Is Bruce Jenner Trolling?

People thought this TV show was a grand reveal?
laugh.gif
This entire 20 page debate was never about Jenner in the first place
 
Edit: Keep killin em' @frankmatthews. The way meth argues has always been to belittle the person with the opposing view and make them out as barbaric simpleton.
Power trip, albeit worthless, is strong on that guy.
 
Last edited:
FrankMatthews said:
Proceeds to write two or more pages then blocks my IP address.

Didn't ban my account because then everyone would see how much of a tyrant you are. You thought I didn't know how to use a proxy?

Its is absolutely pathetic that, in the absence of any supportive evidence or even a coherent logical thought process, your response is to silence any opposing viewpoint. Just goes to show how much faith you have in your own argument. Stay classy, meth.

 
Click to expand...
Get over yourself.  The last IP ban imposed on NikeTalk was issued on 4/22 by Bigj505.  I assume you're using the same ISP as somebody who tried to flood the site with porn. 

If I have the capability to ban your account and delete your posts, wouldn't I do that if I was so intent on silencing you? 

Try to make some sense.   

You're the only one who feels threatened here.  It's gotten sad, honestly.  
I've made every effort to understand, you have done nothing but offer up abstract, undefinable, non-biological "feelings" as the motivation for transition. Whats the motivation? They were born with it? Gender is not biological. It's being who they really are? Gender constructs aren't who you really are. I'm trying to understand. What I've heard thus far makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Gender is a social construct.  Boys aren't born with bow ties.  Girls aren't born with make up.  Gender is performed.  

Sex has its basis in biology.  

Sexuality  can be influenced by biology, but it is better expressed as a spectrum or continuum than a binary.

You can claim that sexual attraction is hormonal, but that's not strictly so.  Much of the sexual attraction you've experienced in life could be described as "abstract, undefinable, non-biological 'feelings.'"  Why do you find one particular trait more desirable than other?  Why doesn't everyone have the same "tastes?"  

I'll never understand the "feelings" that drive people to do a lot of things.  That could refer to a sexual fetish like S&M or it could refer to watching ice hockey.  

That you don't understand it doesn't make it illegitimate.  

Ok, now you are talking about biology again, nature. Gender has no basis in biology remember? Are you now saying that your chromosomes determine your gender? You really need to get focused.
Click to expand...

You're the one who's confused, not me.  You can't seem to wrap your head around the difference between sex, gender, and sexuality.  If you refuse to do anything more than angrily skim my writing for keywords, pick up a damned book.  Hell, you could watch today's episode of the "Nightly Show" with Larry Wilmore.  They covered exactly this in an episode devoted to the Bruce Jenner interview.  

Is there any basis in fact for your claim that it was "always" there or are you just pulling stuff out of your ***
Click to expand...

Do you actually read anything, or do you just blindly attack?  

Certain surgical procedures may be relatively recent, but sex and gender have been conceptualized differently in different cultures for thousands of years.  The existence of "two spirit" persons, "men-women," "women-men," and so on have been well documented in anthropological literature.  If you take off the cultural blinders, you'll find that not everyone treats those who exist between the straight male:female binary as deviant or illegitimate. 

I called one post quasi intellectual, which was when you tried to incorrectly argue semantics with me when it was completely irrelevant to what we were talking about.
Click to expand...

Incorrectly?  You weren't saying "Drew Gooden has evolved into a stretch four."  You were literally talking about "social evolution."  Now you want to act like you weren't talking about something "technical," but speaking in lay terms because you were caught talking out of your rear end. 

Now you want to bring up the "academic definition" of evolution, which is apparently different than the dictionarys definition of evolution.
Click to expand...

You're right.  The one sentence dictionary definition of evolution is more accurate than the University of California, Berkeley's or, you know, Darwin's.  

I learned everything I know about physics by reading Roget's Thesaurus.  Gravity is serious.  

Gender reassignment surgery is not reconstructive surgery now is it? It's not a need, it's a want.
Click to expand...

You keep moving the goalposts.  It's so obvious.  You can't even consistently articulate your opposition to this.  You have to keep inventing new objections each time one is challenged.  If a man steps on a land mine and loses his testicles, reconstructive surgery will not restore his reproductive function.  He's going to have those icky, toxic silicone simulacrums you're so disgusted by - and they won't be at all necessary to his survival.  They will be ornamental, but they might allow him to feel more "whole."  

Go ahead, change your argument again.  Keep drawing that circle until you can find away to keep straight, cisgender folks in and transgender persons out.   
eyes.gif


I take offense to the fact you assumed I don't treat all people like people. I treat everyone how I want to be treated.
Click to expand...
You would like to be treated like you're mentally ill?  You would like to be treated like a deviant?  

What if I told you that I don't hate bigots?  I treat bigots like people.  I just think they're mentally ill and need help.  Would it still bother you if I were to call you a bigot?
You need to understand that every single person who doesn't agree with you is not out to marginalize and oppress. There a very hateful people in this world, I realize that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and you're in their company on this issue.  Bring up Bruce Jenner on Stormfront and see how many people there agree with you.  That's not "a racist likes the same football team you do," or "a racist would also think that murder is bad," that's "a devout racist would have the exact same views on categorizing transgender people as 'mentally ill."  
 
You are not fooling anyone, you have not learned anything, you have no credible knowledge on the subject. You entire thesis is made up of arbitrary opinions and contradictory statements. If you had knowledge, you've done everything you possibly could to keep it to yourself.
Click to expand...

There is an actual body of academic literature on the subject, you know.  I'm sure you'll write that off as illegitimate and "pseudo-intellectual" because it clearly can't compare with the wisdom of your unlettered, knee-jerk response.

 I would definitely consider any alternatives regarding your need based theory. Just the same, the transgender, and you yourself, choose to believe it is NOT superfluous based on your gut feeling.
Click to expand...

Right, because a transgender person can't possibly have any meaningful insight into the experience of... transgender people.  Surely, you know as much about their experience as they do.  

You don't have to convince me but I don't have to accept it either. How about them apples?
Click to expand...

You don't have to "accept" gay people, Darwinian evolution, or climate change if you don't want to, either.  You can believe in the tooth fairy if you want.  Nobody is denying you that.  

Unfortunately, the "right" to bigotry has its consequences.  If you're in an interracial relationship, it's not illegal for someone to stare daggers at you when you walk down the street holding hands with your significant other.  It's not illegal for them to call your children "abominations."  

But hey, as long as you're comfortable.  

In theory, we allow for majority rule with the proviso of minority rights - unless you can manage to deny that someone is a "legitimate" minority entitled to such protections, that is. 

I don't reject it, I just don't take them at their word. The world is flat, take my word for it.
Click to expand...

Pitiful example.  First of all, you obviously DO reject it.  You believe they're "mentally ill."  Second, saying "the world is flat" is different than saying "I don't identify with my sex-assigned gender."

"I honestly like the Beatles."  

"No you don't.  I don't believe you.  Prove it."  

"I've liked them since I was five.  You can ask my parents.  I had all their albums."  

"No, you were faking it.  You only think you like them because they're popular and you were trying to fit in.  You're a phony."  

What must someone do to prove it to you?  What do you need?  A brain scan?  A Vulcan mind meld?  Psychic friends? 

If you don't want to listen to me, fine.  I don't care.  But don't pretend that there aren't other sources out there that just might offer you a more nuanced understanding of the subject than "fake penises? EEEEEEEEWW!"  
 
Last edited:
I am very disappointed in Bruce. Think about your beautiful daughters. This is very selfish.

If you are not happy being a man, fine. To alter your body because you aren't grateful enough of what God blessed you with, is disrespectful to yourself. I do not support Bruce's decision.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Methodical Management  

You're scrambling to come up with legitimate sounding reasons to explain "ick" and "eew."  
Click to expand...
Quote:
Methodical Management said:
 
He's going to have those icky, toxic silicone simulacrums you're so disgusted by - and they won't be at all necessary to his survival.
Click to expand...
Quote:
Methodical Management said:
 
"fake penises? EEEEEEEEWW!"  
Click to expand...
You're marginalizing people's right to sexual preference. People aren't being discriminatory if they're straight and choose to be with women. Gender is a social construct like you said. Sex isn't. You keep calling people bigots on the basis that they have a sexual preference and aren't comfortable with the idea of being with a transsexual, who is still their birth sex in many parts. You're belittling their feelings by reducing their point of view to just "eww." They have a right to be straight or gay and not be attacked for it. If someone was a Vegan and they order a dish, but the cook puts in animal products, and they get upset, would you reduce their point of view to just "eww?" or do they have the right to be taken seriously?
 
Last edited:
Looks like transgender reconstruction is a touchy topic for most. I can't say I speak of it in public like we did hear but I'm definitely not all for it. I mean we live in the free world so do what you do but don't try to sell me them tickets of support.

Hearing things like 'I feel like I was born in the wrong body' is ridiculous to me but whatever makes one comfortable. I've learned to contain my true feelings and that very well would put me in the same category as those old closet racists from the early 1900s but so be it. I try to put myself in others shoes an relate to them but I'm only human and a clear example of what my community an life experiences brought up.

There's no hate in my heart at all when it comes to transgender people. My main problem is the impression they leave on the youth. They're extremist in just about every political/religious/organization group they have out there and with the gender gap you have in today's society, in 30-40 years you'll definitely see people who go under knife just for personal gains like; marry for anterior motives, women who make .77c for every $1 Man makes turn male, etc.

But so be it, I was never too good at predicting the future so as it stands i have to live an let live while just worrying about mines. It's life.
 
lobotomybeats said:
kidKiDd said:
There's no hate in my heart at all when it comes to transgender people. My main problem is the impression they leave on the youth.
Click to expand...

our generation is screwed if we are worried about a future where children are smarter and more accepting than ours.
Click to expand...


Why is accepting always assumed to be a good thing?

If your child was getting bullied, would you want them to accept it??
 
ElecRelaxation said:
Quote:
Methodical Management said:
You're scrambling to come up with legitimate sounding reasons to explain "ick" and "eew."  
 
Click to expand...

Quote:
Methodical Management said:
 
He's going to have those icky, toxic silicone simulacrums you're so disgusted by - and they won't be at all necessary to his survival.
Click to expand...

Quote:
Methodical Management said:
 
"fake penises? EEEEEEEEWW!"  
Click to expand...

You're marginalizing people's right to sexual preference. People aren't being discriminatory if they're straight and choose to be with women. Gender is a social construct like you said. Sex isn't. You keep calling people bigots on the basis that they have a sexual preference and aren't comfortable with the idea of being with a transsexual, who is still their birth sex in many parts. You're belittling their feelings by reducing their point of view to just "eww." They have a right to be straight or gay and not be attacked for it. If someone was a Vegan and they order a dish, but the cook puts in animal products, and they get upset, would you reduce their point of view to just "eww?" or do they have the right to be taken seriously?
Click to expand...

This is my stand as well. I'm rolling with frankmatthews and dcallamerican on this topic. Method seems to be saying a heterosexual man's only reason for not wanting to be with a transgendered person is because they find it "yucky". It's funny that a guy has to defend to the death why he would prefer to be with a woman who was born a woman.
 
oidreez said:
This is my stand as well. I'm rolling with frankmatthews and dcallamerican on this topic. Method seems to be saying a heterosexual man's only reason for not wanting to be with a transgendered person is because they find it "yucky". It's funny that a guy has to defend to the death why he would prefer to be with a woman who was born a woman.
Click to expand...

View media item 1095080
 
sneakerp said:
Whenever there is a big story in the media. Look for the story they are trying to distract you from.
Click to expand...

My gf said that yesterday and I agreed. Usually I'm able to notice that, but in this case, I didn't really care that he wants to change genders so I didn't pay it any attention outside of NT. But now that it's been mentioned... :nerd:
 
Last edited:
oidreez said:
 
ElecRelaxation said:
You're marginalizing people's right to sexual preference. People aren't being discriminatory if they're straight and choose to be with women. Gender is a social construct like you said. Sex isn't. You keep calling people bigots on the basis that they have a sexual preference and aren't comfortable with the idea of being with a transsexual, who is still their birth sex in many parts. You're belittling their feelings by reducing their point of view to just "eww." They have a right to be straight or gay and not be attacked for it. If someone was a Vegan and they order a dish, but the cook puts in animal products, and they get upset, would you reduce their point of view to just "eww?" or do they have the right to be taken seriously?
Click to expand...
This is my stand as well. I'm rolling with frankmatthews and dcallamerican on this topic. Method seems to be saying a heterosexual man's only reason for not wanting to be with a transgendered person is because they find it "yucky". It's funny that a guy has to defend to the death why he would prefer to be with a woman who was born a woman.
Click to expand...
You're completely misunderstanding me.  That is a total distortion of what I've said. 

If you're a straight, cisgender man, you don't have to justify your attraction to straight, cisgender women - nor do you have to be attracted to transgender women.  Nobody is forcing you to "adapt" your sexuality to conform to social norms. 

But your sexuality doesn't entail ridiculing or stigmatizing other people's sexuality.  

People here often laugh at this .gif of Smithers from the Simpsons:

post-59012-Smithers-cornered-by-strippers-wgS7.gif


Two things here:

1)  Smithers doesn't apply this aversion to justify the opinion that anyone who finds a female body attractive is "sick" or "wrong."

2)  Apparently you'd have the same reaction as Smithers if someone told you the two women were "born men."  

Nobody is saying that you're "wrong" to be attracted only to straight, cisgender women.  That's fine.  

The problem is when you take that perspective and use it to ridicule or malign the sexuality of others.  That feeling of "eew" applies to your sexuality.  The rest of the world need not share your revulsion.  

"Broccoli is evil."  "Why is broccoli evil?"  "Because it's gross and disgusting."  

You don't have to be attracted to transgender people to respect them as people.

The reasoning behind my veganism isn't limited solely to "meat is gross" or "it's not natural for humans to drink the bodily fluids of other species."  "Eeew" is not a moral argument.  "Yuck" is not a medical diagnosis.

Similarly, my understanding of human sexuality isn't limited by my own individual sexuality.  I don't have to be attracted to men to believe in marriage equality.  I don't have to personally know what it's like to be transgender or to be attracted to transgender people to accept them as my peers and my equals.  

By the same token, I don't have to be a woman to oppose sexism.  

You don't have to hate men to oppose sexism.  You don't have to hate White people to oppose racism.  You don't have to hate straight, cisgender people to oppose heterosexism and homophobia.  
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom