# Furious man shoots  girlfriend after discovering she had once been a man



## Gonder (Jul 11, 2009)

> A Russian man murdered his girlfriend after discovering she had once been a man.
> 
> The killer, identified as Vladimir F by police, shot Camila several times, deliberately targeting the parts of her body altered during a sex change operation.
> 
> ...



pic Link removed

he went way to far killing her/he but if the same think  happened  to me i would  probably  have the same reaction as  ace ventura
 Link removed


----------



## Kira Yamato (Jul 11, 2009)

I read this as a man shot his girlfriend (who was already dead) because she was with a man (not a virgin). 

I guess it's a shocker to find out the woman you were with was actually a man, but violence, let alone murder is never the solution.


----------



## Big Boss (Jul 11, 2009)

What is the solution?


----------



## Lucaniel (Jul 11, 2009)

Big Boss said:


> What is the solution?



Running the fuck away and getting really, really drunk, I guess.


----------



## Ricky (Jul 11, 2009)

> Furious man shoots dead girlfriend



The way this is worded... 

Anyway, I would've done the same thing if I was in this guy's shoes. Minus the slitting of the wrists. If he really wanted to die he could've shot himself


----------



## muishot (Jul 11, 2009)

Was she really a man or was she a hermaphrodite or a woman who was born with both a male and female sexual organs?  If she was really a man and only becomes a woman after a sex change than that is really gross, but killing is still too much. 

If she was a hermaphrodite, then it is nothing at all because they have a face of a woman, a body of a woman, just that they have a penis as well as a vagina.


----------



## martryn (Jul 11, 2009)

If you can't tell, I don't know how much I would have minded.  I mean, he proposed marriage to him.  Erm...her.

This is why couples need to be upfront and honest with each other from the beginning.


----------



## Romanticide (Jul 11, 2009)

They could have just talked it out instead of him shooting.....um, the girlfriend.


----------



## Sunuvmann (Jul 11, 2009)

Well I for one think he was completely justified


----------



## Twirl (Jul 11, 2009)

Well, from what I understand he is still alive so I think he will get a chance to be a prison bitch... I am sure being with a woman who use to be a man won't feel so bad after that.


----------



## Amaretti (Jul 11, 2009)

Just wait for the guy to bring out the good old 'transpanic defense'. It's sad that things like that still work because there are still too many people in this world who think simply being transgender is an intent to deceive, and murder is an understandable response (ie. transgenders invite violence by existing.)


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Jul 11, 2009)

Cut off his genitals, seriously.

Saying transgender people need to tell everyone they're TG makes little sense. The whole point of transgenderism is you were always that gender, it's just your biology didn't match up.



Amaretti said:


> Just wait for the guy to bring out the good old 'transpanic defense'. It's sad that things like that still work because there are still too many people in this world who think simply being transgender is an intent to deceive, and murder is an understandable response (ie. transgenders invite violence by existing.)



It's Russia, he could pull it off

Just look at all the abuse their gay community suffers : /


----------



## Pilaf (Jul 11, 2009)

Ouch..that's too much. I am friends with a nice girl who happens to have been born a man at one point and had an operation, and I would be very upset if anyone hurt her irrationally over that decision.


----------



## Sunuvmann (Jul 11, 2009)

Amaretti said:


> Just wait for the guy to bring out the good old 'transpanic defense'. It's sad that things like that still work because there are still too many people in this world who think simply being transgender is an intent to deceive, and murder is an understandable response (ie. transgenders invite violence by existing.)


No they invite violence by not being honest.


			
				TPN said:
			
		

> Saying transgender people need to tell everyone they're TG makes little sense. The whole point of transgenderism is you were always that gender, it's just your biology didn't match up.


But they weren't always that sex. Gender is a psychology thing, sex isn't.

And through deception by omission the guy had sex with a man who had surgery and plenty of hormones.

They shouldn't have to tell EVERYONE but you'd think if you are in a relationship, it might be a nice idea to bring up that while you may be female in gender, biologically you still have Y chromosomes.


----------



## Deleted member 161031 (Jul 11, 2009)

I don't really get this. He could just leave her, why the violence? Was he afraid to be called homo? Seriously, there are too many sick people in the world


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 11, 2009)

ane said:


> I don't really get this. He could just leave her, why the violence? Was he afraid to be called homo? Seriously, there are too many sick people in the world



Because he just realised he was fooled into sleeping with a guy for 2 years.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Jul 11, 2009)

Sunuvmann said:


> But they weren't always that sex. Gender is a psychology thing, sex isn't.
> 
> And through deception by omission the guy had sex with a man who had surgery and plenty of hormones.
> 
> They shouldn't have to tell EVERYONE but you'd think if you are in a relationship, it might be a nice idea to bring up that while you may be female in gender, biologically you still have Y chromosomes.



*Shrug*

Think what you will, but I'm the of the opinion that you are the gender you and your brain think you are and that you don't have to tell anyone if you don't wan to. People aren't obliged to attack their own identity.

He never had sex with a man. He had sex with a woman who had... health problems shall we say.

And hopefully the friend will spend the rest of his life in some Russian Gulag.


----------



## Eileen (Jul 11, 2009)

I can understand that the man was shocked, but it wasn´t a reason to kill her in such a cruel way.


----------



## Sunuvmann (Jul 11, 2009)

You miss my point. 'She' may have been female in gender. But 'she' was born male and though there were alterations, they are biologically a male. 

He had sex with a man with biological changes and mental health problems.

I for one am all for people who feel they were born the wrong sex to do what makes them happy. But such fundamental dishonesty in a relationship, its not exactly the most surprising thing that he'd overreact.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 11, 2009)

The Pink Ninja said:


> *Shrug*
> 
> Think what you will, but I'm the of the opinion that you are the gender you and your brain think you are and that you don't have to tell anyone if you don't wan to. People aren't obliged to attack their own identity.
> 
> ...



And the opinion of the guy your sleeping with doesnt matter?? 
it does, unless you want things to end like above. 



sex isnt just skin deep. Its a man mimicking a female.


----------



## Morphine (Jul 11, 2009)

That's horrible.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Jul 11, 2009)

Sunuvmann said:


> You miss my point. 'She' may have been female in gender. But 'she' was born male and though there were alterations, they are biologically a male.
> 
> He had sex with a man with biological changes and mental health problems.
> 
> I for one am all for people who feel they were born the wrong sex to do what makes them happy. But such fundamental dishonesty in a relationship, its not exactly the most surprising thing that he'd overreact.



I got your point entirely, it was just wrong/I didn't care.

As for dishonesty: You are not required to give 100% of yourself up. You're allowed to keep stuff for yourself.



Zabuzalives said:


> And the opinion of the guy your sleeping with doesnt matter??
> 
> it does, unless you want things to end like above.
> 
> sex isnt just skin deep. Its a man mimicking a female.



It doesn't matter if he never finds out.

TGs are still very much an acceptable target in society. Being "Outed" as TG can ruin a person's life so they have every reason and every right to keep in a secret.

Doubly so since the gender they changed to is their true one.

The reason this girl got killed was because the guy was a psycho bigot bastard mother-fucker. Hey she may not have been killed if she told him up front and their never got in a relationship to begin with.

But she'd also never have been killed if she never pursued a relationship with anyone and just stayed indoors all day. That's not a reason to do it.

And:

1) You are whatever gender your think you are

2) This guy couldn't tell until she told him


----------



## Amaretti (Jul 11, 2009)

Sunuvmann said:


> No they invite violence by not being honest.



This girl wasn't killed because she was dishonest, she was killed for being transgender with a boyfriend who couldn't cope with her past. It obviously did not affect the mechanics of their relationship, however, so it wasn't need to know information, and considering the hostility towards transgendered people, being open about it is arguably doing more to put yourself at risk of being assaulted than if you keep quiet. 

And you pretty much confirmed what I said. Being transgender is not an invitation to violence. It wasn't her obligation to reveal anything, but it was his obligation not to murder another human being.



> sex isnt just skin deep. Its a man mimicking a female.



Does that really matter when she looks as genuinely female as any other women?


----------



## -= Ziggy Stardust =- (Jul 11, 2009)

lol poor guy


----------



## Saufsoldat (Jul 11, 2009)

If he already asked her for marriage, that must've been a pretty nice trap


----------



## -= Ziggy Stardust =- (Jul 11, 2009)

Saufsoldat said:


> If he already asked her for marriage, that must've been a pretty nice trap



[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piVnArp9ZE0[/YOUTUBE]

He didn't listen


----------



## Legend (Jul 11, 2009)

He could have just left her.


----------



## Vom Osten (Jul 11, 2009)

Thats definately a deal breaker


----------



## little nin (Jul 11, 2009)

Mustve had a pretty good job done down there

Lol shoot is rather extreme but would've been at ease if heard he beat him alot or some shit


----------



## shiki-fuujin (Jul 11, 2009)

Amaretti said:


> Just wait for the guy to bring out the good old 'transpanic defense'. It's sad that things like that still work because there are still too many people in this world who think simply being transgender is an intent to deceive, and murder is an understandable response (ie. transgenders invite violence by existing.)



with the way the justice system is in Russia i would be surprised.


----------



## T7 Bateman (Jul 11, 2009)

I understand he was shocked about the news but killing her like that was not called for. He could have left.


----------



## Miss Fortune (Jul 11, 2009)

Oh... that must really suck. I can solve this. *holds up key to moonshine storage unit*


----------



## Bryan Paulsen (Jul 11, 2009)

I don't have the stomach for killing, but I would've adminstered an ass-whooping that'd be heard 'round the world.

I'm generally against hitting women, but since it's biologically a male, it'd be on like Donkey Kong.

People can keep secrets in a relationship, but so far as I'm concerned - that's not one of them. Anyone that attempts to draw close to me under such false pretenses deserves what they get.


----------



## dreams lie (Jul 11, 2009)

That's a bit carried away, but he/she should really have said something from the beginning of the relationship.


----------



## the box (Jul 11, 2009)

he would have to die. thats the sickest thing in the world. i would fuck him up . ithnk it was justified


----------



## Gunners (Jul 11, 2009)

Yeah, I have no sympathy for the mwoman. This is one of the situation where you need to respect the fact that people may not like what you are and tell them before hand.


----------



## Ssj3_Goku (Jul 11, 2009)

Amaretti said:


> Does that really matter when she looks as genuinely female as any other women?



If your going to use this logic then we can pull out a number of things that state the same thing. WE can state that a person was a murder for years but then got into a relationship and settled down. You think the female / male should know of his past? esepcially if the person dislikes people who killed other people and it goes against their morals?

 In all honestly they should tell from the start, that person simply is robbing the individual of their choice. I agree murder is just crazy and should not have happened.


----------



## Amaretti (Jul 11, 2009)

Ssj3_Goku said:


> If your going to use this logic then we can pull out a number of things that state the same thing. WE can state that a person was a murder for years but then got into a relationship and settled down. You think the female / male should know of his past? esepcially if the person dislikes people who killed other people and it goes against their morals?



Are you _seriously_ comparing murder with transgenderism as if the two are morally equivalent? So this woman is just as guilty as the man who murdered her?

There isn't a facepalm icon big enough for you right now.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 11, 2009)

Amaretti said:


> Does that really matter when she looks as genuinely female as any other women?



What if he wanted kids?


----------



## Mish (Jul 11, 2009)

No reason to kill her/him.


----------



## Amaretti (Jul 11, 2009)

Seto Kaiba said:


> What if he wanted kids?



Then he'd be in the same position as millions of other men with infertile partners.


----------



## Ssj3_Goku (Jul 11, 2009)

Amaretti said:


> Are you _seriously_ comparing murder with transgenderism as if the two are morally equivalent? So this woman is just as guilty as the man who murdered her?
> 
> There isn't a facepalm icon big enough for you right now.



Not really comparing the two situations, what I'm trying to show you is the fact of lies and deceit that occurred. This was a alteration of someone's life / gender. THAT IS A HUGE thing that should be mentioned before getting married. What you are saying in your pervious posts is pretty much keep these big life changing scenarios a secret from the person you are supposed to spend the rest of your life with. This is not a little thing like I had 4 girlfriends before marrying you or something. This is a big deal that is obviously not the norm.  

plus for the record I am not a fan of murder. I beleive no human has the right to take another humans life away. I also think that it is fine for you to have a sex change and what not, its your body but you also have to accept the fact that you will have to mention it to someone (life partner,etc).


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 11, 2009)

Amaretti said:


> Then he'd be in the same position as millions of other men with infertile partners.



There are treatments for that depending on the reason for infertility...

On the issue of having children, the fiancee would have had to inevitably fess up...


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 11, 2009)

The killing wasn't justified, but "she" really should have been upfront about it from the beginning, IMO.


----------



## Gunners (Jul 11, 2009)

> Does that really matter when she looks as genuinely female as any other women?


Yes it does matter. 

It's the same concept of feeding people stuff they ''choose'' not to eat. If I fed a vegetarian person meat under the disguise that it was meat free. Whether they like it or not, doesn't change the fact that they trusted me with their food and I deceived them into going against their wishes. 

I have no sympathy for his/her death. Whilst I don't think he should have killed him/her I can understand his actions.


----------



## Hand Banana (Jul 11, 2009)

I can't blame the guy. I would've done the same. Thats some fucked up shit right there. How was he gonna tell his momma about this?


----------



## Vanity (Jul 11, 2009)

Wow. That's disturbing.

I mean I guess it's a good idea to tell someone beforehand that you used to be the opposite gender if you were....but geez it's insane that he would kill her over that.


----------



## Roy (Jul 11, 2009)

Ill shoot that bitch..I mean dude


----------



## BluishSwirls (Jul 11, 2009)

I guess it would be a helluva shock but killing them wasn't the answer.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

insecurity at its best

seriously


----------



## Elphaba (Jul 11, 2009)

Oh my. I can understand the man's position of being extremely shocked, betrayed and perhaps disturbed, but murdering her was acting on those emotions in the absolute worst way.


----------



## dreams lie (Jul 11, 2009)

Amaretti said:


> Does that really matter when she looks as genuinely female as any other women?



Of course it matters.  His/her actions have caused someone to go against their values and beliefs without knowing so.


----------



## Sunuvmann (Jul 11, 2009)

Well that's kinda doubling the rage.

For one he was pissed about being rejected when being married. That is then compounded by LOL YOU'VE BEEN FUCKING A GUY FOR 2 YEARS

He could probably argue temporary insanity.


----------



## ~Greed~ (Jul 11, 2009)

The tranny had it coming. I feel no sympathy for him as he should have been honest about having a sex change in the first place. I would probably have a mental breakdown and do some crazy shit If I just found out that I had been screwing a man for 2 years aswell.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

I love how people are actually trying to blame her for his insecurity.



~Greed~ said:


> The tranny had it coming.



Keeping a secret wasn't a capital offense last I checked



> I feel no sympathy for *her* as he should have been honest about having a sex change in the first place.



Should she have been honest? Yes but to be honest she probably knew his reaction would be bad, she couldn't trust him with this secret and in the end she was right not to trust him. Just a pity she never realized how bad his reaction would be.



> I would probably have a mental breakdown and do some crazy shit If I just found out that I had been screwing a man for 2 years aswell.



Oh noes my women has the Y chromosome, MY LIFE IS FUCKING OVER.


----------



## Hexa (Jul 11, 2009)

It's certainly not justified.  I'll go a step further and say that the guy who killed his girlfriend does not in the least deserve any sympathy.  I'm at least a little disturbed at the amount of sympathy he appears to be getting.


----------



## Satsuki (Jul 11, 2009)

i think that's really retarded. he obviously didn't really love her if he couldn't handle the fact she once had a cock. ;~; rest in peace lady


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 11, 2009)

He didn't listen to Ackbar.



Also, this has allready been aproached. The victim is a "she" She always been a she, and that guy is a fucking moron.


----------



## Rinoa (Jul 11, 2009)

Milky said:


> Oh my. I can understand the man's position of being extremely shocked, betrayed and perhaps disturbed, but murdering her was acting on those emotions in the absolute worst way.


I agree with this.
 It's certainly not justified.


----------



## Kairi (Jul 11, 2009)

I mean, sure this is a shocker, but was shooting her really necessary? :/


----------



## Ssj3_Goku (Jul 11, 2009)

Skotty said:


> i think that's really retarded. he obviously didn't really love her if he couldn't handle the fact she once had a cock. ;~; rest in peace lady



You have to watch out with these kind of statements because someone could also say "She obviously did not love him if she could not share an life changing event with her life partner"

Guh murder though? I wonder if this guy was a red neck or something. He does not deserve sypathoy at all he killed an individual. Also for people who want to read

Graveyard of Swords


----------



## Gunners (Jul 11, 2009)

> Should she have been honest? Yes but to be honest she probably knew his reaction would be bad, she couldn't trust him with this secret and in the end she was right not to trust him. Just a pity she never realized how bad his reaction would be.


Then she shouldn't have married him.


----------



## Gymnopedie (Jul 11, 2009)

kairi said:


> I mean, sure this is a shocker, but was shooting her really necessary? :/



I was thinking the same thing. :/


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 11, 2009)

Recca said:


> Then she shouldn't have married him.



He should have never pursued a relationship with the guy to begin with.


----------



## Maximo (Jul 11, 2009)

Oh man thats horrible. If that happens to me then idk, maybe I would as well got furious but not to the point of killing, I would just beat him/her up in crazy furious embaressed mood, I guess. Then get the fuck away from him/her and start over in a different country somwehere overseas with a new name and identity ... and find a shrink


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

Ssj3_Goku said:


> You have to watch out with these kind of statements because someone could also say "She obviously did not love him if she could not share an life changing event with her life partner"]



Well she did turn does his marriage proposal so I don't think she intended on being his life partner. My guess is that she did love him but knew he would react badly to her secret so tried to keep it away from him.


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 11, 2009)

You can say what you want about her right not to tell him, but the truth is if she had been up front about it from the beginning, this wouldn't have happened.

It doesn't excuse him, but still. :/


----------



## Lightfat (Jul 11, 2009)

she/he knew he likes woman then why did she/he chose to stay with him?
she/he is also at fault here but i do agree he should'nt have killed her/him
but if he dident kill her/him she/he should have aleast have gotten some punishment.


----------



## DeterminedIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

i wouldnt shoot her but i would have been pissed.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

God this thread is depressing.



Lightfat said:


> she/he knew he likes woman then why did she/he chose to stay with him? she/he is also at fault here but i do agree he should'nt have killed her/him but if he dident kill her/him she/he should have aleast have gotten some punishment.



Why should she have been punished? Christ she kept a secret that's all she's guilty of. She might have been a man once but she is female in every meaningful sense of the word. If that wasn't good enough for him he had every right to up and leave like the insecure prick that he is.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 11, 2009)

Rob` said:


> God this thread is depressing.
> 
> 
> 
> Why should she have been punished? Christ she kept a secret that's all she's guilty of. She might have been a man once but she is female in every meaningful sense of the word. If that wasn't good enough for him he had every right to up and leave like the insecure prick that he is.



The person was only female in their mind...


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 11, 2009)

Rob` said:


> God this thread is depressing.
> 
> 
> 
> Why should she have been punished? Christ she kept a secret that's all she's guilty of. She might have been a man once but she is female in every meaningful sense of the word. If that wasn't good enough for him he had every right to up and leave like the insecure prick that he is.



Clearly it wasn't good enough for him, but he couldn't leave, because he didn't know.


----------



## ~Greed~ (Jul 11, 2009)

Rob` said:


> I love how people are actually trying to blame *him* for his insecurity.


 
fixed





> Should *he *have been honest? Yes but to be honest *he *probably knew his reaction would be bad, she couldn't trust him with this secret and in the end *he* was right not to trust him. Just a pity *he *never realized how bad his reaction would be.



fixed



> Oh noes my women has the Y chromosome, MY LIFE IS FUCKING OVER.



If a person has a Y chromosome then they are automatically a man, even if he had his dick and balls lobbed off , he is still a man. I'm all for people getting their sex changed if thats what makes them happy. But if their going to hide the fact that they were once a man from the person their screwing, then I have no sympathy for them. Your right that murder was going a bit too far, but what did you expect the guy to do? Just accept that he had been screwing a man for 2 years? Realistically thats not going to happen.


----------



## Amaretti (Jul 11, 2009)

Ssj3_Goku said:


> Not really comparing the two situations, what I'm trying to show you is the fact of lies and deceit that occurred.



How do you know she lied and deceived? What if he just never asked "Did you used to be a little boy?" What if she thought she was a woman, and presenting herself as such to him was not actually a lie or a deceit? It was just who she was.



> This was a alteration of someone's life / gender. THAT IS A HUGE thing that should be mentioned before getting married. What you are saying in your pervious posts is pretty much keep these big life changing scenarios a secret from the person you are supposed to spend the rest of your life with. This is not a little thing like I had 4 girlfriends before marrying you or something. This is a big deal that is obviously not the norm.



She wasn't going to marry him. He asked, she declined. Why should she have to divulge such personal information to someone she didn't plan to spend her life with anyway?




Seto Kaiba said:


> There are treatments for that depending on the reason for infertility...
> 
> On the issue of having children, the fiancee would have had to inevitably fess up...



Not necessarily. And regardless, if she didn't want to marry him. She wasn't his fiancee.



Recca said:


> Yes it does matter.
> 
> It's the same concept of feeding people stuff they ''choose'' not to eat. If I fed a vegetarian person meat under the disguise that it was meat free. Whether they like it or not, doesn't change the fact that they trusted me with their food and I deceived them into going against their wishes.
> 
> I have no sympathy for his/her death. Whilst I don't think he should have killed him/her I can understand his actions.



You have no sympathy for a murder victim because she was trans? You think extreme bigotry is an understandable motive for murder? Fine. Go sit over there with the KKK, gay bashers, and holocaust deniers. I'm done with people who defend to the death the rights of minorities like gays but then turn around and treat transgendered people as subhuman.




dreams lie said:


> Of course it matters.  His/her actions have caused someone to go against their values and beliefs without knowing so.



She was a woman in body and mind. Genetically, not so much. If she made a man go against his heterosexuality (the only 'values and beliefs' she could possibly have violated) it was only intangentially. If she was indistinguishable from other women, _no, it should not matter_.

And you can stop referring to her as his/her. She identified as a woman, she lived most of her life as a woman, you are free to refer to her as a woman. Unless you're deliberately trying to obfuscate her gender identity to make her out as reassuringly freakish enough to dismiss her murder.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

You know that for one of my quotes which you claimed to have fixed you changed nothing right? Also legally she was a woman, she wasn't producing sperm and she had all the bits a female is expected to have except for ovaries. Mentally she was a women and she had all the same hormones running through her. Genetically she was still a man but that's the only way in which she could be called a man. With sex changes gender ceases to be binary but she considered herself female so that's good enough for me.



~Greed~ said:


> If a person has a Y chromosome then they are automatically a man, even if he had his dick and balls lobbed off , he is still a man. I'm all for people getting their sex changed if thats what makes them happy. But if their going to hide the fact that they were once a man from the person their screwing, then I have no sympathy for them. Your right that murder was going a bit too far, but what did you expect the guy to do? Just accept that he had been screwing a man for 2 years? Realistically thats not going to happen.



If it had really bothered him he could have just left, maybe had a shouting match with her but to be honest the only thing he had a right to be annoyed about was her lack of trust in him which I think he justified when he found out anyway. You've got to appreciate that life can't be easy for people like her when people are still stuck in the mindset that people who have had sex changes are somehow subhuman, a mindset that seems to be shared by people in this thread.


----------



## Ssj3_Goku (Jul 11, 2009)

Amaretti said:


> How do you know she lied and deceived? What if he just never asked "Did you used to be a little boy?" What if she thought she was a woman, and presenting herself as such to him was not actually a lie or a deceit? It was just who she was.



Most individual's do not jump and ask those type of questions. Especially in a soceity were the norm is male + Female. Although it seems soceity is becoming more accepting of gays and what not. The phrase  "looks can be deceiving" comes true, especially with the technology we have now   Some 17 year olds look older than they actually are, they lie about their age and the guy sleeps with them. You going to punish the guy or the girl for the lie? Or both equaly guilty?




> She wasn't going to marry him. He asked, she declined. Why should she have to divulge such personal information to someone she didn't plan to spend her life with anyway?



I thought they were going to marry. Either way it does seem they were in a commited relationship and I believe if you are going to be in a commited relationship your partner /boyfriend / girlfriend should know about such huge changes in your life. However, the murdering part of this story is over the top. But it seems the law already as an act for such cases (I was kinda shocked, never knew about it).


----------



## Mintaka (Jul 11, 2009)

I don't know whats more sick.

The murder or some of the assholish reactions in this thread.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 11, 2009)

Tokoyami said:


> I don't know whats more sick.
> 
> The murder or some of the assholish reactions in this thread.



Well obviously the murder.


----------



## Ssj3_Goku (Jul 11, 2009)

Tokoyami said:


> I don't know whats more sick.
> 
> The murder or some of the assholish reactions in this thread.



I agree that some of the reactions in this thread saying "I would have killed blah blah" is pretty scary when you think about it. However, you have to realize  everone does not think rationally when it comes to something that is against the norm  (or beleifs) of what they know. =/


----------



## Sunuvmann (Jul 11, 2009)

> How do you know she lied and deceived? What if he just never asked "Did you used to be a little boy?" What if she thought she was a woman, and presenting herself as such to him was not actually a lie or a deceit? It was just who she was.


Lying by omission, when its something big like that is lying.

What if 'she' just never asked "Do you have AIDS?" What if he never got tested but thought he was clean despite having slept around and not saying that he did was not actually a lie or deceit. Its just who he used to be.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

Sunuvmann said:


> What if 'she' just never asked "Do you have AIDS?" What if he never got tested but thought he was clean despite having slept around and not saying that he did was not actually a lie or deceit. Its just who he used to be.



Then that would actually affect her so he'd have had no right to have hidden it. Her being a former man doesn't affect him so she had every right to keep it secret.


----------



## Omega Level (Jul 11, 2009)

Its understandable.


----------



## Gunners (Jul 11, 2009)

> You have no sympathy for a murder victim because she was trans? You think extreme bigotry is an understandable motive for murder? Fine. Go sit over there with the KKK, gay bashers, and holocaust deniers. I'm done with people who defend to the death the rights of minorities like gays but then turn around and treat transgendered people as subhuman.


You're getting emotional which is causing you to jump to conclusions. 

If the guy went out of his way and murder her because she was a transgender she would have my sympathy. The reason she doesn't have my sympathy is because she robbed the guy of his choice. She doesn't have my sympathy because this situation could have been avoided if she did the right thing and told him the truth from the very beginning. 

First of all, you're making it sound as though I'm saying his actions are justifiable in the sense that it is the right course of action to take. That is untrue, I don't think his actions were right, I can simply see why he would do what he did. 

Second of all I don't think extreme biggotory is okay. However this isn't an issue of bigottory to me. If he killed the person because they were a transgender I could see your point. He killed her because she decieved and slept with him robbing him of his choice to sleep with only women. 

Believe it or not there is a difference. As I said previously, would it be right for me to feed a vegan dairy products under the pretence that it is not?

I'm going to ignore the part on ''sit next to the gaybashers, holocaust deniers and KKK'' quite frankly that was immature and hypocritical considering you deleted a post for trolling in this same thread.

I don't see how this is treating individuals as though they are subhuman, like I said, the comparison would make a lot more sense if the individual went out and killed a transgender who had not actually deceived him.



			
				Rob said:
			
		

> Then that would actually affect her so he'd have had no right to have hidden it. Her being a former man doesn't affect him so she had every right to keep it secret.


It clearly did effect him otherwise we wouldn't be reading about it now.


----------



## T.D.A (Jul 11, 2009)

Yuck, I would be pretty pissed as well, if I found out she was a he before, but I wouldnt murder, I'll would have a fucked up life till death thats all.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

Recca said:


> It clearly did effect him otherwise we wouldn't be reading about it now.



Beyond a homophobic psychological reaction it didn't affect him.


----------



## Sunuvmann (Jul 11, 2009)

Rob` said:


> Then that would actually affect her so he'd have had no right to have hidden it. Her being a former man doesn't affect him so she had every right to keep it secret.


Psychological trauma of 'holy crap I fucked a dude' doesn't count as affecting? Okay.

I know its not nearly the same, that was done for the extreme to make a point that still, when you hide something which you know would destroy a relationship, for good or for bad, its the same as lying about it and the person would be justified to be pissed.

I've already said murder was going too far but it would be a crime of passion and as such should count as second-degree murder.


----------



## Gunners (Jul 11, 2009)

> Because he made it affect him...


No he didn't make it affect him. If he had a choice I'm pretty sure he'd opt for not caring you know. 

Should I start force feeding beef to Hindus, then when they complain say ''They're making it affect them''.


----------



## dreams lie (Jul 11, 2009)

Amaretti said:


> She was a woman in body and mind. Genetically, not so much. If she made a man go against his heterosexuality (the only 'values and beliefs' she could possibly have violated) it was only intangentially. If she was indistinguishable from other women, _no, it should not matter_.



She is not a woman in body;  it just looks like it.  Biologically speaking, "she" will always be a he.  You can pump her full of hormones and change her appearance, but she remains a man.  And yes, by lying to her partner, it made someone go against his heterosexuality.  



> And you can stop referring to her as his/her. She identified as a woman, she lived most of her life as a woman, you are free to refer to her as a woman. Unless you're deliberately trying to obfuscate her gender identity to make her out as reassuringly freakish enough to dismiss her murder.



I was actually leaning to describing "her" as a man, actually.  The boyfriend completely overreacted and there is no excuse for it.  However, I cannot help, but feel that she could have avoided the whole by being honest from the beginning.  I have nothing other than disdain toward the two people involved.


----------



## Hand Banana (Jul 11, 2009)

Rob` said:


> Beyond a homophobic psychological reaction it didn't affect him.



He wasn't being homophobic. If anything confused would be the answer. So in confusion he killed *him*.


----------



## WT (Jul 11, 2009)

Omega Level said:


> Its understandable.



This ...... 

@Amaretti ...

Its just your perception and perhaps even the subjects that once being a man and surgically transforming into a woman means you are a woman. However, it actually depends on how the individual perceives such a person. It varies and there is no one to blame.


----------



## ~Greed~ (Jul 11, 2009)

Rob` said:


> You know that for one of my quotes which you claimed to have fixed you changed nothing right?


You did the same to my post by changing "Him" to "Her".




> Also legally she was a woman, she wasn't producing sperm and she had all the bits a female is expected to have except for ovaries. Mentally she was a women and she had all the same hormones running through her. Genetically she was still a man but that's the only way in which she could be called a man. With sex changes gender ceases to be binary but she considered herself female so that's good enough for me.



It doesn't matter if he is still producing sperm, hell Lance Armstrong doesn't have any balls anymore and can't produce sperm, does that make him a woman?, No it doesn't, he just had his balls hacked off(for different reasons though). What makes the person who was killed a woman? The fake boobs he got from injecting female hormones into his body? a inverted penis which is supposed to look like female genitalia? It doesn't matter what he has done to his body as he is still a man. if a persons chromosomes are XY then he is a *man* not a woman no matter how much surgery he has had to make him look like a woman. Sure he may mentally be very feminine but that doesn't change the fact that he is a man. Genetics are all that matter in determining if someone is a man or a woman, What gender they feel they are mentally has nothing to do with it.




> If it had really bothered him he could have just left, maybe had a shouting match with her but to be honest the only thing he had a right to be annoyed about was her lack of trust in him which I think he justified when he found out anyway. You've got to appreciate that life can't be easy for people like her when people are still stuck in the mindset that people who have had sex changes are somehow subhuman, a mindset that seems to be shared by people in this thread.



You expect him to just walk away after a few mean words. You have to be joking.


----------



## Mαri (Jul 11, 2009)

*Ignoring all the long winded posts*

She should have just told him when they began to start dating on a serious note. No healthy relationships last with secrets as serious as that one.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

Sunuvmann said:


> Psychological trauma of 'holy crap I fucked a dude' doesn't count as affecting? Okay.
> 
> I know its not nearly the same, that was done for the extreme to make a point that still, when you hide something which you know would destroy a relationship, for good or for bad, its the same as lying about it and the person would be justified to be pissed.
> 
> I've already said murder was going too far but it would be a crime of passion and as such should count as second-degree murder.



Psychological trauma? Christ that's hyperbole and you fucking know it. Freaked out would be a bit more accurate, he could have quite easily gotten over it and went on with his life, with or without her. I do agree he had a right to be annoyed about her not telling him since they were together for two years but in all honesty telling someone something like that can not be easy. Also I would argue that it wasn't entirely a sudden revelation, he must have known it to be a possibility from the letters she was recieving.



Recca said:


> No he didn't make it affect him. If he had a choice I'm pretty sure he'd opt for not caring you know.
> 
> Should I start force feeding beef to Hindus, then when they complain say ''They're making it affect them''.



The hindu would have a right to be pissed since you've violating their religious beliefs, also she didn't exactly force him into a relationship nor did she ever rape him so that's just an incomparable situation.

It's more like feeding someone quorn with them thinking it's actual meat. Men don't not fuck men over some moral reason, the lack of sexual attraction is what does it. 



dreams lie said:


> She is not a woman in body;  it just looks like it.  Biologically speaking, "she" will always be a he.  You can pump her full of hormones and change her appearance, but she remains a man.  And yes, by lying to her partner, it made someone go against his heterosexuality.



Heterosexuality isn't some moral decision wherein you decide to avoid fucking men, it's simply a lack of physical attraction to other men and a lot of sexual attraction to women. 




dreams lie said:


> I was actually leaning to describing "her" as a man, actually.  The boyfriend completely overreacted and there is no excuse for it.  However, I cannot help, but feel that she could have avoided the whole by being honest from the beginning.  I have nothing other than disdain toward the two people involved.



You're right she should have told him but as I already pointed out telling someone a secret like hers can not be easy. If he had left it at a shouting match or broken up with her I might be comfortable with blaming her but blaming her for this is like blaming a kid when their dad beats them for stealing a cookie. 



Hand Banana said:


> He wasn't being homophobic. If anything confused would be the answer. So in confusion he killed *him*.



He was freaked out by the idea that he might have fucked a man, homophobia might not fit but surely you can see what I mean.



~Greed~ said:


> You did the same to my post by changing "Him" to "Her".



I was referring to how you quoted "Keeping a secret wasn't a capital offense last I checked", typed "fixed" underneath and didn't actually change anything...



~Greed~ said:


> It doesn't matter if he is still producing sperm, hell Lance Armstrong doesn't have any balls anymore and can't produce sperm, does that make him a woman?, No it doesn't, he just had his balls hacked off(for different reasons though). What makes the person who was killed a woman? The fake boobs he got from injecting female hormones into his body? a inverted penis which is supposed to look like female genitalia? It doesn't matter what he has done to his body as he is still a man. if a persons chromosomes are XY then he is a *man* not a woman no matter how much surgery he has had to make him look like a woman. Sure he may mentally be very feminine but that doesn't change the fact that he is a man. Genetics are all that matter in determining if someone is a man or a woman, What gender they feel they are mentally has nothing to do with it.



Does Armstrong live like a women? Does he have a vagina? Does he consider himself to be a women? No? Then no I don't consider him to be female.

This woman whoever she was was female in everyway except for the Y chromosome which in practice only stopped her from being fertile. I don't give a shit if she was technically a man it really doesn't matter.






> You expect him to just walk away after a few mean words. You have to be joking.



No I expect him to viciously beat her and/or kill her. Of course that's what I fucking expect, what do you think would be a reasonable reaction?


----------



## Gunners (Jul 11, 2009)

> The hindu would have a right to be pissed since you've violating their religious beliefs, also she didn't exactly force him into a relationship nor did she ever rape him so that's just an incomparable situation.


Religious beliefs have more stock than other beliefs? Okay, if I was to disguise beef as pork and feed it to a Hindu person then told them at a later date would that be an okay thing to do?

If you know that people may have certain beliefs, you don't lie them and rob them of their choice not to engage in certain acts. 



> It's more like feeding someone quorn with them thinking it's actual meet. Men don't not fuck men over some moral reason, the lack of sexual attraction is what does it.


If that was the only reason you would see more men engaging in homosexual acts.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

Recca said:


> Religious beliefs have more stock than other beliefs? Okay, if I was to disguise beef as pork and feed it to a Hindu person then told them at a later date would that be an okay thing to do?



Ok so what belief of his did she violate? Unless if he believed that there was something morally wrong with homosexual acts and believed that sex changes don't change your gender then she didn't violate any of his beliefs.

And for reference religious beliefs are the beliefs I tend to take least seriously but they are beliefs none the same.



> If that was the only reason you would see more men engaging in homosexual acts.



I'm not following your logic.


----------



## WheresFooF (Jul 11, 2009)

Honestly this would have been me 
*Spoiler*: __ 



abuse from school



I'd had thought she was joking then when I found out it wasen't a joke. I would have cried more than Paris Jackson.


----------



## Gunners (Jul 11, 2009)

> Ok so what belief of his did she violate? Unless if he believed that there was something morally wrong with homosexual acts and believed that sex changes don't change your gender then she didn't violate any of his beliefs.


He likely believed that sex changes do not change your gender and for his own reason chooses not to engage in homosexual acts.

Because she lied to him this choice was stripped away from him.



> I'm not following your logic.


People have no problem having sex with women they are not physically attracted to.


----------



## ~Greed~ (Jul 11, 2009)

Rob` said:


> I was referring to how you quoted "Keeping a secret wasn't a capital offense last I checked", typed "fixed" underneath and didn't actually change anything...


 whoops, I should have double checked what I wrote.



> Does Armstrong live like a women? Does he have a vagina? Does he consider himself to be a women? No? Then no I don't consider him to be female.



You were using the fact that the transvestite couldn't produce sperm anymore as an example as to why he should be considered a woman. Which was why I brought up armstrong since he has the same problem. also, the transvestite doesn't have a vagina ether, he has a inverted penis surgically changed to make look like a vagina, theres a difference 



> This woman whoever she was was female in everyway except for the Y chromosome which in practice only stopped her from being fertile. I don't give a shit if she was technically a man it really doesn't matter.



Ill say it again, chromosomes are all that matter in determining if somone is male or female. 




> No I expect him to viciously beat her and/or kill her. Of course that's what I fucking expect, what do you think would be a reasonable reaction?



I don't expect him to sit there and think about it rationally. I don't think that a few words back and forth are going to make him feel any better or less sick about sleeping with a man for two years. A reasonable reaction would be him flipping the fuck out and trashing everything around him and probaly hitting the guy who tricked him a few times, but not killing him. When somthing like that happens, you don't think rationally.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

@ Recca, How about this, you find me evidence that he refrained from having sex with men for any more reason than lack of sexual attraction and I'll agree that she may have violated his beliefs. It still wouldn't be black and white since she obviously believed she was a woman and except for that pesky chromosome was a woman but fact is this argument is going nowhere.



~Greed~ said:


> You were using the fact that the transvestite couldn't produce sperm anymore as an example as to why he should be considered a woman. Which was why I brought up armstrong since he has the same problem. also, the transvestite doesn't have a vagina ether, he has a inverted penis surgically changed to make look like a vagina, theres a difference



I do realize that as a solitary reason it doesn't hold up, however as a reason it does contribute to her being a her. And ye the vagina might not technically be a vagina but it looks, feels, smells like one so honestly who gives a fuck?





> Ill say it again, chromosomes are all that matter in determining if somone is male or female.



From wikipedia

"Many people also see "sex change" as factually inaccurate.[1] Sex in humans is usually determined by four factors:
Chromosomes
Gonads (Ovaries and/or testicles)
Hormone status
Primary sex characteristics, sometimes also secondary sex characteristics

Not all of these factors can be changed, however:
Chromosomes cannot be changed.
Gonads can be removed, but not replaced
Hormone status is easily changed
Existing sex characteristics can to some extent be changed; existing ones mostly through surgery, non-existing ones can be induced to grow through hormones.
For example: Changing a male genital anatomy into a good or even excellent female appearing and functioning one is complicated, but entirely possible; changing a female genital anatomy into an even reasonably male appearing one however is extremely complicated and not successful very often; function is always limited."

Basically she was halfway there and I think rounding up (as in saying she's female) is more than fair. 






> I don't expect him to sit there and think about it rationally. I don't think that a few words back and forth are going to make him feel any better or less sick about sleeping with a man for two years. A reasonable reaction would be him flipping the fuck out and trashing everything around him and probaly hitting the guy who tricked him a few times, but not killing him. When somthing like that happens, you don't think rationally.



A 32 year old man being incapable of self-control is not something to defend.


----------



## Hand Banana (Jul 11, 2009)

Rob` said:


> He was freaked out by the idea that he might have fucked a man, homophobia might not fit but surely you can see what I mean.



There is no might. He did fuck him. They been together for two years.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 11, 2009)

Hand Banana said:


> There is no might. He did fuck him. They been together for two years.



And of course the idea that I was referring to her gender being ambiguous totally eluded you.


----------



## Nashima (Jul 11, 2009)

In all honesty, i think i would have done something more gruesome to her . I know that sounds bad but the shock would just hit me to hard.


----------



## Shibo (Jul 11, 2009)

I think he's an a*hole. I had a conversation with my boyfriend about this a week or so ago. He joked about secretly being a woman, and I said, If that were true I couldnt care less. I love him for who he is, right, so what does it matter...

Of course she should have been honest, but then again I also understand she might not have wanted to tell him or anyone else for that matter.


----------



## Seany (Jul 11, 2009)

lol    very   odd


----------



## Utopia Realm (Jul 11, 2009)

Sad to hear. I guess some people handle news better than others.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 11, 2009)

The Pink Ninja said:


> It doesn't matter if he never finds out.



i dont need to tell you what is wrong with such a view....

as long as anyone else doesnt find out anthing goes? such morals and ethics....



The Pink Ninja said:


> TGs are still very much an acceptable target in society. Being "Outed" as TG can ruin a person's life so they have every reason and every right to keep in a secret.



Not when they are in a serious relationship. This is the kind of thing you might want to share. 



The Pink Ninja said:


> Doubly so since the gender they changed to is their true one.



its a man mimicking as a woman. 



The Pink Ninja said:


> The reason this girl got killed was because the guy was a psycho bigot bastard mother-fucker. Hey she may not have been killed if she told him up front and their never got in a relationship to begin with.



she was part to blame yeah. 



The Pink Ninja said:


> But she'd also never have been killed if she never pursued a relationship with anyone and just stayed indoors all day. That's not a reason to do it.



comparison fails. 

try an willingly performing an action that you know will insult someone to their core. 





Amaretti said:


> Does that really matter when she looks as genuinely female as any other women?



yes..there is more to women then outer appearance.


----------



## ~Greed~ (Jul 11, 2009)

Rob` said:


> I do realize that as a solitary reason it doesn't hold up, however as a reason it does contribute to her being a her. And ye the vagina might not technically be a vagina but it looks, feels, smells like one so honestly who gives a fuck?



Its still fake though, if somone is born a man then they are a man. If somone is born a woman then they are a woman. And Im sure that many if not most people would care if they knew that the person they were sleeping with had changed their gender.



> From wikipedia
> 
> "Many people also see "sex change" as factually inaccurate.[1] Sex in humans is usually determined by four factors:
> Chromosomes
> ...



Halfway there doesn't make them female. They lack female organs, chromosomes and real female genitalia to be considered a real woman.






> A 32 year old man being incapable of self-control is not something to defend.



I'd flip out too, Ive gotten in fist fights about people throwing food at my lunch table, so I can't imagine how much I would flip if I found out that the person I was sleeping with was a man. Im not saying that killing the guy was right, but the transvestite wasn't exactly right in not telling him about it right away ether.


----------



## R00t_Decision (Jul 11, 2009)

This is a catch 22 situation. Honestly these people who fool other people in terms of sexuality are depraved scum. You don't fool with a man's love interest.

Maybe some of you don't understand this, perhaps you are women, but seriously this is the most vulgar thing you can do to a man; by fooling him in this way by so long.



> Does that really matter when she looks as genuinely female as any other women?


Yes, they can't give birth. Who knows if he wanted a child. The mind is a terrible thing. It really can be.


----------



## no trigger (Jul 11, 2009)

R00t_Decision said:


> Maybe some of you don't understand this, perhaps you are women, but seriously this is the most vulgar thing you can do to a man; by fooling him in this way by so long.



I *completely* agree.


----------



## R00t_Decision (Jul 11, 2009)

Hexa said:


> It's certainly not justified. I'll go a step further and say that the guy who killed his girlfriend does not in the least deserve any sympathy. I'm at least a little disturbed at the amount of sympathy he appears to be getting.


That really is easy for you to say in text Hexa, but you are and probably will never be in this mans position and I wish you never will be.


----------



## Ice Cream (Jul 11, 2009)

This reminds me of a jerry springer episode where a man finds out
that the 'woman' he was with for two months was actually a man.

After several attempts to use physical force, he stated that
he wished she/he could have revealed the secret at home where
no security could intervene.



> God this thread is depressing.
> 
> 
> 
> Why should she have been punished? Christ she kept a secret that's all she's guilty of. She might have been a man once but she is female in every meaningful sense of the word. If that wasn't good enough for him he had every right to up and leave like the insecure prick that he is.



Can 'she' become pregnant or menstruate?

Well, I'm sure he can be a female in some aspects but with our
current technology in sex reassignment surgery, that's about it. =/

I don't agree with the man's response of killing the individual but 
there are some things you should tell a person up front before going
into a relationship and this is one of them.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 11, 2009)

Hexa said:


> It's certainly not justified.  I'll go a step further and say that the guy who killed his girlfriend does not in the least deserve any sympathy.  I'm at least a little disturbed at the amount of sympathy he appears to be getting.



I am disturbed with how many posters think its ok to hide such a secret which goes against your partners values and beliefs and would shock him to the core. 

Just because you have the opinion that your a woman now and it shouldnt matter. 

well how about letting your partner decide that?


----------



## Nashima (Jul 11, 2009)

R00t_Decision said:


> This is a catch 22 situation. Honestly these people who fool other people in terms of sexuality are depraved scum. You don't fool with a man's love interest.
> 
> Maybe some of you don't understand this, perhaps you are women, but seriously this is the most vulgar thing you can do to a man; by fooling him in this way by so long.




I couldn't agree more. People just don't understand what something like this could do to a straight guy.


----------



## HolyHands (Jul 11, 2009)

The guy has every right to be pissed over his girl keeping a secret from him, but killing the "girl" is just way too far.

I find it rather disturbing, not to mention a little scary, that several of you are basically saying "Yea he was right to kill him" or "I would have done the same". Seriously people, just because your manhood was challenged doesn't give you a right to fucking kill a person. Nothing about this situation justifies a murder.


----------



## Danny Lilithborne (Jul 11, 2009)

R00t_Decision said:


> Maybe some of you don't understand this, perhaps you are women, but seriously this is the most vulgar thing you can do to a man; by fooling him in this way by so long.


What do you say to people who believe they _are_ women, who just were born in men's bodies by nature's cruel joke?

(Not that I disagree with you, I just thought that perspective should get a fair shake.)


----------



## FrostXian (Jul 11, 2009)

Honestly? I wouldn't give a shit. He's been with her for 2 years, they had sex alot of times, probably. 
I wouldn't let that fuck things up, just keep it a secret.
Or you know, blackmail her for a threesome.


----------



## Kira U. Masaki (Jul 11, 2009)

that was extreme but needless to say thats something you must disclose


----------



## Will2x (Jul 11, 2009)

It's sad she had to die. Murder is rarely the answer for anything. But if she knew she was serious with him, she should have told him before they ever did anything.

Shit like that can really fuck a mans mind up. I probably would've Chris Browned him if I was in that situation myself.


----------



## Jagon Fox (Jul 11, 2009)

while violence is definately not the answer, important information like this is also something you should not keep from your Significant Other.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 11, 2009)

The people saying that they have no sympathy for the one murdered, _disgust_ me.

You guys seriously need to get your priorities straight. Lying about something like gender is hardly grounds to think they deserved to get killed or 'had it coming'.



			
				R00t_Decision said:
			
		

> This is a catch 22 situation. Honestly these people who fool other people in terms of sexuality are depraved scum. You don't fool with a man's love interest.
> 
> Maybe some of you don't understand this, perhaps you are women, but seriously this is the most vulgar thing you can do to a man; by fooling him in this way by so long.



I agree that the partner should be upfront on anything like this, for the simple fact that it will cause problems in the future - but lying about something like this doesn't make someone "scum". It's just someone who's scared and wants a relationship, whose willing to lie about something as long as they get what they want. I equate it to a little below cheating, in terms of 'badness'.  A definite breach in terms of honesty, and grounds for someone to be mad or hurt - but not an excuse for violence of _any_ type.

lol, no. Just no. I can understand being mad, but seriously it's like having a relationship with someone that had extreme plastic surgery and is 90% fake (which, actually, is good comparison now that I think on it...). It's not like they did it for the fun of it or to intentionally hurt you - well, most of the time. They wanted a relationship and were scared. You can't be so mad at someone just for that, even if it's not what they _should_ of done.



			
				Zabuzalives said:
			
		

> I am disturbed with how many posters think its ok to hide such a secret which goes against your partners values and beliefs and *would shock him to the core*.
> 
> Just because you have the opinion that your a woman now and it shouldnt matter.
> 
> well how about letting your partner decide that?



Then these people need to get over themselves. 

I think what the problem is that you seriously focus too much on the guys side. I in no way advocate transgenders to lie about this kind of thing. As I've said before, I think it's wrong, that if you want a 'real' relationship you should honest - even if it would potentially cause the relationship to end without even beginning. HOWEVER, I can also see from their POV. They're _scared_. They want someone to love. They don't want weird looks thrown their way. They like this person and they want a relationship with them. 

They're not horrible people at all. They didn't lie with the intention of hurting, even if they should of known better. That's the _difference_. 

If you can't understand that I don't know what to say to you. Maybe it's you who really needs to put themselves in someone else's shoes.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 11, 2009)

Shooting her/him crossed the line.  That bitch certainly deserved a smackdown though.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 11, 2009)

Mider T said:
			
		

> Shooting her/him crossed the line. That bitch certainly deserved a smackdown though.



For what? Do you think the transgender is all like doctor evil and "fufufu, I'm going to trick this straight man because I'm EVILZZZZ!".

No, they're just insecure people. 

Tell me, if you didn't know you're girlfriend had plastic surgery (before transforming her into a buxom beautiful girl) and looked extremely unattractive before - would you be mad? Would you think she needed a good smacking for not revealing how she looked like before the surgery?

Or what about a guy proposes to a girl and she drops the bomb that's she infertile? Does she deserve a good smacking for not disclosing this information earlier?


----------



## Mider T (Jul 11, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> For what? Do you think the transgender is all like doctor evil and "fufufu, I'm going to trick this straight man because I'm EVILZZZZ!".
> 
> No, they're just insecure people.
> 
> Tell me, if you didn't know you're girlfriend had plastic surgery (before transforming her into a buxom beautiful girl) and looked extremely unattractive before - would you be mad? Would you think she needed a good smacking for not revealing how she looked like before the surgery?



She tricked him, end of story.  Not only mad for a lie but he was essentially having sex with a man, if you can't see someone getting heated enough to knocked someone out for that then you don't people.

I'd be upset but you're comparing things of two different levels.


----------



## Yeobo (Jul 11, 2009)

Kay well, there's a right way to handle this situation, and there's a wrong way.

This would be the wrong way.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 11, 2009)

Mider T said:


> She tricked him, end of story.  Not only mad for a lie but he was essentially having sex with a man, if you can't see someone getting heated enough to knocked someone out for that then you don't people.
> 
> I'd be upset but you're comparing things of two different levels.



Except it wasn't a trick. Not to her. She didn't want anything from the man except a relationship. 

You're just too hung up on gender and what defines a man or woman. Or you really, really care about having kids the old fashioned way.

I wouldn't be too upset at getting into a relationship with a woman who I thought was a man. It's just not that important to me.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 11, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> Except it wasn't a trick. Not to her. She didn't want anything from the man except a relationship.
> 
> You're just too hung up on gender and what defines a man or woman. Or you really, really care about having kids the old fashioned way.
> 
> I wouldn't be too upset at getting into a relationship with a woman who I thought was a man. It's just not that important to me.



I wouldn't want to have sex with a man, it's not me.  And if they didn't tell me, I'd be pissed.  More power to you if you do though.


----------



## Rabbit and Rose (Jul 11, 2009)

so, if i found out my girlfriend was a man, i would cry, then move far far away.
i wanted children


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 11, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> Except it wasn't a trick. Not to her. She didn't want anything from the man except a relationship.



Why would she want a relationship with someone who didn't accept her?



> You're just too hung up on gender and what defines a man or woman. Or you really, really care about having kids the old fashioned way.



Who are you to tell someone what they should or shouldn't want from a relationship?



> I wouldn't be too upset at getting into a relationship with a woman who I thought was a man. It's just not that important to me.



Well, that's you.

Other people see it differently, like this guy.


----------



## Mintaka (Jul 11, 2009)

In the end she should have let him know at least a week or two into the relationship.

I can understand it being difficult to do but it is necessary.


----------



## Utopia Realm (Jul 11, 2009)

I'd be angry if I wasn't told at the beginning of the relationship. The guy didn't need to kill her.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 11, 2009)

Mider T said:


> I wouldn't want to have sex with a man, it's not me.  And if they didn't tell me, I'd be pissed.  More power to you if you do though.



And here lies the crossroads. Are you really having sex with a man? 

Besides a very through medical examination, or finding out in an indirect method - you probably wouldn't know their former gender unless the transgendered person told you.  

IMO, the reason most people can't accept it all is just ego. Pride. It's kinda sad.





			
				First Tsurugi said:
			
		

> Why would she want a relationship with someone who didn't accept her?



Why do girls date jerks who are really hot and don't really like them for them? Either she really really liked him and was willing to risk deception. Or the picking's were slim and she couldn't find anyone to accept her anyway. Maybe she'd decided to the hell with it, she was tired of waiting for someone that hard to find - I accept myself as a woman so whatever. 



> Who are you to tell someone what they should or shouldn't want from a relationship?



Oh, shut it. People do this all the frickin time. Our parents, our friends, almost everyone. We tell women who are in abusive relationship what they 'shouldn't or should want' whether they want the opinion or not. Society does outlines what a traditional or modern relationship usually entails. Just because I say something, doesn't mean I'm forcing him or changing his opinion. I'm expressing mine and my logic behind it.



> Well, that's you.
> 
> Other people see it differently, like this guy.



Of course, just because you hold an opinion doesn't make you right or wrong. Yes, this includes me. However, you should at least be able to explain your reasoning. This is a _discussion_.


----------



## Xion (Jul 11, 2009)

Of course no one deserves that, but keeping it a secret is selfish and abominable to the person one supposedly loves. 

So tough luck.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 11, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> And here lies the crossroads. Are you really having sex with a man?



Yes. 



> Besides a very through medical examination, or finding out in an indirect method - you probably wouldn't know their former gender unless the transgendered person told you.



The person should know firsthand to begin with. Especially to avoid circumstances like the one in the article.



> IMO, the reason most people can't accept it all is just ego. Pride. It's kinda sad.



Or because they don't want to be deceived? What a massive assumption you've got there...There's a huge difference between a woman and a man with a mutilated penis.



> Why do girls date jerks who are really hot and don't really like them for them? Either she really really liked him and was willing to risk deception. Or the picking's were slim and she couldn't find anyone to accept her anyway. Maybe she'd decided to the hell with it, she was tired of waiting for someone that hard to find - I accept myself as a woman so whatever.



He deceived him. He didn't deserve to die, but he should have not kept that a secret from him. Besides, it's not up to him to impose his views of gender on the other person. He should not have taken his chances and just been honest from the start. 



> Oh, shut it. People do this all the frickin time. We tell women who are in abusive relationship what they 'shouldn't or should want' whether they want the opinion or not. Society does outlines what a traditional or modern relationship usually entails. Just because I say something, doesn't mean I'm forcing him or changing his opinion. I'm expressing mine and my logic behind it.



Gender plays a massive role in seeking relationships (especially so if they want kids) and a person should not be deceived on that.


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 11, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> Why do girls date jerks who are really hot and don't really like them for them? Either she really really liked him and was willing to risk deception. Or the picking's were slim and she couldn't find anyone to accept her anyway. Maybe she'd decided to the hell with it, she was tired of waiting for someone that hard to find - I accept myself as a woman so whatever.



Well then that's little more than stupidity on her part.
If she knew the risks, you can't really pity her, can you?
Of course, I doubt that's how it actually was.



> Oh, shut it. People do this all the frickin time. We tell women who are in abusive relationship what they 'shouldn't or should want' whether they want the opinion or not. Society does outlines what a traditional or modern relationship usually entails. Just because I say something, doesn't mean I'm forcing him or changing his opinion. I'm expressing mine and my logic behind it.



Your opinion is that Mider is "_too hung up on what defines a man and a woman_" and "_having kids the old fashioned way_".

Since some people do care about that sort of thing, they *are* important factors in a relationship, and not trivial, as you seem to suggest.



> Of course, just because you hold an opinion doesn't make you right or wrong. This includes me of course. However, you should at least be able to explain your reasoning. This is a _discussion_.



Your reasoning was that it wasn't important to you.
The fact is, it *is* important to other people.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 11, 2009)

Xion said:
			
		

> Of course no one deserves that, but keeping it a secret is selfish and abominable to the person one supposedly loves.
> 
> So tough luck.



What I find hilarious is how different this news would be depending on the person. It could change nothing or the _entire_ thing.



			
				Seto Kaiba said:
			
		

> Yes.



Yes, to you she would be a man. 

A rhetorical question isn't meant to be answered. But my apologies for not making that clear. 



> The person should know firsthand to begin with.



...yes, why are you repeating this? I already established that. The point I was trying to make using that example is completely different.



> Or because they don't want to be deceived? What a massive assumption you've got there...There's a huge difference between a woman and a man with a mutilated penis.



It's a vagina, not a mutilated penis. It can even achieve orgasm. That just outlines how similar the two sex organs actually are. What's really distinctive is the testes and ovaries. Besides that...I would tell you to look at a picture, if I didn't already know you'd go "EW!!!".



> He deceived him. He didn't deserve to die, but he should have not kept that a secret from him. Besides, it's not up to him to impose his views of gender on the other person.



So what should she of done? Wear an "I'm a former man" t-shirt when she walked outside? Cause when you think about it, she does that everytime she walks outside. She's 'fooling' (which I don't think she's really doing, but whatev's) everyone around her to think she's female. Oh, how heinous of her!

It was irresponsible of her not to tell him. But we really don't know her circumstances to really judge. We can only assume situations.



> Gender plays a massive role in seeking relationships and a person should not be deceived on that.



Which I'm not advocating if you'd kept up. What I'm arguing is someone being transgendered should not influence you to such a degree when considering a relationship. IMO, I think it's extreme how far people take it.

You talk of deception like she was criminal. She's not as unsympathetic as that. But again, that depends entirely on her motivations.


----------



## Amaretti (Jul 11, 2009)

Recca said:


> You're getting emotional which is causing you to jump to conclusions.



If you think this is me being emotional, you really have no idea. Rather than speculate about my motives for calling you out, let's discuss why I called you out. You say you have no sympathy because she 'robbed a guy of his choice'. Well, wait a minute, isn't robbing someone of their _life_ a little more serious than that? 

This is the problem here. You're measuring her crime against his and finding _her_ to be the primary offender. You and others in this thread did this without even blinking, without having a shred of understanding for the experiences of transgendered women who, it should be pointed out, face the fact that up to 1 in 12 transgender women will be murdered. Think about that for a second. Then think about why these women aren't always forthcoming with men, because it doesn't seem to matter how long you've known a man - murder seems to be an inherent risk by simply existing. Look at the girl who was killed last April by a man she'd only known for three days before he found out she was transgendered. Look at the serial killers recently caught who targeted solely transexual sex workers, whose crimes went unreported because while sometimes the media cares about Jack-the-Ripper style killings, no one has sympathy for transsexual prostitutes. There is a huge amount of violence and prejudice against these women, and I do not blame them for a second for keeping quiet about their past if they can. Hell, if she'd been able to keep her secret, she'd still be alive. 

Sorry if I think her life was more important than his peace of mind.



> First of all, you're making it sound as though I'm saying his actions are justifiable in the sense that it is the right course of action to take. That is untrue, I don't think his actions were right, I can simply see why he would do what he did.



That's the problem. You said you have understanding for his reaction, which means you think his reaction was expected and acceptable on some level because he was 'provoked'.  You don't have to think something is right to sympathise with it, and in that post you were more willing to show sympathy for a murderer than you were willing to give his victim. If you're wondering why that left a sour taste in my mouth, you should reread your own words. Nothing you have said since has reassured me that I was mistaken.



> Second of all I don't think extreme biggotory is okay. However this isn't an issue of bigottory to me. If he killed the person because they were a transgender I could see your point. He killed her because she decieved and slept with him robbing him of his choice to sleep with only women.



In other words, he killed her because she was transgendered. What's so difficult to understand about that? If she hadn't been trans, he wouldn't have killed her, so this is just an attempt to find excuses for him.



> Believe it or not there is a difference. As I said previously, would it be right for me to feed a vegan dairy products under the pretence that it is not?



Feeding dairy products to a vegan would be a fairly overt and intentionally malicious act. That you're equating this to what she did is why I think you don't understand transgendered people at all. They aren't running around deceiving people for giggles. Crossdressing and getting surgery is not an intent to mislead. This woman wasn't in a relationship for two years with this guy because she was trying to deceive him, and what you don't seem to realise that as far as she's concerned, she's a woman, and she's just being herself. Maybe she should have told as soon as she understood he was interested in a relationship that she was transgendered. In an ideal world, he either wouldn't care or would just walk away. In this world, there's every chance she might have had her life ended 2 years ago instead. 



> I'm going to ignore the part on ''sit next to the gaybashers, holocaust deniers and KKK'' quite frankly that was immature and hypocritical considering you deleted a post for trolling in this same thread.



Why? You absolutely refused to offer sympathy to a murder victim and have since been making mealy mouthed excuses for her killer right along the lines of transpanic defence rhetoric, a variation of the gay panic defence, and both universally understood to be the acceptance of bigotry and homophobia as reasonable motives for murder. Yes, it's more acceptable to disregard the rights and humanity of the trans community than any other minority, but it really shouldn't be. And that should go without saying. 



> I don't see how this is treating individuals as though they are subhuman, like I said, the comparison would make a lot more sense if the individual went out and killed a transgender who had not actually deceived him.



Easy. The worst she did to him was a keep an intensely personal secret and "cheat him of his choice to sleep with an XX woman for two years". The worst he did to her was put a bullet in her brain and cheat her of the rest of her life, and _all_ her future choices, and _all_ her future experiences, as well as cheat her family of a daughter and sister, and her friends of of a friend. 

That her life's value apparently amounted to so little that his crime (murder) is actually being treated as a lesser and more 'understandable' crime than hers (lying to him), is why you've treated her as subhuman.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 11, 2009)

First Tsurugi said:
			
		

> Well then that's little more than stupidity on her part.
> If she knew the risks, you can't really pity her, can you?
> Of course, I doubt that's how it actually was.



No, not stupid. Maybe just desperate. 

We really don't know enough to judge in this case.





> Your opinion is that Mider is "_too hung up on what defines a man and a woman_" and "_having kids the old fashioned way_".
> 
> Since some people do care about that sort of thing, they *are* important factors in a relationship, and not trivial, as you seem to suggest.



How do I phrase this....

The man dated the woman for two years. He proposed to her. He was in a relationship with her.

Yet a label caused him to kill her. Do you realize how insignificant that was in the actual relationship? He knew as a _person_, loved her,  _proposed_ to her.

It's like breaking up with someone after finding out they're half-black.





> Your reasoning was that it wasn't important to you.
> The fact is, it *is* important to other people.



No, that's what I said I'd feel in the same situation.

My reasoning on _why_ it isn't important is that it hardly plays anything in the actual relationship. The fact that this man had a relationship with the woman for two years underlines that.


----------



## -Dargor- (Jul 11, 2009)

martryn said:


> If you can't tell, I don't know how much I would have minded.  I mean, he proposed marriage to him.  Erm...her.
> 
> This is why couples need to be upfront and honest with each other from the beginning.



This exactly.

Just looking at the pic you can tell the dude was a moron anyway. I bet he would have eneded up beating her eventually, maybe he already was.


Xion said:


> Of course no one deserves that, but keeping it a secret is selfish and abominable to the person one supposedly loves.


None of them really loved the other obviously. Of course the dude being that short-sighted probably didn't help. No wonder she refused to marry him.

What determines if you're a man or not is where your genitals are, if he actually went *all* the way at a young age, it is logical to concider her a she from that moment on.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 11, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> Yes, to you she would be a man.



Biologically he is a man. He's only a female in his mind.



> A rhetorical question isn't meant to be answered. But my apologies for not making that clear.



Apology accepted.



> ...yes, why are you repeating this? I already established that. The point I was trying to make using that example is completely different.



Mider said he wouldn't want to have sex with a man, you seemed to bring it up as if to claim "what does it matter if you can't tell?" when it does. 



> It's a vagina, not a mutilated penis. It can even achieve orgasm. That just outlines how similar the two sex organs actually are. What's really distinctive is the testes and ovaries. Besides that...I would tell you to look at a picture, if I didn't already know you'd go "EW!!!".



It's a mutilated penis. Just because it can achieve orgasm doesn't change that. Similar =/= same. Those few differences are enormous. I know what a mutilated penis looks like...unfortunately.



> So what should she of done? Wear an "I'm a former man" t-shirt when she walked outside? Cause when you think about it, she does that everytime she walks outside. She's 'fooling' (which I don't think she's really doing, but whatev's) everyone around her to think she's female. Oh, how heinous of her!



No one is saying he should have done that. Just in the case of engaging in serious relationships.



> It was irresponsible of her not to tell him. But we really don't know her circumstances to really judge. We can only assume situations.



Regardless of the circumstances, he should've told the guy the truth when he could.



> Which I'm not advocating if you'd kept up. What I'm arguing is someone being transgendered should not influence you to such a degree when considering a relationship. IMO, I think it's extreme how far people take it.



Why the fuck shouldn't it? Gender plays a critical factor in seeking relationships. That is something extremely serious. 



> You talk of deception like she was criminal. She's not as unsympathetic as that. But again, that depends entirely on her motivations.



I feel sympathy in him losing his life, but not for deceiving his former boyfriend.


----------



## Judge Gabranth (Jul 11, 2009)

wow that's fucked up.


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> How do I phrase this....
> 
> The man dated the woman for two years. He proposed to her. He was in a relationship with her.
> 
> Yet a label caused him to kill her. Do you realize how insignificant that was in the actual relationship? He knew as a _person_, loved her,  _proposed_ to her.



I imagine he felt the same way.
Thus, it isn't that difficult to imagine he must have been devastated by the revelation.

Simply finding out something like this would have likely caused him to question whether he truly knew her at all.



> No, that's what I said I'd feel in the same situation.
> 
> My reasoning on _why_ it isn't important is that it hardly plays anything in the actual relationship. The fact that this man had a relationship with the woman for two years underlines that.



Perhaps this is where we differ in our perception.

You seem to think that this guy killed her simply because she was transgender.

I think it has more to do with him feeling betrayed.

The fact that he delved into her past after she refused his marriage proposal, him shooting her in the areas that had been operated on, and that he attempted suicide shortly after killing her, to me that shows that he was hurt and that he felt betrayed and led on, not that he felt a particular hatred towards her simply for being transgender.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this excuses the killing, but there was clearly more to this than simply a hate crime against a transgendered woman.


----------



## Robot-Overlord (Jul 12, 2009)

The moral of the story, don't start off a relationship with major secrets,
your never know when you marry a open minded man, or someone who does not accept who you were; But then there is the gun-ho crazy guy third option you don't want.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 12, 2009)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Biologically he is a man. He's only a female in his mind.



Oh, you're bringing up this argument? Hasn't this thread already covered it. Ugh.

Tell me, if science advanced to the point where even doing DNA tests you'd couldn't tell the difference between a woman born a woman and one from a transgendered surgery - how would you feel?

It's already moved to the point no one can tell short of a doctor. This argument isn't going to hold much water for much longer.





> Apology accepted.



hmm...





> Mider said he wouldn't want to have sex with a man, you seemed to bring it up as if to claim "what does it matter if you can't tell?" when it does.




Ideally, she would've been able to tell him. But as I've seen Amaretti post...even then, it might not have been such a smart idea.

But you're right, I was bringing that up. Not that she should lie, but what does it really matter barring possibly children.




> It's a mutilated penis. Just because it can achieve orgasm doesn't change that. I know what a mutilated penis looks like...unfortunately.



If you call it that, then I guess I should call penises outside vagina's. Tell me, what is the difference?



> No one is saying he should have done that. Just in the case of engaging in serious relationships.



And I think you persecute her too harshly even on that. As Amerrtai outlined, the circumstances surrounding a trasngendered are complicated.




> Regardless of the circumstances, he should've told the guy the truth when he could.



Ideally, she probably would've of. But it's Russia. They're not as accepting there as California.

But, admittedly, if she had enough money for an operation - she might've had enough money to move. Though, I'm not sure out the country would've been an option... 




> Why the fuck shouldn't it? Gender plays a critical factor in seeking relationships. That is something extremely serious.



No, unless your taking into consideration the subject children. But other than that...

It's looks that matter. Attraction. That's what catches our attention. Transgendered or not, I doubt even after being told a woman was a man in the past - you'd be able to deny feeling an attraction (given that she was your type).

It's in the mind.



> I feel sympathy in him losing his life, but not for deceiving his former boyfriend.



Depending the situation, it's the same for me. I just feel more the former than the latter. 

How much you focus on the _deception_ (which I still don't think is the right word), however, makes it seem you care more about the latter. Thus my ire.


----------



## Hand Banana (Jul 12, 2009)

*Newton's Third Law of Motion*


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 12, 2009)

First Tsurugi said:


> I imagine he felt the same way.
> Thus, it isn't that difficult to imagine he must have been devastated by the revelation.
> 
> Simply finding out something like this would have likely caused him to question whether he truly knew her at all.



And it's that mindset that to me seems really sad. He cared about her as person. He already loved her. Nothing changed about her. 

She was not a different person from the person he'd first met. 

She's transgendered. It's understandable to see why she'd kept that secret. Something like this shouldn't be seen as something so altering. That's what I don't like. It's only the outside, not the inside.



> Perhaps this is where we differ in our perception.
> 
> You seem to think that this guy killed her simply because she was transgender.
> 
> ...



I understand that. Why I don't get is where a logical person would see this as betrayal? Follow it back to the root. It has nothing to do with him at all. This is not a secret meant to hurt him, even if she did keep it from him. It's likely the opposite. She maybe even wanted to tell him at first, but couldn't get up the courage and let it go.


----------



## Cirus (Jul 12, 2009)

It is understandable the guy was upset, but actually doing what he did was wrong.


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> And it's that mindset that to me seems really sad. He cared about her as person. He already loved her. Nothing changed about her.
> 
> She was not a different person from the person he'd first met.



On the contrary.

If she kept one thing from him, it's likely he wondered about what else she kept from him.

The trust in the relationship was broken. 



> She's transgendered. It's understandable to see why she'd kept that secret. Something like this shouldn't be seen as something so altering. That's what I don't like. It's only the outside, not the inside.



The outside matters to some people.

That may seem cold, but it's true.



> I understand that. Why I don't get is where a logical person would see this as betrayal? Follow it back to the root. It has nothing to do with him at all. This is not a secret meant to hurt him, even if she did keep it from him. It's likely the opposite. She maybe even wanted to tell him at first, but couldn't get up the courage and let it go.



You're looking for a logical response from a person who was emotionally damaged, and commited a crime of passion.

Needless to say, you aren't going to find one. 

From what I can tell, 
a) This woman was not killed because she was transgender.
b) The man who killed her felt betrayed and used.
c) There was no danger in her telling him her past a man at the beginning of their relationship.

Which leads me to conclude that had she simply been up front about her past from the beginning, none of this would have happened.


----------



## Ssj3_Goku (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> And it's that mindset that to me seems really sad. He cared about her as person. He already loved her. Nothing changed about her.
> 
> She was not a different person from the person he'd first met.
> 
> She's transgendered. It's understandable to see why she'd kept that secret. Something like this shouldn't be seen as something so altering. That's what I don't like. It's only the outside, not the inside.



So you're saying that everyone should accept this no matter what their beleifs? (meaning gays, etc)? 





> I understand that. Why I don't get is where a logical person would see this as betrayal? Follow it back to the root. It has nothing to do with him at all. This is not a secret meant to hurt him, even if she did keep it from him. It's likely the opposite. She maybe even wanted to tell him at first, but couldn't get up the courage and let it go.



First relationships are not logical, they are irrational from the very start. Second, in society today, this stuff is against what is known as the "norm" and people who get sex changes have to understand that they are going outside that norm and should be honest with others about it because everyone has different beliefs, customs, morals, etc. Still it is sad to see her life taken away like this, heck they even have a law for a defense about this type of action to =/


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> Oh, you're bringing up this argument? Hasn't this thread already covered it. Ugh.



Yes. Poorly.



> Tell me, if science advanced to the point where even doing DNA tests you'd couldn't tell the difference between a woman born a woman and one from a transgendered surgery - how would you feel?



That sounds like an interesting scenario, but I don't think I could give a definite answer on it to be honest. 



> It's already moved to the point no one can tell short of a doctor. This argument isn't going to hold much water for much longer.



Not true. Extended time around the person, you'd probably notice something.



> Ideally, she would've been able to tell him. But as I've seen Amaretti post...even then, it might not have been such a smart idea.



I'm sure it would have been a much better alternative than being shot to death.



> But you're right, I was bringing that up. Not that she should lie, but what does it really matter barring possibly children.



It matters for everything. The relationship is based under false pretenses. 



> If you call it that, then I guess I should call penises outside vagina's. Tell me, what is the difference?



A man doesn't have a uterus, or ovaries which produce eggs. So you really couldn't call it that.



> And I think you persecute her too harshly even on that. As Amerrtai outlined, the circumstances surrounding a trasngendered are complicated.



I am not persecuting him. I am being rational on this. Under no circumstances should this have been kept a secret. 



> Ideally, she probably would've of. But it's Russia. They're not as accepting there as California.



This should have been taken into account by the victim.



> But, admittedly, if she had enough money for an operation - she might've had enough money to move. Though, I'm not sure out the country would've been an option...



Maybe, maybe not.



> No, unless your taking into consideration the subject children. But other than that...



It means EVERYTHING. If the person means to seek a relationship with a woman (biologically), and begins one with a transgender person oblivious to the fact that his partner is a transgender then it is a relationship based on deception and that is wrong. 



> It's looks that matter. Attraction. That's what catches our attention. Transgendered or not, I doubt even after being told a woman was a man in the past - you'd be able to deny feeling an attraction (given that she was your type).



Gender matters a lot to me. I don't consider a transgender male a woman, even a convincing one, because they aren't.



> It's in the mind.



And the body. 



> Depending the situation, it's the same for me. I just feel more the former than the latter.



I can tell.



> How much you focus on the _deception_ (which I still don't think is the right word), however, makes it seem you care more about the latter. Thus my ire.



It is deception. The boyfriend engaged in a relationship with the victim under false pretense that he was a woman when the truth was he wasn't.


----------



## R00t_Decision (Jul 12, 2009)

Danny Lilithborne said:


> What do you say to people who believe they _are_ women, who just were born in men's bodies by nature's cruel joke?
> 
> (Not that I disagree with you, I just thought that perspective should get a fair shake.)


I really don't care what they do with their body, just don't get someone else's body involved for your own selfish gain.


----------



## PerveeSage (Jul 12, 2009)

justified. justifiable as a woman wanting to kill a man who raped her. women deserve the right not to be raped. straight men have the right not to be tricked into sleeping with a man.


----------



## Draffut (Jul 12, 2009)

The Pink Ninja said:


> *Shrug*
> 
> Think what you will, but I'm the of the opinion that you are the gender you and your brain think you are and that you don't have to tell anyone if you don't wan to. People aren't obliged to attack their own identity.
> 
> ...



My brain thinks I am a robot, therefor I am a robot despite my physiology?


----------



## R00t_Decision (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> I agree that the partner should be upfront on anything like this, for the simple fact that it will cause problems in the future - but lying about something like this doesn't make someone "scum". It's just someone who's scared and wants a relationship, whose willing to lie about something as long as they get what they want. I equate it to a little below cheating, in terms of 'badness'.  A definite breach in terms of honesty, and grounds for someone to be mad or hurt - but not an excuse for violence of _any_ type.
> 
> lol, no. Just no. I can understand being mad, but seriously it's like having a relationship with someone that had extreme plastic surgery and is 90% fake (which, actually, is good comparison now that I think on it...). It's not like they did it for the fun of it or to intentionally hurt you - well, most of the time. They wanted a relationship and were scared. You can't be so mad at someone just for that, even if it's not what they _should_ of done.


No offence, but I understand you are putting this nicely. This is a very naive way of putting it. This issue has no grey, it's black and white.  Considering this 'type' of plastic surgery has only been going on for a few decades, there are not enough studies to base the effect of these type of relationships. One thing is certain, men do not, and will not like this. They just don't, and if the 'women' fear what they get themselves in, then it's their responsibility not to play with fire and be upfront about it.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 12, 2009)

First Tsurugi said:


> On the contrary.
> 
> If she kept one thing from him, it's likely he wondered about what else she kept from him.
> 
> The trust in the relationship was broken.



It's tragendersism. Again, it's easy to see why they would lie.

Heck, to some they don't even see it as 'lying'.





> The outside matters to some people.
> 
> That may seem cold, but it's true.



Yes, which is probably why she went through the procedure in the first place. What I meant that he was already attracted to her, and her personality. Nothing had changed on that aspect.





> You're looking for a logical response from a person who was emotionally damaged, and commited a crime of passion.
> 
> Needless to say, you aren't going to find one.
> 
> ...



And yet people still handle things like things without involving violence. It's no excuse. He was a lunatic and deserves little sympathy.

If she would of told him in the first place, she still may of very well been hurt. There are many crimes against transgendered simply for being transgendered. He overreacted. He may have held prejudice as well. We don't know that.

What she should of done is gotten to know him a bit at first before getting into the relationship, asked a few discreet questions on his views on gays or trasngenders (which probably would've been hard as well) and taken it from there. But even then...if she was desperate enough even then I might not fault her...


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 12, 2009)

EDIT: sorry for the triple post. One I deleted and this one I assumed at how fast things were moving - someone would've already posted by now...



Ssj3_Goku said:


> So you're saying that everyone should accept this no matter what their beleifs? (meaning gays, etc)?



When did I say this? It's obviously just my opinion and how _I_ see things. 





> First relationships are not logical, they are irrational from the very start. Second, in society today, this stuff is against what is known as the "norm" and people who get sex changes have to understand that they are going outside that norm and should be honest with others about it because everyone has different beliefs, customs, morals, etc. Still it is sad to see her life taken away like this, heck they even have a law for a defense about this type of action to =/



I wasn't taking about the relationship. I was taking about her being transgender and keeping it a secret. It's logical to see why it had nothing to do with him. And I disagree. While we might not understand certain things, I'd argue relationships are very much logical. 

And it's easy to say this in an accepting country, but it's Russia. It's not so accepting.

Still, yes, it would be smart to get this over with at the beginning of the relationship. Still, I can understand how a transgendered woman would feel - being anxious at telling anyone and how they might let a relationship start without telling them anything.



Seto Kaiba said:


> Yes. Poorly.



Well, it is a pretty small thread. I'm probably just thinking of the various transgender threads I've frequented in the debate section.





> That sounds like an interesting scenario, but I don't think I could give a definite answer on it to be honest.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> It's tragendersism. Again, it's easy to see why they would lie.
> 
> Heck, to some they don't even see it as 'lying'.



And many people do. This thread is proof of that. Best not to risk offending a potential romantic interest, don't you think?

If you live in a society where mentioning that can get you killed or otherwise physically assaulted, you shouldn't even be seeking a romantic relationship in the first place.

If you don't, it shouldn't be a problem.



> Yes, which is probably why she went through the procedure in the first place. What I meant that he was already attracted to her, and her personality. Nothing had changed on that aspect.



Attraction doesn't mean you have to pursue a relationship with someone.

There are other factors that need equal consideration.



> And yet people still handle things like things without involving violence. It's no excuse. He was a lunatic and deserves little sympathy.



Crimes of passion are not that uncommon.
A fairly large percentage of murders are motivated by emotion.



> If she would of told him in the first place, she still may of very well been hurt. There are many crimes against transgendered simply for being transgendered. He overreacted. He may have held prejudice as well. We don't know that.



I thought I already established why I felt that wasn't the case here. :/



> What she should of done is gotten to know him a bit at first before getting into the relationship, asked a few discreet questions on his views on gays or trasngenders (which probably would've been hard as well) and taken it from there. But even then...if she was desperate enough even then I might not fault her...



Merely asking those questions would have likely clued him in that something was amiss anyway.


----------



## Xion (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> It's already moved to the point no one can tell short of a doctor. This argument isn't going to hold much water for much longer.



Actually it wouldn't be that hard to tell at all if one knew what to work with and how biological females look and work.


----------



## Elim Rawne (Jul 12, 2009)

Xion should know more about this,since I almost did the same thing on him/her


----------



## the box (Jul 12, 2009)

Lanna said:


> No reason to kill her/him.



1:hi honey im home! 

2:lou i have a penis

3: 

4 now what would you do honestly i would have killed the bitch, its almost like rape


----------



## Hand Banana (Jul 12, 2009)

Diceman said:


> Xion should know more about this,since I almost did the same thing on him/her



Pics or it didn't happen.


----------



## Elim Rawne (Jul 12, 2009)

Hand Banana said:


> Pics or it didn't happen.



all here
[Essay]Why Kabuto is likely the 8tails Jinchuuriki


----------



## Kusogitsune (Jul 12, 2009)

Of all the things to shoot your girlfriend over. It's not like she was cheating on you with your dad, who cares if she used to have a penis?


----------



## Rolling~Star (Jul 12, 2009)

it doesn't matta who's wrong or right

just beat it! :mj


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 12, 2009)

Diceman said:


> all here
> [Essay]Why Kabuto is likely the 8tails Jinchuuriki



I'm suddenly reminded of Zaru/Fable.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 12, 2009)

First Tsurugi said:


> And many people do. This thread is proof of that. Best not to risk offending a potential romantic interest, don't you think?
> 
> If you live in a society where mentioning that can get you killed or otherwise physically assaulted, you shouldn't even be seeking a romantic relationship in the first place.
> 
> If you don't, it shouldn't be a problem.



What kind of life is that? I understand that sex and relationships isn't everything, but a lot of people hold it as a very important part of their lives. You can't expect her to condemn herself to a life of loneliness and  not at least _try_ if it's really her only option. Even if her life may of been at risk.



> Attraction doesn't mean you have to pursue a relationship with someone.
> 
> There are other factors that need equal consideration.



No, but it's the first step.



> Crimes of passion are not that uncommon.
> A fairly large percentage of murders are motivated by emotion.



I know that. They are still crimes, though. Some get lesser sentences because they're more understandable. For example, killing someone who murdered a family member. 

This, however, is not as understandable as that. _Far_, far less.



> I thought I already established why I felt that wasn't the case here. :/



I understand that explanation, and it's possible, but it's not the only one.  



> Merely asking those questions would have likely clued him in that something was amiss anyway.



Yes, there's that as well...she really didn't have much options.



			
				Xion said:
			
		

> Actually it wouldn't be that hard to tell at all if one knew what to work with and how biological females look and work.



She 'fooled' the man for over two years. Even more obvious tells like the    male voice box can be...fixed. It's really not that easy, I don't think.


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> What kind of life is that? I understand that sex and relationships isn't everything, but a lot of people hold it as a very important part of their lives. You can't expect her to condemn herself to a life of loneliness and  not at least _try_ if it's really her only option. Even if her life may of been at risk.



If she chooses to do so fully aware of the possible consequences, then she does so at her own risk.



> No, but it's the first step.



And often that's as far as it gets.



> I know that. They are still crimes, though. Some get lesser sentences because they're more understandable. For example, killing someone who murdered a family member.
> 
> This, however, is not as understandable as that. _Far_, far less.



I agree, but it's still the same principle.



> I understand that explanation, and it's possible, but it's not the only one.



It's how I see it.

And I'm basing my conclusions and opinions off of that.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 12, 2009)

First Tsurugi said:


> If she chooses to do so fully aware of the possible consequences, then she does so at her own risk.



Of course, but doesn't that garner more sympathy for her if it was the case? She just made a really hard decision living in such a society. It's sad for her and not something that should attributed as her fault. It's the proverbial choice of "a rock and a hard place"....which I think is how it's worded...

But that's only if it _was_ the case.



> And often that's as far as it gets.



Yes, but again it really depends on her motivations and her circumstances. 



> I agree, but it's still the same principle.



I'm not sure...what separates a regular murder from a crime of passion? 

What kind of person is so far removed from reality that he does this?

Would you label someone killing a partner that cheated on them a crime of passion? 



> It's how I see it.
> 
> And I'm basing my conclusions and opinions off of that.



So where do we actually differentiate on this? _Just_ his motivations?

And how much at fault she is? If any?


----------



## First Tsurugi (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> Of course, but doesn't that garner more sympathy for her if it was the case? She just made a really hard decision living in such a society. It's sad for her and not something that should attributed as her fault. It's the proverbial choice of "a rock and a hard place"....which I think is how it's worded...
> 
> *But that's only if it was the case*.



The bolded is the key phrase.

To be honest I don't think she was in the position where revealing her past would have brought violence upon her, at least not if she had done it early on in the relationship.



> Yes, but again it really depends on her motivations and her circumstances.



How could she have hoped to achieve a real relationship if she couldn't even reveal such a key part of her past? It is clear that there was never a real trust between them.

Additionally, the fact that she rejected his marriage proposal shows that she was not interested in pursuing a deeper relationship with him, which just makes it more questionable why she even bothered to not be more up front about her status with him.



> I'm not sure...what separates a regular murder from a crime of passion?



A crime of passion is defined as a perpetrator committing a crime, specifically assault and/or murder against a spouse or other loved one due to a sudden strong impulse such as a jealous rage or heartbreak, as opposed to a premeditated killing, or First Degree murder.



> What kind of person is so far removed from reality that he does this?



Someone who is emotionally distraught to the point of not being able to think rationally.

There is such a defense as "_temporary insanity_", and it is a legitimate defense.



> Would you label someone killing a partner that cheated on them a crime of passion?



Yes.



> So where do we actually differentiate on this? _Just_ his motivations?



That and whether she should have been more straightforward about her past, apparently.



> And how much at fault she is? If any?



If she had been straightforward about her past and status as a transgeder, this wouldn't have happened.

In all likelihood, a relationship would have never been formed, but she'd still be alive.


----------



## Champagne Supernova (Jul 12, 2009)

I don't see what the big deal is.


----------



## Trism (Jul 12, 2009)

The world is just full of sick people.

Both of these two are at fault here. The transgender person should have been completely honest about his/her past. If the man wouldn't want you for who you are, then why bother trying to stay in the relationship? You'd be living a lie.

Of course, the man who killed her is guilty of a far worse crime. Dishonesty in a relationship is not a reason to commit murder, or any kind of violence at all. He should have just left.

And some of the people in this thread really do amuse me. First of all, those of you who say that you would have done some act of violence in the same situation, I would have to wish you good luck in prison. To the people who say she got what she deserved, think on this: if you get murdered for some reason, someone in the world may say YOU had it coming.

Who the hell are any of you to pick and choose what justifies the taking of another's life and what doesn't anyway?

Full of hypocrisy.


----------



## the box (Jul 12, 2009)

Kusogitsune said:


> Of all the things to shoot your girlfriend over. It's not like she was cheating on you with your dad, who cares if she used to have a penis?



im guessing your not heterosexual. most heteros would care


----------



## the box (Jul 12, 2009)

Mozenrath said:


> The world is just full of sick people.
> 
> Both of these two are at fault here. The transgender person should have been completely honest about his/her past. If the man wouldn't want you for who you are, then why bother trying to stay in the relationship? You'd be living a lie.
> 
> ...



im sorry but just leaving isnt going to do it for most men.woman who are straight, imo opinion its close to rape because if your wanting to commit sexual acts with a person of the OPPOSITE sex and they agree fine.

however if you agree to have sex with some on of the opposite sex and it turns out to have been the same sex, he/she has broken the contract and if committing rape.

so as i see it he was getting raped while not knowing it and finally when he realized he went insane.

imo i think he was right, or at least he could have broken a bone or something. but i wont justify rape


----------



## Yosha (Jul 12, 2009)

it does not matter, it is what he believed to be right....it was his truth.


----------



## Trism (Jul 12, 2009)

the box said:


> im sorry but just leaving isnt going to do it for most men.woman who are straight, imo opinion its close to rape because if your wanting to commit sexual acts with a person of the OPPOSITE sex and they agree fine.
> 
> however if you agree to have sex with some on of the opposite sex and it turns out to have been the same sex, he/she has broken the contract and if committing rape.
> 
> ...



No, it was not rape. Your definition is clearly different from the law's.

And you won't justify rape, but you'll justify murder? Really now?
Like I said, hypocrisy.


----------



## Geek (Jul 12, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> He didn't listen to Ackbar.
> 
> 
> 
> Also, this has allready been aproached. The victim is a "she" She always been a she, and that guy is a fucking moron.



If you really believe that why are you putting inverted commas around she?

I'm sick and tired of people referring to this poor girl as he/she or a dude. Shes a chick for fucksake.


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 12, 2009)

First Tsurugi said:


> The bolded is the key phrase.
> 
> To be honest I don't think she was in the position where revealing her past would have brought violence upon her, at least not if she had done it early on in the relationship.



That doesn't make it unlikely, though. Worldwide (that isn't Europe) attitude's against homosexuality are not good. Worse even for transgendered.

He shot her six times in the gentials. The very fact that he killed her shows he's not right in the head. Honestly, I'm not sure how he'd of reacted.



> How could she have hoped to achieve a real relationship if she couldn't even reveal such a key part of her past? It is clear that there was never a real trust between them.
> 
> Additionally, the fact that she rejected his marriage proposal shows that she was not interested in pursuing a deeper relationship with him, which just makes it more questionable why she even bothered to not be more up front about her status with him.



Just because she was a man before, doesn't mean there wasn't a relationship. It doesn't undermine it. Not even the trust, technically, if she only really did it for her own protection. 

She may have rejected the marriage proposal, but that doesn't mean it was because she didn't want a deeper relationship. The state/region (whatever you call sub Russia governments) probably still recognized her as a man, getting married would've been impossible. Unless she did something legal to retify her as female. 



> A crime of passion is defined as a perpetrator committing a crime, specifically assault and/or murder against a spouse or other loved one due to a sudden strong impulse such as a jealous rage or heartbreak, as opposed to a premeditated killing, or First Degree murder.



But this confuses me:



			
				Criminal Law dot com said:
			
		

> In most states, first-degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated, meaning that it was committed after planning or "lying in wait" for the victim.
> 
> *For example, Dan comes home to find his wife in bed with Victor. Three days later, Dan waits behind a tree near Victor's front door. When Victor comes out of the house, Dan shoots and kills him. *
> 
> ...



Link removed

That sounds like a passion crime, yet it's categorized as First Degree. 

From the article, it wasn't immediate. The murderer waited three days.

In terms of this case, it isn't actually clear how much time passed before he confronted the woman, but I assume it's premediated if he had a gun on him. So it might not really be a crime of passion.



> Someone who is emotionally distraught to the point of not being able to think rationally.
> 
> There is such a defense as "_temporary insanity_", and it is a legitimate defense.



Let's be clear on this. If you were to decide how long this guy was behind bars - how much do you think he should be there?

In this case, I don't think "temporary insanity" cuts it. Or him being emotionally distraught. It may of very well been premeditated.



> Yes.



Hmm...that site I got the definition from kinda condricts that, but maybe I'm just misintrepting it.



> That and whether she should have been more straightforward about her past, apparently.
> 
> If she had been straightforward about her past and status as a transgeder, this wouldn't have happened.
> 
> In all likelihood, a relationship would have never been formed, but she'd still be alive.



I still stand that if the environment she lived in was really extreme, then I don't blame her at all. 

And even witholding the information, I don't put very much blame. People cheat on each other all the time, which I consider a worse offense, but they in no way deserve to die for it or are responsible for someone who can't control their actions.


----------



## Mider T (Jul 12, 2009)

The Incredible Gai Sensei said:


> If you really believe that why are you putting inverted commas around she?
> 
> I'm sick and tired of people referring to this poor girl as he/she or a dude. Shes a chick for fucksake.



You need to calm down.  Gender pronouns should be the least of your concerns.  Come back when you've chilled out.


----------



## Elias (Jul 12, 2009)

Awful story. This could have been easily avoided too.


----------



## Geek (Jul 12, 2009)

Mider T said:


> You need to calm down.  Gender pronouns should be the least of your concerns.  Come back when you've chilled out.



OK. 

Just putting it out there anyway. I Just find it irritating that people seem to think that post op transsexuals have an identity crisis. Its derogatory and hurtful. Think how anyone would feel if they were called a dude when they were in fact a chick, Or if you were called a chick when they are actually a dude.

On to the meat of the matter... Although the girls death was wholly unjustifiable and that people are allowed to have secrets, keeping the fact that they used to (biologically) be part of the other sex from your lover is definitely not one of them.


----------



## Nizuma Eiji (Jul 12, 2009)

Rod failed. That's all I have to add aside from murder was the wrong thing to do, but she should have told him before pursuing a relationship. Small secrets are fine, but being a transvestite is right there with having AIDS or an STD on the KINDA LIKE A BIG DEAL chart.


----------



## WT (Jul 12, 2009)

This is a form of deception. Although death is far too extreme of a punishment, that man/woman should have been thrown into prison for some time. Justice has to be served.


----------



## ragnara (Jul 12, 2009)

I would have done the same. Deceiving someone in something this important is the worst possible thing one could ever do.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 12, 2009)

ragnara said:


> I would have done the same. Deceiving someone in something this important is the worst possible thing one could ever do.



Really, the worst possible thing one could ever do?


Really?

Because it's a crime to have been a man
Because it's worse than "Hey' I used to be in jail for raping little girls"
Because you'dd only tap women with real tits
Because they touched wangs, so now he's gay forever?


----------



## Danny Lilithborne (Jul 12, 2009)

Danny Lilithborne said:


> What do you say to people who believe they _are_ women, who just were born in men's bodies by nature's cruel joke?
> 
> (Not that I disagree with you, I just thought that perspective should get a fair shake.)


Way to ignore me gaiz, but I'm not gonna just let this slide.


----------



## Aiolia (Jul 12, 2009)

Well, she could've told him. But again his reaction was way over the top


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> Then these people need to get over themselves.



see, again absolutely no understanding for the level of betrayal and pain a transgender causes by deceiving someone like that. 

1. he is fooled into into numerous counts of sex with someone who is BIOLOGICALLY A MALE. FACT. You may regard him as ""her"" because of an inverted penis, but he might have a different opinion. 

this is as the box already mentioned on the level of RAPE. 

Like tying down a woman and blindfolding her then having other men have sex with her while she thought it was only with you and trusted you. 

like drugging a woman, trick her into saying ""yes"" in her confused/near unconscious state and having sex with her. Then her not really remembering what happened later.  


both a huge breach of trust, getting someone to perform sexual acts against their will. 

and here you guys come ?n. I'll use your side's words on my similar scenarios.   

PinkNinja: It doesnt hurt anyone if she doesnt know.

You: These woman need to get over themselves. 


GJ, you sound like those who try to apologise rapists. 



2. He WASTED two years of his life trying to form a relationship. Marriage. with someone who is a man. What if ""she"" said yes, and he would find out the moment hes wondering why its so hard to have children?? 

All that time and effort for a relationship he would never want to pursue if he had known the truth. 

again...this is kinda a big deal....



RoguefanAM said:


> I think what the problem is that you seriously focus too much on the guys side.



murder is going to far. But i can understand his anger. 



RoguefanAM said:


> I in no way advocate transgenders to lie about this kind of thing. As I've said before, I think it's wrong, that if you want a 'real' relationship you should honest - even if it would potentially cause the relationship to end without even beginning.



you could have fooled me. I get to hear ""they just want to be accepted"" with a ""they are really females anyway"" 



RoguefanAM said:


> HOWEVER, I can also see from their POV. They're _scared_. They want someone to love. They don't want weird looks thrown their way. They like this person and they want a relationship with them.



So? i can understand their POV as well. Just as i can understand the murderers POV. 



RoguefanAM said:


> They're not horrible people at all. They didn't lie with the intention of hurting, even if they should of known better. That's the _difference_.



they are selfish and only cared for their own opinion (i am a woman now). 
This had led to deceit and basically rape. 



RoguefanAM said:


> If you can't understand that I don't know what to say to you. Maybe it's you who really needs to put themselves in someone else's shoes.



as i said before..i can understand both sides. You are looking at this with your ""its a female now"" opinion. Which is flawed seeing as that is far from the guys opinion.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 12, 2009)

Danny Lilithborne said:


> Way to ignore me gaiz, but I'm not gonna just let this slide.



do whatever makes you feel happy, but dont hurt others with it. deceiving someone like this is a terrible thing to do. 


what do you say to someone who has a (different) handicap or disorder/syndrome? 




Sesshomaru said:


> This is a form of deception. Although death is far too extreme of a punishment, that man/woman should have been thrown into prison for some time. Justice has to be served.



do you truly think its too extreme a punsihment considering the sharia laws and how muslims value honor and family name more then in the west?


----------



## Migooki (Jul 12, 2009)

"Furious man shoots dead girlfriend (...)"

So basically, he tried to kill someone that was already dead.


----------



## Danny Lilithborne (Jul 12, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> do whatever makes you feel happy, but dont hurt others with it. deceiving someone like this is a terrible thing to do.
> 
> 
> what do you say to someone who has a (different) handicap or disorder/syndrome?



I am guessing that this person genuinely identified as a woman, and only saw his/her body as a handicap to that true identity.

I take issue with a global society that supports this viewpoint, but what is this person supposed to do about it when his/her decision is confirmed by a surgery?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 12, 2009)

Danny Lilithborne said:


> What do you say to people who believe they _are_ women, who just were born in men's bodies by nature's cruel joke?
> 
> (Not that I disagree with you, I just thought that perspective should get a fair shake.)



Someone already did respond, but I say they are a man, regardless of whether they like it or not and nothing can truly change that (at this present time).


----------



## Bitch (Jul 12, 2009)

What a bigot.

I bet he was scared of being called a homosexual or something.  His girlfriend may have been a man once, but on the inside, she is (was, now) truly a woman.  Its sickening how he chose to kill her over something so insignificant.

I bet if she didn't tell him the relationship would have been just fine.


----------



## Xion (Jul 12, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> She 'fooled' the man for over two years. Even more obvious tells like the    male voice box can be...fixed. It's really not that easy, I don't think.



Well it must have been a very convincing transformation so to speak, but honestly to be that convincing the person either had to be super naive or the other individual was extremely, extremely good at hiding it. SRS and hormones are not that great as to induce miracles for these people, so other factors must have been at work.


----------



## Hellrasinbrasin (Jul 12, 2009)

Nothing Stands between a Man and his Beer, Food, Football or Women unless the Women turns out to be a guy in which case you pop a cap in its ass


----------



## Peter (Jul 12, 2009)

Well, the man overreacted, but still, his girlfriend should have told him she was a transsexual.


----------



## Mintaka (Jul 12, 2009)

> This is a form of deception. Although death is far too extreme of a punishment, that man/woman should have been thrown into prison for some time. Justice has to be served.


Thrown in prison!?

What in the hell is wrong with you?  Yeah she lied and thats bullshit but being thrown in goddamn prison for being who you are!?


----------



## RoguefanAM (Jul 12, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> see, again absolutely no understanding for the level of betrayal and pain a transgender causes by deceiving someone like that.
> 
> 1. he is fooled into into numerous counts of sex with someone who is BIOLOGICALLY A MALE. FACT. You may regard him as ""her"" because of an inverted penis, but he might have a different opinion.
> 
> ...



You're actually comparing this woman....to a rapist???? 

First of all no. Just no. Any sex acts between the two were consensual. They both had fun. The woman wasn't trying to get anyone hurt. As the rapists were. And it wasn't forced. 

A better example is finding out you had sex with a girl who was supremely ugly beforehand, and was 90% fake. And infertile. In a sense, they 'lied' to you too.

The two examples you bring up are completely ridiculous. 



> 2. He WASTED two years of his life trying to form a relationship. Marriage. with someone who is a man. What if ""she"" said yes, and he would find out the moment hes wondering why its so hard to have children??
> 
> All that time and effort for a relationship he would never want to pursue if he had known the truth.
> 
> again...this is kinda a big deal....



Wasted? It's not waste of someone's life to love someone. And she loved him too. I doubt she didn't. Not if she spent two years of HER life with him. 

Relationships aren't a competition zubuza. They're about having fun with the person you're with. How can that time of been wasted? Just because she can't give him kids? How insulting to infertile people.

And yes, you're right. If he'd of known he probably wouldn't of wanted a relationship with her. But that's just prejudice. As the two years shown, she really not much different from any other woman, and besides, gave him everything else in that relationship she could. Besides marriage - which is probably not possible if the country still recognized as male.

Yes, she should of told him. Ideally, she would've be able to - _without_ fearing bodily harm. But no, this isn't that type of environment. So, no, I don't blame her very much. Not when she really didn't cause much damage at all. Emotional betrayal perhaps, but not even then if you consider perhaps she just did it to protect herself. Selfish of her, but it doesn't make her scum. Hardly.



> murder is going to far. But i can understand his anger.



So can I, but that anger in no way excuses his actions. It's an overreaction. To an extreme degree. 



> you could have fooled me. I get to hear ""they just want to be accepted"" with a ""they are really females anyway""



 I don't advocate it, but I'm not gonna put her on a cross because of what she did. It's like cheating, bad but understandable. I just think that ideally, the man wouldn't of even cared. Since IMO gender really doesn't matter much. The relationship itself just proves that. 



> So? i can understand their POV as well. Just as i can understand the murderers POV.



It doesn't seem like to me. 



> they are selfish and only cared for their own opinion (i am a woman now).
> This had led to deceit and basically rape.



Again with the rape. It's not rape. Just semi-false advertisement. 

The man got what she thought of herself. A woman. To me the motivations are important. 



> as i said before..i can understand both sides. You are looking at this with your ""its a female now"" opinion. Which is flawed seeing as that is far from the guys opinion.



And I think _your_ opinion is flawed. Why you are bringing this up? It's obvious we all have different opinions.


----------



## Kagemizu (Jul 12, 2009)

He is still a failure.


----------



## ragnara (Jul 12, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> Because it's a crime to have been a man


"She" deceived him about the most basic foundation of their relationship. There wouldn't even be a problem if she had told him that she's a guy from the beginning.


> Because it's worse than "Hey' I used to be in jail for raping little girls"


Yes it is, at the very least as far as their relationship goes.


> Because you'dd only tap women with real tits


I only tap women who are actually women, not men pretending to be women.


> Because they touched wangs, so now he's gay forever?


It's not about being gay or not. The transsexual guy is in no shape or form the person he pretended to be. There can't be a worse way to go into a relationship. If it didn't come out soon, she could have robbed the guy off his possibility to have children as well.


----------



## WT (Jul 12, 2009)

Tokoyami said:


> Thrown in prison!?
> 
> What in the hell is wrong with you?  Yeah she lied and thats bullshit but being thrown in goddamn prison for being who you are!?



Yeah, you heard me correctly. There's nothing wrong with me.


----------



## armorknight (Jul 12, 2009)

The guy's anger is completely justified and understandable, but resorting to violence and murder was completely wrong.

Transgenders really need to stop using deceit just to make it easier to get into relationships. Deceiving someone about such a fundamental part of human relationships is a despicable act and is completely unfair to those who are deceived. The emotional damage from being deceived in such a way is enormous. Also, it puts transgenders in really bad positions and can lead to really bad shit happening to them like in this case. They made the choice to get the surgery, so they should accept the consequences and look for people who are willing to accept them from the get go.


----------



## R00t_Decision (Jul 12, 2009)

armorknight said:


> The guy's anger is completely justified and understandable, but resorting to violence and murder was completely wrong.
> 
> Transgenders really need to stop using deceit just to make it easier to get into relationships. Deceiving someone about such a fundamental part of human relationships is a despicable act and is completely unfair to those who are deceived. The emotional damage from being deceived in such a way is enormous. Also, it puts transgenders in really bad positions and can lead to really bad shit happening to them like in this case. They made the choice to get the surgery, so they should accept the consequences and look for people who are willing to accept them from the get go.


I agree, very nice post. This type of action is equivalent to how a women would feel if she was raped.  It's the exact same feeling, except the male species is capable of doing more harm to their abuser.


----------



## Trism (Jul 12, 2009)

Sesshomaru said:


> This is a form of deception. Although death is far too extreme of a punishment, that man/woman should have been thrown into prison for some time. *Justice has to be served*.



Indeed it does, against the man who murdered her.



ragnara said:


> I would have done the same. Deceiving someone in something this important is the worst possible thing one could ever do.



You would have done the same thing and ended up right where the boyfriend is now. And there are many worse crimes than this.

It amazes me that people think they have the right to justify murder.


----------



## ragnara (Jul 12, 2009)

Mozenrath said:


> Indeed it does, against the man who murdered her.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The emotional trauma I would get from this is through the roof. I wouldn't even care afterwards if I was raped by a guy, but this kind of continuous deception from from a supposed loved one plays in a different league. There is no punishment in our society that could ever make up for something this horrible.

Actually it looks like the transsexual rapist guy won't even get punished at all.
(if he lived of course)


----------



## Gunners (Jul 12, 2009)

*Spoiler*: __ 





> If you think this is me being emotional, you really have no idea. Rather than speculate about my motives for calling you out, let's discuss why I called you out. You say you have no sympathy because she 'robbed a guy of his choice'. Well, wait a minute, isn't robbing someone of their life a little more serious than that?


I give you an A on focusing on the part of the post that justifies your little rant most. I made it pretty clear that I also lacked sympathy for her because this situation could have easily been avoided by her being honest. 

To me it doesn't matter whether death was an extreme consequence to her actions, it's the same way I don't feel sympathy for people stupid enough to walk into a Lions den. 



> This is the problem here. You're measuring her crime against his and finding her to be the primary offender. You and others in this thread did this without even blinking, without having a shred of understanding for the experiences of transgendered women who, it should be pointed out, face the fact that up to 1 in 12 transgender women will be murdered. Think about that for a second. Then think about why these women aren't always forthcoming with men, because it doesn't seem to matter how long you've known a man - murder seems to be an inherent risk by simply existing.


I don't see how you get the impression that I see her as the primary offender, he is either guilty of murder or manslaughter. She is the middle ground between murder and manslaughter, the factor that can potentially change what he is convicted of. 

Second of all, I don't care how difficult her life is, difficulties in life doesn't strip you off responsibility. If you're going to become sexually involved with someone, that's the information you have a responsibility to disclose and a risk you have to take. 



> Look at the girl who was killed last April by a man she'd only known for three days before he found out she was transgendered. Look at the serial killers recently caught who targeted solely transexual sex workers, whose crimes went unreported because while sometimes the media cares about Jack-the-Ripper style killings, no one has sympathy for transsexual prostitutes. There is a huge amount of violence and prejudice against these women, and I do not blame them for a second for keeping quiet about their past if they can. Hell, if she'd been able to keep her secret, she'd still be alive.
> 
> Sorry if I think her life was more important than his peace of mind.


If she wants to keep her secret she shouldn't get sexually involved with him. If someone has an STD do you think they should keep it secret because they may be scorned by society? 

Obviously they don't need to tell the world about it, but the moment they become intimate with an individual they should disclose that to them. If they feel that they would overreact or tell the world then it isn't right to pursue a relationship with them as you would be intentionally deceiving them.



> That's the problem. You said you have understanding for his reaction, which means you think his reaction was expected and acceptable on some level because he was 'provoked'. You don't have to think something is right to sympathise with it, and in that post you were more willing to show sympathy for a murderer than you were willing to give his victim. If you're wondering why that left a sour taste in my mouth, you should reread your own words. Nothing you have said since has reassured me that I was mistaken.


I obviously don't think his actions are acceptable. There is a reason why provocation is not a complete defence to murder and still gets you sent to prison for manslaughter. I understand the mans anger but I think he should have shown some self control. I don't really care much about reassuring you. 

I don't really care much for the words of people who think people should accept individuals way of life but at the same time don't respect other people's views on life. I think those people are hypocrites.



> In other words, he killed her because she was transgendered. What's so difficult to understand about that? If she hadn't been trans, he wouldn't have killed her, so this is just an attempt to find excuses for him.


Are you trying to be annoying or hard ears? He killed her because he felt like he was tricked into sleeping with a man.

What you're saying suggests he saw a transgender on the streets and murdered them. I doubt he would have killed the woman if he had not been sexually involved with her.



> Feeding dairy products to a vegan would be a fairly overt and intentionally malicious act. That you're equating this to what she did is why I think you don't understand transgendered people at all. They aren't running around deceiving people for giggles.


Some people may simply want them to try their ''dish'' out so to speak. It doesn't have to be malicious they may simply want to share their food with the world so to speak. That would not simply be for giggles. 

Deception is deception in any case. It doesn't matter what your motives are, if it's something you know the person may have strong feelings about, you should fully inform them or not involve them at all. 



> Crossdressing and getting surgery is not an intent to mislead. This woman wasn't in a relationship for two years with this guy because she was trying to deceive him, and what you don't seem to realise that as far as she's concerned, she's a woman, and she's just being herself.


It doesn't matter how she feels. This boils down to having respect for other people's view points on life. Which neither you nor she has. 



> Maybe she should have told as soon as she understood he was interested in a relationship that she was transgendered. In an ideal world, he either wouldn't care or would just walk away. In this world, there's every chance she might have had her life ended 2 years ago instead.


If she didn't feel she could tell him because he would react badly to it walk away. If that view point comes across in your head that they may react badly, then you're actually deceiving the individual. That is actually worse than thinking the person would not care.



> Why? You absolutely refused to offer sympathy to a murder victim and have since been making mealy mouthed excuses for her killer right along the lines of transpanic defence rhetoric, a variation of the gay panic defence, and both universally understood to be the acceptance of bigotry and homophobia as reasonable motives for murder. Yes, it's more acceptable to disregard the rights and humanity of the trans community than any other minority, but it really shouldn't be. And that should go without saying.



First of all, sympathy isn't a right. You'd be correct in saying ''the rights of the trans community have been disgarded''if I were to say he should not go to prison for his actions.

Second, me not having sympathy for her has nothing to do with her being a transexual. I'd funnily enough feel the sameway if a born man slept with a woman under the pretense that he was a transexual ( Though the situation would be odd). It's to do with the lack of respect for what people value in life, the deception and the lack of forethough. 



> Easy. The worst she did to him was a keep an intensely personal secret and "cheat him of his choice to sleep with an XX woman for two years". The worst he did to her was put a bullet in her brain and cheat her of the rest of her life, and all her future choices, and all her future experiences, as well as cheat her family of a daughter and sister, and her friends of of a friend.



Wrong, this is a subjective matter whether you like it or not. The worst she may have done to him is deceive him into commiting homosexual acts which he may strong be against. The way how you feel about a situation is not the way others feel about it.



> That her life's value apparently amounted to so little that his crime (murder) is actually being treated as a lesser and more 'understandable' crime than hers (lying to him), is why you've treated her as subhuman.


Me not caring about her death does not equal me saying her life is worthless. Just the same me understanding why he would lose his temper does not equal me saying her life is worthless. 

Trying somebody with manslaughter isn't devaluing the life of a victim, it's called taking into account the situation that led to the event. To devalue her life I would have to say ''He should be convicted of a lower crime because she is a transexual'', I have not said that, I haven't even stated what I think he should be tried of, just that it is either murder or manslaughter. 

Me not caring about her death does not equal me devaluing her life either. I'm not saying she should have or deserved to die, I'm saying that because she could have avoided this situation by being honest or not dating someone who would likely flip the way he did my sympathy for her has gone.


----------



## Yume-chan (Jul 12, 2009)

That's disgusting.  I can't believe there are people defending this murderer.  Not telling one's partner something of this magnitude does show a lack of trust (which was clearly justified in this case) because having had a sex change is something that would have a large influence on someone's life and it's generally expected that people share such things with their partners, but the appropriate reaction to that is to try to work out the trust issues in the relationship.  It's the same as if someone in a relationship didn't tell their partner about having been abused by a relative or some other childhood trauma.  Sympathy, and perhaps admiration for having come through emotionally intact, is more in line than anger.  So what if his homophobic pride was insulted?  I don't feel bad for him at all.


----------



## FrostXian (Jul 12, 2009)

Yume-chan said:


> That's disgusting.  I can't believe there are people defending this murderer.


Lots of internet inhibitants have insecurities about their sexual identity.


----------



## Amaretti (Jul 12, 2009)

Recca said:


> I give you an A on focusing on the part of the post that justifies your little rant most. I made it pretty clear that I also lacked sympathy for her because this situation could have easily been avoided by her being honest.



The hypocrisy in a nutshell. It could easily have been avoided if her boyfriend hadn't been a hysterical transphobe who decided to kill her when he found out she was trans. That this kind of murderous hatred is treated as normal or inevitable enough to place the blame of the death on the victim is the problem you're missing here.

So by all means, focus on the faults of the victim, not of the transmisogyny of the man who killed her - the ONLY one responsible for her death. And you really do think you're different from the people who like to blame the gays, or the jews or the women when they're raped, murdered, and beaten, don't you? 



> The emotional trauma I would get from this is through the roof. I wouldn't even care afterwards if I was raped by a guy, but this kind of continuous deception from from a supposed loved one plays in a different league. There is no punishment in our society that could ever make up for something this horrible.
> 
> Actually it looks like the transsexual rapist guy won't even get punished at all.



She's dead, she's not a rapist (thanks for spitting on real rape victims with those comments), and had she survived, no, she wouldn't have deserved punishment for sleeping with a transphobic murderer. What the fuck is wrong with you?


----------



## Mintaka (Jul 12, 2009)

Sesshomaru said:


> Yeah, you heard me correctly. There's nothing wrong with me.


O'rly!?

You think it's perfectly fine for somone who cannot help feeling the way they are and who made a change to themselves by there own volition to be thrown in fucking PRISON for it!?

Sickening little bigot we've moved past such horribly outdated and barbaric ideas.  ((At least I'd hope we have.))  Grrrr....I hate having to bite my tongue around here.......

((By the way I already stated that lying to him was wrong damnit.))


----------



## Gunners (Jul 12, 2009)

> The hypocrisy in a nutshell. It could easily have been avoided if her boyfriend hadn't been a hysterical transphobe who decided to kill her when he found out she was trans. That this kind of murderous hatred is treated as normal or inevitable enough to place the blame of the death on the victim is the problem you're missing here.


Yes it could have been avoided if he showed self control, did I dispute that? It doesn't change the fact that the situation could have been avoided if she told the truth from the beginning.



> So by all means, focus on the faults of the victim, not of the transmisogyny of the man who killed her - the ONLY one responsible for her death. And you really do think you're different from the people who like to blame the gays, or the jews or the women when they're raped, murdered, and beaten, don't you?


Obviously I'm focusing on both of their faults. Otherwise I would think a faultless person should go to prison.

Yes I do think I'm different from those people.


----------



## Ssj3_Goku (Jul 12, 2009)

Both are going to hell now, God does not accept those kind of people (According to some religions).


Also the interesting thing here is the fact that some people are trying to justify the murder (though of course I do not reply). Then other  people here are trying to say transgenders are part of the norm and some people are trying to push that those views are right and the other should acccept that. I really do not know anymore but my mom always said telling the truth is a good thing. I mean thats what this case really breaks down to in the end.

Can anyone tell me if there are any  sociological studies on people who "feel" they are female (or really gays / trannys ,etc) . I want to know more about this.


----------



## armorknight (Jul 12, 2009)

Ssj3_Goku said:


> This convo is getting crazy.
> 
> Both are going to hell now, God does not accept those kind of people (According to some religions).
> 
> ...



Yeah there are some extreme viewpoints in this thread. You have people who think that the murder was justified, which it clearly wasn't. Then there are those who think that it's okay for transgenders to deceive other people into having relationships, which is also extremely wrong.


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> Except it wasn't a trick. Not to her. She didn't want anything from the man except a relationship.
> 
> You're just too hung up on gender and what defines a man or woman. Or you really, really care about having kids the old fashioned way.
> 
> I wouldn't be too upset at getting into a relationship with a woman who I thought was a man. It's just not that important to me.



sickos like you make me sick, that is the filthest thing i have ever sen posted on this forum

first off it wasent her it was a fucking man.

if he proposed he must have cared about having kids the normal fucking way, you know sperm egg all that jazz

and the last line is because you must not know what the fuck you are.

its not a gay or straight issue its a nasty tricked into rape one.


sicko


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Mozenrath said:


> No, it was not rape. Your definition is clearly different from the law's.
> 
> And you won't justify rape, but you'll justify murder? Really now?
> Like I said, hypocrisy.



rape is incosesual sex. he did not give HIM permission to have sex with, he gave permission to HER. 

its not murder if you defend your self from a freaking phyco who pretended to be a man and slept with you


----------



## Tim (Jul 13, 2009)

If heshe had been honestly like you are supposed to be, this could have been avoided. /moralofthestory

Still, guy definitely overreacted. Obviously.


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

> RoguefanAM said:
> 
> 
> > You're actually comparing this *woman*....to a rapist????
> ...


----------



## R00t_Decision (Jul 13, 2009)

RoguefanAM,

All this arguing you are doing with everyone and then you drop this bombshell.

Woweee wow.  :amazed


----------



## Zabuza (Jul 13, 2009)

If the guy/girl told me that only after I started a serious relationship and If I had a gun with me, my reaction would probably be the same.

Lying about your true gender and fooling with other people feelings is the most shameful act.


----------



## ragnara (Jul 13, 2009)

Amaretti said:


> She's dead, she's not a rapist (thanks for spitting on real rape victims with those comments), and had she survived, no, she wouldn't have deserved punishment for sleeping with a transphobic murderer. What the fuck is wrong with you?



I know "she" is dead, that's what I wrote in my post as well. And yes, I consider the transsexual guy a rapist. He repeatedly tricked the other guy into thinking he was a woman to get sex. 

The fact that the transgender guy raped the other guy again and again (both sexually and emotionally) is enough for me to see him as a criminal. Not to mention he commited fraud as well.

Of course murder isn't the right solution, but I can see why the guy saw no other way to end this. I doubt the trasgender guy would have gotten any real punishment besides the gruesome sexual crimes he commited on the guy.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 13, 2009)

You know the_box I could be wrong but I reckon burning in hell as a punishment for not siding with you is a bit over the top.



Oh and this rape argument is fucking ridiculous, rape is forcing someone to have sex with you, the man was never forced. And as for fraud? Even if you consider this woman to be a man fact is she didn't so the most you could claim she commited was unintentional fraud.


----------



## WT (Jul 13, 2009)

Tokoyami said:


> O'rly!?
> 
> You think it's perfectly fine for somone who cannot help feeling the way they are and who made a change to themselves by there own volition to be thrown in fucking PRISON for it!?
> 
> ...



Go read my first post again. 

Actually, there was no point for you to even post. I stated that because *he/she* *deceived the person*, they should be put into prison for a while. Not because they're a tranny of some sort.


----------



## ragnara (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> Oh and this rape argument is fucking ridiculous, rape is forcing someone to have sex with you, the man was never forced. And as for fraud? Even if you consider this woman to be a man fact is she didn't so the most you could claim she commited was unintentional fraud.



Just because the man didn't know what was done to him doesn't mean it never happened. From his reaction one can clearly see that he didn't want to have sex with a guy, much less one that tricked him into sex.

If you have sex with your one egg twin's wife while pretending to be your twin and she discovers it later on, it wouldn't be rape as well?

I have nothing against transsexuals, it's the deceiving him in such a horrible way that I can't stand.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 13, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> You're actually comparing this woman....to a rapist????
> 
> First of all no. Just no. Any sex acts between the two were consensual. They both had fun. The woman wasn't trying to get anyone hurt. As the rapists were. And it wasn't forced.



my comparison is spot on. 

he did NOT CONSENT TO SEX WITH A GUY. 

this is no different to my blindfold scenario. Where the woman consented to having sex with her partner, but get tricked in sex with several other guys. 

thats right, tricked in sex she does not want to have. SAME as here. 
how do you think they would call that?? rape maybe?? 

and you call it ridiculous...try to list the differences then, i only see similarities in the points that matter. 



RoguefanAM said:


> A better example is finding out you had sex with a girl who was supremely ugly beforehand, and was 90% fake. And infertile. In a sense, they 'lied' to you too.



I would have sex with a 90% fake girl, allthough get pissed about her lying about things, especially inferitlity with marriage plans. 

I would not have sex with a transgender, cause its biologically a guy. 

same as this guy, he would never CONSENT to the latter. so your comparison is OFF....

he gets tricked into a form of sex he does not consent with.....  



RoguefanAM said:


> Wasted? It's not waste of someone's life to love someone. And she loved him too. I doubt she didn't. Not if she spent two years of HER life with him.
> 
> Relationships aren't a competition zubuza. They're about having fun with the person you're with. How can that time of been wasted? Just because she can't give him kids? How insulting to infertile people.



you answer it yourself next sentence. and yeah. someone who really wants children meeting someone lying about infertility does have his needs trampled over and time and effort wasted. 



RoguefanAM said:


> And yes, you're right. If he'd of known he probably wouldn't of wanted a relationship with her.



He seeks a long lasting relationship. A future with ""her"". He spends a lot of effort and time doing that. This is all wasted since there IS no future for them. 

the good times they had together are sullied by the deceit and rape. 

2 years building a romantic relationship with a guy. I view this as an utter waste of effort and time. And so will the other guy. 

Again. YOUR opinion doesnt matter to how HE thinks. 



RoguefanAM said:


> But that's just prejudice. As the two years shown, she really not much different from any other woman, and besides, gave him everything else in that relationship she could. Besides marriage - which is probably not possible if the country still recognized as male.



your opinion doesnt matter to how he thinks and feels. 

and its not prejudice. It is a matter on how hung up you are on the ""biologically a male"" part. 



RoguefanAM said:


> Yes, she should of told him. Ideally, she would've be able to - _without_ fearing bodily harm. But no, this isn't that type of environment. So, no, I don't blame her very much.



she could when he showed serious interest in her. 



RoguefanAM said:


> Not when she really didn't cause much damage at all. Emotional betrayal perhaps, but not even then if you consider perhaps she just did it to protect herself. Selfish of her, but it doesn't make her scum. Hardly.



a selfish person committing what is basically a form of rape. 



RoguefanAM said:


> So can I, but that anger in no way excuses his actions. It's an overreaction. To an extreme degree.



I agree. it wasnt even in the heat of the moment. He planned the murder and the way to do it. 

still...deceiving someone like that will provoke extreme anger. I dont know if i would not start throwing my fists around in such a case. Never has my self-control been tested to that extent. 



RoguefanAM said:


> I don't advocate it, but I'm not gonna put her on a cross because of what she did. It's like cheating, bad but understandable.



you excuse her almost completely..its sickening. 



RoguefanAM said:


> I just think that ideally, the man wouldn't of even cared. Since IMO gender really doesn't matter much. The relationship itself just proves that.



again...you act as if your opinion is the only one that really matters. 

its not, its the partners opinion that matters. It influences the amount of anger generated and trust breached. 

The transgender could know such things or expect them to an agree. ""she"" starts a relationship with a prejudiced guy. Fools a prejudiced guy. And you blame the guy for his prejudice?? 



RoguefanAM said:


> It doesn't seem like to me.



well now you know. Why should i discuss this alot seeing how the guy will get 2nd degree murder which is just fine with me? 



RoguefanAM said:


> Again with the rape. It's not rape. Just semi-false advertisement.



Honey...all those nights with the blindfolds...you didnt have sex with me, you were working your way through my whole basketball team. 

""semi false advertisement"" 



RoguefanAM said:


> The man got what she thought of herself. A woman. To me the motivations are important.



the man did not consent to sex with a guy..which was what he got. Atleast according to his views. 



really try to see things to the POV of guys like me. 

I was tricked in to having sex with a guy. something i would NEVER consent to. This multiple times over 2 years. would i feel violated? yeah. Apart from the huge breach of trust. 

I was deceived into actively working on building a relationship with what i thought a woman. with the aim of making a lasting future with her. 
Now it turns out that its a guy, so i have been basically wasting 2 years  courting and sleeping with a guy. There never was a future for us. 




RoguefanAM said:


> And I think _your_ opinion is flawed. Why you are bringing this up? It's obvious we all have different opinions.



because you only look at this from your sides POV.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> Oh and this rape argument is fucking ridiculous, rape is forcing someone to have sex with you, the man was never forced.



Wrong...its the CONSENT that matters. 

he did NEVER consent to sex with a GUY...which was what he was TRICKED in getting. 


as I said before this is no different then blindfolding your girlfriend and letting all your friends have a go over the course of 2 years, while she is tricked into thinking it is with you. 


Trick her into sex she did not consent to.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 13, 2009)

he agreed to have sex with a person not with a gender


----------



## Gunners (Jul 13, 2009)

> Oh and this rape argument is fucking ridiculous, rape is forcing someone to have sex with you, the man was never forced. And as for fraud? Even if you consider this woman to be a man fact is she didn't so the most you could claim she commited was unintentional fraud.


Actually rape is having sex where the other person is not consenting. You can actually argue that the man did not give informed consent as he did not know all of the details.

Actually you cannot argue that, it's clear that he didn't give informed consent.


----------



## ragnara (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> he agreed to have sex with a person not with a gender



The transsexual is not the person he said he was, neither genetically nor on an organic basis. His identity is completely different from what he pretended to be.

All that speaks for him is that he is legally considered a female (I think), but this has no basis whatsoever, other than not being against the law. 

This is also the reason why the man had little hope of getting any justice if he didn't do something by himself.


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> You know the_box I could be wrong but I reckon burning in hell as a punishment for not siding with you is a bit over the top.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and this rape argument is fucking ridiculous, rape is forcing someone to have sex with you, the man was never forced. And as for fraud? Even if you consider this woman to be a man fact is she didn't so the most you could claim she commited was *unintentional fraud.*



a  

so if you steal someone and say it was some one eles it was unintentional theft 

man your sick you seriously got problems you wil find another neg when i get my negging powers back


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> he agreed to have sex with a person not with a gender



your so ill.


he agreed to have sex with a woman not a man therefor its rape


----------



## Dark Saint (Jul 13, 2009)

He should have gotten a sex change too, then they could have been lesbians.


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Dark Saint said:


> He should have gotten a sex change too, then they could have been lesbians.



thats the logic of rob indeed


----------



## Worm Juice (Jul 13, 2009)

SO one minute he loves her next he kills her  ....


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

yeah he lover "her" but it wasent a HER so he killed HIM


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 13, 2009)

ragnara said:


> The transsexual is not the person he said he was, neither genetically nor on an organic basis. His identity is completely different from what he pretended to be.



Your identity isn't a fucking chromosome for christ sake.



> so if you steal someone and say it was some one eles it was unintentional theft
> 
> man your sick you seriously got problems you wil find another neg when i get my negging powers back



I'm sure you made a great point somewhere in there, pity your english is so fucked up that it's impossible to make out.


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

> Rob` said:
> 
> 
> > Your identity isn't a fucking chromosome for christ sake.
> ...


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 13, 2009)

the box said:


> the human body fucking disagrees



You've a fucked up idea of what an identity is.



> i would like to properly respond but you prolly think animals and humans is ok and capatable as long as there breathing life forums in other words im saying you need to stop complaining



Oh yes I do love sex with kittens...


----------



## Sephiroth (Jul 13, 2009)

Poor guy, he just wanted to attract other men. 

He didn't do a good job keeping it secret, nor did he pick a good person to date. 

He shouldn't of tricked him like that, as it seemed to make the guy kill him over a broken heart.


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

by trickery and rape yeah that worked out just fine


----------



## Saufsoldat (Jul 13, 2009)

Box, I think you're a closet homosexual.


----------



## ragnara (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> Your identity isn't a fucking chromosome for christ sake.


What do you say an identity is? A soul?


----------



## Nashima (Jul 13, 2009)

She should have had the balls to tell him from the get go .




...


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Saufsoldat said:


> Box, I think you're a closet homosexual.



im a box i have no such sexual ambition this also has nothing to do with the thread


----------



## Starrk (Jul 13, 2009)

I wonder how you can fail to slit your wrist properly?


----------



## Nashima (Jul 13, 2009)

Stark said:


> I wonder how you can fail to slit your wrist properly?



I'm still wondering why the guy did blow his head off with the gun he killed the other guy with if he wanted to commit suicide after.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 13, 2009)

ragnara said:


> What do you say an identity is? A soul?



personality might be a start...as a matter of fact why the fuck are we talking about idenity, he agreed to have sex with her a person not with a female...who you are as a person isn't the same thing as identity

and failing to slit your wrists properly is very simple, you're an emo you cut across the wrist if you're serious you cut down


----------



## Lucaniel (Jul 13, 2009)

People seem to be getting a lot of mileage over what I thought was a fairly unremarkable thread 

Aside from the "IT'S A TRAP" part.


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> *personality* might be a start...
> 
> and failing to slit your wrists properly is very simple, you're an emo you cut across the wrist if you're serious you cut down



 that hasent got anything to do with you being a man or a woman


----------



## ragnara (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> personality might be a start...as a matter of fact why the fuck are we talking about idenity, he agreed to have sex with her a person not with a female...who you are as a person isn't the same thing as identity



Your gender is an important part of yourself. It wouldn't even be an issue if the transgender guy had told the other guy the truth from the start. He knew the man thought he was a female and yet he continued to deceive him. It is clear that he wouldn't have agreed to the sex if the transgender guy hadn't lied to him.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 13, 2009)

ragnara said:


> Your gender is an important part of yourself. It wouldn't even be an issue if the transgender guy had told the other guy the truth from the start. He knew the man thought he was a female and yet he continued to deceive him. It is clear that he wouldn't have agreed to the sex if the transgender guy hadn't lied to him.



apart from even when she was a he she didn't take being a man very seriously so it never really affected her as a person, and you're acting like her being a man was a confirmed fact. you know there's a reason it's called a sex change right?


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> apart from even when she was a he she didn't take being a man very seriously so it never really affected her as a person, and you're acting like her being a man was a confirmed fact. you know there's a reason it's called a sex change right?



bull shit, the chromosome determines sex. not your genitals, get it right and while your at it


----------



## Elim Rawne (Jul 13, 2009)

Saufsoldat said:


> Box, I think you're a closet homosexual.



He did have sex with a tranny


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 13, 2009)

the box said:


> bull shit, the chromosome determines sex. not your genitals, get it right and while your at it



4 things determine your sex

genetics - male
gonads - neither 
hormones - female
then the primary and secondary sex charateristics which were mostly changed to be female

so yes he is a fucking she like it or not


----------



## ragnara (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> apart from even when she was a he she didn't take being a man very seriously so it never really affected her as a person, and you're acting like her being a man was a confirmed fact. you know there's a reason it's called a sex change right?



It might not be important to "her", but as we have seen it did matter a lot to him. Unfortunately, today's sex changes do nothing else than mutilating your genitalia and giving you hormones. 

With the science of today, we cannot really change a person's sex. This will undoubtedly change in the future, but up until then a sex change remains a very superficial change of a person's looks. Inside he remains a man in everything but name.



Rob` said:


> 4 things determine your sex
> 
> genetics - male
> gonads - neither
> ...


They only made him look more female, they didn't really change any characteristics into female. Even the new hormones have to be supplied from the outside. He doesn't even get real female organs, let alone chromosomes.


----------



## CrazyMoronX (Jul 13, 2009)

He'll try to commit suicide again. Mark my words.

Something like that would really screw a lot of people up, mentally. The "woman" you were in love with turns out to be a man? Talk about a mind-fuck.


----------



## Yume-chan (Jul 13, 2009)

There have been cases in the past (at least in America, I don't know about other countries) in which white men became involved in sexual relationships with women who looked white, but were actually part black.  When they discovered that their girlfriends had black relatives, the white men would murder them.  So what do you think?  Was it understandable?  Did the mixed race women rape the white men?  Race is about as much as important a part of identity as gender, right?


----------



## Jin-E (Jul 13, 2009)

Sometimes.....being blissfuly ignorant about certain things is better than having uncomfortable truths revealed


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 13, 2009)

CrazyMoronX said:


> He'll try to commit suicide again. Mark my words.
> 
> Something like that would really screw a lot of people up, mentally. The "woman" you were in love with turns out to be a man? Talk about a mind-fuck.



No the woman you were suposedly in love with used to have beard and a penis.



Oh my God people, as if he was never be the same because he was love with tranny.

He should try to kill himself again, only this time, he should do it rite.


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> 4 things determine your sex
> 
> genetics - male
> gonads - neither
> ...



horse shit you made that up


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> No the woman you were suposedly in love with used to have beard and a penis.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



no he wont ever bee the same because he was gfetting molested by a full grown man for 2 years


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 13, 2009)

christ almighty you could at least check wikipedia before calling me out

A Soul's Salvation


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Yume-chan said:


> There have been cases in the past (at least in America, I don't know about other countries) in which white men became involved in sexual relationships with women who looked white, but were actually part black.  When they discovered that their girlfriends had black relatives, the white men would murder them.  So what do you think?  Was it understandable?  Did the mixed race women rape the white men?  Race is about as much as important a part of identity as gender, right?



this isnt race  this is gay or not gay.

and she ticked him into the former aka GAY


----------



## the box (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> christ almighty you could at least check wikipedia before calling me out
> 
> A Soul's Salvation



funny says here that the person is still the same gender regardless of how much physical alteration. heres a hint read your own shit


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 13, 2009)

the box said:


> funny says here that the person is still the same gender regardless of how much physical alteration. heres a hint read your own shit



"Many people also see "sex change" as factually inaccurate."

That's an opinion people hold


----------



## Inuhanyou (Jul 13, 2009)

So a guy shoots his boyfriend cause of cheating  and having a sex change

Lol@Intolerance, although that CAN cause severe mental instability finding out about something like that..so i can understand him being angry, but injuring and killing? There's no excuse for going that far.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> 4 things determine your sex
> 
> genetics - male
> gonads - neither
> ...



He's still a guy. Just one pumped full of hormones and a mutilated penis.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 13, 2009)

the box said:


> no he wont ever bee the same because he was gfetting molested by a full grown man for 2 years



just because she used to have a penis dosen't mean he was molested.


----------



## Sephiroth (Jul 13, 2009)

Let this be lesson to all, if your in a disguise, at least tell the person what you are, before they have sex with you.


----------



## E (Jul 13, 2009)

oh shit


----------



## Ceria (Jul 13, 2009)

Big Boss said:


> What is the solution?



drunk enough to kill the brain cells containing this knowledge


----------



## dummy plug (Jul 13, 2009)

damn, if i got duped like that i would be really mad but not to the point of killing! third russian news in a day!


----------



## Havoc (Jul 13, 2009)

He should have gave 'her' aids.


----------



## E (Jul 13, 2009)

Havoc said:


> He should have gave 'her' aids.



'it' probably already beat him to the punch


----------



## Ephemere (Jul 13, 2009)

I dont quite understand how he thought that changed who she was. If he was dating her before he knew it, what would change regardless anyway....depressing


----------



## Chu-kun♥ (Jul 13, 2009)

That's a whole new level of transphobia aggression issues.

Poor girl..
Why'd he shoot her?


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 13, 2009)

Rob` said:


> he agreed to have sex with a person not with a gender



he did not consent to gay sex which what he was tricked into getting. 


form of sex matters. One can consent to having regular sex, this does not give me free reign to throw my SM rape fantasies on the woman. 



this case is no different from my blindfolded women gets tricked into sleeping with the football team scenario. 

same trust broken, while at the same time she gets tricked into sex she does not consent to. 



its on the level of rape.


----------



## nyo_nyo43 (Jul 13, 2009)

Sounds to me like he went a little off the deep end in killing him/her....
The worst I would do is just break up with them, and maybe bitch a little, but....


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 13, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> he did not consent to gay sex which what he was tricked into getting.


Even if she wasn't a woman, which she was, he would still have to have had at any point be promised to have sex with a natural woman and then replacing her.
That's crappiest excuse I've ever heard.


> form of sex matters. One can consent to having regular sex, this does not give me free reign to throw my SM rape fantasies on the woman.


Yeah, but consenting to have normal sex, having sex, and then afterwards tell you it was SM sex, dosen't mean you were are or had a SM sexual relationship.
Comon Sense man. Only 9.99 





> this case is no different from my blindfolded women gets tricked into sleeping with the football team scenario.


This is obfucastingly retarded.
He gives consent to a person not to eleven.



> same trust broken, while at the same time she gets tricked into sex she does not consent to.
> 
> 
> its on the level of rape.


It's not and you should really get another brain cell because yours is getting lonely


----------



## Judge Gabranth (Jul 13, 2009)

Lol this reminds me of a movie i saw.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 14, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> Even if she wasn't a woman, which she was, he would still have to have had at any point be promised to have sex with a natural woman and then replacing her.
> That's crappiest excuse I've ever heard.



promised sex with a women is not the issue. (who does that anyway) 

its the matter of consent. 

the guy did not consent to sex with another guy. Which he was fooled into getting. 

this is the bottomline. its no excuse. 



Banhammer said:


> Yeah, but consenting to have normal sex, having sex, and then afterwards tell you it was SM sex, dosen't mean you were are or had a SM sexual relationship.
> Comon Sense man. Only 9.99



this was a comparison to show how consenting to a form of sex. (man/woman) does not mean consenting to every form of sex (male/male) 

this is a response to Rob who felt that consenting to a person ended all form of discussion on the consent part...which it clearly does not. 

Reading comprehension man...Only 9.99



Banhammer said:


> This is obfucastingly retarded.
> He gives consent to a person not to eleven.



then reduce it to 1 stranger. Their neighbour. 

you are ignoring the point though. This is a scenario where she gives consent but is tricked into sex she did NOT consent to.  

same as is the case with this transgender. 



Banhammer said:


> It's not



I forgot how great your arguments are....im being sarcastic btw. 



Banhammer said:


> and you should really get another brain cell because yours is getting lonely



Same old Banhammer  

Give some shitty arguments or unbased opinion *check*
flame *check*  

I guess im up for a neg rep soon followed by you running away from the discussion cause you cant last vs me.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> promised sex with a women is not the issue. (who does that anyway)
> 
> its the matter of consent.
> 
> the guy did not consent to sex with another guy. Which he was fooled into getting.


Did the woman tell him at any time "Hey, just so you know, I never ever ever had a penis before"?
No?
Then he was fooled into nothing.
He had sex with a woman, he consented with a woman. She is a woman everywhere it counts.


> this is the bottomline. its no excuse.


No excuses, really? So it's all her fault that he thinks touching trannies = gay.
This is stupid for reasons I hold to be self evident



> this was a comparison to show how consenting to a form of sex. (man/woman) does not mean consenting to every form of sex (male/male)


Here you are calling apples by tomatos.
He consented to a form of sex. He had that sex. The end. He did not consent to have missonary and then got pinned down to the floor and fucked from behind.





> this is a response to Rob who felt that consenting to a person ended all form of discussion on the consent part...which it clearly does not.


Consenting to something you can consent and you got does end the discussion.





> Reading comprehension man...Only 9.99


Go to wallmart and get that too then. Maybe they'll give you a pitty discount.


> then reduce it to 1 stranger. Their neighbour.


It's still not the person you gave consent to!
This woman was always the same. She didn't grow a penis during sex. Dear God, can you really believe what's coming out of your mouth?



> you are ignoring the point though. This is a scenario where she gives consent but is tricked into sex she did NOT consent to.


Which is only 100% difrent on the case at hand. One got gang raped, the other one found out the woman he fucked used to have a schlong.


> same as is the case with this transgender.


And it's not and you should get kicked upside the head for thinking it.

We had sex, oh but I used to be black before I went all michael jackson, but oh wait, you're a neo-nazi so you shoot me in the head. Okay, it's all my fault.


> I forgot how great your arguments are....im being sarcastic btw.


What are you gonna ask me to proove water is wet for my next trick?
I forgot how convicted at living in  paralel universe where stupid is the right thing to believe in you are. So I guess none of us is perfect.



> Same old Banhammer
> 
> Give some shitty arguments or unbased opinion *check*
> flame *check*
> ...


Yes, that or, you're not worth half the atention you think you are, in an argument against you, I can and have bend you over the knee and shoved a rocket up your a..rguments and thanks for reminding me. I do enjoy whiping out the old neg canon.


----------



## the box (Jul 14, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> just because s
> *he* used to have a penis dosen't mean *he* was molested by *IT*.



fixed, and yes yes it does he wanted a woman not a fucking cheap knock off fake of a woman.

born a man you die a man


----------



## the box (Jul 14, 2009)

> Banhammer said:
> 
> 
> > Did the woman tell him at any time "Hey, just so you know, I never ever ever had a penis before"?
> ...


----------



## WT (Jul 14, 2009)

the box said:


> fixed, and yes yes it does he wanted a woman not a fucking cheap knock off fake of a woman.
> 
> born a man you die a man



bu...bu...but ... he had a womanz brain


----------



## the box (Jul 14, 2009)

bu bu but he wasent born with the right cromosome and was obviously mentally not sane if there a man and thinks there a woman


----------



## Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki (Jul 14, 2009)

You have to be really stupid not to see that someone could have problems with the situation as described in the article. Not everyone will see transgender as ACTUALLY transgender. They will see it as a man that simply looks like a woman.


----------



## the box (Jul 14, 2009)

thats because that what it is. you cant completely turn around your gender with out altering DNA and all that jazz


----------



## Xyloxi (Jul 14, 2009)

the box said:


> he would have to die. thats the sickest thing in the world. i would fuck him up . ithnk it was justified



Its the sickest thing in the world? You obviously haven't been on the interwebs enough and its always good to justify murder.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

the box said:


> fixed, and yes yes it does he wanted a woman not a fucking cheap knock off fake of a woman.
> 
> born a man you die a man



Where I came from, it takes a fucklot more than a penis for you to have the right to call yourself a man.

Also, box, trying to be a bigger jackass has never been a wining argument. Not once did you came close to a sensible notion of reality.


----------



## Agmaster (Jul 14, 2009)

RoguefanAM said:


> They're not horrible people at all. They didn't lie with the intention of hurting, even if they should of known better. That's the _difference_.


I completely disagree.  People do alot of hurtful and wrong things with no malevolent intent.  Does this mean because you weren't trying to be mean it suddenly doesn't count?

Because you're a pissy little ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".).  Sorry, I didn't mean that in a bad way.  

Also, so they believe themselves a woman.  Does that mean because I like like a stereotypical white male, that's what I really am?  Because that's how I feel the most comfortable after all?


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

bleach your skin and that's what I'll call you


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 14, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> Did the woman tell him at any time "Hey, just so you know, I never ever ever had a penis before"?
> No?
> Then he was fooled into nothing.
> He had sex with a woman, he consented with a woman. She is a woman everywhere it counts.


so you can only fool someone with words??? 
someone who is biologically a male fooled someone into thinking he was a women. And never bothered to adress that misconception. 



Banhammer said:


> No excuses, really? So it's all her fault that he thinks touching trannies = gay.
> This is stupid for reasons I hold to be self evident


strawmanning me is pretty stupid yeah. 
my point that it is close to rape is no ""excuse"", it is a valid point. 


Banhammer said:


> Here you are calling apples by tomatos.
> He consented to a form of sex. He had that sex. The end. He did not consent to have missonary and then got pinned down to the floor and fucked from behind.
> Consenting to something you can consent and you got does end the discussion.


he did not consent to sex with a guy. Which is a different form of sex. 


Banhammer said:


> Go to wallmart and get that too then. Maybe they'll give you a pitty discount.


Why do i need to do your shopping for you? Your lazy too?? 



Banhammer said:


> It's still not the person you gave consent to!


and the transgender was not the women he gave consent to. It was a guy mimicking a women. 


Banhammer said:


> This woman was always the same.
> She didn't grow a penis during sex. Dear God, can you really believe what's coming out of your mouth?


the scenario is similar in the point that matters. 
tricked into sex you do not consent with/agree with. 
try reading that line several times, maybe it will sink in....



Banhammer said:


> Which is only 100% difrent on the case at hand. One got gang raped, the other one found out the woman he fucked used to have a schlong.


ehmm you bring up gang rape after i already reduced it to the single neighbour? You have to rehash old points cause you cant handle adressing current ones? 
hint..look at the similarities, they are the ones that put this on the level of rape. 


Banhammer said:


> And it's not and you should get kicked upside the head for thinking it.


and you guys should be beat down for aplogizing for and condoning such huge deceit. 


Banhammer said:


> We had sex, oh but I used to be black before I went all michael jackson, but oh wait, you're a neo-nazi so you shoot me in the head. Okay, it's all my fault.


knowingly forming a relationship with someone who hates blacks, then spends years on the relationship, and then be suprised he gets pissed?
also, i do condemn the murderer for going way to far, said this several times. 


Banhammer said:


> Yes, that or, you're not worth half the atention you think you are, in an argument against you, I can and have bend you over the knee and shoved a rocket up your a..rguments and thanks for reminding me. I do enjoy whiping out the old neg canon.


I dont want attention. I just see you never replying to certain arguments and points. 
I call that running from a debate. 
I curbstomped you in the debates about gay marriage and homosexuality.  
So much so..that last time you didnt even have the courage to reply in the thread, but replied in a neg rep. Bringing up an old point I already disproved even 
I like the neg button too, but im not even gonna use it on you. You humiliating yourself in our discussions should be punishment enough.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> so you can only fool someone with words???
> someone who is biologically a male fooled someone into thinking he was a women. And never bothered to adress that misconception.


That's because you're hellbent into thinking of that woman as a man with a deep desguise.
She is a woman, she was a woman at the time of the intercourse and she was a woman when she was killed.
There was no trickery, only a buthurt sap.



> strawmanning me is pretty stupid yeah.
> my point that it is close to rape is no ""excuse"", it is a valid point.


No. Rape is when you force someone to have sex against their will. It was his will to have sex with that woman. No rape there.


> he did not consent to sex with a guy. Which is a different form of sex.


First, he had sex with a woman
Second, he consented sex with that person.
He wasn't raped, and he wanted everything he got, from the person he got it from.
Spin and spin around as you want, this is what happened.


> Why do i need to do your shopping for you? Your lazy too??


Oh, I see you went with the Unfunny Deluxe package.



> and the transgender was not the women he gave consent to. It was a guy mimicking a women.


First of all, no she wasn't. Women with brest and uterous cancer are still women, transgeder women are still women. You may have been born with two legs, but chop them off and you die a handicap with handicap rights.
Honnestly, you people sound like TIMMY and JIMMY being buthurt at the guy that played superman because he wasn't born a cripple.


> the scenario is similar in the point that matters.
> tricked into sex you do not consent with/agree with.
> try reading that line several times, maybe it will sink in....


I read it several times
The only thing that it sunk in was you thinking that she told him fucking her in the artificial pussy dosen't count as sex. 
Sounds like you've had some tough childhood there


> ehmm you bring up gang rape after i already reduced it to the single neighbour? You have to rehash old points cause you cant handle adressing current ones?
> hint..look at the similarities, they are the ones that put this on the level of rape.


You were the one that tried to say the points were the same. But thanks, I take all the lulzy victories I can get.
It's still retardedly not the same.
Man gave consent to the woman he got sex from. 
Woman did not give consent to someone she got raped by
Nothing to do with each other


> and you guys should be beat down for aplogizing for and condoning such huge deceit.


Yeah, we are allready. And if we're lucky, when that happens, they don't carve swastikas in our backs.


> knowingly forming a relationship with someone who hates blacks, then spends years on the relationship, and then be suprised he gets pissed?
> also, i do condemn the murderer for going way to far, said this several times.


Yeah, you're not attacking and blaming the victim at all.
Make it so the bleached person did not know the fucker was KKK. Argument defeated yet?


> I dont want attention. I just see you never replying to certain arguments and points.
> I call that running from a debate.


Sometimes, the arguments are too stupid for reasons I hold to be self evident


> I curbstomped you in the debates about gay marriage and homosexuality.
> So much so..that last time you didnt even have the courage to reply in the thread, but replied in a neg rep. Bringing up an old point I already disproved even


Nope. At best, you bored me and earned nothing more. I seldomly bother to correct people who are wrong i nthe internet, but I assure you, you have never ever reasonably defeated me in a café argument.



> I like the neg button too, but im not even gonna use it on you.


yeah but the difrence is, I can probably still neg for over three, four times your e-penis. You're not being the bigger man when you get sonned there too
So have that cherry on top of the sundae of whoopass you delude yourself into thinking that's strawberry.





> You humiliating yourself in our discussions should be punishment enough.


Then keep trying Sally, you're still failing hard.


----------



## Utopia Realm (Jul 14, 2009)

I don't see a problem with not telling your spouse something like this. Funny how you peeps judge people by thier gender in this thread. Also, rape is completely different from what happened in this article.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki said:


> You suddenly come to realize that all the chocolate you've eaten for the last two years was shit (feces, turds) with bacteria eliminated and which had been made to taste like chocolate through some epic illusion spell.
> 
> It maybe tasted like chocolate, but it was shit. There's no way around it. What is your reaction?
> 
> ...



It's actually not a ridiculous argument.
The trace amounts of fecal material in water, and specially bottled water equals to about people eating four pounds of pure shit a year.
This process does not register in beer, since shit cannot survive the manufacturing procedure
Are people who swear off water to do beer not delusional?

I propse to you another theory.

You just found out all mint you ever for the last five years was actually soy.
Nothing?
More suited than your riddle, but the reason you're confused it's because your similar riddle really holds no weight for this discussion
What you want is something a little more risky.
You find that the supermodel you had dated for the past two years is in fact ughly, and you had epic beer goggles.
Did she decieve you?
Tadaaah.
~

PS:As a male I actually find myself offended to be the shit side, of the shit-chocolate conudrum


----------



## Utopia Realm (Jul 14, 2009)

Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki said:


> You suddenly come to realize that all the chocolate you've eaten for the last two years was shit (feces, turds) with bacteria eliminated and which had been made to taste like chocolate through some epic illusion spell.
> 
> It maybe tasted like chocolate, but it was shit. There's no way around it. What is your reaction?



Life's tough, shit happens. Deal with it accordingly.



> Of course the scenario is impossible in reality, but it is comparable because it relates to your own perception. It didn't taste like shit. It wasn't dangerous to eat so in reality you could say it actually WASN'T shit... But it was. It's all about perception. It's all about what you think. Someone might be able to shrug it off saying "But it tasted like chocolate" while someone else might be all like "omg I ate shit wtf kill me kill me".
> 
> This is basically the core issue:
> Not everyone will agree that a man who was surgically made into a woman actually is a woman.



Your right, not everone will agree. Thus, thier shouldn't be too much of a problem to accept the person for who they are.


----------



## Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki (Jul 14, 2009)

cheapoman said:


> I don't see a problem with not telling your spouse something like this. Funny how you peeps judge people by thier gender in this thread. Also, rape is completely different from what happened in this article.



You suddenly come to realize that all the chocolate you've eaten for the last two years was shit (feces, turds) with bacteria eliminated and which had been made to taste like chocolate through some epic illusion spell.

It maybe tasted like chocolate, but it was shit. There's no way around it. What is your reaction?

Of course the scenario is impossible in reality, but it is comparable because it relates to your own perception. It didn't taste like shit. It wasn't dangerous to eat so in reality you could say it actually WASN'T shit... But it was. It's all about perception. It's all about what you think. Someone might be able to shrug it off saying "But it tasted like chocolate" while someone else might be all like "omg I ate shit wtf kill me kill me".

This is basically the core issue:
Not everyone will agree that a man who was surgically made into a woman actually is a woman.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

Sure, I am willing to understand that this man had some distraught, without being some random retard.
Is he actually entitled to any?
No.
He commited the most vicious act someone can commit for no good reason. 
The only thing the woman is guilty of, is of not doing something she shouldn't have to.

This woman gave consent to have sex with someone she didn't know that was a jackass so great that he would kill her if he were to find out about her past.
Who was really decieved here?


----------



## Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki (Jul 14, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> It's actually not a ridiculous argument.
> The trace amounts of fecal material in water, and specially bottled water equals to about people eating four pounds of pure shit a year.
> This process does not register in beer, since shit cannot survive the manufacturing procedure
> Are people who swear off water to do beer not delusional?
> ...



The soy analogy is invalid because it is neutral in this culture. We eat soy regularily unless we are allergic. Soy is not in itself a loaded concept while shit eating is. I used shit because most people don't want to eat shit. Likewise most men do not want to fuck a man.

If the example is too extreme, imagine tricking a muslim into eating pork. That's the same thing. It's culturally loaded.

At this point you will say, "But it was a woman".

And at that point I say "But it tasted like CHOCOLATE".

You have to realize that some people will not see this as fucking a woman. They will see it as a man. Some people will not. It's that simple.

I don't defend the idiocy of this guy, but I understand why he does not see it as a woman.


----------



## master bruce (Jul 14, 2009)

I don't condone murder or hate crimes against homos, but dude.

I'm straight as heck and if I were dating some chick and had sex with her only to find out that it was a dude who had a surgically implanted vagina and tits, I'd probably do the same thing, bro.



She/he/them/whatever could have at least told that man before any kind of intercourse took place.

that dude is probably mentally scared for his entire life.

He shouldn't have killed the chick/dude/whatever, but I'd probably had snapped too given the situation, bro.

At least, a vicious ass whooping would've ensued.


----------



## Hemino Hyuuga (Jul 14, 2009)

Eww how gross.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

master bruce said:


> I don't condone murder or hate crimes against homos, but dude.
> 
> I'm straight as heck and if I were dating some chick and had sex with her only to find out that it was a dude who had a surgically implanted vagina and tits, I'd probably do the same thing, bro.
> 
> ...



Is your personality, mind and sexuality not strong enough to stay unthreatned by finding out you tapped a very convincing tranny somewhere along te way? Specially since you didn't know?


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 14, 2009)

master bruce said:


> I don't condone murder or hate crimes against homos, but dude.
> 
> I'm straight as heck and if I were dating some chick and had sex with her only to find out that it was a dude who had a surgically implanted vagina and tits, I'd probably do the same thing, bro.
> 
> ...



Because that's like what manly and completely straight men that aren't in the least bit insecure do.


----------



## Nic (Jul 14, 2009)

This is a sad story really.  The guy should be prosecuted for this but at the same time she should have told him.


----------



## armorknight (Jul 14, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> Is your personality, mind and sexuality not strong enough to stay unthreatned by finding out you tapped a very convincing tranny somewhere along te way? Specially since you didn't know?



The guy who murdered was a scumbag who couldn't properly control his anger. However, expecting someone not to be ferociously angry after such deceit is totally unrealistic. A sex change is just shallow mimicry that doesn't really change one's biological sex. Sexual orientation is taken very seriously by homos and heteros because it's a basic aspect of human nature. I would definitely take the asshole to court if I was deceived like that.


----------



## ♠Mr.Nibbles♠ (Jul 14, 2009)

I agree with this reaction


----------



## The Imp (Jul 14, 2009)

Nic said:


> This is a sad story really.  The guy should be prosecuted for this but at the same time she should have told him.



I agree                 .


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 14, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> That's because you're hellbent into thinking of that woman as a man with a deep desguise.
> She is a woman, she was a woman at the time of the intercourse and she was a woman when she was killed.
> There was no trickery, only a buthurt sap.



your OPINION on this case is not FACT.  

fact is she still has the genetic makeup of a man. He does not truly metamorphose into a different sex, it is more of a ""close"" resemblance, mimicking the sex. 

Now with that in mind there are 2 lines of thought going around this thread.  

1. she changed enough to be seen as a women
2. it is still basically a man who tried to look like a women. 

Someone who has 1. as an opinion sees little harm in all of this. Its just a little deceit about the past that doesnt matter. 

Someone who has 2. as an opinion feels completely differentely. Namely being tricked into a sexual relationship with what deep down is still a guy. 

Stop acting like your opinion is the only legitimate one surrounding this topic.

A LOT of people feel differentely. and seeing it is THEIR beliefs that will determine the level of anger and pain they go through from such a revelation, every transgender should atleast try and figure out the other guys stance before starting a long term sexual relationship. 



Banhammer said:


> No. Rape is when you force someone to have sex against their will. It was his will to have sex with that woman. No rape there.



there is a variety in definitions of rape you know. Dont act like your personal definition is the only one. 



""Other jurisdictions define all NON_CONSENSUAL sexual activity to be rape"" 

Oh, Lawd

""Sex with a woman, other than the perpetrator's wife, without her CONSENT.""

or what about statuatory rape?? Its the ""children cannot give CONSENT"" part that makes it rape.

And how would you rate my blindfolded women scenario?? She was not forced and consented with sex a the time. 

he did not consent to sex with a guy, which he was tricked into getting. In this POV, the transgenders actions are close to the level of rape. (not the violent forceful kind but rape none the less) 



Banhammer said:


> First, he had sex with a woman



opinion...
were looking at the emotional response caused so its best to do this with the guys POV. 

stop treating your opinion like fact. You want it to mean something? try to prove why opinion 2. is flawed. 
Good luck with that.... ""genetically still a male"" makes it a perfectly valid opinion. 



Banhammer said:


> Second, he consented sex with that person.



Not to that form of sex. Namely sex with another guy. 

Deceiving someone into consenting to sex they would otherwise NEVER agree with doesnt look good in court either. 

Hey im that ex you hate/your brother and I played dress up to get you to consent to sex with me while you thought i was another person.. 



Banhammer said:


> He wasn't raped, and he wanted everything he got, from the person he got it from.
> Spin and spin around as you want, this is what happened.



Im not spinning anything. 

He did not consent to sex with another guy. 



Banhammer said:


> Oh, I see you went with the Unfunny Deluxe package.



yeah even your ""witty"" little remarks get tossed right back at you. 



Banhammer said:


> First of all, no she wasn't. Women with brest and uterous cancer are still women,



A woman is more then outer appearance yes... 
thanks for agreeing with me. 

This transgender is genetically still a male. with appearance a mere attempt to mimick the real thing. (inverted penis, no womb etc.) 

Best way to identify sex when outer appearance can fool you=????
exactly, genes and physiology. 

heh, now I know when you quit debates so fast..if you keep talking, you start to rape your own arguments....



Banhammer said:


> You were the one that tried to say the points were the same.   But thanks, I take all the lulzy victories I can get.



It is a good example of deceiving someone into consenting to a form of sex they would normally never agree with. 

hey thats SIMILAR to the transgender scenario. 



Banhammer said:


> It's still retardedly not the same.
> Man gave consent to the woman he got sex from.
> Woman did not give consent to someone she got raped by
> Nothing to do with each other



So a different person is what matters? 
The transgender was a different person then she pretended to be. 

besides, i already accounted for this with the ""hey im your brother dressed up as someone else"" scenario. As you have seen, it does not matter to the main point. 

Namely, not consenting to sex with a guy but being deceived into such sex. 



Banhammer said:


> Yeah, we are allready. And if we're lucky, when that happens, they don't carve swastikas in our backs.



and Banhammer...how many of the posters in this thread are nazis then? cause many would react violently to such huge deceit. 



Banhammer said:


> Yeah, you're not attacking and blaming the victim at all.



The deceit is caused by the transgender. And he either knew of the others beliefs..or did not care for them and selfishly placed his own needs above it.
(2 year relationship ffs) 
he can be blamed for that much. 
for abusing the trust of his partner. To risk mentally hurting him to such an extent. 

the other guy can then be blamed for having no respect for life, and a lack of self control. and possibly severe homophobia. 



Banhammer said:


> Make it so the bleached person did not know the fucker was KKK. Argument defeated yet?



If not, the deceiving part falls away. And is more of a tragic difference of opinion on what constitutes race on the bleached persons case. While the murderer is an extremely violent racist.  

However, they had a relationship for 2 years. 
We also have the HIGH probability a partner would treat a transgender different. (whereas how many hardcore KKK members are around??).  

As such, the transgender could have expected this conflict. But very likely kept on keeping him in the dark. or was outright lying about things. (past)


Also, not consenting to sex with a different race is abnormal behaviour due to racism. 

not consenting to gay sex is a normal response (for heterosexuals) as homosexuality is an abnormal sexuality. 




Banhammer said:


> Sometimes, the arguments are too stupid for reasons I hold to be self evident



which doesnt say much cause you seem to be living in your little fantasy world where your opinion=fact



Banhammer said:


> but I assure you, you have never ever reasonably defeated me in a café argument.



I did adress your gay marriage points, problem is you wasn't there to see it (having run from debate already)...or just flat out ignored it which is even weaker.


----------



## Nizuma Eiji (Jul 14, 2009)

R00t_Decision said:


> RoguefanAM,
> 
> All this arguing you are doing with everyone and then you drop this bombshell.
> 
> Woweee wow.  :amazed




Unless they're bi I call bullshit.


----------



## Razgriez (Jul 14, 2009)

Born an man always a man.


----------



## Yume-chan (Jul 14, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> If not, the deceiving part falls away. And is more of a tragic difference of opinion on what constitutes race on the bleached persons case. While the murderer is an extremely violent racist.
> 
> However, they had a relationship for 2 years.
> We also have the HIGH probability a partner would treat a transgender different. (whereas how many hardcore KKK members are around??).
> ...


 Then instead of going with the "bleached" person scenario, look at my example from history, in which white men murdered their mixed race girlfriends after discovering they had black relatives.  At the time, that behavior could be somewhat expected and wasn't that abnormal.  Does that make it understandable?  Though this of course isn't a possibility someone of your beliefs would want to acknowledge, it may be that in the future transgender people will be commonly accepted as being the gender they claim they are and seeing sex with them as "homosexual" will be considered abnormal behavior due to transphobia.


----------



## Descent of the Lion (Jul 14, 2009)

Murder is wrong and all that, but not telling someone you're really a man or used to be a man (whatever you choose to describe it as) is probably the most rage inducing thing a person can do.  That's like provoking a bear.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> your OPINION on this case is not FACT.
> 
> fact is she still has the genetic makeup of a man. He does not truly metamorphose into a different sex, it is more of a ""close"" resemblance, mimicking the sex.
> 
> ...


I act like it because it is the legitimate opinion. This is not someone with a deep desguise, she engeneerly changed her body to be a woman. Female. Female as recognized by law, as recognized by doctors, as recognized by herself. Not my opinion.
What's that Endocrine society?

Transexuals have female neurons?
You mean male-to-female transexuals are women in wrongly configurated body?
Yes?
So doing the closest thing modern medicine has to proper corrections is just more than an opinion?
Yes?
I'm sorry, I just can't hear you over the sound of zabuzalives shutting the hell up




> A LOT of people feel differentely. and seeing it is THEIR beliefs that will determine the level of anger and pain they go through from such a revelation, every transgender should atleast try and figure out the other guys stance before starting a long term sexual relationship.


Alot of people feel Xenu is the the one true God.
Don't make any less stupid.


> there is a variety in definitions of rape you know. Dont act like your personal definition is the only one.
> 
> 
> 
> ""Other jurisdictions define all NON_CONSENSUAL sexual activity to be rape""


omg, wikipedia skills. You're awesome.
Let's play around them a little

Oh, what's this

A page about types of rape?
LOLHI (That's n00bish for "GREETINGS", kthx)
Date Rape? No, she didn't do that
Spousal rape? No, that wasn't it either
College Campus rape? Haha, she wish
Gang Rape? No, but this is more up your ally right?
Rape of Children? Wrong again. Wow, what a bad luck streak
Statutory rape? Oh my, not this either
Prision Rape? No, but it's coming.
War Rape? No, she didn't like it that tough
Rape within the military? No, don't ask don't tell amirite?

Oh my. No she said she was a woman but in fact she was a tranny? No?
It seems your glorious wikipedia has let you down.




> LOLHI (That's n00bish for "GREETINGS", kthx)
> 
> ""Sex with a woman, other than the perpetrator's wife, without her CONSENT.""


No male rape there. But there was plenty of consent though, so try again


> or what about statuatory rape?? Its the ""children cannot give CONSENT"" part that makes it rape.


Keyword Einstein, CHILDREN



> And how would you rate my blindfolded women scenario?? She was not forced and consented with sex a the time.


Consent means the involved parties. Neighbour is a third party she did not give consent to. Tranny woman and crazy hick were the only parties involved.
Fail, do try another proposterous one.


> he did not consent to sex with a guy, which he was tricked into getting. In this POV, the transgenders actions are close to the level of rape. (not the violent forceful kind but rape none the less)


In the nazi's pov, killing jews was country's safet. Totally excusable then. Because crazy criminal's pov is ever so important.



> opinion...
> were looking at the emotional response caused so its best to do this with the guys POV.
> 
> stop treating your opinion like fact. You want it to mean something? try to prove why opinion 2. is flawed.
> Good luck with that.... ""genetically still a male"" makes it a perfectly valid opinion.


First, allready have. Go check the World Health Organization website for more.
Second, you wanna call DNA?  We don't know shit about DNA. We're still so far behind on the entire ends of the human genome that saying he's genetically still a male is stupid as hell. Genetically she has a penis and no tits and that's all you can say.
Newsflash, you need more than a dick to be a man. Long prooven studies of how women's and men's brains are completly difrent, and last time I checked, your freedom, which means your identity as a citizen still depends on the ability of your brain, not the amount or shape of the gear between your legs.
Just because your structuring code, your body bluprints came off with a few kinks, dosen't mean your house has to have four shitters in the bathroom and a door on the ceeiling.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

> Not to that form of sex. Namely sex with another guy.


He didn't have. Your opinion that it was with a man. Again, she was a woman. She saw herself as a woman. You think she did something unethical? You like to advocate POV's so fucking much? Proove right now this woman did not see herself as one, and that she had the intent to trick him into having gay sex.
A fantastic new gay sex I never heard of, one where you put your penis in another man's vagina while fondle his tits and call him as a woman.


> Deceiving someone into consenting to sex they would otherwise NEVER agree with doesnt look good in court either.


Proove intent. Oh wait, you can't
I win.


> Hey im that ex you hate/your brother and I played dress up to get you to consent to sex with me while you thought i was another person..


Then I'll have fucked your little part, and you took it up the ass from me.
Nothing new.

Has nothing to do with this case thogh, because this woman never lied about herself. She saw herself as exactly what she was, and we behaved to him exactly as she is suposed to behave. She used no pretense, no judgment imparing drugs, no doubles, and no other asspulls you'dd like to came up with right now.



> Im not spinning anything.
> 
> He did not consent to sex with another guy.


Oh look, and he goes back to the same point. He consented to have sex with this person and he had it. He got everything exactly as advertised.



> yeah even your ""witty"" little remarks get tossed right back at you.


They did? Then you failed. Try again.


> A woman is more then outer appearance yes...
> thanks for agreeing with me.
> 
> This transgender is genetically still a male. with appearance a mere attempt to mimick the real thing. (inverted penis, no womb etc.)
> ...


My arguments are still holeproof, you're just trying to pounce at anything you can spin. A woman who lost her woomb and breasts and no difrence to a man that lost his penis except for the brain. If their brain are the same, point out a difrence, will you?
Since you do hold the genitalia to be about as important as the brain.
Oh, right.
Nothing left.
Keep trying Susan, I'm still wining.





> It is a good example of deceiving someone into consenting to a form of sex they would normally never agree with.
> 
> hey thats SIMILAR to the transgender scenario.


No, it's a horrible example that has nothing to do with this case. I hold these reasons to be self evident, but if they weren't re-read this post.





> So a different person is what matters?
> The transgender was a different person then she pretended to be.


No she wasn't. And good luck trying to nail everyone that tells a lie to get laid.


> besides, i already accounted for this with the ""hey im your brother dressed up as someone else"" scenario. As you have seen, it does not matter to the main point. Namely, not consenting to sex with a guy but being deceived into such sex


And I allready defeated it. Aint life grand?




> and Banhammer...how many of the posters in this thread are nazis then? cause many would react violently to such huge deceit.


Yeah? Well then they all have this little club to relate to. Enjoy.


> The deceit is caused by the transgender. And he either knew of the others beliefs..or did not care for them and selfishly placed his own needs above it.
> (2 year relationship ffs)
> he can be blamed for that much.
> for abusing the trust of his partner. To risk mentally hurting him to such an extent.


His problem, not hers. If he dosen't tell the difrence, then it's up to her judgment to let know, which she eventually did, something she didn't have to.
So, fault? None? Good.

Also, lol, opinions.


> the other guy can then be blamed for having no respect for life, and a lack of self control. and possibly severe homophobia.


yes, yes, we all get it, you think it's wrong he got caught.


> If not, the deceiving part falls away. And is more of a tragic difference of opinion on what constitutes race on the bleached persons case. While the murderer is an extremely violent racist.


I see no difrence. Both parties held long lasting relationships with violent bigots.


> However, they had a relationship for 2 years.
> We also have the HIGH probability a partner would treat a transgender different. (whereas how many hardcore KKK members are around??).



joke question right?


> As such, the transgender could have expected this conflict. But very likely kept on keeping him in the dark. or was outright lying about things. (past)


Yes, heavens forbid her being afraid of rejection, abuse, or assault from the only person she had loved.



> Also, not consenting to sex with a different race is abnormal behaviour due to racism.
> not consenting to gay sex is a normal response (for heterosexuals) as homosexuality is an abnormal sexuality.


This is a whole difrent debate for me to son you in and I'm way too tired.

Proove it Susan.





> which doesnt say much cause you seem to be living in your little fantasy world where your opinion=fact


No, my opinions came from published facts, two years of psichology and an in depth conection with all branches of society. Yours came from wikipedia.




> I did adress your gay marriage points, problem is you wasn't there to see it (having run from debate already)...or just flat out ignored it which is even weaker. I baaaaaaawed to hell about something, used a hell of alot of semantics, ignored historical facts, ignored real reasoning comon sense and rules of society, equated grown men to monkeys, and got the shit ignored out of.


Fixed for you


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

0Fear said:


> Murder is wrong and all that, but not telling someone you're really a man or used to be a man (whatever you choose to describe it as) is probably the most rage inducing thing a person can do.  That's like provoking a bear.



A bear that is bound by laws, comon sense, a society of courtesy, two years of loving relationship and the ability to use toilet paper.


----------



## Descent of the Lion (Jul 14, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> A bear that is bound by laws, comon sense, a society of courtesy, two years of loving relationship and the ability to use toilet paper.



Come on...spare me that bs. The man went into the relationship thinking that the person was born a woman. Who on earth would be happy about finding the opposite? The reason we have laws is BECAUSE humans do stuff like this. It's pretty simple. In fact, humans are WORSE than bears. We blow crap up in anger.


 And you don't provoke people to anger. I'm sure s/he or whatever would have found someone into that.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 14, 2009)

And she didn't. She was just honnest. She did it to give him a choice, now that he got to know the real her.
That's like saying Oncologists tell people about cancer to depress them.


----------



## Descent of the Lion (Jul 14, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> And she didn't. She was just honnest. She did it to give him a choice, now that he got to know the real her.
> That's like saying Oncologists tell people about cancer to depress them.



What? You may be talking about the present...but I'm talking about the beginning. Relationships don't start on their own, and everyone has a choice of what they disclose in the beginning. Not disclosing this is provocation. You're just building up the potential for rage.


 Your analogy is false...and terrible to say the least.


----------



## Yume-chan (Jul 15, 2009)

Sort of off-topic, but...

I do think it's better for transgendered people to disclose that fact at the beginning of a relationship, for their own protection if nothing else.  But I can also understand why they wouldn't want to do so, especially on a first date.  There are a lot of people who would refuse to date a transgendered person right off the bat, but might be willing to reconsider if it was someone they'd grown to love.  Keeping the secret for two years might be a bit much (and by "a bit much" I mean slightly inconsiderate, not a horrible crime) but I have to disagree with those who say it has to be discussed right away.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 15, 2009)

Yume-chan said:


> Then instead of going with the "bleached" person scenario, look at my example from history, in which white men murdered their mixed race girlfriends after discovering they had black relatives.  At the time, that behavior could be somewhat expected and wasn't that abnormal.  Does that make it understandable?  Though this of course isn't a possibility someone of your beliefs would want to acknowledge, it may be that in the future transgender people will be commonly accepted as being the gender they claim they are and seeing sex with them as "homosexual" will be considered abnormal behavior due to transphobia.



ill repeat

""
Also, not consenting to sex with a different race is abnormal behaviour (biologically speaking) due to racism. 

not consenting to gay sex is a normal response (for heterosexuals) as homosexuality is an abnormal sexuality. ""


so the negative reaction on finding out you had sex with a guy will always stay there and does not necessarely have something to do with hatred for homosexuals. 

unlike the negative reaction once you find out someone is of mixed race. Which is purely racist.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 15, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> I act like it because it is the legitimate opinion.



I said, dont act like its the only legitimate opinion. 



Banhammer said:


> This is not someone with a deep desguise, she engeneerly changed her body to be a woman.



changed his body to mimick that of a women



Banhammer said:


> Female. Female as recognized by law, as recognized by doctors, as recognized by herself. Not my opinion.



female as in gender. 

hell even i would be willing to call him a ""her"" as that makes the transgender very happy and takes me little effort. But do i see her as a true woman?? nope. 

it is done to make life easier for the transgender. Not because everyone agrees she is physiologically a female.




Banhammer said:


> What's that Endocrine society?
> 
> Transexuals have female neurons?
> You mean male-to-female transexuals are women in wrongly configurated body?
> ...



from your article ""Transsexuals experience themselves as being of the opposite sex, despite having the biological characteristics of one sex"" 

""may reflect a form of brain hermaphroditism such that this limbic nucleus itself is structurally sexually differentiated opposite to the transsexual?s genetic and genital sex"" 

if we look at chromosomal sex/genetic sex. they are male. 

males with a disorder/abnormality in the brain.  



Banhammer said:


> Alot of people feel Xenu is the the one true God.
> Don't make any less stupid.



stop dodging the point. 

Its like secretly serving pork to fundamental muslims. You might find their belifes stupid...but that does not erase the fact that you are TRAMPLING ALL OVER THEIR BELIEFS AND HURTING THEM IN THE PROCESS. 



Banhammer said:


> omg, wikipedia skills. You're awesome
> 
> Let's play around them a little.



why? I proved it is not only about force and against someones will.

many define it as non-consentual sex being vital. 
seeing as the partner did not consent to sex with another guy...you fill in the blanks. 



Banhammer said:


> Oh, what's this
> A page about types of rape?
> Source
> Date Rape? No, she didn't do that
> ...



This list misses the stranger rapes women outside of campus. guess thats not rape then. 

Or those who rape animals or the elderly, guess thats not rape then cause wikipedia didnt list it. 

You are focusing on differing details, yet ignoring the main point. 
its not the fucking campus grounds that make it rape its NON-CONSENTUAL SEX. 



Banhammer said:


> No male rape there. But there was plenty of consent though, so try again



not to the form of sex he was getting. 
I already adressed this. your going around in circles now. 



Banhammer said:


> Keyword Einstein, CHILDREN



it is rape because the lack of consent. 

once we established that...we get

Partner deceived into a form of sex he does not agree with/consent to. 

combined, we can then only conclude that from the partners POV, this is on the level of rape. 



Banhammer said:


> Consent means the involved parties.



already disproven that with my SM scenario. giving consent to one form of sex=/= giving the other free reign to do whatever he wants. 



Banhammer said:


> Neighbour is a third party she did not give consent to. Tranny woman and crazy hick were the only parties involved.
> Fail, do try another proposterous one.



FAIL. my point here was how would you rate it seeing you told rape was about force and against someones will. 

so either agree its rape or dont. You can then start discussing how i cant extrapolate it to the transgender scenario. 



Banhammer said:


> First, allready have. Go check the World Health Organization website for more



oh yeah just throw around a big name with no further backup. 

your own fucking article already gave me enough room to base my opinion with. 



Banhammer said:


> Second, you wanna call DNA?  We don't know shit about DNA. We're still so far behind on the entire ends of the human genome that saying he's genetically still a male is stupid as hell.



tell that to the scientists and doctors who do that...

sex can be pretty easily identified genetically btw, dont act like its a rare genetic disease we still know little about 



Banhammer said:


> Genetically she has a penis and no tits and that's all you can say.



idiot. there is far more to sexual dimorphism then that. 

you are also just pointing out appearance there.  



Banhammer said:


> Newsflash, you need more than a dick to be a man.



exactly...to bad for transgenders. 
Else you could simply have a penis transplant. 

Just keep talking and rape more of your own arguments please. aside from causing major lulz for me. 



Banhammer said:


> Long prooven studies of how women's and men's brains are completly difrent,



they have found 1 brainpart that is about identification that shows similarities to the other gender. 

far from having a ""female brain"". 



Banhammer said:


> and last time I checked, your freedom, which means your identity as a citizen still depends on the ability of your brain, not the amount or shape of the gear between your legs.



were talking about sex...you try to spin this so much you are now talking about ""freedom"" and how ""your brain shapes your identity"" 

this all you got left??? 

my brain tells my i am a Pandabear. ppl wont agree with me in front of physiological and genetic proof of me being human. They would think I have some mental disorder. 



Banhammer said:


> Just because your structuring code, your body bluprints came off with a few kinks, dosen't mean your house has to have four shitters in the bathroom and a door on the ceeiling.



1. your body has a few kinks, causing someone to identify themselves as opposite to their ACTUAL BIOLOGICAL SEX. 

2. Changes done are NOT on the level of a true biological metamorphosis. They can only try to mimick appearance. 

as such, its eprfectly logical to conclude this transgender is a male who merely looks/acts like a woman (to an extent).


----------



## Ace Fangirl (Jul 15, 2009)

He never should of resorted to violence... maybe talked about it... or he could of just left... but killing... thats never the way to sort out anything.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 15, 2009)

You got anything else other than the unbacked, unreasonable, and untre opinion that "she isn't a woman because she wasn't born that way"?

Because everything else you throw goes from pathetic to just fake after that.


----------



## Saufsoldat (Jul 15, 2009)

The woman you love and have sex with was once man? Quick, kill her and wash your dick with nitric acid! Only that will reverse the gay polarity.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 15, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> He didn't have. Your opinion that it was with a man. Again, she was a woman.



latter which is your opinion. 

as i said before...what causes the amount of mental turmoil in the partner??? 
his OWN beliefs, or yours?? 
so when we look at this from the partners POV, under what opinion do we do that?? 



Banhammer said:


> She saw herself as a woman. You think she did something unethical? You like to advocate POV's so fucking much? Proove right now this woman did not see herself as one, and that she had the intent to trick him into having gay sex.
> A fantastic new gay sex I never heard of, one where you put your penis in another man's vagina while fondle his tits and call him as a woman.



I never claimed the transgender had his partners POV. 
Funny, asking me to prove points i never brought up so you can claim victory and run from debate right?? 

She sees herself as a women. But during 2 years and with society as it is, either outright knew the guys opinion, or did not care to know, did not care about how it would affect him. 

having sex with another guy...is just that....and the transgender is genetically a male. 



Banhammer said:


> Proove intent. Oh wait, you can't
> I win.



if i cannot prove a murder...does that make the murder OK???? 

from the partners POV, she is a man trying to mimick a women. And actively deceived him/kept him in the dark about her true sex, in a situation where she would know he would have issues with it, or could have expected it. 

If i think a girl says ""no"' but means that as ""hard to get/roleplaying"" and i have sex with her. Or perhaps im hard-hearing and didnt hear the ""no"".  I still caused a rape. Despite my intention 

rape=non consentual sex. and he did not consent to sex with another guy. 



Banhammer said:


> Then I'll have fucked your little part, and you took it up the ass from me.
> Nothing new.



oh theres nothing wrong with that? 



Banhammer said:


> Has nothing to do with this case thogh, because this woman never lied about herself.



""hey what about your past"" 

""ehmm i grew up as a nice girl"" 

and again..this is a matter of POV. 




Banhammer said:


> She saw herself as exactly what she was, and we behaved to him exactly as she is suposed to behave. She used no pretense, no judgment imparing drugs, no doubles, and no other asspulls you'dd like to came up with right now.



i am not pulling anything out of my ass. To the partner POV...he did not consent to sex with another guy, which he was fooled (by him mimicking a women) into getting. 

non-consentual sex=rape. 
as such, to this guy...what she did was on the level of rape...I would feel violated as well. 

And you wonder why so many heterosexual guys state they would get terribly angry.  

that is because you look at the whole situation with a ""transgender is a real woman now"" 



Banhammer said:


> Oh look, and he goes back to the same point. He consented to have sex with this person and he had it. He got everything exactly as advertised.



form of sex matters, consent to 1 does not give the other free reign etc. etc. 



Banhammer said:


> My arguments are still holeproof, you're just trying to pounce at anything you can spin. A woman who lost her woomb and breasts and no difrence to a man that lost his penis except for the brain.



how about you read up on the differences between men and women. There are far more differences then ""breast+womb"" vs ""penis"".

Jesus christ you look like a toddler taking his first steps in learning the  differences between the sexes. 



Banhammer said:


> If their brain are the same, point out a difrence, will you?



ahh..im so fucking smart...i predicted you would get to this earlier and already debunked it.  

1 brain area=/=entire brain is the same. Again...simplistic. 



Banhammer said:


> Since you do hold the genitalia to be about as important as the brain.



you jump to some weird conclusions. 



Banhammer said:


> Oh, right.
> Nothing left.
> Keep trying Susan, I'm still wining.



I guess ""wining"" should be whining?? it sure as hell is not winning. you sound like a damn toddler on matters of sexual dimorphism. 



read up. yes...thats me schooling you. 



Banhammer said:


> Yeah? Well then they all have this little club to relate to. Enjoy.



for identifying someones sex based on their biological sex? my my....



Banhammer said:


> His problem, not hers. If he dosen't tell the difrence, then it's up to her judgment to let know,



and he showed some very poor judgment. putting his needs above the other guys feelings/beliefs. As such, risk hurting him and angering him tremendously. 



Banhammer said:


> which she eventually did, something she didn't have to.So, fault? None? Good.



ehmm...the guy found out after checking her up after her refusal to marry. 
Also...telling after he wasted 2 years on sex with another guy. (form of sex he did not consent to)  hardly erases the damage caused....



Banhammer said:


> yes, yes, we all get it, you think it's wrong he got caught.



sure just state the opposite of what i just said...makes sense. 



Banhammer said:


> I see no difrence. Both parties held long lasting relationships with violent bigots.



the difference is if she knew or was expected to know about the partners belief. This matters immensely in the matter of deceit. 


% of population? matters to what you can reasonably expect her to know. 
Which matters to the level of selfish behaviour/deceit. 




Banhammer said:


> Yes, heavens forbid her being afraid of rejection, abuse, or assault from the only person she had loved.


"
she did not want to be rejected...so purposely kept him in the dark about it and actively lied about her past. 

as i said, putting his own needs above the other. 

I am not attacking the transgender as much as you think. Holding opinion 1. I dont think they fully realize how damaging and hurtfull it can be for someone with opinion 2. 



Banhammer said:


> This is a whole difrent debate for me to son you in and I'm way too tired.
> 
> Proove it Susan.



abnormal sexuality. We are not evolved to react to the sexual stimuli of same-sex. It is a disorder/kink in early development. It negatively affects fitness. 

As such. imagining sexual acts with same sex (as heterosexual) provokes no response or a slight disgust. Normal reaction. 

With the racist he goes against biological attraction and mechanism, purely through a hate-filled thought construct. 
Many racist slave drivers were not above abusing an attractive slave girl. 
Only the biggest racists would be disgusted by it.  
Biologically this is an abnormality. Only when indoctrinated with a culture of hate does it overcome biological mechanisms to spread as an stance over a larger number. 


While here we have many following opinion 2 and stating they would have trouble controlling their anger. How many hate homosexuals? how many see them as less then human??? 

I dont think anyone does in this thread. I sure dont. 

You comparing us to nazi's/KKK falls short. 




Banhammer said:


> No, my opinions came from published facts, two years of psichology and an in depth conection with all branches of society. Yours came from wikipedia.



genetically male...its a fact listed even in your own articles. wikipedia is just so you can read up a bit on the basics....

Ah...a damn psychologist..never liked how they often discount biology in favor of personal theories about behavioural/mental causes. 

Im close to getting my master of science. in Biology. 
might give you a hint why i have opinion 2.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 15, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> You got anything else other than the unbacked, unreasonable, and untre opinion that "she isn't a woman because she wasn't born that way"?
> 
> Because everything else you throw goes from pathetic to just fake after that.



I never voiced that opinion...FAIL again from Banhammer, what a suprise


----------



## Raiden (Jul 15, 2009)

Kira Yamato said:


> I guess it's a shocker to find out the woman you were with was actually a man, but violence, let alone murder is never the solution.



True. My instinct tells me that most men would have responded in a similar fashion though.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 15, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> I never voiced that opinion...FAIL again from Banhammer, what a suprise



But Timmy, All your arguments are summed up by it.
And what I said was that without it, you go from pathetic to just fake, not that you've said it explicitly.
So I supose that is a "no" right? I accept your concession.
Delusional statements by zabuza. What revolting development
But say do they still have that reading comprehension at wallmart? You seem to have run out of it again.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 15, 2009)

No, timmy, wait, I was wrong, there's a single other argument that can put all your other ones in a category difrent than pure shit.
If you define the genitalia as the identity organ of a citizen, equal to the brain.
Unless you proove right now how the brain, who has been long prooven to have leaps of difrence between a man and a woman, which is the one that without the full working capacity, we don't allow the freedoms of choice (as in comas, underage and mental disabilities) is about as relevant as a dick, and without stating that everyone that has ever lost their penis or woomb is a second class citizen, once again, all your arguments fall to shit again.
And I re-accept your concession


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 15, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> But Timmy, All your arguments are summed up by it.



failing at reading comprehension again Banhammer?? 

I would never use that argument as I leave the possibility of a true metamorphosis open with future increases in technology. 

if it can be achieved, the ""he was born a man"" has no value. 



Banhammer said:


> And what I said was that without it, you go from pathetic to just fake, not that you've said it explicitly.



baseless opinion without adressing my points...looks like you are getting ready to run from the debate again...see ya Banhammer. 



Banhammer said:


> So I supose that is a "no" right? I accept your concession.



is your fantasy world fun?? 



Banhammer said:


> Delusional statements by zabuza. What revolting development
> But say do they still have that reading comprehension at wallmart? You seem to have run out of it again.



yeah...you just given up on trying to make any sense now....
your the one who comes up with utter BS as a ""sums up your argument"" point.  



If your going on some acid trip on points I never made, dont expect me to respond from now on. Deal with my actual points, i have no patience to play your childish flame game.








Banhammer said:


> No, timmy, wait, I was wrong, there's a single other argument that can put all your other ones in a category difrent than pure shit.
> If you define the genitalia as the identity organ of a citizen, equal to the brain.



which i do not. else a woman just sowing on a penis is now a man. while a man losing his suddenly becomes ""it"". 

stop strawmanning me...its either that or you are actually delusional about what my points are. 



Banhammer said:


> Unless you proove right now how the brain, who has been long prooven to have leaps of difrence between a man and a woman, which is the one that without the full working capacity, we don't allow the freedoms of choice (as in comas, underage and mental disabilities) is about as relevant as a dick,



seriously?? wtf?? what does this have to do with my points and seeing it doesnt...why the hell should i prove it?? 
really..I talk about genetic and biological indentification of sex. And you respond with penis this penis that...you sound like Mister Garrisson, writing his love novel.  



Banhammer said:


> and without stating that everyone that has ever lost their penis or woomb is a second class citizen,



what makes you think i would do that? 



Banhammer said:


> once again, all your arguments fall to shit again.
> And I re-accept your concession



are you high?? i really need to get the stuff you're on then.


----------



## Tendou Souji (Jul 15, 2009)

lol zabuzalives you must lack in the cognitive department or something. 



> he did not consent to sex with a guy, which he was tricked into getting. In this POV, the transgenders actions are close to the level of rape. (not the violent forceful kind but rape none the less)


Of course he didn't because he had sex with a female. You're bringing up legal definitions and then ignoring that legally said transgender is a female now. Your point is null and void. You saying it's rape is purely based on an opinion of yours which contradicts the legal system. Sure on a genetic level she is a he, but organ and legal wise it's a girl, not a man. So don't bring in legal definitions if you are going to ignore other definitions.

Also fun fact, every single person starts out as a female.


----------



## master bruce (Jul 15, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> Is your personality, mind and sexuality not strong enough to stay unthreatned by finding out you tapped a very convincing tranny somewhere along te way? Specially since you didn't know?




*dude do you not realized that everything about your statement is wrong!?!?!?!?!?!?!!


You shouldn't have to " not know about a freaking tranny".

The other party should tell you before any kind of sex takes place.


Your answer is as ignorant as saying if someone has aids, they shouldn't have told you before you had sex with them.
Then you read a doctor's note addressed to that person(after they knowingly had sex with you.) telling them to remember to pick up their new bottle of medicine.




What you said was completely idiotic.


The whole point of this is that the dude believed that he was having sex with/dating a real chick.
Its about trust.
Its about deception.
Its about choice.
The dude should have had a choice in the matter, he should have been able to say "Hold up, you used to be a dude and you had the sex change, whoa. I'm sorry, but I gotta go bro." That choice was taken from him through sheer deception. Hr was probably completely temporarily insane during the murder anyway.


Your post fails, dude.*


----------



## Saufsoldat (Jul 15, 2009)

master bruce said:


> *Your answer is as ignorant as saying if someone has aids, they shouldn't have told you before you had sex with them.
> Then you read a doctor's note addressed to that person(after they knowingly had sex with you.) telling them to remember to pick up their new bottle of medicine.*



Oh yeah, because having sex with a chick that used to be a man is totally gonna kill you 

Grow up and don't act like an insecure closet homosexual.


----------



## master bruce (Jul 15, 2009)

Saufsoldat said:


> Oh yeah, because having sex with a chick that used to be a man is totally gonna kill you
> 
> Grow up and don't act like an insecure closet homosexual.



dude,I wonder about some of the ppl on this forum when they post the things they do. *cough * probably homo *cough*.


My point is that the whole tranny thing makes me sick.


I never said it would kill him, I said he should have known before hand.

Its about trust and choice.


I get more girls and pussy than you, I'm sure of that. So don't try to trash me dude and don't try to change the focus of this debate.



The dude was wrong in killing the tranny, but the tranny was wrong in not telling the dude the "truth"(you know, the thing that shall set you free.) before sex took place.


How is it that I get bashed for stating the "truth" about the "truth".
Is it that this country really is that far gone down the drain?


----------



## Hand Banana (Jul 15, 2009)

master bruce said:


> I get more girls and pussy than you, I'm sure of that. So don't try to trash me dude and don't try to change the focus of this debate.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 15, 2009)

Irvine Kinneas said:


> lol zabuzalives you must lack in the cognitive department or something.
> Of course he didn't because he had sex with a female. You're bringing up legal definitions and then ignoring that legally said transgender is a female now. Your point is null and void.



""In this POV, the transgenders actions are close to the level of rape""

I am talking about the POV of the guy and others who still see the transgender as their biological sex. Or atleast not really as the transgender target gender. 

Nothing about legal POV, as I know they are viewed as women in that regard. 



Irvine Kinneas said:


> You saying it's rape is purely based on an opinion of yours which contradicts the legal system.



if you see the transgender as a man, which is a perfectly valid opinion. it becomes something on the level of rape. which is my point.  

nowhere do i state transgenders need to be jailed for rape...i am pointing out how the anger is not just homophobia. Its a logical response for people holding the opinion that transgenders are their genetic sex. 



Irvine Kinneas said:


> Sure on a genetic level she is a he,



we have a winner 



Irvine Kinneas said:


> but organ



wut? like no ovaries? 
or a ""vagina"" thats really an inverted penis?? 



Irvine Kinneas said:


> and legal wise it's a girl, not a man
> So don't bring in legal definitions if you are going to ignore other definitions..



BS. 
the legal definition of transgender has little to do with my point. 
As this is not about the legal results. 
But about the anger caused in the partner...so i take his point of view (transgender=guy) and then look deeper into that. How is that guy supposed to feel? 


now tell me who is lacking in the cognitive department.....


----------



## Saufsoldat (Jul 15, 2009)

master bruce said:


> I never said it would kill him, I said he should have known before hand.
> 
> Its about trust and choice.



I was referring to the AIDS analogy. Getting AIDS from someone because he didn't tell you about it will kill you. Having sex with someone who used to a man... well, it doesn't really damage you in any way whatsoever.



> I get more girls and pussy than you, I'm sure of that. So don't try to trash me dude and don't try to change the focus of this debate.



Gays in denial are known to have sex with girls a lot to convince themselves of their straightness 



> The dude was wrong in killing the tranny, but the tranny was wrong in not telling the dude the "truth"(you know, the thing that shall set you free.) before sex took place.



Yeah, but one bears no relation to the other. The way you're saying it almost sounds like "he was wrong in destroying your sandcastle, but you were wrong in taking his shovel without asking".

He fucking killed her, there is no justification for that.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 15, 2009)

master bruce said:


> I get more girls and pussy than you, I'm sure of that. So don't try to trash me dude and don't try to change the focus of this debate.



Dont speak to quickly, your talking to a guy who sees trannies as real women. Maybe even guys in drag pass for him. 

he could be a hit in those bars. getting so much ""girls"" he lost count.  

they are who they want to identify as...after all...or something like that...


----------



## Hand Banana (Jul 15, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> Dont speak to quickly, your talking to a guy who sees trannies as real women. Maybe even guys in drag pass for him.
> 
> he could be a hit in those bars. getting so much ""girls"" he lost count.
> 
> they are who they want to identify as...after all...or something like that...



 zomg you guys are killing me please stop.


----------



## @lk3mizt (Jul 15, 2009)

ouch 


talk about overreacting 

i dunnno wat i'd do tho


----------



## master bruce (Jul 15, 2009)

Saufsoldat said:


> I was referring to the AIDS analogy. Getting AIDS from someone because he didn't tell you about it will kill you. Having sex with someone who used to a man... well, it doesn't really damage you in any way whatsoever.






Saufsoldat said:


> Gays in denial are known to have sex with girls a lot to convince themselves of their straightness


Dude, who are you trying to convince, me or you?!
By your statement, Bill clinton,eric bennet,r kelly,brad pitt, any man who has sex with many chicks is gay.
=your logic fails.


Saufsoldat said:


> Yeah, but one bears no relation to the other. The way you're saying it almost sounds like "he was wrong in destroying your sandcastle, but you were wrong in taking his shovel without asking".
> 
> He fucking killed her, there is no justification for that.



Clean your ears out bro, i already said that he was wrong in killing the traany chick.
I said the tranny chick was wrong keeping the secret.

Yes it probably did do him damage mentally. That has nothing to do with him being gay or not. He believe it was a woman, but it was a dude that "knowingly decieved" him.
Your whole sense of logic is strange and greatly twisted, bro.

I feel sorry for the ppl that have to deal with you on a daily basis.
ppl like you make me     


Anyway,

Bruce out.


----------



## Saufsoldat (Jul 15, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> Dont speak to quickly, your talking to a guy who sees trannies as real women. Maybe even guys in drag pass for him.
> 
> he could be a hit in those bars. getting so much ""girls"" he lost count.
> 
> they are who they want to identify as...after all...or something like that...



If she looks good and doesn't want to stick anything up my pooper it's fair game 



master bruce said:


> Yes it probably did do him damage mentally. That has nothing to do with him being gay or not. He believe it was a woman, but it was a dude that "knowingly decieved" him.
> Your whole sense of logic is strange and greatly twisted, bro.



In a longterm relation, it might be wrong to keep such things a secret, but still she had no real obligation to tell him.



> I feel sorry for the ppl that have to deal with you on a daily basis.
> ppl like you make me



So wait, if I make you laugh why do you feel sorry for people dealing with me on a daily basis? Most people like laughing.


----------



## Yume-chan (Jul 15, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> ill repeat
> 
> ""
> Also, not consenting to sex with a different race is abnormal behaviour (biologically speaking) due to racism.
> ...


What I was trying to point out there was that at the time, it wasn't considered abnormal to want to avoid having sex with someone from another race.  If you asked someone from that time period about it, they would probably tell you it was natural, biologically speaking, for someone to want to perpetuate their own race.  Sure, there were some slave owners who would rape their slaves, but that was seen differently than having a mutually affectionate romantic relationship.  It's similar to how these days occasional extremely bigoted people will joke about raping transgendered people as a sort of punishment, but would be extremely angry if they found out that their girlfriend used to be a man.  

Homosexuality isn't considered abnormal from a biological standpoint.  There are lots of animals who practice homosexuality, and there are rational evolutionary explanations for it.  It's considered abnormal from a cultural standpoint, just as interracial relationships used to be.  And just like racists of the past, homophobes of the present rely on religion and flawed views of science to justify their bigotry.  There's nothing scientific or natural about being violently angry over something like this.  The perception of it as such is purely cultural and based on the majority opinion, just like racism used to be.



@ Master Bruce: Why would any female want to spend time around someone who brags about how much "pussy" he gets?


----------



## Elim Rawne (Jul 15, 2009)

Yume-chan said:


> @ Master Bruce: Why would any female want to spend time around someone who brags about how much "pussy" he gets?



They do get paid for it


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 15, 2009)

I think you're confusing reality with porn again


----------



## LoboFTW (Jul 15, 2009)

I would have just beat the jerk down, not killed them. That would have been harsh, but I would have been really, really angry.
Also I don't know for sure, but I think most of the people commenting that the transgender was fine for lying are female. If this is the case, I would reason that women are better with it because they are more accepting of lesbian activities and they can't relate as well.


----------



## Gecka (Jul 15, 2009)

tranny train


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 16, 2009)

LoboFTW said:


> Also I don't know for sure, but I think most of the people commenting that the transgender was fine for lying are female. .



or gay/bi males.


----------



## Karsh (Jul 16, 2009)

It isn't alright to keep something so important from someone you love (I'm guessing she did) for so long, although I'm sure it must be a difficult thing to confess. It meant risking him leaving her.
Either way it wouldn't have been a completely normal relationship considering the children factor and many other things, so she would have had to keep lying to him and make things up, which is never very healthy.

In the end though, what she did wasn't deserving of murder.
You can be outraged, try to erase her from your memory, but not _kill_ her.
It was out of line and completely irrational, so he deserves either jail time or the asylum.


----------



## Coheed (Jul 16, 2009)

Sunuvmann said:


> Well I for one think he was completely justified



I was thinking this as I read the beginning info.

but seriously, I'm pretty sure you can tell when *cough* its *cough* fake, when you're in it.

Atleast thats what tv shows have said... and we all know they never lie.


----------



## Yume-chan (Jul 16, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> that is because of culture and indoctrination overriding normal biological urges.
> 
> point of the matter is. the attraction to females is there. We are evolved to respond to sexual stimuli which are found in all races.
> even those who saw other races as subhuman werent above indulging on their instincts.
> ...


When we talk about animals that practice homosexual behavior, we don't usually mean animals that exclusively choose to mate with the same sex.  There aren't many of those, just as there aren't many animals, especially among mammals, who choose to mate only with the opposite sex.  So an animal choosing to mate with others of the same sex sometimes doesn't mean that its genes won't be passed on at all, and having some homosexuality within its ranks often provides benefits for a species as a whole.    


> like??





> with some its a behaviour evolved to closen bonds within a group or a form of submission



And apart from the issue of whether homosexuality is natural, there is certainly no reason for seeing male to female transgendered people as male to be instinctual.  You haven't evolved to examine chromosomes.  The fact that there are cases such as this one at all shows that as long as a transgendered woman looks good enough the instinctual reaction from a heterosexual male is attraction.  If you have to look at a DNA test to decide how to feel, you aren't really acting on basic instinct.  To be blunt about it, if our closer animal relatives are any indication, our instincts probably don't lead us to care much what we mate with.  The restrictions we place on sex are usually societal.  Sometimes those restrictions serve a good purpose, like protecting children, and sometimes they're detrimental, such as when they're used to promote racism, but either way it's not a matter of evolution or instinct.  Since being disgusted by transgendered people doesn't serve any societal purpose or help anyone, and it does cause harm to some people, I'd put it in the "detrimental" category.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 16, 2009)

Yume-chan said:


> When we talk about animals that practice homosexual behavior, we don't usually mean animals that exclusively choose to mate with the same sex.



in which case its usually a lacking ability to identify sexes. or some evolved social behaviour...like grooming. That only applies for a FEW species. 


is this the case with humans? lets have gay sex to settle our disputes?? 

is it Yume?? 

Whats normal for bonobo isnt so for other species. 




Yume-chan said:


> There aren't many of those, just as there aren't many animals, especially among mammals, who choose to mate only with the opposite sex.



that is bs. complete and utter bs.  

go ahead....prove how the majority of mammals are bisexual in nature. 
despite that being a complete waste of resources and effort in biological sense for the vast majority of mammals. 

the gay pinguins are an abnormal exception in a species that forms pairs of opposite sex couples. they are not proof how it is normal for pinguins to be homosexual. 



Yume-chan said:


> So an animal choosing to mate with others of the same sex sometimes doesn't mean that its genes won't be passed on at all, and having some homosexuality within its ranks often provides benefits for a species as a whole.



yeah...i'll ask you to explain how that works..go ahead.

you do realize that evolution is mostly caused by selection on individuals??  



Yume-chan said:


> And apart from the issue of whether homosexuality is natural,



I say its abnormal. Not unnatural..



Yume-chan said:


> there is certainly no reason for seeing male to female transgendered people as male to be instinctual. You haven't evolved to examine chromosomes.



strawman. i dont claim this. 

Seeing it in such a way is a legitimate opinion. 
Having issues with participating in gay sex is instinctual. sexual acts with someone or something you have absolutely no attraction too leads to slight disgust in most. 



Yume-chan said:


> The fact that there are cases such as this one at all shows that as long as a transgendered woman looks good enough the instinctual reaction from a heterosexual male is attraction.



and when figuring out its a guy...the instinctual reaction is a sense of disgust and violation. 



Yume-chan said:


> If you have to look at a DNA test to decide how to feel, you aren't really acting on basic instinct.



we are not talking about what his basic instinct was JUST from SEEING ""her""

we are talking about what his basic reaction is when realizing its a guy. a guy he ahs been sleeping with so long while kept in the dark or lied to. 

try to keep up....



Yume-chan said:


> To be blunt about it, if our closer animal relatives are any indication, our instincts probably don't lead us to care much what we mate with.



really now? 

I observed chimps for months and there wasnt alot of gay sex going on buddy. Let alone in Orangutans or Gorillas. 



Yume-chan said:


> The restrictions we place on sex are usually societal.  Sometimes those restrictions serve a good purpose, like protecting children, and sometimes they're detrimental, such as when they're used to promote racism,



who is restricting what now?? gays can have their gay sex i dont mind. 

we are talking about the response of a heterosexual guy to seeing gay porn or being tricked into sex with another guy. 




Yume-chan said:


> but either way it's not a matter of evolution or instinct.  Since being disgusted by transgendered people doesn't serve any societal purpose or help anyone, and it does cause harm to some people, I'd put it in the "detrimental" category.



Male lions KILL the cubs of earlier pride leaders. It is far from beneficial to their species as a whole....

that it is ""detrimental"" does not mean its not a matter of evolution. 

Besides, such harm could be avoided better if the transgender would simply be truthfull about their past before starting such a relationship.


----------



## Yume-chan (Jul 16, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> in which case its usually a lacking ability to identify sexes. or some evolved social behaviour...like grooming. That only applies for a FEW species.


  There are thousands of species which practice homosexuality.  




> is this the case with humans? lets have gay sex to settle our disputes??
> 
> is it Yume??
> 
> Whats normal for bonobo isnt so for other species.


We were discussing evolution and natural behavior, right?  Current societal norms in human civilization is a completely different matter.  





> that is bs. complete and utter bs.
> 
> go ahead....prove how the majority of mammals are bisexual in nature.
> despite that being a complete waste of resources and effort in biological sense for the vast majority of mammals.
> ...


  Individuals benefit when the group is doing well as a whole.  Especially when sexual interaction provides an alternative to fighting that might otherwise lead to the death of one of the animals.  I admit that I don't entirely understand the purpose homosexuality serves in some cases, but its sheer prevasiveness seems to indicate that it does serve some purpose.  




> I say its abnormal. Not unnatural..


If by "abnormal" you mean less common, then I agree with you.  That's obvious.  But you were saying it made more sense from an evolutionary standpoint to be disgusted by gays and transgendered people than to be disgusted by blacks, which seems to have more to do with nature than with prevalence in society.  


> strawman. i dont claim this.
> 
> Seeing it in such a way is a legitimate opinion.
> Having issues with participating in gay sex is instinctual. sexual acts with someone or something you have absolutely no attraction too leads to slight disgust in most.
> ...


  What evolutionary purpose would feeling disgust towards the possibility of homosexual sex or a desire for violent retribution for having had sex with a transgendered person serve?  That the majority should prefer to have sex with the opposite sex, sure, but disgust?  That sounds much more like a social construct than an evolutionary trait to me, and thus liable to change with public opinion.  



> really now?
> 
> I observed chimps for months and there wasnt alot of gay sex going on buddy. Let alone in Orangutans or Gorillas.





> The most well-known homosexual animal is the dwarf chimpanzee, one of humanity's closes relatives.


[/url]
Assigned Moderators: Bass, Luna, Esponer, Iria, MechaTC, Hexa, halfhearted, Spy_Smasher, Hiroshi, Kribaby, Blind Itachi, Dream Brother, Rice Ball, Protoman, Distracted, Green Lantern, Grrblt, e-nat, Naruko, JediJaina, destroy_musick, Serp, EvilMoogle, Ukoku Sanzo, sel, Kamen Rider Ryoma, Jello Biafra, AestheticizeAnalog, Yondaime

Posted by:


----------



## Sanity Check (Jul 17, 2009)

That's one of my greatest fears.

Pulling down the pants of a woman to reveal the fact that she has a bigger penis than I do.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 18, 2009)

Yume-chan said:


> There are thousands of species which practice homosexuality.




Naruto1987

its a minority and hes counting cases such as the pinguins..in which cases its a clear disorder hurting their fitness. 



Yume-chan said:


> We were discussing evolution and natural behavior, right?  Current societal norms in human civilization is a completely different matter.



As I said..what is natural behaviour for one species does not have to be so for another. 

You brought up bonobos. (dwarf chimp is an old name for them). but their behaviour is a LOT different from human behaviour which is far more like regular chimps. including the agression. (you thing war and murder are current societal results??) 

so again...i am asking you...do we humans resolve our differences and conflicts with gay sex??? 
we just fought over something...lets reconcile with gay sex?? 



Yume-chan said:


> Individuals benefit when the group is doing well as a whole.  Especially when sexual interaction provides an alternative to fighting that might otherwise lead to the death of one of the animals.  I admit that I don't entirely understand the purpose homosexuality serves in some cases, but its sheer prevasiveness seems to indicate that it does serve some purpose.



seeing you ignore to defend your earlier claim that the majority of mammals is bisexual in nature. I will take that as a concession on that issue. 

As i said before, there are some cases in which homosexual behaviour is a way of reconciling/forming bonds/allies. 

in other cases homosexuality, especially the preferring same-sex above opposite sex, is a pure disorder....hurting fitness. 



Yume-chan said:


> If by "abnormal" you mean less common, then I agree with you.  That's obvious.  But you were saying it made more sense from an evolutionary standpoint to be disgusted by gays and transgendered people than to be disgusted by blacks, which seems to have more to do with nature than with prevalence in society.



No...what i am saying is that most of us see no attraction to same-sex. 
So imagining or performing sexual acts with such will be quickly seen as strange/slightly disgusting. And a natural/logical result from that is that most people do not want to engage in such form of sex. 

whereas, females from different races DO have all the sexual stimuli that attracts us. And Only a very racist upbringing/stance, will thus lead you to reject such sex. 

see the difference??? 
As such there will always be a large group not consenting with gay sex. And to change this will be far harder as its instinctual, instead of reliant on racist indoctrination. 

That is 1. 

then we have the 2. ""its still a male"" opinion. Which is legitimate based on facts (its just on what you put the emphasis). As such this will be hard to change as well. 

1+2 together means that a large group will see such deceit as violation. 

this is my main point. but me calling homosexuality abnormal caused you to argue about that too...and now your mixing up my points. 



Yume-chan said:


> What evolutionary purpose would feeling disgust towards the possibility of homosexual sex or a desire for violent retribution for having had sex with a transgendered person serve?



well..you can agree that engaging in such a relationship with no chance of offspring is devastating for the guys fitness. To avoid such a thing or reduce the number of ""traps"" in the population could be argued adaptive behaviour. 

But again..this is not my point. see above. 

I never intend to make this purely about evolution. (you end up a nazi then) As a human we should go past our primal instincts at times to benefit the species more. 



Yume-chan said:


> That the majority should prefer to have sex with the opposite sex, sure, but disgust?  That sounds much more like a social construct than an evolutionary trait to me, and thus liable to change with public opinion.



if you have no attraction...sexual acts seem out of place and awkward. This is only natural no? 
imagine you having sex with a tree. 

most would view it neutral.....or strange and awkward which results in a slight disgust. 




Yume-chan said:


> Naruto1987



I started talking about bonobos before you. 
Looking at 1 primate while ignoring others is pretty shady. Especially considering the large differences between the species. 




Yume-chan said:


> There's no good reason a heterosexual man should care if he did happen to see some gay porn (a situation that could be easily avoided, I think)



point of the matter is...it does not appeal to him and he wouldnt consent to that form of sex. unlike mixed sex where there ARE sexual stimuli at play. 
only the hardcore racists would not be tempted to a little rape here and there.  



Yume-chan said:


> or care about the chromosomes of his sexual partner as long as she appeals to him.



with science comes knowledge. 
Its a legitimate opinion. 

you think sex is defined by outer appearance. others care more for physiology and actual biological sex. 

this opinion wont be easily discarded as its based on facts. 



Yume-chan said:


> I listed both beneficial and detrimental restrictions enforced by society, so there's no reason to think I meant that all natural behaviors have to be beneficial to the species as a whole.



""it's not a matter of evolution or instinct, Since""  ""doesn't serve any societal purpose or help anyone"" 

You discounted it for not having societal purpose. Which is flawed.


----------



## Yume-chan (Jul 18, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> Link removed
> 
> its a minority and hes counting cases such as the pinguins..in which cases its a clear disorder hurting their fitness.


Do you really think you need to tell me there are more than 1,500 species in the world?  1,500 is the number in which homosexual behavior has been _observed_.  Obviously they didn't observe every species of animal, so not being on the list of animals that practice homosexuality doesn't necessarily mean those animals don't.   




> As I said..what is natural behaviour for one species does not have to be so for another.
> 
> You brought up bonobos. (dwarf chimp is an old name for them). but their behaviour is a LOT different from human behaviour which is far more like regular chimps. including the agression. (you thing war and murder are current societal results??)  so again...i am asking you...do we humans resolve our differences and conflicts with gay sex???
> we just fought over something...lets reconcile with gay sex??





> I started talking about bonobos before you.
> Looking at 1 primate while ignoring others is pretty shady. Especially considering the large differences between the species.





> seeing you ignore to defend your earlier claim that the majority of mammals is bisexual in nature. I will take that as a concession on that issue.





> Among the apes it is the females that create the continuity within the group. The social network is maintained not only by sharing food and the child rearing, but also by having sex. Among many of the female apes the sex organs swell up. So they rub their abdomens against each other


   It's not just the bonobos.  Of course we don't solve conflicts with gay sex in modern times, but that doesn't mean we as a species aren't inclined towards some homosexuality.  



> No...what i am saying is that most of us see no attraction to same-sex.
> So imagining or performing sexual acts with such will be quickly seen as strange/slightly disgusting. And a natural/logical result from that is that most people do not want to engage in such form of sex.
> 
> whereas, females from different races DO have all the sexual stimuli that attracts us. And Only a very racist upbringing/stance, will thus lead you to reject such sex.
> ...





> with science comes knowledge.
> Its a legitimate opinion.
> 
> you think sex is defined by outer appearance. others care more for physiology and actual biological sex.
> ...


 No, I understand they're two different points, and I'm responding to them as such whenever I can, but there are times when they're inseparable.  First of all, transgendered women, unlike gay men, do have the same sexual stimuli that attract straight men, so looking at that part first there should be no instinctual rejection that would make change difficult.  The second point is where we disagree.  I acknowledge that you have facts to back up your position, though I disagree with your interpretation.  But the fact alone means nothing.  It carries no compulsion to believe either interpretation.  It is as unhelpful to choosing an interpretation as the fact that black people have darker skin than white people.  A racist could say, "I have that _fact_ to support me.  White people and black people _are_ different, so I think they should be treated differently."  And supporters of racial equality would claim that fact was insignificant, and shouldn't be considered, but it is still a fact which could be twisted to fit the racist's interpretation and is completely neutral to the position of the proponents of equality, neither supporting nor (at least in their minds) contradicting them.  The proponents of equality could test the intelligence and compassion of black people and find them equal to whites, but the racist could still say that those things weren't important to him, it was a _fact_ that blacks and whites appeared different and he chose to pay attention to that instead, making his interpretation a legitimate one.  


> well..you can agree that engaging in such a relationship with no chance of offspring is devastating for the guys fitness. To avoid such a thing or reduce the number of ""traps"" in the population could be argued adaptive behaviour.


 Humans haven't evolved in the time since surgery good enough that a man could actually believe he was having sex that might produce children when he was with a transgendered woman was invented, meaning it's a societal, not a natural, adaptation.  



> I never intend to make this purely about evolution. (you end up a nazi then) As a human we should go past our primal instincts at times to benefit the species more.


  I agree.  So how does rejecting transgendered women benefit the species?  We don't have an underpopulation problem.  On the other hand, there are benefits to accepting them, that being more peaceful lives for them and no misplaced anger and guilt for their partners.  


> if you have no attraction...sexual acts seem out of place and awkward. This is only natural no?
> imagine you having sex with a tree.
> 
> most would view it neutral.....or strange and awkward which results in a slight disgust.


  Neutral, sure.  But to add disgust to that serves no purpose.  



> point of the matter is...it does not appeal to him and he wouldnt consent to that form of sex. unlike mixed sex where there ARE sexual stimuli at play.
> only the hardcore racists would not be tempted to a little rape here and there.


  Again, there are sexual stimuli at play.  Breasts, for instance, are a sexual stimuli.  Chromosomes are not a sexual stimuli.  Being disgusted by them requires the intervention of society, what you classified earlier as your second point.  Without that second point there would be no disgust or rejection, just as in the racist scenario there would be no disgust or rejection without the societal influence of racism.  


> ""it's not a matter of evolution or instinct, Since""  ""doesn't serve any societal purpose or help anyone""
> 
> You discounted it for not having societal purpose. Which is flawed.


  Here's the full quote, if you need reminding:


> Sometimes those restrictions serve a good purpose, like protecting children, and sometimes they're detrimental, such as when they're used to promote racism, but *either way *it's not a matter of evolution or instinct. Since being disgusted by transgendered people doesn't serve any societal purpose or help anyone, and it does cause harm to some people, I'd put it in the "detrimental" category.


  Having sex with a thirteen-year-old girl and having sex with a black woman can both serve an evolutionary purpose by producing offspring.  But comapassionate people refrain from the former to protect children, and racists refrain from the latter to preserve the "purity" of their race.  Both are purely societal restrictions and have nothing to do with evolution.  Being disgusted by transgendered people is also not a result of evolution.  It requires the intervention of science.    Since it doesn't help anyone and does hurt people I think of it as detrimental.  I am discounting it in the sense that I think it is unhelpful to our society and we should move past it, but my belief that it is not based in evolution is based on something completely different, which I'll elaborate on a little more now.

We can agree that being disgusted by sex with transgendered women requires the intervention of science.  That much is obvious, and you've also acknowledged it by classifying it as your second point.  Where we differ is that you believe it's logical to combine the innovation of science with instincts inherited from our ancestors.  I believe that is illogical.  If we bring the modern world into the debate by saying that we know because of science that transgendered women do not have the same chromosomes as women who were born female, why should we not also bring the modern world into the debate by saying that we no longer need to strive to pass down our genes?  That the instinct to breed only with those who can reproduce is obsolete?  And that we no longer condone men rejecting their girlfriends upon finding they are infertile, so why should we condone rejecting a girlfriend because she is transgendered?  The instinct passed down by evolution is to have sex with anything with breasts and a vagina.  Anything beyond that is societal intervention.


----------



## Xyloxi (Jul 18, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> or gay/bi males.



I wouldn't be fine with lying, I have no problem with them being transgender though. I doubt Banhammer, Sauf and some others are gay or bisexual.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 18, 2009)

Is this thread still on


----------



## WT (Jul 18, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> Is this thread still on



No ... it clearly turned off.


----------



## tinhamodic (Jul 19, 2009)

I'd be pretty pissed too but I wouldn't shoot her/him!


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 19, 2009)

Yume-chan said:


> Do you really think you need to tell me there are more than 1,500 species in the world?



yes...since you come with BS like this "" there aren't many animals, especially among mammals, who choose to mate only with the opposite sex.""



Yume-chan said:


> 1,500 is the number in which homosexual behavior has been _observed_.  Obviously they didn't observe every species of animal, so not being on the list of animals that practice homosexuality doesn't necessarily mean those animals don't.



derrrrr. 

point stands though. Its rare. And in a good deal of these cases its a disorder. 



Yume-chan said:


> It's not just the bonobos.  Of course we don't solve conflicts with gay sex in modern times, but that doesn't mean we as a species aren't inclined towards some homosexuality.



""inclined to homosexuality"" is pretty vague. 

This can be the gay pinguins...where it is an abnormal behaviour and a disorder....
or the bonobos, where it serves a purpose as evolved social behaviour and reconciliation. 



Yume-chan said:


> No, I understand they're two different points, and I'm responding to them as such whenever I can, but there are times when they're inseparable.  First of all, transgendered women, unlike gay men, do have the same sexual stimuli that attract straight men, so looking at that part first there should be no instinctual rejection that would make change difficult.



They did have constructed female sexual stimuli yeah. 


my point is that gay sex..as an abnormal sexuality..will often be seen as strange...and thus create a gut response of being slightly awkward/disgusting. 

So the ""so what if its a guy. nothing wrong with some gay sex"" angle wont work. 

the change in favor of mixed race was easier because that form of sex is only unattractive to the hardcore racists. 



Yume-chan said:


> The second point is where we disagree.  I acknowledge that you have facts to back up your position, though I disagree with your interpretation.  But the fact alone means nothing.  It carries no compulsion to believe either interpretation.  It is as unhelpful to choosing an interpretation as the fact that black people have darker skin than white people.  A racist could say, "I have that _fact_ to support me.



ok i understand you so far. 




Yume-chan said:


> White people and black people _are_ different, so I think they should be treated differently."



well this is far from racist. 
same=/=equal. 



Yume-chan said:


> And supporters of racial equality would claim that fact was insignificant, and shouldn't be considered, but it is still a fact which could be twisted to fit the racist's interpretation and is completely neutral to the position of the proponents of equality, neither supporting nor (at least in their minds) contradicting them.  The proponents of equality could test the intelligence and compassion of black people and find them equal to whites, but the racist could still say that those things weren't important to him, it was a _fact_ that blacks and whites appeared different and he chose to pay attention to that instead, making his interpretation a legitimate one.



ok i get it...major difference however...the fact is hardly insignificant. 

how the hell is actual biological sex insignificant to someones sex? 


And here we get back to point 1. 

In human sexual behaviour, does race matter a lot to atraction?? 
Nope...only the hardcore racists will be completely put off. 

In human sexual behaviour, does sex matter a lot to attraction?? 
does it Yume?? How many heterosexuals want gay sex? 

as you see your comaprison is completely off. the differences matter. And no..this is not due to racism or social construct. 



Yume-chan said:


> Humans haven't evolved in the time since surgery good enough that a man could actually believe he was having sex that might produce children when he was with a transgendered woman was invented, meaning it's a societal, not a natural, adaptation.



we are evolved to react strongly to those ruining our fitness. This is a larger adaption. 

the level of anger/violence IS influenced by society yeah. 

Just how much do we value trust, how much do we punish deceit, how negatively do we react on homosexuality. 


my point however. seeing that heterosexuals do not consent with gay sex, a good deal will always feel violated due to transgenders lying to them. As opinion 2 is a legitimate one and will always have a large following.  

this has nothing to do with bigotry. 

And it needs infact a social construct that greatly propagandizes homosexuality to override it 



Yume-chan said:


> I agree.  So how does rejecting transgendered women benefit the species?



It doesnt really....the anger is a instinctual response on deceit and violation. 



Yume-chan said:


> We don't have an underpopulation problem.  On the other hand, there are benefits to accepting them, that being more peaceful lives for them



benefits that will come at the cost of their partners...no thank you. 



Yume-chan said:


> and no misplaced anger and guilt for their partners.



its not misplaced...as i proven with my arguments. 



Yume-chan said:


> Neutral, sure.  But to add disgust to that serves no purpose.



its a natural result to an strange, out of place behaviour. 



Yume-chan said:


> Again, there are sexual stimuli at play.  Breasts, for instance, are a sexual stimuli.  Chromosomes are not a sexual stimuli.



I am talking about gay sex. not the transgender. 

When finding out hes thinking ""I had sex with a guy"" not thinking about the female parts on the transgender. 




Yume-chan said:


> Being disgusted by them requires the intervention of society, what you classified earlier as your second point.



i never said disgusted by ""them"". disgusted by gay sex. in combo with opinion 2=feeling violated by the transgender. 



Yume-chan said:


> Without that second point there would be no disgust or rejection, just as in the racist scenario there would be no disgust or rejection without the societal influence of racism.



the opinion is legitimate...

you want to censor the truth so to force acceptance???? 

again brings me back to my theory. It is you guys that want society to influence our instincts. By force feeding us certain opinions. 



Yume-chan said:


> Having sex with a thirteen-year-old girl and having sex with a black woman can both serve an evolutionary purpose by producing offspring.  But comapassionate people refrain from the former to protect children, and racists refrain from the latter to preserve the "purity" of their race.  Both are purely societal restrictions and have nothing to do with evolution.



sure...our nurturing/protecting instinct towards children has nothing to do with evolution.....



Yume-chan said:


> Being disgusted by transgendered people is also not a result of evolution.



i am not disgusted by transgenders....i would feel violated being tricked into sex with them...again your starting to lose focus on what were arguing about here. 



Yume-chan said:


> We can agree that being disgusted by sex with transgendered women requires the intervention of science.  That much is obvious, and you've also acknowledged it by classifying it as your second point.  Where we differ is that you believe it's logical to combine the innovation of science with instincts inherited from our ancestors.  I believe that is illogical.  If we bring the modern world into the debate by saying that we know because of science that transgendered women do not have the same chromosomes as women who were born female, why should we not also bring the modern world into the debate by saying that we no longer need to strive to pass down our genes?  That the instinct to breed only with those who can reproduce is obsolete? And that we no longer condone men rejecting their girlfriends upon finding they are infertile, so why should we condone rejecting a girlfriend because she is transgendered?



EVERYONE holding opinion 2 makes this connection. 
They see it as a man...they do not consent to sex with a guy...they have some issues 
simple cause and effect. 

and why ignore my sides point?? why should we condone deceit on such a level..why should we condone something that is close to rape??? 



Yume-chan said:


> The instinct passed down by evolution is to have sex with anything with breasts and a vagina.  Anything beyond that is societal intervention.



nope, getting pissed about deceit is pretty inborn as well. 

And to react slightly negatively to out of place, awkward behaviour has been around since the dawn of time as well. 

seems to me you guys want societal intervention...with our kids growing up hearing every day: 
""you dont need to reproduce"" 
""transgenders are actual women now"" 
""gay sex is normal and fun""


----------



## Yume-chan (Jul 19, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> yes...since you come with BS like this "" there aren't many animals, especially among mammals, who choose to mate only with the opposite sex.""
> 
> 
> 
> ...


  You don't know if it's rare.  In order to claim it was rare you would have to look at a huge sample of animal species and find that many more than 1,500 rarely, if ever, practiced homosexuality.  If all you know is that 1,500 do practice homosexuality you have no indication of rarity.   



> This can be the gay pinguins...where it is an abnormal behaviour and a disorder....
> or the bonobos, where it serves a purpose as evolved social behaviour and reconciliation.


  Are humans more closely related to penguins or to apes?  



> my point is that gay sex..as an abnormal sexuality..will often be seen as strange...and thus create a gut response of being slightly awkward/disgusting.


  Not all abnormal things incite a response of disgust.  Red hair, for example, is more abnormal than homosexuality, but it isn't usually seen as disgusting.  There have also been times in history when homosexuality wasn't seen that way.  That we choose to be repulsed by it in our society is a byproduct of a culture which has been highly influenced by Christianity and an attitude of condemnation towards almost all forms of sex.  



> So the ""so what if its a guy. nothing wrong with some gay sex"" angle wont work.


 I'm not arguing that at all.  You referred to homosexuality as something it is natural to be disgusted by, so I as a homosexual felt the need to correct you.  It's not related to my argument about the topic, so maybe we should drop it for now.  



> And here we get back to point 1.
> 
> In human sexual behaviour, does race matter a lot to atraction??
> Nope...only the hardcore racists will be completely put off.
> ...





> the change in favor of mixed race was easier because that form of sex is only unattractive to the hardcore racists.


  And sex with transgendered women is only unattractive to heterosexual men who think of them as other men.    


> well this is far from racist.
> same=/=equal.


  So you don't think someone is racist for wishing to treat black people and white people differently based on their skin color?  


> ok i get it...major difference however...the fact is hardly insignificant.
> 
> how the hell is actual biological sex insignificant to someones sex?


  The question is what determines someone's sex, remember?  Though you claim that your view is just another way of looking at things, you're presupposing that your conclusion is the only one that can be drawn from the facts.  In the racism analogy, you would be the racist pointing to the difference in skin tone between white people and black people and saying, "How the hell is actual biological inferiority insignificant to someone being inferior?" not realizing that not everyone takes darker skin to be inferior.  I don't take that stance.  I acknowledge that, scientifically speaking, your view is a legitimate one, as is mine.  But I believe that my view is more worthy of defending because I find it to be more compassionate and beneficial to society.  


> we are evolved to react strongly to those ruining our fitness. This is a larger adaption.


  Then why do men not murder their wives upon finding they are infertile?  Society plays a much larger role than you give it credit for.    






> sure...our nurturing/protecting instinct towards children has nothing to do with evolution.....


  From an evolutionary standpoint, it makes sense to protect children from death or serious injury, which in the case of prepubescent girls would include childbirth.  And in modern times it would make sense to protect 13-15 year-old girls from becoming pregnant even if we had no sense of ethics of morals, because they and their children would have a higher chance of surviving if they waited until they were older.  However, when humans had much lower life expectancies, it made sense to allow all girls capable of childbirth to be impregnated, and we haven't had time to evolve since then.  



> my point however. seeing that heterosexuals do not consent with gay sex, a good deal will always feel violated due to transgenders lying to them. As opinion 2 is a legitimate one and will always have a large following.
> 
> this has nothing to do with bigotry.





> And it needs infact a social construct that greatly propagandizes homosexuality to override it





> benefits that will come at the cost of their partners...no thank you.
> 
> I am talking about gay sex. not the transgender.





> When finding out hes thinking ""I had sex with a guy"" not thinking about the female parts on the transgender.





> i never said disgusted by ""them"". disgusted by gay sex. in combo with opinion 2=feeling violated by the transgender.





> you want to censor the truth so to force acceptance????





> again brings me back to my theory. It is you guys that want society to influence our instincts. By force feeding us certain opinions.





> i am not disgusted by transgenders....i would feel violated being tricked into sex with them...again your starting to lose focus on what were arguing about here.





> EVERYONE holding opinion 2 makes this connection.
> They see it as a man...they do not consent to sex with a guy...they have some issues
> simple cause and effect.





> and why ignore my sides point?? why should we condone deceit on such a level..why should we condone something that is close to rape???





> nope, getting pissed about deceit is pretty inborn as well.
> 
> And to react slightly negatively to out of place, awkward behaviour has been around since the dawn of time as well.
> 
> ...


  Well, I do think it would be a good idea to encourage adoption over reproduction, given the soaring population of the world.  And teenagers especially really don't need to reproduce so much.  But in all seriousness, most gay and transgender activists, including myself, are not promoting censorship or daily indoctrination programs.  Conservatives see it as indoctrination when books featuring children with gay parents are placed in libraries, but there are far more children with gay parents than there are such books.  They see it as indoctrination if a health teacher mentions that some people will be attracted to members of the same gender, but some people _are_ attracted to members of the same gender.  These aren't programs of indoctrination but a simple reflection of the truth.  I have no intention of trying to hide the fact transgendered people don't change their chromosomes when they have surgery.  Why would I want to?  I believe that as both our views can argued to be legitimate, once the public has had a chance to get used to transgendered people, to see that they can live normal lives and learn that they have sex change operations for reasons of identity, not so they can get more people to have sex with them, they will have no more reason to choose an interpretation that will hurt transgendered people.  How am I doing anything at the expense of the partners of transgendered people?  I'm only saying that in the future they likely won't be bothered as much if they discover that their loved one used to be of the other sex.  When that day comes it will be better for all of us.  I don't approve of deceit either, but I don't think violence is justified.  And if transgendered people were more accepted by society, there would no need for such deceit anyway.


----------



## horsdhaleine (Jul 19, 2009)

There are many men who are willing to date gays and transsexuals. I know, because there are lots of foreign men who date local gays and transsexuals here. The girlfriend should have been honest in the first place. If the potential boyfriend cannot accept the sex change, s/he should look for someone else.


----------



## Razgriez (Jul 19, 2009)

horsdhaleine said:


> There are many men who are willing to date gays and transsexuals. I know, because there are lots of foreign men who date local gays and transsexuals here. The girlfriend should have been honest in the first place. If the potential boyfriend cannot accept the sex change, s/he should look for someone else.



I dunno Id probably kill myself along with the said guy who just violated me both physically and mentally. Ugh I dunno how I would be able to coup with having sex with an once "male" female.

Just thinking about it gives me the chills.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (Jul 19, 2009)

Saufsoldat said:


>



Wow I suddenly hate you!


----------



## tiff-tiff86 (Jul 19, 2009)

I know people here have been debating the whole thing of whether hiding the fact that she was once a man mean that she "raped him" or how either way it was consensual-

-but the article never said anything about them having sex! (I'm just saying! )


----------



## Utopia Realm (Jul 19, 2009)

Razgriez said:


> I dunno Id probably kill myself along with the said guy who just violated me both physically and mentally. Ugh I dunno how I would be able to coup with having sex with an once "male" female.
> 
> Just thinking about it gives me the chills.



Some people can cope with shit like that and some cannot. Its just how people operate I suppose. It still doesn't mean you should treat the person any different than you would anybody else.


----------



## Robot-Overlord (Jul 19, 2009)

This has become the longest page in forum history!

" _'Pity'_ Irrelevant"​


----------



## Camille (Jul 20, 2009)

The bigotry in this thread is disgusting


----------



## Yαriko (Jul 20, 2009)

omg sick people


----------



## FrostXian (Jul 20, 2009)

Stop quoting the longcat you fucking retards.
I hope you all get a ban up your asses or something.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 20, 2009)

Camille said:


> The bigotry in this thread is disgusting



you deceive someone into throwing away 2 years on a relationship. making the partner feel violated on the level of rape. 

and then expect him not to get angry?? 


and I see banhammer decided to return to trolling. neg rep for giving up on a debate yet again banhammer.


----------



## Banhammer (Jul 20, 2009)

I gave up on no debate.

You're the one who allready lost to me when failed to proove your arguments with the only logical assumptions that don't turn them all to shit which are that Genitalia is as important as a brain to a person's identity as a citizen, and therefore, those dickless are as valueable as those in a vegetative coma, or that a woman's brain in a body with no penis and silicone boobs is not a woman.
Think you have the balls to neg me and get on that list? Fine. Your choice.


----------



## Utopia Realm (Jul 20, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> you deceive someone into throwing away 2 years on a relationship. making the partner feel violated on the level of rape.
> 
> and then expect him not to get angry??



Your arguement is invalid. This is not on the level of rape, nor even close to it. To even consider it is just retarded. The guy overreacted and lost his cool in the midst of hearing the truth. Anyone with at least some restraint wouldn't have gone nuts like he did. Also, its not as if she did this to ruin the guy's life or anything for that matter. She simply decided to tell him when she thought it was appropiate and safe after a few years into the relationship.


----------



## Camille (Jul 20, 2009)

Zabuzalives said:


> you deceive someone into throwing away 2 years on a relationship. making the partner feel violated on the level of rape.
> 
> and then expect him not to get angry??
> 
> ...



I expect him to get angry and hurt, but saying that murdering her is _justified_ just because she didn't tell him of the sex change before, is absolute bigoted bullshit.


----------



## WT (Jul 20, 2009)

Camille said:


> I expect him to get angry and hurt, but saying that murdering her is _justified_ just because she didn't tell him of the sex change before, is absolute bigoted bullshit.



*Very* angry and *Very* hurt. An ordeal he would never forget for the rest of his life. His pride as a Man was completely and utterly destroyed.

However, like I said before, Murder wasn't the solution, a little far fetched. They should have thrown that thing in the prison for deception and a form of rape.


----------



## Utopia Realm (Jul 20, 2009)

Sesshomaru said:


> *Very* angry and *Very* hurt. An ordeal he would never forget for the rest of his life. His pride as a Man was completely and utterly destroyed.
> 
> However, like I said before, Murder wasn't the solution, a little far fetched. They should have thrown that thing in the prison for deception and a form of rape.



For the last time, it was not a form of rape.


----------



## Camille (Jul 20, 2009)

Sesshomaru said:


> *Very* angry and *Very* hurt. An ordeal he would never forget for the rest of his life. His pride as a Man was completely and utterly destroyed.
> 
> However, like I said before, Murder wasn't the solution, a little far fetched. They should have thrown that thing in the prison for deception and a form of rape.



Thank you for cementing my belief that this thread reeks of first-class bigotry. 

Oh, his manly sensibilities were hurt, poor guy indeed. And, "that thing", seriously?


----------



## FrostXian (Jul 20, 2009)

Sesshomaru said:


> *Very* angry and *Very* hurt. An ordeal he would never forget for the rest of his life. His pride as a Man was completely and utterly destroyed.



What the shit? I wouldn't really give a crap if I found out that I fucked a man. Really, who the shit cares? 
"I didn't know, sorry about your ass."

OH MY PRIDE! YOU'VE HURT MY PRIDE, KAKAROT!


----------



## WT (Jul 20, 2009)

FrostXian said:


> Really, who the shit cares?



You wouldn't believe it but a lot of people do.


----------



## Saufsoldat (Jul 20, 2009)

Sesshomaru said:


> You wouldn't believe it but a lot of people do.



People who are insecure about their sexual orientation?


----------



## Camille (Jul 20, 2009)

Saufsoldat said:


> People who are insecure about their sexual orientation?



Bingo.


Honestly, I can't believe some people in here who ascertain they would do the same and justify it on their _pride_ and feelings being "raped".


----------



## Utopia Realm (Jul 20, 2009)

Camille said:


> Bingo.
> 
> 
> Honestly, I can't believe some people in here who ascertain they would do the same and justify it on their _pride_ and feelings being "raped".



Not all that uncommon for people to act uncontrollably but still not the right way it seems.


----------



## Tyrael (Jul 20, 2009)

I'll keep my thoughts short.

A: She should have told him; since it was a casual relationship, not doing so is forgivable.

B: The only thing he has a right to be angry about is that she didn't trust him (rightfully, it seemed)-any sort of violence at all, especially murder, is uncalled for.

C: Lol, this thread.

The pregnancy/having kids thing would be a good point if they were committing to each other, but they weren't.


----------



## horsdhaleine (Jul 20, 2009)

Razgriez said:


> horsdhaleine said:
> 
> 
> > There are many men who are willing to date gays and transsexuals. I know, because there are lots of foreign men who date local gays and transsexuals here. The girlfriend should have been honest in the first place. If the potential boyfriend cannot accept the sex change, s/he should look for someone else.
> ...


I know. If I were a man, it would give me the chills too. 

That's why the _girlfriend_ should have been honest with him in the first place. If the boyfriend could accept the fact, then the _girlfriend_ should have look for another guy. There are lots of men who are cool with being gay. Why be with someone whose strictly straight?

I'm not justifying the murder. Of course, it's wrong. Lying about your past and murdering someone are not solutions.


----------



## Zabuzalives (Jul 20, 2009)

Banhammer said:


> I gave up on no debate.
> 
> You're the one who allready lost to me when failed to proove your arguments with the only logical assumptions that don't turn them all to shit which are that Genitalia is as important as a brain to a person's identity as a citizen, and therefore, those dickless are as valueable as those in a vegetative coma, or that a woman's brain in a body with no penis and silicone boobs is not a woman.
> Think you have the balls to neg me and get on that list? Fine. Your choice.



as i said in an earlier post. my argument is FAR more then ""penis=man"", an argument even after been told 3 times...you still try to strawman me into

and enjoy your ban btw


----------



## Havoc (Jul 20, 2009)

lol at some of these posts.

One side feels that he is justified killing 'her'.

One side thinks you have to be insecure to be mad you fucking a tranny.

I hope stupidity isn't contagious.



FrostXian said:


> What the shit? I wouldn't really give a crap if I found out that I fucked a man. Really, who the shit cares?
> "I didn't know, sorry about your ass."
> 
> OH MY PRIDE! YOU'VE HURT MY PRIDE, KAKAROT!



Well, you're a ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".).

It's cool.


----------



## joe53746 (Jul 20, 2009)

Well murder is wrong. But you can't blame the guy for going crazy. he/she  created an allusion of a women and technically that women died the moment he learned the truth. So maybe his mind set was to take out the person who took his loved one.


----------

