"I can't keep denying it"

Status
Not open for further replies.
MarchinBunny said:
It's not a very good expenation if you ask me. So some news outlets had a few people complain about it. I don't care. News outlets complain about stupid crap all the time, especially these days with all the SJW around. All it's doing is drawing up false comparisons and nothing more. Also, you can't honestly sit there say "transgender" people prefer it that way, when I am transgender myself and don't care. What ... am I not included in it for some reason?

Gayed and lesbianed does certainly sound weird no doubt and would giggle if someone used them that way, but it's a false comparison. Just because you can point to instances where it's not used doesn't mean it's not used for a different word. Also, they state transgender brings it in line with gay, lesbian, bi, etc but never explain why it needs it or why it matters. They say the -ed adds unnecessary length, but if it's about length then wouldn't trans also be better than transgender?

The second articles doesn't understand grammar.

The colored comparison to me is just stupid. I think calling people of color, is the same as calling them colored. Using them in a descriptive manner aka, as an adjective, there is nothing wrong with either. Grammatically both are correct, and anyone who has a problem with it is just be rediculous. As long as a person isn't going up to someone and saying "Hey, person of color, come over here."

Something very important to note Kerry is news and random people who write headlines and articles ... are not authorities on word use, and they certainly do not speak for all of those who are transgendered. <--- purposefully used

If some people have a problem with its use, then fine. Don't use it. But the moment you start telling others not to use it, because you don't use it is the moment I think it's going too far. Correct people when they need to be corrected. This to me is not one of those times. This is more about opinion, than it is about correction.

You may feel this way, and you are entitled to do so. But I will leave you with this:

Would you approach a black person and refer to him as "colored"? I'm guessing not. And the reason is that you know that "person of color" is not the same as "colored." Nor is "transgendered," which indicates a thing done to someone, a journey of sorts, the same as "transgender," which is simply a fact.

As I have said, neither one feels like an "insult" to me. But I am keenly aware of what is considered correct and why.
 
kerry said:
You may feel this way, and you are entitled to do so. But I will leave you with this:

Would you approach a black person and refer to him as "colored"? I'm guessing not. And the reason is that you know that "person of color" is not the same as "colored."
No offense to you, but I wouldn't approach a person who is black and refer to them as a person of color at all. I refer to them as a human being. I don't go up to people and refer to them as adjectives. I don't go up to a person and say hey blond hair person. I am sorry, but that is stupid. It's not a good example because I simply wouldn't do that for anyone for any reason.
Person of color and colored to me is the same thing. It's insulting both ways. Rude and shouldn't be done at all.

Nor is "transgendered," which indicates a thing done to someone, a journey of sorts, the same as "transgender," which is simply a fact.
It does not imply it is done to someone. It's an adjective. It's a descriptive word. That is why you don't go up to someone and say "hey transgendered person" or "hey transgender person" .. both are equally rude in my eyes. Call me by my damned name, and if you don't know it, ask for it.

As I have said, neither one feels like an "insult" to me. But I am keenly aware of what is considered correct and why.
I don't think you are as aware as you think. It's just an opinion in a mass of opinions.

You havn't shown me any reason why transgendered is wrong to use. It's maybe wrong to use in certain ways ... but I am not suggesting someone go up to someone and call them transgender like as if it's their name.
 
MarchinBunny said:
You havn't shown me any reason why transgendered is wrong to use. It's maybe wrong to use in certain ways ... but I am not suggesting someone go up to someone and call them transgender like as if it's their name.

Well, if I haven't shown you, then I probably can't show you. No use in any further attempt. I tried.
 
kerry said:
Well, if I haven't shown you, then I probably can't show you. No use in any further attempt. I tried.

Well, I would like you to if you can, but you simply haven't. I don't even think you understand it yourself, to be honest. I think you just randomly made a decision on this without much thought.

Edit:
I mean ... not once have you actually refuted a single point I made.
 
MarchinBunny said:
Well, I would like you to if you can, but you simply haven't. I don't even think you understand it yourself, to be honest. I think you just randomly made a decision on this without much thought.

Edit:
I mean ... not once have you actually refuted a single point I made.

I have. Completely. You simply are refusing to accept it. I'm done.
 
kerry said:
I have. Completely. You simply are refusing to accept it. I'm done.

Meh ... fine if you say so, then I guess you will have no problem if I continue to use it, and I will continue to do so. Thank you.
 
Marka said:
There's something to be said about opinion too... I'm not sure, where the emphasis on correctness; seems to be taking precedent, over the general affect, that this 'ed' form has - more and, above, it's dictionary and/or grammatical correctness...

Yet, it tends to leave the debate - whether, transgender, happened to you or, another (transgendered) or, whether it's more intrinsic than that... that, transgender, is more of an overall and, throughout, part of each being - not, an event.

I suppose, that it would largely depend, on whether the point of differentiation - is genetic, nature or, nurture... Or, simply, discovery...

Whether it's been properly used, in a grammatical or accredited definition source... or, if it's merely a leniency on the use of such terms culturally and/or historically...

...Colored people, do not exist... in so much as, they were not likely, colored-in yet, they have acquired, their particular pigmentation, through thousands of years of evolution... They are people, 'of color'

It's not an event yet, an extensive and enduring process... an evolution...

It's not as though, someone egged your house and so; it's a an egged house - for all of time remaining though - historically, it will have always been egged, from that time... it's not intrinsic nor, everlasting... It, does not define, the intrinsic aspects - of said house...

That's my thoughts on this, so far...

My best and, for now...
-Marka

See, I don't understand at all what it is you all keep talking about XD.
To me people of color, is the exact same thing as colored people. It's an adjective, not a verb. The ed to me at the end does not imply it was something done to them and I have no clue where you are getting that from. Just because other words are used in that manner doesn't imply it is for all words. Remember, we are talking about the english language here. Rules are essentially followed ..and one of the rules is the rules don't need to be followed lmao.

Here let me teach you all a little lesson in English lol so I don't have to feel like I am being ganged up on when I am soooooo not wrong here.

http://www.grammar.cl/Notes/Adjectives_ED_ING.htm
So transgendered is literally just a descriptive word. It's absolutly no different than saying transgender. "That person is transgender" and "that person is transgendered" .. is quite literally the same thing.

And colored in that context is the same as saying people of color.

Edit:
I would like to point out though, the only caveat about using it as an adjective is that implies it's temporary. So I suppose in that sense we could consider it the wrong usage, however, to a degree we could call it something that is temporary. After transition, the person is no longer transgendered. Though if you still wanted to be considered as such, at that point i would say transexual would be the word to use after transitioning. So it works with transgendered in that sense. Also, all dictionaries I looked at accept transgendered as an adjective. So again ... not like im wrong o.o

It doesn't work with colored people, because it's not really temporary. However, again this is english ... the rules simply are not allways followed in this langauge and we cannot ignore that.
 
Last edited:
*Makes post about being transgender*

*post becomes about meaning of the word transgender and the difference between transgendered*

*Giggles*
 
Binary said:
*Makes post about being transgender*

*post becomes about meaning of the word transgender and the difference between transgendered*

*Giggles*

Ya sorry >.<
 
Marka said:
In my defense... I don't have one... :D

Welcome, to TG, whether you 'ed' it or, not...

At any rate - this, could... explain, some of the extenuating barriers, that you've seemed to have had... so - perhaps, you are well on your way, to a much better opportunity, for getting some sense of 'self' and, the subsequent empowerment, that you've long been seeking...

Which, as you might have guessed; is likely, a very significant opening, to a sort of jurisprudence of your life...

Again, welcome aboard! ...And, hold-on!...

Turbulence, does not indicate, the landing; never-mind, where we've landed...

If, you'll entertain it further, Binary - You are (in my estimation), in good hands, just-the-same!



Many blessings and, may you prosper,
-Marka
*apologies, too*

That's Fine :D

MarchinBunny said:
Ya sorry >.<

Good, you know what I do with people who do that?

I steal there nappies, and throw them at grandmas walking down the road.

In all seriousness, it's fine, it's actually a interesting discussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top