Glados from portal is a robot, not a woman - not trans; not anything. She is a machine, bro. Lmao


Sure, we can casually refer to her as a woman - or a she, but we all understand that she is a robot. I guess you think this is me owning myself on this point, but think twice about what I just said.

What you're failing to grasp is the part where 'we all understand that she is a robot' - that is the part the left needs to accept, when it comes to thinks like deciding who should be entitled to wage gap compensation, for instance. How can you redistribute wealth when white male CEOs can identify as females?

This post was edited by LoverManGenius on Oct 23 2022 09:36am

As long as people are paying out of their own pockets for these surgeries, I have no problem with it.

And nobody is making anything illegal. We are merely refusing to make it possible to change one's sex. There is a difference. We shouldn't have to do anything differently just to accommodate a small group of mentally ill people. Oh, you were born a man but got surgeries and now have a fake vagina? Too bad, we are not going to cater to you and have our forms changed.

If someone got surgery and turned himself into a tiger, do you think we are under an obligation to allow their ID to have a new category that says they are now a tiger?

So nobody is making it illegal, but you are making it illegal to change sex. That is a contradiction.

Male and Female are already on the drivers license. It doesn't require new categories.

We are not outright making it illegal to change sex. We are saying that we refuse to make it possible to change sex.

The former is an act of commission. The latter is an act of inaction. There is a difference.

If you still insist that we are making it illegal, you need to tell me what this law is.

https://www.kff.org/other/issue-brief/youth-access-to-gender-affirming-care-the-federal-and-state-policy-landscape/

It's not hard to find Republicans actively legislating against gender affirming surgery.

The government doesn't get to hide behind "it's inaction, not action". If there is a method to change your gender or sex on your drivers license (there is) they don't get to exclude you from that process.

Sounds to me like they aren't preventing grown-ups from having those surgeries, only young people, which makes sense, young people aren't mature enough to decide on something as monumental as whether to get sex change operations.



We are not talking about making it illegal to get sex change operation though. We are talking about whether the government should change how it does things to accommodate trannies.



Really? Why not? Because you don't like it?



I guess according to this "logic", if I cry hard enough, and then get some surgeries, I can change my race from Asian to Caucasian.

We do medical procedures on teenagers all the time. You don't exclude them from evidence-based treatments because they're teenagers. That's what parental consent is for and why doctors are the ones making the recommendations.

Race is also arbitrary and socially determined so I really don't see why not. Race does not correspond to any kind of biological attributes or physical traits. It's a pretty good analog to gender honestly.

But if the government does nothing to allow me to change my race on my driver's license, I don't go around crying about how my rights have been trampled on like the trannies.

That's because you don't actually want to lol

If there's a law that says "let's make a process to allow changing of race on your drivers license and allow people who are trans-racial to use it" I'd vote yes, because racial identification is arbitrary and personal just like gender is.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Oct 23 2022 10:02am

My point is that there is literally no law that forbids the changing of sex on documents and forms. You keep saying we make it illegal to change sex when that is simply not the case.