Would you date a Transgender?

wow that was impressive, so you can cut and paste a fake anthro degree...if you actually had one it wouldn't be worthless and you'd have a job...I'm calling you out because it's obvious you don't have one, your posts give you away...

all that bs and you don't know the scientific definition of Theory?
Theory-accepted to be true[/I]

sadly for you that's incorrect, it only needs to be observable...what's more it has been tested...

claim to be anthropologist but doesn't believe evolution is fact?..wow, that's a first...
claim to be anthropologist and doesn't know all mutations are natural?...
claim to be an anthropologist and doesn't know homosexuality is natural, normal and beneficial to the species?

wannabe anthropologist ...you're a waste of my time....

 

Good refutation. It's totally devoid of facts and says nothing.

Explain why sexual delusions are coddled by you lefties. BRADLEY Manning wants to pretend he's a girl, but he isn't. Normal people recognize this and refuse to play along. Diseased people call him "her" and get upset when normal people won't play the game. Diseased people want taxpayers to fund surgical mutilation to enable MISTER Manning to live out his delusions. Diseased people think nothing of allowing a MAN who's undergone sexual mutilation to not only pretend HE's a woman, but HE's not only allowed to compete in women's sporting events, it's illegal to refuse him.....even though, because he's really a man, he has a man's stronger muscles, giving HIM a clearly unfair advantage.

Given all of the above....why can't persons believing themselves to be dogs to form their own team in the Iditarod? Why aren't the taxpayers dunned to provide them with add-a-tail-to-me surgery? That delusion is different from the "woman trapped in a man's body" delusion only in degree, not in kind. You gonna tell us that the Furries wouldn't be demanding such surgery if it wasn't clearly insane, as is anyone having "transgender" delusions?

 

You, sir, are incredibly ignorant. It must blow your mind that someone who has a degree in Anthropology could possibly question the "fact" of evolution. It's actually amazing how many idiots I come across that try to question my knowledge of a "scientific theory" versus a regular "theory." They usually spout the same bull that you just did and attempt to stump me by suggesting that I don't know what scientific theory is... merely because I called evolution a theory and said it was improvable.

Here's the thing... it's NOT a scientific theory. You can't test the hypothesis, thus it cannot be observed. It doesn't pass falsifiability and you can't prove whether it happened or whether it didn't. You can prove evolution occurred as much as you can prove that God exists. You merely cannot. I asked you to provide me proof and you went on to insult me.

The degree I have is worthless, because it's useless, unless of course, I'd prefer to get a "job" traveling non-stop to go on various digs throughout the country/world. It's either that or obtain a masters or doctorate in order to make $40k/yr in DC or VA... which, newsflash, doesn't get you much around here. I opted for business after doing a preliminary job search in the area once I moved to Alexandria, VA. I made some calls and sent some emails, and talked to some museums, organizations and CRM firms (do you even know what CRM stands for, I wonder? Since you're the be-all, know-all of Anthropology...). The fact of the matter is you could either live from site to site (probably out of your car) and take a crap paying job, while not having a happy family, or you could settle down, take a job in business and build a family and make real money. It's not a real choice. Get a masters/doctorate and become indebted for life... while making less money than most mid-level business managers make, or skip the higher education and start working toward a bigger goal.

Idiot... mutations are natural, but they're mistakes... not an evolutionary tract. Homosexuality is natural, normal and beneficial to the species? lol Let me guess... "It takes a village," right? No, I'm sorry... not every family needs an extra homosexual to take care of their children. You're a fricking loon.

 

Mutations are ERRORS in replication.

The word "ERROR" means "mistake".

Funny how you ignore the meaning of words.

 

Just because the socialists have to lie about evolution to defend their own delusions about homosexuality and perversion doesn't mean your ignorance of the same topic gives you a superior position to argue from.

Put your bible down, it's 6,000 years out of date, try learning some biology.

- - - Updated - - -

That's so sad.

Can you tell us what school gave you your degree? Some of us have children soon to go to college, and we'd like to avoid the bad schools.

 

Definitely no.

 

Yay, more insults and more ignorance! Let me guess... Your go-to on the subject of evolution is who? The Atheist/Socialist Richard Dawkins? Or is it the Atheist/Socialist Darwin?

Please explain what I'm missing about biology? Educate me, Mayor Snorkum.

I honestly wouldn't recommend anyone attending the University I attended (William Paterson University of New Jersey), merely on the basis that they teach a Socialist agenda and support the likes of Francis Fox Piven, Cornell West and Richard Trumpka (as was seen by their Teach-In event in 2011). I also recall the indoctrination taking place. When you attend these universities and you're sitting in class, there to learn from someone who is supposed to be a professional/expert in their field, you trust that they're being completely honest and objective. That's not the case... I was forced to take women's studies, African American studies, etc... obviously meant to push Social Justice. When I was in my Anthropology courses, I just absorbed everything I was taught and believed Evolution to be fact - didn't question it. It wasn't until after I graduated that my studies continued and I started asking better questions and using common sense.

How is it that you can make up a theory about human ancestry, based merely on skeletal fragments, crushed bones/skulls, single teeth (which are the best preserved pieces of the skeleton), etc... while using a flawed dating technique, such as carbon dating. We already have proof that gorillas, chimps and orangutans have similar skeletal structures as human beings. Why would we make the deduction that all of these ancient skeletal fragments, merely because they look similar to ours, must be related to us? How is a skeletal fragment from an assumed human ancestor evidence of anything? If you actually studied early hominid skeletons, you'd actually find that they resemble the modern-day gorilla.

With that in mind, why are humans the only species to evolve in such a manner that we did? Why are we the only ones with civilizations, when reptiles preceded us by millions/billions of years? Can you answer why there aren't lizard people walking around? Additionally, why didn't the ape side of the ape/human split evolve into a civilization creating hominid? Why just us?

Evolution is a facade... What's sad, is that so many people have fallen for it and have accepted it as scientific fact.

Put down your Atheist pamphlet and your Communist Manifesto... then open your eyes and retread your steps. You're missing some vital information pertaining to evolution. One such piece of info is in regards to radiometric dating: carbon-14 dating can only determine the age of something that was once living up to 50,000-80,000yrs old. Not only that, but the current "accepted" half-life value of carbon-14 is 5,730yrs. How can we be sure that's even true? What test have we used to determine the half-life of carbon-14? Is is just another assumption? Has the rate of decay always been the same?

Radiometric dating for igneous rock has the same flaws... Half-lives are assumptions/guesses. Potassium, rubidium, uranium and samarium have over a million year half-lives? Really? How did we determine that one? When samples are measured/calculated from the same location and same strata, each of these radioactive elements have been demonstrated to show a different age (hundreds of millions of years apart). Once again, we don't know what the real rate of decay was, when the samples that we test were originally created.

It's all a guessing game, yet, you still believe it, because it's "science."

 

It doesn't make you a bigot. Your attraction to others is entirely subjective. You would be a bigot if you objected to a friend or relative dating a transgendered person

 

Love the way you quote 3 famous liberals at the bottom of your posts.

 

Yes, classic liberals. Certainly not modern-day liberals. A Constitutional Conservative IS a classic liberal. You guys just love to twist words around and redefine them through progressivism.

 

I'm a classic liberal not a 'progressive'. I am certainly not a Socialist. American Conservatives are not classic liberals other then in a purely economic way . There is no way that any of the people you quote would agree with the cultural/social positions American conservatives hold.

There is one publication that has assidously held the same position come hell or high water and that is The Economist, a magazine I agree with 90% of the time and well over that on base value issues.

 

My social/cultural positions nearly mimic those of the Founders. For which positions are you referring to?

 

Lets not obfusctate. I am talking of the three people you quote. Paine, Jefferson and Franklin.

Positions conservative have on Sexuality and on Religion, specifically Christianity (amongst others)

 

You is one sick Puppy ,Margaret THATCHER ,you Did Maggot Thatcher !!!

 

The decay of American Thinking !

We Communists rest our case ,Them's US Imperialist Supporters are Pig ignorant!

Worse case of Post-modernist ,disguised as Thinking ,for ages !

 

No, because if gender is totally "a perception in the mind" (which trangenders claim), well I perceive people with XY chromosomes as men, and XX chromosomes as women. Doesn't matter if a guy chops his dick off and pumps himself full of hormone blockers - I still perceive him as a man, and since I'm straight I wouldn't want to date a man.

Just like I perceive Michael Jackson as a "black man" regardless of whether or not he wants to bleach his skin and have 50 plastic surgeries to look white.

 

All humans ,including you ,started off in mummies womb as girls!

Hello Sister!
Girly with willy ,to girly with Willy !
Did you miss science class AGAIN??!

- - - Updated - - -

Or just plain Michael J!

 

I am in general agreement but not all mutations a e natural. Mutations have been often induced by manmade actions

The rest is imho true

 

Gender is NOT the same thing as Sex.

"Sex" refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women.
"Gender" refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women.
To put it another way:
"Male" and "female" are sex categories, while "masculine" and "feminine" are gender categories.

 

I perceive people with XX chromosomes as women, and XY chromosomes as men, regardless of what they look like.

 

So that applies to Sex and not Gender then since its physical.

If Chromosomes define sex though then that would indicate that XXY and XXX are different sexes.

To get back to the original post I could have a sexual relationship with a transsexual and transgendered person but they would have to by completely Gynomorphic and be physically attractive enough within that context.

I have never had such a relationship but I have been close to a Thai kathoey who filled that criteria and I noted that I was reacting inwardly in the same way as I would to an attractive Standard Female.

 

I've seen pictures of transgendered "women" online, and I felt next to nothing stirring in my loins.

The only transgendered "women" I've ever encountered in real life were extremely overweight or unattractive, so I couldn't testify on that.

 

These three believed in the classic definition of marriage, two of the three were Christians who believed in God and studied science. Even Jefferson delved into Anthropology/Archaeology. One was not a Christian, but believed in God. Two of them believed that the Bible should be taught and used in public schools, and they all believed in maximum freedom with limited and responsible government.

Additionally, I admire these three figures in history. If ever there were heroes, these and Washington (and really, many others) would be amongst them (there are many more quotes I'd like to add to my signature, but I ran out of room). They all had a part to play in the forming of this nation and believed in speaking truth to power.

That being said, what does any of that have to do with my liking of and prescribing to their quotes in my signature?

 

Sure. masculine features makes them look horrendous. I live in Thailand and we have some transgendered post ops who are indistinguishable possibly because thai men often have very feminine features. Large hands are certainly a put off though but many have naturally small hands.

Many boys who gender identify as Girls have the undeveloped hypothalamus found in women so they actually have female brains along with the increased social skills and aptitude for learning language and decreased spatial awareness and aptitude for mechanics.

This is why I support early intervention in sex reassigment so that boys who have strongly identified as girls over a long period of time can take appropriate medication to stop the development of masculine features.

 

Two of them had very radical beleifs about sexuality.Franklin being the obvious one whilst Jefferson openly lived in Paris with one of his slaves and fathered children with them. The would all be disgusted with the Southern Baptist convention and its influence on US politics.

US conservatives do not believe in maximum freedom. They do everything they can to limit the rights of gay people for instance.

Paine openly demanded a national minimum wage and for the government to provide social services borne from taxation.


NONE of the three were Christians. All were openly deist just as Washington were deist I have no idea where you get the information that two were christians. I'd love the links where you think that Franklin and Jefferson wanted the bible taught.

.