies people have an obligation to disclose something. Transgenders have no such obligation.</quote> And why dont they?</quote> Because nobody is required to tell the person they're dating whether they're cis, trans, or what's between their legs. If you're that concerned about it, you should ask them. You shouldn't assume they'll just reveal private information right out the gate.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 2:52:34 AM #52:	OctilIery posted... StealthRock posted... OctilIery posted... SH_expert44 posted... OctilIery posted... SH_expert44 posted... They should be required by law to let them know before hand. Nope. yup Nope. There's literally no reason they should ever be required to reveal it, that decision should be entirely up to them. Their right to privacy, autonomy, and safety trumps the desire of some horny guy to get laid. Flip that logic and use it in the next #Metoo case That logic literally has nothing to do with #MeToo. What a worthless post. It does if you arent too bullheaded to see it. You are the same type of person to defend Metoo cases yet will condone a man getting tricked into a sexual relationship with a perceived natural born woman. Cant have it both ways. Rape is rape. --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926516277] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>SH_expert44 posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>SH_expert44 posted...</cite> <quote>They should be required by law to let them know before hand.</quote> Nope.</quote> yup</quote> Nope. There's literally no reason they should ever be required to reveal it, that decision should be entirely up to them. Their right to privacy, autonomy, and safety trumps the desire of some horny guy to get laid.</quote> Flip that logic and use it in the next #Metoo case</quote> That logic literally has nothing to do with #MeToo. What a worthless post.</quote> It does if you arent too bullheaded to see it. You are the same type of person to defend Metoo cases yet will condone a man getting tricked into a sexual relationship with a perceived natural born woman. Cant have it both ways. Rape is rape.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
RdVEHfJqAvUPIbk 08/25/19 2:52:45 AM #53:	Blue_Dream87 posted... There is no fucking way to salvage this topic anymore You can't once certain users just decide to wreck it. You'd thinking them being known for trolling would stop people taking the bait. --- https://i.imgtc.ws/ZSMkmi1.jpg <cite>RdVEHfJqAvUPIbk posted [p:926516281] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>Blue_Dream87 posted...</cite> <quote>There is no fucking way to salvage this topic anymore </quote> You can't once certain users just decide to wreck it. You'd thinking them being known for trolling would stop people taking the bait.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 2:53:06 AM #54:	StealthRock posted... I love how you dehumanize a straight man who is looking for sex. I don't. I dehumanize someone who thinks their desire to find a partner trumps someone else's right to privacy, autonomy, and safety, and I'm completely right to do so. StealthRock posted... The right to lie is mote important than what a man may or may not desire to get involved with They aren't lying and the man always has the choice to not get involved at any point based on what he sees. He has no right to know anything beyond what he sees. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926516287] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>I love how you dehumanize a straight man who is looking for sex.</quote> I don't. I dehumanize someone who thinks their desire to find a partner trumps someone else's right to privacy, autonomy, and safety, and I'm completely right to do so. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>The right to lie is mote important than what a man may or may not desire to get involved with</quote> They aren't lying and the man always has the choice to not get involved at any point based on what he sees. He has no right to know anything beyond what he sees.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 2:53:29 AM #55:	Dragonblade01 posted... SH_expert44 posted... Dragonblade01 posted... SH_expert44 posted... They should be required by law to let them know before hand. Why? If you find out, all you have to say is no and leave. Seems much better than legally requiring people to divulge private information on a date. For safety and peace of mind. People should also divulge things like if they have ever been convicted of a sex crime, or if they have and STD or ongoing pregnancy. You can also talk to your doctor about it for more information. I agree that it would be safer at the moment for transgenders to be open about it, but that doesn't mean they should be legally obligated to do it. And the only thing on that list that I might agree people should be legally obligated to reveal is if they have an STD, because that is a medical issue that could be transferred to their partner. StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... This implies people have an obligation to disclose something. Transgenders have no such obligation. And why dont they? Because nobody is required to tell the person they're dating whether they're cis, trans, or what's between their legs. If you're that concerned about it, you should ask them. You shouldn't assume they'll just reveal private information right out the gate. By your logic they dont even have to answer truthfully Also, many women would be offended by thay question would theu not? --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926516292] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>SH_expert44 posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>SH_expert44 posted...</cite> <quote>They should be required by law to let them know before hand.</quote> Why? If you find out, all you have to say is no and leave. Seems much better than legally requiring people to divulge private information on a date.</quote> For safety and peace of mind. People should also divulge things like if they have ever been convicted of a sex crime, or if they have and STD or ongoing pregnancy. You can also talk to your doctor about it for more information.</quote> I agree that it would be safer at the moment for transgenders to be open about it, but that doesn't mean they should be legally obligated to do it. And the only thing on that list that I might agree people should be legally obligated to reveal is if they have an STD, because that is a medical issue that could be transferred to their partner. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>This implies people have an obligation to disclose something. Transgenders have no such obligation.</quote> And why dont they?</quote> Because nobody is required to tell the person they're dating whether they're cis, trans, or what's between their legs. If you're that concerned about it, you should ask them. You shouldn't assume they'll just reveal private information right out the gate.</quote> By your logic they dont even have to answer truthfully Also, many women would be offended by thay question would theu not?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/25/19 2:54:23 AM #56:	StealthRock posted... a man getting tricked into a sexual relationship with a perceived natural born woman Assuming someone is cisgender is not a trick. It's an assumption you made all on your own. <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:926516304] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>a man getting tricked into a sexual relationship with a perceived natural born woman</quote> Assuming someone is cisgender is not a trick. It's an assumption you made all on your own.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 2:54:30 AM #57:	OctilIery posted... StealthRock posted... I love how you dehumanize a straight man who is looking for sex. I don't. I dehumanize someone who thinks their desire to find a partner trumps someone else's right to privacy, autonomy, and safety, and I'm completely right to do so. StealthRock posted... The right to lie is mote important than what a man may or may not desire to get involved with They aren't lying and the man always has the choice to not get involved at any point based on what he sees. He has no right to know anything beyond what he sees. Man, delusion like this probably needs to be studied --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926516305] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>I love how you dehumanize a straight man who is looking for sex.</quote> I don't. I dehumanize someone who thinks their desire to find a partner trumps someone else's right to privacy, autonomy, and safety, and I'm completely right to do so. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>The right to lie is mote important than what a man may or may not desire to get involved with</quote> They aren't lying and the man always has the choice to not get involved at any point based on what he sees. He has no right to know anything beyond what he sees.</quote> Man, delusion like this probably needs to be studied</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
edededdy 08/25/19 2:54:42 AM #58:	shit logic. we shouldnt have to disclose stds either. after all its our right to privacy autonomy and safety. --- Voted best user on CE 2017 and 2018 hahahahah lmfao <cite>edededdy posted [p:926516311] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>shit logic. we shouldnt have to disclose stds either. after all its our right to privacy autonomy and safety.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/25/19 2:57:41 AM #59:	StealthRock posted... By your logic they dont even have to answer truthfully Also, many women would be offended by thay question would theu not? As I said before, if they literally lie to you, then you might have a case for rape by deception. And most people would be offended by that question, yes. Most people would be offended by asking most very personal questions on a date. But guess what? That's dating, regardless of whether the person is cisgender or transgender. There's no need to make special laws for the latter. <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:926516359] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>By your logic they dont even have to answer truthfully Also, many women would be offended by thay question would theu not?</quote> As I said before, if they literally lie to you, then you might have a case for rape by deception. And most people would be offended by that question, yes. Most people would be offended by asking most very personal questions on a date. But guess what? That's dating, regardless of whether the person is cisgender or transgender. There's no need to make special laws for the latter.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 2:58:17 AM #60:	StealthRock posted... It does if you arent too bullheaded to see it. Then explain how. StealthRock posted... You are the same type of person to defend Metoo cases yet will condone a man getting tricked into a sexual relationship with a perceived natural born woman. "You're the type of person to defend women coming forward about being raped, yet don't condone transgenders for participating in consensual sex". Literally no part of what they're doing is rape unless they force the man. Rape by Deception doesn't mean both parties have to be completely honest about who or what they are. There is no crime for hiding an aspect of yourself from a partner unless you're either promising something you don't intend to deliver, or causing actual damage to your partner, neither of which is the case here. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926516370] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>It does if you arent too bullheaded to see it.</quote> Then explain how. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>You are the same type of person to defend Metoo cases yet will condone a man getting tricked into a sexual relationship with a perceived natural born woman.</quote> "You're the type of person to defend women coming forward about being raped, yet don't condone transgenders for participating in consensual sex". Literally no part of what they're doing is rape unless they force the man. Rape by Deception doesn't mean both parties have to be completely honest about who or what they are. There is no crime for hiding an aspect of yourself from a partner unless you're either promising something you don't intend to deliver, or causing actual damage to your partner, neither of which is the case here.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 3:02:59 AM #61:	OctilIery posted... StealthRock posted... It does if you arent too bullheaded to see it. Then explain how. StealthRock posted... You are the same type of person to defend Metoo cases yet will condone a man getting tricked into a sexual relationship with a perceived natural born woman. "You're the type of person to defend women coming forward about being raped, yet don't condone transgenders for participating in consensual sex". Literally no part of what they're doing is rape unless they force the man. Rape by Deception doesn't mean both parties have to be completely honest about who or what they are. There is no crime for hiding an aspect of yourself from a partner unless you're either promising something you don't intend to deliver, or causing actual damage to your partner, neither of which is the case here. The lack of awareness if astounding Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. Some men dont want that amd should be able to make informed decisions before sex. Sorry if that hurts liberal feelings --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926516444] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>It does if you arent too bullheaded to see it.</quote> Then explain how. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>You are the same type of person to defend Metoo cases yet will condone a man getting tricked into a sexual relationship with a perceived natural born woman.</quote> "You're the type of person to defend women coming forward about being raped, yet don't condone transgenders for participating in consensual sex". Literally no part of what they're doing is rape unless they force the man. Rape by Deception doesn't mean both parties have to be completely honest about who or what they are. There is no crime for hiding an aspect of yourself from a partner unless you're either promising something you don't intend to deliver, or causing actual damage to your partner, neither of which is the case here.</quote> The lack of awareness if astounding Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. Some men dont want that amd should be able to make informed decisions before sex. Sorry if that hurts liberal feelings</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:04:55 AM #62:	StealthRock posted... Man, delusion like this probably needs to be studied There's no delusion there. edededdy posted... shit logic. we shouldnt have to disclose stds either. after all its our right to privacy autonomy and safety. You don't have to disclose STDs, but you do have to take steps to ensure your partner's safety if you decide to keep it secret. Dragonblade01 posted... As I said before, if they literally lie to you, then you might have a case for rape by deception. Slipping a condom off(or just not putting it on and lying about it) is rape by deception. Claiming you're making porn then ghosting and never paying is rape by deception. Swapping out in a dark room for someone your partner didn't agree to have sex with is rape by deception. Not divulging personal information? That isn't rape by deception. If you believe not revealing you're transgender is rape by deception, you're opening the door for stupidity like saying "I didn't know they were racist" is rape by deception. You aren't entitled to know anything more than what you can see, and rape by deception requires a clear intention to deceive. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926516479] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Man, delusion like this probably needs to be studied</quote> There's no delusion there. edededdy posted...</cite> <quote>shit logic. we shouldnt have to disclose stds either. after all its our right to privacy autonomy and safety.</quote> You don't have to disclose STDs, but you do have to take steps to ensure your partner's safety if you decide to keep it secret. Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>As I said before, if they literally lie to you, then you might have a case for rape by deception.</quote> Slipping a condom off(or just not putting it on and lying about it) is rape by deception. Claiming you're making porn then ghosting and never paying is rape by deception. Swapping out in a dark room for someone your partner didn't agree to have sex with is rape by deception. Not divulging personal information? That isn't rape by deception. If you believe not revealing you're transgender is rape by deception, you're opening the door for stupidity like saying "I didn't know they were racist" is rape by deception. You aren't entitled to know anything more than what you can see, and rape by deception requires a clear intention to deceive.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/25/19 3:06:41 AM #63:	StealthRock posted... Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves. <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:926516508] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it.</quote> Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:06:41 AM #64:	StealthRock posted... Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. No it isn't. It's just promising sex with the person they see. They get naked, and the man either likes what they see, or doesn't and leave. That's all there is to it. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926516509] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it.</quote> No it isn't. It's just promising sex with the person they see. They get naked, and the man either likes what they see, or doesn't and leave. That's all there is to it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:07:55 AM #65:	RdVEHfJqAvUPIbk posted... Blue_Dream87 posted... There is no fucking way to salvage this topic anymore You can't once certain users just decide to wreck it. You'd thinking them being known for trolling would stop people taking the bait. Does anyone know whose alt this is? I'm assuming it's just another transphobic bigot. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926516538] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>RdVEHfJqAvUPIbk posted...</cite> <quote>Blue_Dream87 posted...</cite> <quote>There is no fucking way to salvage this topic anymore </quote> You can't once certain users just decide to wreck it. You'd thinking them being known for trolling would stop people taking the bait.</quote> Does anyone know whose alt this is? I'm assuming it's just another transphobic bigot.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Gobstoppers12 08/25/19 3:09:04 AM #66:	This is one of those topics where there are a lot of wild claims being made, and I'd love to argue about them, but I'm afraid I'll get warned again for stating the obvious. --- I write Naruto Fanfiction. <cite>Gobstoppers12 posted [p:926516565] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>This is one of those topics where there are a lot of wild claims being made, and I'd love to argue about them, but I'm afraid I'll get warned again for stating the obvious.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctaviaMelody30 08/25/19 3:09:42 AM #67:	Yes, definitely. <cite>OctaviaMelody30 posted [p:926516581] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>Yes, definitely.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/25/19 3:11:49 AM #68:	OctilIery posted... Not divulging personal information? If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario. <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:926516635] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Not divulging personal information?</quote> If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 3:13:55 AM #69:	Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves. Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926516673] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it.</quote> Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves.</quote> Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 3:16:08 AM #70:	OctilIery posted... StealthRock posted... Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. No it isn't. It's just promising sex with the person they see. They get naked, and the man either likes what they see, or doesn't and leave. That's all there is to it. Lol man, im weak. I cant. --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926516711] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it.</quote> No it isn't. It's just promising sex with the person they see. They get naked, and the man either likes what they see, or doesn't and leave. That's all there is to it.</quote> Lol man, im weak. I cant.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:16:18 AM #71:	Dragonblade01 posted... OctilIery posted... Not divulging personal information? If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario. No. Someone can lie about not being transgender. They can lie about being rich. They can lie about being famous. They can lie about having a big dick, natural tits, real hair, or being shaved. They can lie about whatever they want as long as they aren't promising anything in compensation or putting the other person in danger. If we were talking about morally, then there'd be a lot more room for discussion, but we're talking legally, and legally speaking nobody is or ever should/will be required to reveal their transgender status. Full stop, no discussion. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926516719] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Not divulging personal information?</quote> If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario.</quote> No. Someone can lie about not being transgender. They can lie about being rich. They can lie about being famous. They can lie about having a big dick, natural tits, real hair, or being shaved. They can lie about whatever they want as long as they aren't promising anything in compensation or putting the other person in danger. If we were talking about morally, then there'd be a lot more room for discussion, but we're talking legally, and legally speaking nobody is or ever should/will be required to reveal their transgender status. Full stop, no discussion.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:19:00 AM #72:	StealthRock posted... Lol man, im weak. I cant. We know you can't make an argument. You've made that very clear this topic. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926516783] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Lol man, im weak. I cant.</quote> We know you can't make an argument. You've made that very clear this topic.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/25/19 3:19:21 AM #73:	OctilIery posted... Dragonblade01 posted... OctilIery posted... Not divulging personal information? If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario. No. Someone can lie about not being transgender. They can lie about being rich. They can lie about being famous. They can lie about having a big dick, natural tits, real hair, or being shaved. They can lie about whatever they want as long as they aren't promising anything in compensation or putting the other person in danger. If we were talking about morally, then there'd be a lot more room for discussion, but we're talking legally, and legally speaking nobody is or ever should/will be required to reveal their transgender status. Full stop, no discussion. To be perfectly honest, I don't have a problem with some of those other examples being rape by deception either. I understand that under the current laws they aren't, but we're talking about how the law should be, not how the law is. <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:926516792] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Not divulging personal information?</quote> If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario.</quote> No. Someone can lie about not being transgender. They can lie about being rich. They can lie about being famous. They can lie about having a big dick, natural tits, real hair, or being shaved. They can lie about whatever they want as long as they aren't promising anything in compensation or putting the other person in danger. If we were talking about morally, then there'd be a lot more room for discussion, but we're talking legally, and legally speaking nobody is or ever should/will be required to reveal their transgender status. Full stop, no discussion.</quote> To be perfectly honest, I don't have a problem with some of those other examples being rape by deception either. I understand that under the current laws they aren't, but we're talking about how the law should be, not how the law is.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 3:21:17 AM #74:	OctilIery posted... Dragonblade01 posted... OctilIery posted... Not divulging personal information? If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario. No. Someone can lie about not being transgender. They can lie about being rich. They can lie about being famous. They can lie about having a big dick, natural tits, real hair, or being shaved. They can lie about whatever they want as long as they aren't promising anything in compensation or putting the other person in danger. If we were talking about morally, then there'd be a lot more room for discussion, but we're talking legally, and legally speaking nobody is or ever should/will be required to reveal their transgender status. Full stop, no discussion. You put someone in danger by lying to them. If i think im involved with a natural born woman and find out its not, then that is rape because thats not what i signed up for. Ita too bad you are too transphilic to see it. Why not promote actual safety for transexuals instead of encouraging them to lie? --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926516826] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Not divulging personal information?</quote> If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario.</quote> No. Someone can lie about not being transgender. They can lie about being rich. They can lie about being famous. They can lie about having a big dick, natural tits, real hair, or being shaved. They can lie about whatever they want as long as they aren't promising anything in compensation or putting the other person in danger. If we were talking about morally, then there'd be a lot more room for discussion, but we're talking legally, and legally speaking nobody is or ever should/will be required to reveal their transgender status. Full stop, no discussion.</quote> You put someone in danger by lying to them. If i think im involved with a natural born woman and find out its not, then that is rape because thats not what i signed up for. Ita too bad you are too transphilic to see it. Why not promote actual safety for transexuals instead of encouraging them to lie?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/25/19 3:21:20 AM #75:	StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves. Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered. <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:926516827] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it.</quote> Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves.</quote> Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt</quote> The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:24:37 AM #76:	Dragonblade01 posted... OctilIery posted... Dragonblade01 posted... OctilIery posted... Not divulging personal information? If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario. No. Someone can lie about not being transgender. They can lie about being rich. They can lie about being famous. They can lie about having a big dick, natural tits, real hair, or being shaved. They can lie about whatever they want as long as they aren't promising anything in compensation or putting the other person in danger. If we were talking about morally, then there'd be a lot more room for discussion, but we're talking legally, and legally speaking nobody is or ever should/will be required to reveal their transgender status. Full stop, no discussion. To be perfectly honest, I don't have a problem with some of those other examples being rape by deception either. I understand that under the current laws they aren't, but we're talking about how the law should be, not how the law is. They shouldn't be just because you can't pick and choose specific examples when making a law - if you make any of those a crime, you're opening the door for the law to be abused as people claim rape for not revealing personal things. Those are all extremes and you should certainly judge a person for them, but, for instance, if you say lying about being rich to get laid is a crime, then that opens the door for someone who is extremely poor(something they'd have understandable reason to not want to divulge) being punished for lying about it. Laws are made very carefully so there aren't unintended consequences. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926516897] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Not divulging personal information?</quote> If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario.</quote> No. Someone can lie about not being transgender. They can lie about being rich. They can lie about being famous. They can lie about having a big dick, natural tits, real hair, or being shaved. They can lie about whatever they want as long as they aren't promising anything in compensation or putting the other person in danger. If we were talking about morally, then there'd be a lot more room for discussion, but we're talking legally, and legally speaking nobody is or ever should/will be required to reveal their transgender status. Full stop, no discussion.</quote> To be perfectly honest, I don't have a problem with some of those other examples being rape by deception either. I understand that under the current laws they aren't, but we're talking about how the law should be, not how the law is.</quote> They shouldn't be just because you can't pick and choose specific examples when making a law - if you make any of those a crime, you're opening the door for the law to be abused as people claim rape for not revealing personal things. Those are all extremes and you should certainly judge a person for them, but, for instance, if you say lying about being rich to get laid is a crime, then that opens the door for someone who is extremely poor(something they'd have understandable reason to not want to divulge) being punished for lying about it. Laws are made very carefully so there aren't unintended consequences.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 3:26:05 AM #77:	OctilIery posted... StealthRock posted... Lol man, im weak. I cant. We know you can't make an argument. You've made that very clear this topic. Its like arguing with a psychotic liar Besides. Cant really say too much or the over sensitive mods might snap --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926516923] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Lol man, im weak. I cant.</quote> We know you can't make an argument. You've made that very clear this topic.</quote> Its like arguing with a psychotic liar Besides. Cant really say too much or the over sensitive mods might snap</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 3:26:42 AM #78:	Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves. Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered. No it doesnt --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926516941] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it.</quote> Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves.</quote> Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt</quote> The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered.</quote> No it doesnt</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:27:39 AM #79:	StealthRock posted... You put someone in danger by lying to them. Only in specific circumstances. You aren't putting anyone in danger by not revealing you're transgender. StealthRock posted... If i think im involved with a natural born woman and find out its not, then that is rape because thats not what i signed up for. No, you signed up for sex with that individual. Nothing more, nothing less. If you willingly went through with the sex, then it isn't rape. StealthRock posted... Why not promote actual safety for transexuals instead of encouraging them to lie? I love this subtle victim blaming, saying we should force Transgenders to divulge it because some bigots are violent. And I'm not encouraging anything, I'm saying they have the right to make their own choice. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926516965] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>You put someone in danger by lying to them. </quote> Only in specific circumstances. You aren't putting anyone in danger by not revealing you're transgender. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>If i think im involved with a natural born woman and find out its not, then that is rape because thats not what i signed up for.</quote> No, you signed up for sex with that individual. Nothing more, nothing less. If you willingly went through with the sex, then it isn't rape. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Why not promote actual safety for transexuals instead of encouraging them to lie?</quote> I love this subtle victim blaming, saying we should force Transgenders to divulge it because some bigots are violent. And I'm not encouraging anything, I'm saying they have the right to make their own choice.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/25/19 3:28:30 AM #80:	StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves. Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered. No it doesnt Why is not revealing you are transgender a promise that you are cisgender, when we are all fully aware that being transgender is a possibility? Assuming someone is cisgender is on you. <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:926516980] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it.</quote> Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves.</quote> Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt</quote> The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered.</quote> No it doesnt</quote> Why is not revealing you are transgender a promise that you are cisgender, when we are all fully aware that being transgender is a possibility? Assuming someone is cisgender is on you.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
AirFresh 08/25/19 3:29:46 AM #81:	Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this. --- I am probably on the toliet. <cite>AirFresh posted [p:926517000] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:31:23 AM #82:	AirFresh posted... Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this. No, you really are. The answer is no, 100%. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926517017] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this.</quote> No, you really are. The answer is no, 100%.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 3:32:10 AM #83:	OctilIery posted... StealthRock posted... You put someone in danger by lying to them. Only in specific circumstances. You aren't putting anyone in danger by not revealing you're transgender. StealthRock posted... If i think im involved with a natural born woman and find out its not, then that is rape because thats not what i signed up for. No, you signed up for sex with that individual. Nothing more, nothing less. If you willingly went through with the sex, then it isn't rape. StealthRock posted... Why not promote actual safety for transexuals instead of encouraging them to lie? I love this subtle victim blaming, saying we should force Transgenders to divulge it because some bigots are violent. And I'm not encouraging anything, I'm saying they have the right to make their own choice. Again, apply that warped backwards logic next time a metoo case crops up and see how it works. I never said it i was blaming transexuals. What im saying is punsih those to harm them like you would anyone elae who commits violent crimes. But dont friggin encourage them to lie just because you think their "privacy" is more important than their partners wants. --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926517033] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>You put someone in danger by lying to them. </quote> Only in specific circumstances. You aren't putting anyone in danger by not revealing you're transgender. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>If i think im involved with a natural born woman and find out its not, then that is rape because thats not what i signed up for.</quote> No, you signed up for sex with that individual. Nothing more, nothing less. If you willingly went through with the sex, then it isn't rape. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Why not promote actual safety for transexuals instead of encouraging them to lie?</quote> I love this subtle victim blaming, saying we should force Transgenders to divulge it because some bigots are violent. And I'm not encouraging anything, I'm saying they have the right to make their own choice.</quote> Again, apply that warped backwards logic next time a metoo case crops up and see how it works. I never said it i was blaming transexuals. What im saying is punsih those to harm them like you would anyone elae who commits violent crimes. But dont friggin encourage them to lie just because you think their "privacy" is more important than their partners wants.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/25/19 3:32:23 AM #84:	OctilIery posted... Dragonblade01 posted... OctilIery posted... Dragonblade01 posted... OctilIery posted... Not divulging personal information? If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario. No. Someone can lie about not being transgender. They can lie about being rich. They can lie about being famous. They can lie about having a big dick, natural tits, real hair, or being shaved. They can lie about whatever they want as long as they aren't promising anything in compensation or putting the other person in danger. If we were talking about morally, then there'd be a lot more room for discussion, but we're talking legally, and legally speaking nobody is or ever should/will be required to reveal their transgender status. Full stop, no discussion. To be perfectly honest, I don't have a problem with some of those other examples being rape by deception either. I understand that under the current laws they aren't, but we're talking about how the law should be, not how the law is. They shouldn't be just because you can't pick and choose specific examples when making a law - if you make any of those a crime, you're opening the door for the law to be abused as people claim rape for not revealing personal things. Those are all extremes and you should certainly judge a person for them, but, for instance, if you say lying about being rich to get laid is a crime, then that opens the door for someone who is extremely poor(something they'd have understandable reason to not want to divulge) being punished for lying about it. Laws are made very carefully so there aren't unintended consequences. I agree that laws should be made very carefully to avoid unintended consequences, but when I say I would be okay with some of those being rape by deception as well, I'm assuming that the new version of the law is also made very carefully. Of course, that's not the law that we have now, so the reality is that not revealing you are transgender could never be rape by deception. That much I definitely recognize. <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:926517036] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>Not divulging personal information?</quote> If someone lies and says they aren't transgender, then at the very least I think there's a discussion to be had about what could and could not be classified as rape by deception. My point with that allowance was not to say that it's definitely rape by deception, but rather that the only way the conversation would even be on the table is in the described scenario.</quote> No. Someone can lie about not being transgender. They can lie about being rich. They can lie about being famous. They can lie about having a big dick, natural tits, real hair, or being shaved. They can lie about whatever they want as long as they aren't promising anything in compensation or putting the other person in danger. If we were talking about morally, then there'd be a lot more room for discussion, but we're talking legally, and legally speaking nobody is or ever should/will be required to reveal their transgender status. Full stop, no discussion.</quote> To be perfectly honest, I don't have a problem with some of those other examples being rape by deception either. I understand that under the current laws they aren't, but we're talking about how the law should be, not how the law is.</quote> They shouldn't be just because you can't pick and choose specific examples when making a law - if you make any of those a crime, you're opening the door for the law to be abused as people claim rape for not revealing personal things. Those are all extremes and you should certainly judge a person for them, but, for instance, if you say lying about being rich to get laid is a crime, then that opens the door for someone who is extremely poor(something they'd have understandable reason to not want to divulge) being punished for lying about it. Laws are made very carefully so there aren't unintended consequences.</quote> I agree that laws should be made very carefully to avoid unintended consequences, but when I say I would be okay with some of those being rape by deception as well, I'm assuming that the new version of the law is also made very carefully. Of course, that's not the law that we have now, so the reality is that not revealing you are transgender could never be rape by deception. That much I definitely recognize.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OmegaPillow 08/25/19 3:32:35 AM #85:	StealthRock posted... OctilIery posted... StealthRock posted... Lol man, im weak. I cant. We know you can't make an argument. You've made that very clear this topic. Its like arguing with a psychotic liar Besides. Cant really say too much or the over sensitive mods might snap Oh trust, you cant say nothing, which is why these forums are dying --- Psn: An_Axe_Murderer 360: An Axe Murd3r3r 3ds friend code: 3583 4500 8225 plz add me <cite>OmegaPillow posted [p:926517039] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Lol man, im weak. I cant.</quote> We know you can't make an argument. You've made that very clear this topic.</quote> Its like arguing with a psychotic liar Besides. Cant really say too much or the over sensitive mods might snap</quote> Oh trust, you cant say nothing, which is why these forums are dying</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
AirFresh 08/25/19 3:34:07 AM #86:	OctilIery posted... AirFresh posted... Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this. No, you really are. The answer is no, 100%. You cannot give me a convincing argument on this case my man. I respect that they went through the change to be who they are but I am sorry but it is clear deception. Like, a married man or woman not disclosing they are married. History is history and that is the bottom line. --- I am probably on the toliet. <cite>AirFresh posted [p:926517069] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this.</quote> No, you really are. The answer is no, 100%.</quote> You cannot give me a convincing argument on this case my man. I respect that they went through the change to be who they are but I am sorry but it is clear deception. Like, a married man or woman not disclosing they are married. History is history and that is the bottom line.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 3:34:18 AM #87:	Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves. Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered. No it doesnt Why is not revealing you are transgender a promise that you are cisgender, when we are all fully aware that being transgender is a possibility? Assuming someone is cisgender is on you. We are also aware that someone having HIV is a possibility. Should theu not disclose that info as well?? Jobs know that someone being an excon is a possibility. Should ex cons keep their jail records secret too?? --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926517074] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it.</quote> Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves.</quote> Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt</quote> The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered.</quote> No it doesnt</quote> Why is not revealing you are transgender a promise that you are cisgender, when we are all fully aware that being transgender is a possibility? Assuming someone is cisgender is on you.</quote> We are also aware that someone having HIV is a possibility. Should theu not disclose that info as well?? Jobs know that someone being an excon is a possibility. Should ex cons keep their jail records secret too??</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:36:07 AM #88:	AirFresh posted... OctilIery posted... AirFresh posted... Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this. No, you really are. The answer is no, 100%. You cannot give me a convincing argument on this case my man. I respect that they went through the change to be who they are but I am sorry but it is clear deception. Like, a married man or woman not disclosing they are married. History is history and that is the bottom line. A married man or woman not disclosing is not a crime, nor is it at all comparable to someone not revealing that they're married. That's why you're bigoted - you make arguments to this case by constantly comparing being transgender to negative things, when there's nothing negative about it. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926517115] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this.</quote> No, you really are. The answer is no, 100%.</quote> You cannot give me a convincing argument on this case my man. I respect that they went through the change to be who they are but I am sorry but it is clear deception. Like, a married man or woman not disclosing they are married. History is history and that is the bottom line.</quote> A married man or woman not disclosing is not a crime, nor is it at all comparable to someone not revealing that they're married. That's why you're bigoted - you make arguments to this case by constantly comparing being transgender to negative things, when there's nothing negative about it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
AirFresh 08/25/19 3:36:50 AM #89:	StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves. Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered. No it doesnt Why is not revealing you are transgender a promise that you are cisgender, when we are all fully aware that being transgender is a possibility? Assuming someone is cisgender is on you. We are also aware that someone having HIV is a possibility. Should theu not disclose that info as well?? Jobs know that someone being an excon is a possibility. Should ex cons keep their jail records secret too?? Yup. I was going to mke this case as well. History is history and if you are wanting to start an intimate relationship then some aspects of privacy are to be abolished. --- I am probably on the toliet. <cite>AirFresh posted [p:926517138] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it.</quote> Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves.</quote> Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt</quote> The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered.</quote> No it doesnt</quote> Why is not revealing you are transgender a promise that you are cisgender, when we are all fully aware that being transgender is a possibility? Assuming someone is cisgender is on you.</quote> We are also aware that someone having HIV is a possibility. Should theu not disclose that info as well?? Jobs know that someone being an excon is a possibility. Should ex cons keep their jail records secret too??</quote> Yup. I was going to mke this case as well. History is history and if you are wanting to start an intimate relationship then some aspects of privacy are to be abolished.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:38:14 AM #90:	StealthRock posted... We are also aware that someone having HIV is a possibility. Should theu not disclose that info as well?? They don't have to reveal it, but they have to take steps to prevent transmission, because that would cause actual harm. StealthRock posted... Jobs know that someone being an excon is a possibility. Should ex cons keep their jail records secret too?? Again, not comparable. But even then people with records have rights regarding what stage of the interviewing process that gets revealed in some states - they shouldn't have to reveal it right on the application. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926517153] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>We are also aware that someone having HIV is a possibility. Should theu not disclose that info as well??</quote> They don't have to reveal it, but they have to take steps to prevent transmission, because that would cause actual harm. StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Jobs know that someone being an excon is a possibility. Should ex cons keep their jail records secret too??</quote> Again, not comparable. But even then people with records have rights regarding what stage of the interviewing process that gets revealed in some states - they shouldn't have to reveal it right on the application.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
AirFresh 08/25/19 3:38:38 AM #91:	OctilIery posted... AirFresh posted... OctilIery posted... AirFresh posted... Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this. No, you really are. The answer is no, 100%. You cannot give me a convincing argument on this case my man. I respect that they went through the change to be who they are but I am sorry but it is clear deception. Like, a married man or woman not disclosing they are married. History is history and that is the bottom line. A married man or woman not disclosing is not a crime, nor is it at all comparable to someone not revealing that they're married. That's why you're bigoted - you make arguments to this case by constantly comparing being transgender to negative things, when there's nothing negative about it. It's not a negative statement. It is a disclosure, would I date a married woman? Convictions say no but who knows how I would react. You are character attacking instead of disussing the actual topic at hand. It is am important part of their history. --- I am probably on the toliet. <cite>AirFresh posted [p:926517159] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this.</quote> No, you really are. The answer is no, 100%.</quote> You cannot give me a convincing argument on this case my man. I respect that they went through the change to be who they are but I am sorry but it is clear deception. Like, a married man or woman not disclosing they are married. History is history and that is the bottom line.</quote> A married man or woman not disclosing is not a crime, nor is it at all comparable to someone not revealing that they're married. That's why you're bigoted - you make arguments to this case by constantly comparing being transgender to negative things, when there's nothing negative about it.</quote> It's not a negative statement. It is a disclosure, would I date a married woman? Convictions say no but who knows how I would react. You are character attacking instead of disussing the actual topic at hand. It is am important part of their history.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:39:15 AM #92:	AirFresh posted... History is history and if you are wanting to start an intimate relationship then some aspects of privacy are to be abolished. Literally, objectively wrong. Having sex with someone doesn't give you the right to any of their private details. You get to know what they let you know, that's it. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926517173] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>History is history and if you are wanting to start an intimate relationship then some aspects of privacy are to be abolished.</quote> Literally, objectively wrong. Having sex with someone doesn't give you the right to any of their private details. You get to know what they let you know, that's it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dragonblade01 08/25/19 3:39:43 AM #93:	StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Dragonblade01 posted... StealthRock posted... Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it. Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves. Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered. No it doesnt Why is not revealing you are transgender a promise that you are cisgender, when we are all fully aware that being transgender is a possibility? Assuming someone is cisgender is on you. We are also aware that someone having HIV is a possibility. Should theu not disclose that info as well?? Jobs know that someone being an excon is a possibility. Should ex cons keep their jail records secret too?? You could make a case that people should be legally obligated to reveal STDs, but the reason for that has nothing to do with the fact that it's possible for people to have STDs. It would be because the disease could be transferred to the partner. Regarding ex-convicts, companies ask if you've been arrested or charged with a crime. They can get criminal records which are made available to them. This is not a comparable situation. <cite>Dragonblade01 posted [p:926517179] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Dragonblade01 posted...</cite> <quote>StealthRock posted...</cite> <quote>Not disclosing is promising to deliver a natural born woman and not delivering it.</quote> Uh, no it's not. Transgender people exist. We're aware that transgender people exist. That means you should be aware that the person you're dating might be transgender. There's nothing about consent that includes "cisgender unless otherwise stated." That's an assumption that people make all by themselves.</quote> Did i say they dont exist? No i didnt</quote> The point is not that you claimed they don't exist. The point is that the understanding that they do refutes the idea that not disclosing it is promising something that isn't being delivered.</quote> No it doesnt</quote> Why is not revealing you are transgender a promise that you are cisgender, when we are all fully aware that being transgender is a possibility? Assuming someone is cisgender is on you.</quote> We are also aware that someone having HIV is a possibility. Should theu not disclose that info as well?? Jobs know that someone being an excon is a possibility. Should ex cons keep their jail records secret too??</quote> You could make a case that people should be legally obligated to reveal STDs, but the reason for that has nothing to do with the fact that it's possible for people to have STDs. It would be because the disease could be transferred to the partner. Regarding ex-convicts, companies ask if you've been arrested or charged with a crime. They can get criminal records which are made available to them. This is not a comparable situation.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:39:59 AM #94:	AirFresh posted... It's not a negative statement. It is a disclosure, would I date a married woman? Convictions say no but who knows how I would react. You are character attacking instead of disussing the actual topic at hand. Sorry no, being trans is not comparable to being married. At all. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926517189] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>It's not a negative statement. It is a disclosure, would I date a married woman? Convictions say no but who knows how I would react. You are character attacking instead of disussing the actual topic at hand.</quote> Sorry no, being trans is not comparable to being married. At all.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
AirFresh 08/25/19 3:41:41 AM #95:	OctilIery posted... AirFresh posted... History is history and if you are wanting to start an intimate relationship then some aspects of privacy are to be abolished. Literally, objectively wrong. Having sex with someone doesn't give you the right to any of their private details. You get to know what they let you know, that's it. No, it is not objectively wrong. It does give you rights to disclose certain private details. You are not giving me even a remotely compelling argument here. --- I am probably on the toliet. <cite>AirFresh posted [p:926517223] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>History is history and if you are wanting to start an intimate relationship then some aspects of privacy are to be abolished.</quote> Literally, objectively wrong. Having sex with someone doesn't give you the right to any of their private details. You get to know what they let you know, that's it.</quote> No, it is not objectively wrong. It does give you rights to disclose certain private details. You are not giving me even a remotely compelling argument here.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
OctilIery 08/25/19 3:42:24 AM #96:	AirFresh posted... It does give you rights to disclose certain private details. Objectively wrong. <cite>OctilIery posted [p:926517238] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>It does give you rights to disclose certain private details.</quote> Objectively wrong.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
AirFresh 08/25/19 3:47:56 AM #97:	OctilIery posted... AirFresh posted... It does give you rights to disclose certain private details. Objectively wrong. I am done. Open your mind up or learn how to properly present an argument. You lost this one, champ. --- I am probably on the toliet. <cite>AirFresh posted [p:926517328] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>It does give you rights to disclose certain private details.</quote> Objectively wrong.</quote> I am done. Open your mind up or learn how to properly present an argument. You lost this one, champ.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
asagi_mode_gone 08/25/19 3:50:22 AM #98:	AirFresh posted... OctilIery posted... AirFresh posted... It does give you rights to disclose certain private details. Objectively wrong. I am done. Open your mind up or learn how to properly present an argument. You lost this one. "If you don't debate exactly how I want so I can straw man and make demands of your side that I would never make an attempt to draw up for my own side, you automatically lose the argument" <cite>asagi_mode_gone posted [p:926517375] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>It does give you rights to disclose certain private details.</quote> Objectively wrong.</quote> I am done. Open your mind up or learn how to properly present an argument. You lost this one.</quote> "If you don't debate exactly how I want so I can straw man and make demands of your side that I would never make an attempt to draw up for my own side, you automatically lose the argument"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 3:52:03 AM #99:	OctilIery posted... AirFresh posted... OctilIery posted... AirFresh posted... Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this. No, you really are. The answer is no, 100%. You cannot give me a convincing argument on this case my man. I respect that they went through the change to be who they are but I am sorry but it is clear deception. Like, a married man or woman not disclosing they are married. History is history and that is the bottom line. A married man or woman not disclosing is not a crime, nor is it at all comparable to someone not revealing that they're married. That's why you're bigoted - you make arguments to this case by constantly comparing being transgender to negative things, when there's nothing negative about it. Bigot is such a worthless buzzword these days its almost lost all meaning. Everyone is a bigot --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926517411] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>Guys I am sure as hell am not readinf this thread but the answer is a simple "Yes". It is 100% deception othewise and I am not transphoic for saying this.</quote> No, you really are. The answer is no, 100%.</quote> You cannot give me a convincing argument on this case my man. I respect that they went through the change to be who they are but I am sorry but it is clear deception. Like, a married man or woman not disclosing they are married. History is history and that is the bottom line.</quote> A married man or woman not disclosing is not a crime, nor is it at all comparable to someone not revealing that they're married. That's why you're bigoted - you make arguments to this case by constantly comparing being transgender to negative things, when there's nothing negative about it.</quote> Bigot is such a worthless buzzword these days its almost lost all meaning. Everyone is a bigot</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
StealthRock 08/25/19 3:52:45 AM #100:	OctilIery posted... AirFresh posted... It's not a negative statement. It is a disclosure, would I date a married woman? Convictions say no but who knows how I would react. You are character attacking instead of disussing the actual topic at hand. Sorry no, being trans is not comparable to being married. At all. Rape by deception is comparable to rape though. --- Pokemon is awesome <cite>StealthRock posted [p:926517423] in Should wom... [t:77962578]...</cite> <quote>OctilIery posted...</cite> <quote>AirFresh posted...</cite> <quote>It's not a negative statement. It is a disclosure, would I date a married woman? Convictions say no but who knows how I would react. You are character attacking instead of disussing the actual topic at hand.</quote> Sorry no, being trans is not comparable to being married. At all.</quote> Rape by deception is comparable to rape though.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10

Current Events > Should women(trans) Let you know before hooking up? (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Should women(trans) Let you know before hooking up?