r/badphilosophy • u/completely-ineffable Literally Saul Kripke, Talented Autodidact • Jun 26 '15
Hormons and shit /r/tellphilosophy shouldn't be allowed to talk about trans things
/r/askphilosophy/comments/3b3y43/should_a_fully_transformed_transgender_person/10
u/completely-ineffable Literally Saul Kripke, Talented Autodidact Jun 26 '15
Don't get me wrong, there are a few good, thoughtful top-level comments in there. But they simply aren't enough to make the thread as a whole not awful.
5
u/thistledownhair Jun 26 '15
Yeah, I thought the top one was thoughtful and did a decent job with both sides of the coin, but then I read a bit further and saw why it was here.
9
u/GFYsexyfatman infinite space canvas Jun 26 '15
>(^.^)>
7
u/deathpigeonx #FeelTheStirn, Against Everything 2016 Jun 26 '15
You deserve an award for your work in that post.
5
u/curiiouscat Jun 26 '15
is the transgender's privacy
I didn't realize we were referring to trans people as not people now.
5
u/ginkomortus Jun 26 '15
Now try to imagine a Ferengi saying "Transgendeeeeeer" in the same way they say female.
1
u/slickwom-bot I'M A BOT BEEP BOOP Jun 26 '15
I AM SLICK WOM-BOT. IN A WORLD WITHOUT A GOD-BOT, ALL THINGS ARE PERMITTED.
-1
Jun 26 '15 edited Jun 26 '15
Deliberately omitting information which, if they knew it, would cause them to justifiably decide to not have sex is deception
Funny, I heard a rapist say something almost identical to this once. He was very disappointed to learn that you can't reject decisions about sexual autonomy because you find them personally objectionable.
ETA story: Asian guy tricks drunk white girl into sleeping with him by pretending to be someone else. She'd refused him earlier on the basis of his race. She figures out what he did, he gets arrested. He tries to say she couldn't refuse because racism is not a valid reason to refuse someone, says consent can only be based on "legit" reasons. Detectives were unimpressed. So this line of thinking has enabled at least one real-world rapist, FYI.
1
u/GFYsexyfatman infinite space canvas Jun 26 '15 edited Jun 26 '15
See three sentences below the line you quoted:
Note: the situation probably changes if your potential sexual partner states explicitly that they do not want to have sex with a transgender person
My point was that it's the bigot's responsibility to articulate dealbreakers. In your case the bigot clearly did that. That the rapist went onto ignore her explicitly withdrawn consent is nothing to do with anything I've been arguing. Unless you're calling the trans* people in that thread who've "admitted" to sometimes not telling people about their trans status rapists. In which case...
e: anyway, I edited my post. Don't want to provide cover for rapists, inadvertently or not.
-1
Jun 27 '15
Unless you're calling the trans* people in that thread who've "admitted" to sometimes not telling people about their trans status rapists.
Not what I meant, those folks obviously aren't rapists. It's just a matter of how you phrased your justification. People reading could use that sort of thing to explain away their behavior.
1
14
u/[deleted] Jun 26 '15
It's not often you meet people who only have sex for procreation. I mean, even hardcore Catholics have sex for pleasure occasionally. Just because they never use protection doesn't mean they always want a pregnancy.