TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Transsexuals feel violated
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »


Posted by MarkT on Nov-30-2004 01:06:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
I dont look down on transsexuals at all. I thank god im not one because it must be terribly difficult. However, i still cannot buy their arguement that it violates their rights when so many common services are delisted.

My point here is not about whether it should be listed or not. My point is that if they win this case based on discrimination then why shouldnt i be able to fight for discrimintion based on having to pay for an eye exam? If not having the right "equipment" is grounds for discrimination then not being able to see properly is as well.

I don't really care if transsexuals get free operations or not. Personally i think it would be great if they did. But there is no justification for that to happen unless they relist all the other more common procedures first.

People who need glasses or contacts have rights too. Just because they don't fall into a special politically correct special interest group doesn't lessen that. (or it shouldnt at least)


you're right...we agree to a great extent. Both should be funded.

so then I'd say to you...put your money, time and energy where your mouth is, if this is such an important issue to you. Clearly it is to those transgendered persons...they're going to court. Their desire to fight for funding for a proceedure that they can't afford on there own appears to be rather strong and something they believe in.

What are the people who feel so strongly about funded eye exams doing? not much, it seems.

So are you upset at this issue going to court? or the lack of motivation on the part of the millions of people who require eye exams?


Posted by Jayx1 on Nov-30-2004 01:10:

This is my point. If this case wins i know two people who are chiropractors and i will be presenting this idea to them. I personally dont have the money to challenge this in the court but it would be a good way to right the wrong that mcguinty has placed on all of us. Its time to hold these liars accountable.

If this is a human rights case then you and I also have the same rights to other services.


Posted by Izra on Nov-30-2004 01:12:

If the government pays for gender transition treatment, which is a form of body modification, then they should pay for brest enhancements and nose jobs too. Eye exams are 100 times more important then any form of body modification.

And Skipper, I realize that they have issues about thier body, but so do millions of other Canadians. This isn't about how they feel, it is about the line that should be drawn when it comes to government funding. If you are born with a penis, and you want to trade it in, you better start fundraising, sorry transexuals.


Posted by Skipper on Nov-30-2004 01:28:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
If they win i just might. Im tired of special interests. It's time for someone to stick up for the common person.


Good! It's really quite hypocritical of you to judge people who are fighting for what they believe in when you have no plans to fight for what you believe in.

Props to them. i'm sure they have encountered a lot of opposition along the way.


Posted by Skipper on Nov-30-2004 01:33:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
This is my point. If this case wins i know two people who are chiropractors and i will be presenting this idea to them. I personally dont have the money to challenge this in the court but it would be a good way to right the wrong that mcguinty has placed on all of us. Its time to hold these liars accountable.

If this is a human rights case then you and I also have the same rights to other services.


Sounds like we agree in principle.
However, many in this thread have put forth an argument that goes like this: "if you were born with a penis, deal with it, or pay for it" which is similar to "if you were born with a lazy eye, or imperfect vision, deal with it, or pay for it." Some people in this thread would agree with the first statement but not the second, which is hugely hypocritical.


Posted by MarkT on Nov-30-2004 01:38:

quote:
Originally posted by PartEgurl
If the government pays for gender transition treatment, which is a form of body modification, then they should pay for brest enhancements and nose jobs too. Eye exams are 100 times more important then any form of body modification.
...


That's a very slippery slope. You're making a value judgement on what is "100% more important". To you, who presumably leads a relatively normal life, vision is probably REALLY important. I fall into that boat too. To a transgendered individual, every waking hour is probably occupied with their condition and how they can "fix" it. To them, the procedure is a lot more life altering and important to them than not having to pay for their exam to get proper contact lenses.

Taking the path you lay out, I could then say that fixing your broken arm is a form of "body modification", no? If you reply with "well, your arm wasn't broken before, it's merely a repair", then I'd say what about people born with serious disfigurements? They feel that they can't integrate or function in society...well, a transgendered person feels the same way. Those with disfigurements are in a vast minority comapared to those who need corrective vision care, but you won't find many people saying "fuck paying for that kid's surgery to fix his disfigured face, their parents can cover it", will you?

Seriously...while there are those with "issues", the idea is that the intense psycholigical assessments will weed out those who just "think" they want to change their gender. Anyone who actually makes it to the surgery stage (in Canada, anyway) is well beyond the "this is a phase" or "I just need psychotherapy" stage

There's a difference between elective body modification and a legitimately recognized condition. Like I said, this isn't a frivolous issue...it's been researched and documented. It's not the same as piercing your nose or enlarging your breasts (although in cases of RADICALLY large or small breasts that seriously affect a women's quality of life, I'd support funded surgery too).


Posted by TrueToTheCrew on Nov-30-2004 03:21:

How about bald people. What about our psycological well being.
If i want my hair back i gotta pay 5K but if i want a C unt and tits I can get them for free courtesy of our government.

What is this world coming to.


Posted by nycionx on Nov-30-2004 04:33:

Re: Transsexuals feel violated

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
So they delisted sex change operations and these people say it's a violation of their human rights. Well when i have to pay for an eye exam because i cant see i think i will seriously take the province to court if this case wins. I think sight is a little more important than a penis replacement. Why shit like this even makes it to court is beyond me.


why? cuz this is canada. only stuff like this u can be sure to happen here.

get used to it..

but ya that shit is disturbing. and im reallly not surprised about it


Posted by nycionx on Nov-30-2004 04:39:

quote:
..He described his partner�s life after surgery as radiant and full of joy.


lol! wut a joke


happpy happpy joy joy



(fagots)


Posted by Yohan on Nov-30-2004 05:45:

quote:
Originally posted by nycionx
lol! wut a joke


happpy happpy joy joy



(fagots)


How mature of you.


Posted by ShadoWolf on Nov-30-2004 05:47:

quote:
Originally posted by Skipper
Sounds like we agree in principle.
However, many in this thread have put forth an argument that goes like this: "if you were born with a penis, deal with it, or pay for it" which is similar to "if you were born with a lazy eye, or imperfect vision, deal with it, or pay for it." Some people in this thread would agree with the first statement but not the second, which is hugely hypocritical.


born with penis = boy


Posted by Cyrus King on Nov-30-2004 06:34:

There is a deep complexity to this issue that cant be fixed with a simple frontal lobodomy surgery. These people spend every waking moment with a need to become the person they want to be.

This is not a cosmetic sugery. They are not going about this procedure in order to showoff thier new pussy. Bald men transplant thier hair becuase they want to SHOW that they have hair. Woman get implants to SHOW thier big breats.

Do you guys think that Hermaphrodites should pay to correct what they feel they should have?? Is that a cosmetic procedure to you all? If you had both genetalia.. would you like it if someone told you that its a costmetic procedure?

Some people sound earily similar to the same people who still think homosexuality is a disaese of the mind. Cant beleive how ignorant people are.


Posted by MarkT on Nov-30-2004 07:44:

no kidding. I guess it shouldn't be surprising, but the level of ignorance, the lack of compassion, and the inability or unwillingness to identify with others who are different that exists here...wow.

nycionx...that would be 3 threads in a week where you go out of your way to bring up homosexuality (useless here since it's pretty much unrelated to this issue). it's clear you have...issues to work out.


Posted by bass drive on Nov-30-2004 12:55:

I don't have much info about this subject, so say even if they chop off the "tools", wouldn't they still have male features like body type/ hair ,voice.. etc?


Posted by drgoodvibe on Nov-30-2004 13:24:

quote:
Originally posted by bass drive
I don't have much info about this subject, so say even if they chop off the "tools", wouldn't they still have male features like body type/ hair ,voice.. etc?


hormone therapy helps with that. Basically a man would take all the various hormones that a woman has (namely Estrogen) and since he no longer has testicles his body produces only an extremely minute amount of testosterone. Thereby giving a man, female features such as breasts, a softer voice and so on.

how I feel about the subject, I feel that it should be covered by OHIP ,including eye exams and chiropractic care.


Posted by TrueToTheCrew on Nov-30-2004 14:09:

quote:
Originally posted by drgoodvibe
hormone therapy helps with that. Basically a man would take all the various hormones that a woman has (namely Estrogen) and since he no longer has testicles his body produces only an extremely minute amount of testosterone. Thereby giving a man, female features such as breasts, a softer voice and so on.

how I feel about the subject, I feel that it should be covered by OHIP ,including eye exams and chiropractic care.


Sounds like playing God to me.


Posted by bass drive on Nov-30-2004 14:18:

quote:
Originally posted by drgoodvibe
hormone therapy helps with that. Basically a man would take all the various hormones that a woman has (namely Estrogen) and since he no longer has testicles his body produces only an extremely minute amount of testosterone. Thereby giving a man, female features such as breasts, a softer voice and so on.


hmm I don't think it's that simple. Also, They would still have the male body structure

maybe someone can post pics of "successful" cases (no under the belt pics )


Posted by Jayx1 on Nov-30-2004 14:44:

i personally think that privately delivered but universal access is the way to go. Then maybe we could afford everything.


Posted by pinkphantasm on Nov-30-2004 17:26:

quote:
Originally posted by MarkT
well said.

taxpayer money pays for cancer treatment of lifelong smokers, broken legs of skiiers, rehab of drug addicts, etc.

so the "this is a choice" or "this isn't necessary" arguments are groundless. If you disagree, then you must support a position of "You chose to ski, you broke your leg, you pay for your surgery then!"



In Canada, people pay for their own rescues (or there insurance does) when they're skiing out of bounds. Being phiysically active (in any kind of sport - extreme or not) comes with an inherent risk of physical injury. It's reasonable to expect our health care system to pay for the resonable consequences of physical activity.

I don't understand how its not a choice to have a sex change. There is another viable option - be uncomfortable in your body. It sucks and isn't ideal but it is an option.


Posted by pinkphantasm on Nov-30-2004 17:42:

quote:
Originally posted by Jayx1
If they win i just might. Im tired of special interests. It's time for someone to stick up for the common person.


Yeah - 'cause the common person is never represented
Special interest groups are totally necessary in democracy so that the government runs the best way for everyone. It helps to eliminate tyrany of the majority.


Posted by ShadoWolf on Nov-30-2004 17:56:

quote:
Originally posted by pinkphantasm
Yeah - 'cause the common person is never represented
Special interest groups are totally necessary in democracy so that the government runs the best way for everyone. It helps to eliminate tyrany of the majority.


What about tyranny of the minority?


Posted by pinkphantasm on Nov-30-2004 19:29:

quote:
Originally posted by ShadoWolf
What about tyranny of the minority?


That would be like everyone being forced to get sex changes

By someone getting a sex change paid for - there's no direct personal impact to any member of the majority.


Posted by drgoodvibe on Nov-30-2004 20:07:

quote:
Originally posted by bass drive
hmm I don't think it's that simple. Also, They would still have the male body structure

maybe someone can post pics of "successful" cases (no under the belt pics )


its not that simple sure, but the general way is through hormone therapy. The bone structure definitely cannot change and does not. However skin, breasts, facial hair, muscle tone, weight/mass/fat distribution all are effected by hormones.


Posted by baystreetboi on Nov-30-2004 20:15:

quote:

By someone getting a sex change paid for - there's no direct personal impact to any member of the majority.



Other than the fact that collectively, society must do without the financial and other resources which would be used by the procedure that could be put towards other types of procedures. It comes back to the ranking / priority question. If we only have so many dollars / hospital beds / what have you, then choices have to be made as to which procedures are covered by tax dollars and which must unfortuately be funded from private sources.

Personally, I don't think this is an area that the courts should be deciding. Obviously, there are scarce dollars in our health care system and there will be for the forseeable future. It really comes down to a value judgement as to which procedures are more "important" or pressing than others. This is the reason we have elected representatives... to make these calls. If left in the hands of the court, this decision should logically mean that OHIP coverage should be extended to a slew of other procedures which are not currently covered (such as eye exams which has been mentioned).

Who do we want setting health policy in this country? Unelected judges (who obviously will take the interests of minorities into account, yet have no responsibility or accountability as to the spending of tax dollars), or our elected representatives?


Posted by Jayx1 on Nov-30-2004 20:19:

At least you understand the actual point i was making instead of the validity of the operation itself which is what other people have been talking about


Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.