I really don't think you actually took the time to read my post - not even the paragraph with all of the bold in it. Also, it would help if you would quote the parts of my post you are responding to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink
(Post 9422996)
I think you've taken it a bit further than it should have. Again, I am not saying transgender people break the law. I'm not saying being gay is against the law. What I am saying is that it can open problems Courtside.
|
I already addressed the idea that non-binary genders would affect court proceedings. Half of my post addressed this. Let me repeat:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psychic
(Post 9422226)
Trans people are not asking to be "identified as somebody else or a different age," and do not typically believe that their identity means they should receive different treatment if they do break the law. If someone breaks the law and asks for special treatment by pretending to be transgender, they should be treated the same way as someone who breaks the law and pretends to have a mental illness. The needs of people with mental illness should not be ignored just because there are a few people out there who will try to take advantage of the system by faking having mental illness - then you're punishing the wrong people, and not actually solving the problem. You're focusing on the wrong thing.
Again, trans people do not ask for special treatment in cases such as breaking the law. What could they possibly ask for? The only realistic example I can think of is if a cisgender man pretends to be a transgender women because women tend to receive lighter sentences for the crime he committed, or are treated better by the system. However, in such an instance, it is the fault of the system for giving women lighter sentences and treating them better to begin with! In that case, the system should change because it is unjust and is being taken advantage of. This literally has nothing to do with being LGBT - you are trying to blame the wrong people
|
I have countered
the only situations I could think of where a transgender or non-binary identity could affect a ruling. You have failed to give a single example as of yet. I would like to see you give some examples we can actually discuss instead of constantly suggesting that "it is plausible if you squint at it hard enough."
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink
(Post 9422996)
Don't know what Indians or Native Americans have anything to do with it.
|
Seriously? I made a point to show how "gender" and "sex" are different, and in response you said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink
(Post 9422005)
Typing gender into Google comes back with a definition [gender] and a synonym pointing to sex. My dictionary had it under euphemism. So it could be out of date.
|
This indicated that you believe that gender and sex should be used interchangeably. I compared this to how stupid it would be to use Indian and Native American interchangeably. I assume this means you will be using the terms sex and gender correctly from here on out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink
(Post 9422996)
I said that 'transgender' people, as in people whom falsely state that they are transgender, can claim in court that their crimes were not malicious in nature because of what they believe.
|
This indicates that you do not understand what being transgender means. Being trans does not mean you can commit a crime and get away with it. Being trans is about your identity, not about your actions. Pretending to be trans in order to get away with a crime would not serve as a legal argument. Again, if someone believes that they can get away with a crime by pretending to be trans, then that means
the system is flawed and needs to be fixed. That is
not the fault of trans people. If you truly care about this issue, you are not holding the right people accountable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink
(Post 9422996)
I've also stated that psychological experts have absolutely nothing to do in terms of building a defense. The lawyers do. Having a witness or expert is a key part of building a defense, not the defense itself. So, no, Psychologists do not build defenses, they merely reinforce them.
|
That is wrong: that is the role of an
expert witness: "a person who is a specialist in a subject, often technical, who may present his/her expert opinion without having been a witness to any occurrence relating to the lawsuit or criminal case." So if there is reason to believe that someone is faking being transgender, you would call in an expert witness. Same with if you thought someone was faking having a mental illness - they administer a psychological evaluation and have an expert present their opinion on the results. So this is not a problem worth discussing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink
(Post 9422996)
What I don't understand is that you seem to think that I believe that transgender people are all criminals. All I've stated is that it can become a legitimate defense, regardless of what you want to believe. Sure, transgender people want respect. Okay, great there's nothing wrong with that. But you seem to think the court cares about whether or not they do get treated with respect or not. The court is there to condemn or vindicate. So even if the person is or is not transgender doesn't mean they can't claim as being one. And if one court finds someone not guilty due to being transgender, than it gives a foothold to everyone else regardless if they are transgender or not.
|
You are not reading my posts; I addressed this above. Regardless, this is not related. Being transgender cannot be used as a "defense" in court - being transgender does not mean you get to break the law. Again, I addressed the only examples I could think of, so if you can give examples where this would be a legitimate concern, I'd like to hear them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink
(Post 9422996)
It's an argument, a defense, a claim whether true or not. What I worry is if a civil case can be found in favor of a transgender person, it then can be accepted criminally. Does that make any sense?
So if Mr. A commits fraud or is found not guilty of any civil law, then Mr. B can then be tried under the same effects even though he allegedly committed, say, a robbery. That's my point.
|
I'm really not sure what you're trying to say here. If a civil case was found in favour of a religious person, would you have the same beliefs about the consequences of it? What examples can you give that relate to cases with transgender or non-binary people?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink
(Post 9422996)
This whole mess that you seem to think that transgender people won't be used as an excuse is a bit naive. Anything can, and will, be used as a defense and if in criminal or civil law a 'transgender' (faker or not) is found not guilty due to the way they feel, than the case can then be cited in every court in the country, potentially seeing differing sentences due to how someone feels.
That is my issue. Not 'transgender people aren't real' or "transgender people want special treatment". It's "This will be used as an excuse".
|
You're right: anything can be used as an excuse. Religion can and DOES get used as an excuse - are you also campaigning against religion? This argument is ridiculous. Again, I have not seen any examples which legitimize your concern. And even if being trans WAS used as an excuse, an expert can be brought on to testify about it, and a judge can still deem it irrelevant.
Once again, none of this really has to do with the "psychological legitimacy of nonbinary gender identities." How someone's identity would affect a court proceeding does not affect the legitimacy of the subject. In regards to any other type of identity,
we don't bring up the affect it would have in court, so the fact that you're so focused on this sounds incredibly prejudiced.
The rest of your post is not worth my time touching.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmepie
(Post 9423165)
Can we please actually discuss the topic at hand? The legitimacy of non-binary gender identities has absolutely nothing to do with Native Americans, black children, paedophiles or even the transgender community.
Discuss the topic at hand and if you want to talk about other things make a separate thread.
|
I brought up terminology for Native Americans and the way certain groups are treated by the judicial system to make a point about how hypocritical it is to pick on the non-binary and transgender communities. Also, a lot of non-binary people do identify as transgender and are a part of the trans or greater LGBTQ community.
~Psychic