CreateDebate


Debate Info

56
61
Yes No
Debate Score:117
Arguments:113
Total Votes:121
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (45)
 
 No (53)

Debate Creator

brontoraptor(28873) pic



Are you evil if you assume someone's gender/ hold them to their original gender?

Yes

Side Score: 56
VS.

No

Side Score: 61
3 points

Bruce Gender is a man .... therefore I am evil (in their eyes)

Bradly Manning is a man .... therefore I am evil (in their eyes)

there is no such thing as "trans" gender .... not unless you can change your DNA

just as there is no such thing as a "two-state" solution ....

not when one of the "states" seeks to obliterate the other

Side: Yes
Jace(4706) Disputed
1 point

Sex is biological. Gender isn't. Even if gender and sex were both the same genetic phenomenon, sex is not binary so your male/man and female/woman model doesn't follow from your own rationale.

Side: No
xljackson(260) Disputed
1 point

How do you define sex or gender? Maybe then it will be easier to tell you where you're wrong... :)

Side: Yes

Evil?

That's a too minor matter to even be worth weighing on the scale.

But if you still want to feel evil doing it, then sure, so be it.

Side: Yes
5 points

You aren't wrong, you are just an asshole.

Side: No
1 point

You beat me to it. ................................................................

Side: No
1 point

True, but the truth is the truth, asshole or not. At least you aren't that far gone. I'd give you points, but I don't want to because you are a snotty little clown, and we both know what I am.

Side: Yes
outlaw60(15500) Clarified
1 point

SouthPark a man can't assume a woman's gender nor can a woman assume a man's gender just not scientifically possible !

Side: Yes
1 point

You misunderstand the liberal terminology being used here. This discussion is about calling someone a certain gender. You can think you know what gender someone else is. That's the assumption being discussed. When liberals talk about assuming a gender they are talking about someone assuming they know the gender of someone else. In that case you might assume a man is a woman or a woman is a man if they dress/look a certain way.

Side: No
xljackson(260) Disputed
1 point

So I'm a police officer walking down the street and I see an adult male in a dress,

Someone that I can quite clearly tell has balls as big as their adam's apple,

But I can't 'assume someone's gender', and now he tell's me that he's 'female'.

I must now wait and get a female officer on scene to search this fully grown man,

meanwhile other calls are coming in and I'm just stuck wasting time...

But If I didn't do this by your standard I would be considered an asshole...lol you're just stupid champ...

Side: Yes
Jace(4706) Disputed
3 points

The only reasons such protocol would exist is because the law enforcement agency that employs you as an officer has determined that it is most pursuant to the ends of law enforcement. Whether you think it is a waste of time in this scenario is as irrelevant as that opinion would be in upholding any other mandates of your office.

Moreover, the rationale for such protocol would be identical to protocol requiring you to wait for a female officer to search a female woman. The concern would be with the real and perceived safety of the person in question, as well as protecting the officer from wrongful allegations of assault. Therefore, your objection is unsound unless you also think waiting for a female officer to search females is a waste of time.

Side: No
Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

You are a cop. It doesn't take anything else to determine that you are an asshole.

Side: No
Amarel(4987) Disputed
1 point

There is no law saying you can't search a person you are arresting. Of course, you never said you were arresting the ladyman, so your search would be illegal anyway.

Side: No
2 points

No, you're not evil. Are you evil if you assume a human person is not a trash can, a fish, a cat, a dog, or a cloud? Not at all.

Side: No
1 point

Hello bront:

I believe in FREEDOM.. That's FREEDOM to BE what you wanna BE... I don't hold people to ANYTHING except civil behavior.. It ain't up to me.. And, I don't care where people pee.

excon

Side: No
FromWithin(7637) Disputed
2 points

LOL, this ex con is the freedom loving Liberal that wants to force every public school to bow to his ideology, censor the nativity on public grounds, supports the party whose goal is to take our Gun freedoms, forces all Americans to pay to kill unborn babies, etc. etc.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, I CANT TAKE ANY MORE OF YOUR FREEDOM LOVING INTOLERANCE.

Side: Yes
1 point

So if I unzipped and took a leak on your pant leg, you wouldn't care Con?

Side: Yes
excon(12962) Disputed
1 point

Hello bront:

I love it.. You are now Chief Pee on Pants. You're native, right? Can you prove that?? Until you do, I'm gonna call you Pee on Pants..

excon

Side: No
1 point

I want to be an octopus and get benefits that you pay for because I claim to be mentally handicapped as said "octopus". If you could give me your car and pay for my medical that'd be great too.

Side: Yes
Jace(4706) Disputed
1 point

Quite a leap from having the civility to call someone what they want to be called and having to pay or their entire existence. Affirming the former doesn't mean backing the latter.

Side: No
outlaw60(15500) Disputed
1 point

Were Transgender's ever refused the right of any bathroom ? You don't care where people pee but your agenda should be pushed on all Americans ? When you Progressives have nothing left in the tank it's bathrooms , Russians or whatever other insane BS you can dream up !

Side: Yes
1 point

No, you're not evil, as that may just be the way you grew up, however, if you deliberately refuse to refer someone as the pronoun that makes them feel the most comfortable solely to spite them, then yes that's quite messed up.

Side: No
1 point

No, deeming someone 'evil' would be defined by the perspective of the individual.

Gender is defined biologically not by the perspective of the individual.

Side: No
Jace(4706) Disputed
1 point

Sex is defined biologically. Notably, there are also more than two sexes; so even if gender essentialism were true your notion of gender would still be ill-informed.

Gender is a social concept that varies across cultures and times. It only ever exists as a matter of perspective, no matter what position you want to take on the validity of trans* identity.

Side: Yes
xljackson(260) Disputed
1 point

Yeah not to sure what you are even trying to say, I don't think you do either...

Your gender is defined biologically.

If you want to argue about culture, sex and semantics then you're just going to get left behind :)

Side: No

If this thing is entertained, soon, people will be in monster, comic and animal costumes and expect people to accept them as such.

There are many girls who like wearing men's clothes but they never claim to be men And it shouldn't be different at the opposite.

We should understand some people are morons who never grew out of stupid childhood fantacies....

Pay attention to their nonsense and making it law is puting future of your country in jeopardy

Side: No
Jace(4706) Disputed
1 point

How, exactly, does using the preferred pronouns of transgender women threaten the future of the whole country? That's not remotely coherent.

Side: Yes
xljackson(260) Disputed
1 point

It's slippery. You don't think it's detrimental for a society that has gained so much from science to make law's going against it....

Side: No
1 point

No, this is an idea created by liberals to get trans. people to vote for them, and you can tell because they also support Muslims, who cannot go trans., and they also idolize them.

Side: No
Jace(4706) Disputed
1 point

Because trans* people make up such a huge voting block... get real.

Side: Yes
xljackson(260) Disputed
1 point

Trust me these leaches will take a vote from anywhere and they need all the help they can get, libs are a dying breed.

Side: No
1 point

There is no such thing as evil, but even if there were I should hardly think either of these things would count for it. However, as it doesn't take much effort and doesn't hurt anyone to call someone by the name and pronouns they prefer... it probably does make you an asshole, but that's your prerogative.

Side: No
outlaw60(15500) Clarified
1 point

There is no such thing as evil ? Ever heard of Muslims ? Or have you missed the news ?

Side: Yes
Jace(4706) Clarified
1 point

Of course I've heard of Muslims. Still no such thing as evil.

Side: Yes

nope, that shouldn't be wrong, but it might offend the person.. and if you are willing to do that, or you don't care of offending the person, go for it.

Side: No

I think you're normal; nothing wrong with being normal.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Side: No
1 point

No, you're not evil.

I don't think it's wrong to "assume" someone's gender in most situations as transgender people make up around 0.6% of the population. I will normally refer to someone as what they look like unless they tell me otherwise.

I will however try not to assume someone's gender in specific contexts:

- If I'm doing something LGBT+ related, or if I think the person is likely to be LGBT+

- If the person concerned dresses and has their hair in a fashion that makes me think they may be transgender. I also have a couple of acquaintances who wear badges that let you know they are trans, in which case I'll respect it

- The above two points even more so if I am on a college campus

- Also, if I have an acquaintance on Facebook, I'll use whatever pronouns they go by on there

In those situations, I'll talk to them like any other person, but if I have to refer to them in the third person I'll use "they" or "them". That's their cue to let me know if they want to be referred to another way.

I do think it's unnecessarily antagonistic to continually refer to people as a gender they don't want to identify as. Calling them by their birth gender isn't going to make them change their minds, it's just going to make you look rude.

However, there are some trans people who need to chill a little on pronouns. Accusing people of assuming their gender, or insulting them for getting it wrong the first time, is just going to make people not want to talk to you.

I think a reasonable analogy to use for all this would be someone who feels American although they were actually born in another country. They feel strongly American and strongly patriotic towards America.

Telling them they're not American because they weren't born that way is just you being a jerk. You can think it, but you don't have to say it.

Side: No
1 point

This is a difficult question.

Of course these people are mentally ill, and the PC idea that their illness should be celebrated is very detrimental to society.

On the other hand, post-op transgenders have a suicide rate of 40%.

This is real statistical data, unlike the bullshit about "gay teen suicide".

So, it might be a good idea not to disappoint these people further.

Their life is misarable as it is and they might not have a lot left.

However, in the case of pr-op transgenders, I would say it's evil not to address them by their real gender and mock their delusional ideas.

For the same reason mentioned above.

Side: No