View Single Post
Old 07-15-2014, 05:28 PM   #37
BrutalDaddy
Member

How Do You Identify?:
Her Asshole.
Preferred Pronoun?:
Him, hym, he, whatever.
Relationship Status:
Bitch has no more excuses now.
 
BrutalDaddy's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Lower Alabama
Posts: 519
Thanks: 206
Thanked 2,785 Times in 499 Posts
Rep Power: 21474849
BrutalDaddy Has the BEST ReputationBrutalDaddy Has the BEST ReputationBrutalDaddy Has the BEST ReputationBrutalDaddy Has the BEST ReputationBrutalDaddy Has the BEST ReputationBrutalDaddy Has the BEST ReputationBrutalDaddy Has the BEST ReputationBrutalDaddy Has the BEST ReputationBrutalDaddy Has the BEST ReputationBrutalDaddy Has the BEST ReputationBrutalDaddy Has the BEST Reputation
Default

I don't know if this couple chose to go this route strictly based off "loophole" or if there were past thoughts/desires to transition and so this "loophole" provided the perfect opportunity to do so. I don't know if this couple intentionally realized the back lash that could/would stem from their decision to use the "loophole" to their advantage. I don't even know exactly how I feel about this yet.

What I do know is this. My first thought had to do how the same "scenario" has been played out for the argument against gay marriage. By this I'm speaking of the argument that gay people should not be allowed to legally marry because god had ordained marriage between a bio male and bio female so that they may procreate. This argument/scenario has been played out in front of judges all over this nation. First time I ever heard it all I could think about were all the heterosexual couples out there who, for whatever reason, could not have children.

I guess where I'm going with this is, whether intentional or unintentional, the couples' actions could/can undermine the struggles of others (transgenders and transsexuals) within that same umbrella. Just as the hard core religious organizations actions to ban gay marriage could/can undermine the struggles of those within their umbrella (heterosexual couples unable to give birth "the way god intended").

Amazing to me how two "groups", so vastly different in beliefs, could possibly parallel each other in their mission(s), not realizing (or maybe they do but don't care), how much it could affect those around them. Granted, the couple isn't a "group" but merely two people looking for a way to be considered legally married in the eyes of the law but who's to say others won't follow suit? If it worked for them, it could work for others.

It can be viewed as follows....if masculine person of that couple transitioned only to be able to legally get married yet has no desire to be a man then that can undermine the serious struggle, grief, confusion, pain that a person who transitions goes through and also the way society views transgender/transsexual. Basically that transgender/transsexual really isn't that serious of an issue so dismiss it. Same for the organized religion argument that undermines heterosexual couples who can not procreate because their argument essentially says they can't marry either or shouldn't be married.

Anyway, this ramble may have gotten off topic but the thought kept bugging me and I knew if I didn't get it out of my head, it'd stay there. So figured I'd make y'all suffer with my musings.



That's All,
Brute.
BrutalDaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to BrutalDaddy For This Useful Post: