However, "women who identify as men won’t be accepted, the college said, because “Smith does not accept applications from men.”
-
Accepted to Smith College after you say you identify as a woman.
-
Achieve 600:1 Female:Male ratio.
-
???
4 Profit.
Hmm. I’m comfortable identifying as a butch lesbian who happens to have male genitalia. Perhaps it’s time to pursue another degree. Woman’s studies seems appropriate.
This “trans-gender” bullshit needs to stop. If somebody wants to “identify” with one gender (whatever that means), then identify away. Whatever floats your boat.
But you’re either born with indoor plumbing or outdoor plumbing. And whether you’re a male or a female is decided by which type of plumbing you have. Period.
If you’ve got the outdoor type, you use the boy’s restroom, you play on the boy’s team, you live in the men’s dormitory, and you go to the men’s prison.
That’s my .02 anyway…
I think there is nothing wrong with self identifying as a woman… but you should be required to remove the dick as proof…
Women are just aliens in disguise. They don’t think right.
A few days ago my wife and I had a conversation on the trans-gender concept. Like any guy I was thinking of the possibilities for a straight guy to infiltrate and have the time of his life. Her reply was that if a woman acts “creepy” towards another woman, the second woman would most vociferously object, so how does it matter if the first woman has a dick or not? The most perviness that could be accomplished is look-but-don’t-touch. And that is available legally today to any guy, via tittie bars and porn. And even that, in a common shower for example, would have to be done discreetly. Is that worth the trouble of coming out as a trans when you are not?
^ Clever!
Suppose someone is born with both?
Why? You’ve expelled more emotion on the subject in that one sentence than it’s worth. Much like gay marriage, it has zero affect on my life and the lives of pretty much everyone else.
Everyone has issues and everyone should be able to try to work them out. Some are stranger than others. So long as it doesn’t f’uck up your cabbage patch, who cares?
I guess there are minor effects, like people with dicks using the women’s bathroom (or shower if in a college). I don’t really care about this particular thing; if anything, shared showers would be positive for me. But I imagine some people might be adverse to this.
^If an average straight dude puts in the time and dedication to come across as transgender, let that man into the women’s showers. He’s earned it.
I identify as a dog.
Woof.
Now give me a back rub bitchez!
^Word, Gallileo.
I stood in the garage yesterday and went “VROOOOOM!!!” several times. I identify as a car now!!!
Yes, but you need to fill up with unleaded at gas stations for a year before they’ll let you have surgery.
If I identify as a pilot, can I fly a Delta 767?
It has done a number on free speech and association. One has to be careful expressing any opposition to gay marriage, or likely be subjected to threats against employment, media ridicule (if you’re at all in the public eye), or even lawsuits. Just this weekend I was berated for not wanting to go to a gay wedding, even though I made no comments about it otherwise (I’m “judgemental”!). I wouldn’t dare express my opinion even in a private conversation at work, lest I be fired for some violation of political correctness (an insufficiently bland term to describe a rather extreme social movement).
It’s effect on your life may be zero because you support it, but the fascist lobby behind it ensures that the effect on everybody else is much more than zero.
^+1
The fact that Hobby Lobby, Chick-Fil-A (Christian owners) and the Boy Scouts (a Christian organization) are subject to the whims of the gay lobby is a disgrace. I support the right of gays to marry, but they don’t have a right to my opinion.
^^I agree with you, minus the hyberbole. You should have every right to express your opinions*. No one is saying you have to accept anything. You do have to tolerate it though. I expect the same from, in this case, supporters of gay marriage. They don’t have to accept your views on it. But they must be tolerant of them.
The path to liberty is a bumpy one.
*Obviously there are certain rules we all have to abide by in the workplace. I’d prefer not to wear pants, but I have to. But only while I’m at work. Once I get home I can wear whatever the hell I want. That’s the whole point.
^its not true though, you could well get in trouble for your opinion, case in point - Brendan Eich
Unfortunately, “tolerance” in modern Orwellian-speak means “conforming to the ‘correctness’ standard-setters”. Bakers who don’t want to bake a gay wedding cake aren’t being “intolerant”. They’re passively conforming to their own beliefs by refusing to do somethnig that they perceive as wrong. They’re not out there actively stopping a gay wedding or protesting on a gay couple’s lawn. They’re being approached by (gay) people who are not tolerant of the bakers’ beliefs. In that case, and just about every other that I can think of, it’s the gay lobby that’s intolerant.
I wonder if these standard-setters would have the same opinion if a Christian asked a gay baker to quote Leviticus on a cake and the baker refused.
Regarding workplace rules, why is it *suddenly* not okay to oppose gay marriage in a private conversation at work? What else will these standard-setters say we can’t talk about?