Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let me give you a hint;
As far as people of European descent go, in not so distant past, the arranged marriages (mostly through the means of money) were taking care of this potential problem, and were keeping men "very very male" and women - "very, very female."
But this part is simply overlooked.
And then came "women's liberation."
What you see ( in regard of ever-increasing volume of "transgendering") is the direct result of it.
You think an arranged marriage prevented people from being gay or lesbian or trans?
Here's the real question. Why is this even news? Why are we having this discussion? If the desire of the transgender person is to become the opposite sex, then why politicize or advertise it? Why do we make this such a big deal? Shouldn't this model have simply done the shoot and accepted "her" accolades as one of Sports Illustrated's new swimsuit models, just like any of their other models would have done? If the desire is to become a woman, then wouldn't a transgender person be better suited in this course by not making it a big deal or calling attention to the fact that they actually are not a woman? Just be a woman. Mission accomplished. If this is a true desire, straight from the heart, then no fanfare or publicity should be needed. You've made it, you are a woman now. Go live your life like the rest of us.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 11 days ago)
35,637 posts, read 17,989,189 times
Reputation: 50679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reads2MUCH
Here's the real question. Why is this even news? Why are we having this discussion? If the desire of the transgender person is to become the opposite sex, then why politicize or advertise it? Why do we make this such a big deal? Shouldn't this model have simply done the shoot and accepted "her" accolades as one of Sports Illustrated's new swimsuit models, just like any of their other models would have done? If the desire is to become a woman, then wouldn't a transgender person be better suited in this course by not making it a big deal or calling attention to the fact that they actually are not a woman? Just be a woman. Mission accomplished. If this is a true desire, straight from the heart, then no fanfare or publicity should be needed. You've made it, you are a woman now. Go live your life like the rest of us.
Because she's an international model.
I guess she could have made the change, and been a commercial graphic artist or something instead.
But with her looks, the international model is a great way to make a LOT of money.
How did arranged marriages produce people who were "very male" and "very female"?
And who was overlooking what?
They didn't "produce."
They were MAKING SURE that things stayed the way they were intended - keeping men "very very male" and women - "very very female."
This practice was overlooked, because such marriage arrangements of the past were regarded as oppressive for European women, particularly of certain bloodlines.
I won't go any further with that, sorry, because then it will bring the subject of "Church," institution of marriage created with the purpose of procreation, the vows taken in church "till death do as part," existence of god, religion and so on.
Not a very appropriate subject for the Politics section.
Here's the real question. Why is this even news? Why are we having this discussion? If the desire of the transgender person is to become the opposite sex, then why politicize or advertise it? Why do we make this such a big deal? Shouldn't this model have simply done the shoot and accepted "her" accolades as one of Sports Illustrated's new swimsuit models, just like any of their other models would have done? If the desire is to become a woman, then wouldn't a transgender person be better suited in this course by not making it a big deal or calling attention to the fact that they actually are not a woman? Just be a woman. Mission accomplished. If this is a true desire, straight from the heart, then no fanfare or publicity should be needed. You've made it, you are a woman now. Go live your life like the rest of us.
Why? It is the acceptance and promotion of mental illness as normal, that's why. Just like we are seeing the acceptance and promotion of Marxism as normal. It is destructive to society.
Maybe you need to read a little more? And not Leftist propaganda.
Here's the real question. Why is this even news? Why are we having this discussion? If the desire of the transgender person is to become the opposite sex, then why politicize or advertise it? Why do we make this such a big deal? Shouldn't this model have simply done the shoot and accepted "her" accolades as one of Sports Illustrated's new swimsuit models, just like any of their other models would have done. If the desire is to become a woman, then wouldn't a transgender person be better suited in this course by not making it a big deal? Just be a woman. Mission accomplished. If this is a true desire, straight from the heart, then no fanfare or publicity should be needed. You've made it, you are a woman now. Go live your life like the rest of us.
Unfortunately, the stigma and systemic discrimination against trans men and women are real. Read the very comments on THIS thread. You know as well as anyone the tremendous impact of having a trans woman on the cover of an iconic, even if dying, publication like the SI swimsuit edition. The editor chose to use the far-reaching, mainstream platform to showcase and challenge notions of femininity, an endeavor that is very much in sync with the cultural conversations of today.
To pretend otherwise and to suggest they stay silent are transparent (and poor) attempts to diminish the cultural message of this momentous decision. And yes, we will call out disingenuous attempts that minimize the significance of this celebration of culture.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 11 days ago)
35,637 posts, read 17,989,189 times
Reputation: 50679
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure
They didn't "produce."
They were MAKING SURE that things stayed the way they were intended - keeping men "very very male" and women - "very very female."
This practice was overlooked, because such marriage arrangements of the past were regarded as oppressive for European women, particularly of certain bloodlines.
I won't go any further with that, sorry, because then it will bring the subject of "Church," institution of marriage created with the purpose of procreation, the vows taken in church "till death do as part," existence of god, religion and so on.
Not a very appropriate subject for the Politics section.
When I say "very very male", and "very very female", I'm not talking about roles they play. As in, the male works outside the home and dresses male, and the woman works inside the home and dresses female.
I'm not talking about a society that forces people to live up to specific expectations set out for them, or they will be completely shunned or even violently assaulted.
I mean genetics. When you LOOK at people, you can see with your own eyes that some males have more testosterone than others, and that some women have more estrogen than others.
I'm not talking about people being forced by society to do anything other than behave as their binary sexual designation, I'm asking you to LOOK and see that there is a wide range of human maleness and femaleness.
You think an arranged marriage prevented people from being gay or lesbian or trans?
I think it prevented the gender fluidity first of all; the blurring of the lines, the gradual sliding from this "very feminine men" into downright "I must be a woman, not a man."
When it comes to being clear gay or lesbian - I suspect it's a somewhat different story.
When I say "very very male", and "very very female", I'm not talking about roles they play. As in, the male works outside the home and dresses male, and the woman works inside the home and dresses female.
I mean genetics. When you LOOK at people, you can see with your own eyes that some males have more testosterone than others, and that some women have more estrogen than others.
I'm not talking about people being forced by society to do anything other than behave as their binary sexual designation, I'm asking you to LOOK and see that there is a wide range of human maleness and femaleness.
Neither am I.
It's not about the "role playing" at all.
I guess she could have made the change, and been a commercial graphic artist or something instead.
But with her looks, the international model is a great way to make a LOT of money.
My point is, she could be an international model....period. The transition has been made. He is a woman now, able to grace the pages of Sports Illustrated. Mission accomplished. Why not simply embrace your new found womanhood rather than making sure the world knows you aren't really a woman?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
