How Would You Respond If You Were In Allyson's Position?

[kneehighs]

Did you guys see this video air on American National TV via CBS?

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6414895n

While I think Allyson did a great job of remaining composed and articulate and was thus a great reprentative, I also believe that Allyson could have responded with content that better FRAMED the conversation in her favor.

The argument is that transgendered people are Mentally Disordered, because the DSM labels it as such. It's a great argument put forth by the Traditional Values Coalition. This argument CAN NOT be countered by arguing against their points like done in this article. The TVC argument is based on a value that is universal to all mankind. Who doesn't want to be mentally healthy?

How would you reframe this issue if someone ever confronted your wearing of heels as a man? I've never been challenged with this issue personally and doubt it will ever really be an issue on a personal level, but the issue did light a fire within my heart. This TVC argument is BS as is the DSM diagnostic.

[ilikekicks]

This is just my view of it, I speak for nobody else.

Medical sciences have become the supposed ' facts ' for way to many things. Sciences in general are touted all to much and make life more complicated then it needs to really be.

That being said, I think transgendered people are being *exploited*. Medical communities as a whole arent really listening to whats being said ( again, this is just my opinion ).

A Medical Doctor will look at any of our bodies and say ' Well. you have a good heart rate and no pains.. your healthy enough physically to win the superbowl.. so.. Your body is sound '. They then deduce its something ' mentally wrong '.

Theres always been that argument of people not being of ' sound mind '. How about the mind is fine and the body was/is wrong. has it totally been ruled out? Really? 100% Absolutely?

Ive known of 2 people whome have been in my life whom have changed gender. Both worked jobs, cared for their family and would go out of their way to help a friend in times both good and bad. They would both present a picture of what I would feel is ' the best ' of what humanity has to offer. How could they have something ' mentally ' wrong with them?

The Saddest thing in that whole video is the woman who is the ' villan ' or will be disliked and flamed by those on this site actually has a very valid point in regards to the Federal System, once again, getting to take a crap on everyone and over-ride the 10th amendment ( Its the main problem with the US of A right now, States Rights no longer exist ).

If I were in her ( Allysons ) position, I would have simply asked the moderator of the discussion what THEIR definition of someone changing gender is and what they believe it entails. I would have tried to present some logic behind this kind of rational:

Knowing 99.9% of the planets populace doesnt know what its like to have ( what Im going to call ) a disassociation between mind and body, where someone knows they are ' fine ' but feel they have the wrong gender.. *I* have no idea what it would be like.

With that being said, How could someone whos not ' transgendered ' begin to curtail anything in regards to a ' mental disorder '.

A serial killer.. yeah, something aint right in their heads. Cannibals? Umm.. maybe they dont know what a cow and bbq sauce is? Nope! cannibals have something going on that just isnt right. People whom are thinking of or have committed suicide.. yeah, something definitely not right.

Someone harming nobody else, Sitting at the table with those 2 others having a pleasant/reasonable/civil discussion.. they arent ' mentally fit '? They have some ' mental disorder '? If I have some disorder, why am I here speaking in kind with both of you on equal terms?

That is how I would present such a rebuttal. I dont think Allyson was ' prepared ' for the conversation. her nemesis was fully versed in past and present laws and the voting behind them. Her nemesis was also well prepared to know what to say in counter arguments and probably only scratched the tip of the iceberg in what was said in regards to what she really knows in the ' statistics ' and ' logistics ' of how that conversation could have gone.

How would you reframe this issue if someone ever confronted your wearing of heels as a man? I've never been challenged with this issue personally and doubt it will ever really be an issue on a personal level, but the issue did light a fire within my heart. This TVC argument is BS as is the DSM diagnostic.

You cannot really ' reframe ' an ' issue ' when it comes to laws in the US. I dont know if you are very familiar with how US law works or how things work in a Constitutional Republic, but the reasons we have a lot of the problems we face in the US today is because our Laws have been walked all over ( maybe by a guy in heels, Im sure one of the Past Presidents whom signs things into law had to have worn heels at least once in their life )

If this were an issue about men wearing heels, I would treat the individual like a heckler. They would be at a disadvantage as I would already have a microphone in front of me ( I have a part history and practice with such a setting! ). I wouldnt be a ' push over ' as Allyson was.

Im all for a civil debate or a good discussion, but if someone has an adjenda and they wish to force it upon me, they better try it with someone else.

The moment ANY woman or person would bring up such a thing as ' men wearing heels have a mental disorder ', I would laugh fool-heartedly AT them. I wouldnt stop laughing and would laugh continually through whatever it is they wished they wouldnt have said. When they asked whats so funny..

" You see.. In the time it took me ( 1 hours time for arguments sake )to put on my heels, walk and drive and locate to the set where this news happening occurred, 100 people were killed/injured by drunk drivers . The US Government spent/wasted 31million dollars. 4 women were raped. 50+innocent people had their homes broken into. 15 children were aborted. 20 people died from Drug Overdoses and 5 teenagers committed suicide. You say I have something wrong with me? How about those other 200ish people involved in what they did in the last hour? Im 1/2 of 1% and your pointing a finger at *me*? "

Im pretty sure once such was stated, and the other people at the table realized I ' have a clue ', the conversation would settle down and it would stay quite civil.

By all means, if it comes to rolling up the sleeves and taking off the heels to have a melee, its an option on the table, but only if the other person is trying to insinuate they are Intellectually or ' mentally ' superior. People with that mindset are just good for using as cannon fodder/roadkill or as presenting an example of how to clean society up properly. ' Those kinds ' arent even worth talking to as they believe only they should be allowed to speak. So dont speak, swing.

Edited June 15, 2012 by ilikekicks

[Foxyheels]

I always say to people who dont like the idea of anyone swapping sex to consider this. Imagine if you woke up tomorrow morning, looked in the mirror and you had the body of th opposite sex, how would you feel? Think about it carefully and then imagine telling someone you were in the wrong body, something had happened and imagine your feelings when they didn't believe you, were abusive to you or thought you were mad.

[Gudulitooo]

Kneehighs,

I think the answer lies in the purposely corrupted use of the very word "disordered" in the DSM label.

This word needs a reference. You cannot use it alone. Nothing is disordered.

Things or people are disordered relatively to what other people think "ordered" is.

Their argument has very weak foundation, because they will never be able to bring a reference of who is mentally ordered.

Thus, in your very wording of the argument "The argument is that transgendered people are Mentally Disordered", you have supported them.

You should have said "The argument is that transgendered people are Mentally Disordered compared to (...)".

And you would have understand that you cannot complete the sentence.

When someone dares to complete this, then all the nazi thing comes back.

Regards.

Eric

[heelguy]

Absolutely disgusting. Bravo to Allyson for keeping her cool! if it was me there is no way I could've sat there and let somebody diagnose me with having a mental disorder for not feeling right in my body. This is the exact kind of redneck-hillbilly mentality that keeps other countries believing that the majority of Americans are fat, stupid hicks still living in the stone age.

[kneehighs]

....[snip]....

Theres always been that argument of people not being of ' sound mind '. How about the mind is fine and the body was/is wrong. has it totally been ruled out? Really? 100% Absolutely?...[snip]...

I always say to people who dont like the idea of anyone swapping sex to consider this. Imagine if you woke up tomorrow morning, looked in the mirror and you had the body of th opposite sex, how would you feel? Think about it carefully and then imagine telling someone you were in the wrong body, something had happened and imagine your feelings when they didn't believe you, were abusive to you or thought you were mad.

Thanks for your input guys and this hits the nail on the head!

This isn't just an issue of the mind, this is an issue of the body. Therin lies reframe #1.

BAM. Instantly, if Allyson's response to the Mentally Disordered allegation had been along that line, transgenderism is an issue of the body more than anything, then she would have instantly redirected the focus of the conversation and taken control of the frame. We're not just minds alone, we are heart, soul, body and minds. And Allyson and everyone else like her is merely using all the forces of human existence to live the most authentic lives they can live. Who can argue against being authentic? Therein lies the very heart, the very core of true, congruent psychological happiness.

Genius responses from both of you.

...

Thus, in your very wording of the argument "The argument is that transgendered people are Mentally Disordered", you have supported them.

You should have said "The argument is that transgendered people are Mentally Disordered compared to (...)".

....

Great point! Mentally disordered compared to what specifically?

That's reframe number two!

Edited June 15, 2012 by kneehighs

[Tom-NL]

On a sidetrack: what has happened to that bill? (the comments about the videoclip KH linked to, are from summer 2010, so about 2 years ago)

[hoverfly]

What about the mental health of the children? Protecting them from the reality, truth and for those who need early treatment is way worse? In Western Europe the mentally ill is around 40 percent of the population! Apply that static in the U.S., does that mean those children who are mentally ill and undiagnosed just get thrown away? Dam, to me that's typical Christianity mind washing. If you don't fit into this category of just man and women you should be thrown into the fire.

[Dr. Shoe]

Speaking as someone who is "suffering" from GID I think that the DSM ideal of it being a Mental Disorder is the closest you're going to get to an accurate assessment. You will notice that it doesn't say mental iIlness.

Yes, it is an incongruence between body and psyche and the classic way to treat this incongruence is to bring the body in harmony with the psyche.

However, I have found that since my transition that I have been truly happy. I am so happy that I actually laugh out loud at times.

This is why I put "suffering" in inverted commas. I would say that I am actually enjoying GID!

[Heelster]

Absolutely disgusting. Bravo to Allyson for keeping her cool! if it was me there is no way I could've sat there and let somebody diagnose me with having a mental disorder for not feeling right in my body. This is the exact kind of redneck-hillbilly mentality that keeps other countries believing that the majority of Americans are fat, stupid hicks still living in the stone age.

I live amongst them - they exist - They are not going away any time soon, and they propagate.

[Guest]

just watched the video if i was in Allyson place if would smacked that other lady(lol) Since ive tranastioned10 yrs ago im no longer sad. I work as a female do every thing as a female.But the other lady needs to fo more research.

[ilikekicks]

Im not up on all the multi-quoting features so please allow my response in this fashion

Kneehighs :

"BAM. Instantly, if Allyson's response to the Mentally Disordered allegation had been along that line, transgenderism is an issue of the body more than anything, then she would have instantly redirected the focus of the conversation and taken control of the frame. We're not just minds alone, we are heart, soul, body and minds. And Allyson and everyone else like her is merely using all the forces of human existence to live the most authentic lives they can live. Who can argue against being authentic? Therein lies the very heart, the very core of true, congruent psychological happiness.

Genius responses from both of you."

How is ' Transgenderism ' an issue to anyone outside of the person transitioning and those whom are immediately involved?

A lot of people have this nasty thing entitled a ' world view '. Instead of keeping within their own boundaries, they feel they have an internal function to effect others even when UNWANTED intervention is stated.

The way *I* see things ( this is going to be rude, raw and probably not liked by many but Im just saying this as it needs to be said for total brash ' in your face ' presentation ) , You can put a vaccume up in there and ' correct ' an ' unwanted pregnancy '. Seriously? Why not either refrain or just swallow? Its cheaper to everyone and doesnt get anyone outside of the ' deed ' involved. No doctors, no 3rd parties of any kind. Instead, it becomes a public matter and everyone has to hear about it.

Its not my business at all, not my concern. My to-be wife and I are monogynous and if *we* come to that instance, *we* will deal with it, not some whole nation or ' national laws '.

In the newer homes/court near my home, they have laws against people putting a dish on their house for Television reception. Its THEIR house. They bought the damn thing! There was a retired Veteran whom couldnt put up a flag? Guy won a Medal of Honor for actions in Combat and he cannot put up a flag.. even on MEMORIAL DAY! ( yes, the ' association ' made him take it down! ).

Again, its their houses and not any of my business.

Applying such a mindset to whats being called ' Transgenderism '.. Huh? I dont know of any ' trannies ' or ' shemales ' or ( insert whatever title/name here.. ). I do know of 2 PEOPLE and they both have NAMES, legal ones.. How about that! Chloe and Christina. Not hard to remember. They both eat and .. well.. a while later they.. you know.. expel used matter.. just the same way I do.. So.. whats wrong here?

If someone can enlighten me as to what makes one human different then the other or why this matter of Allyson and the other woman needs to be anything in the ' public sector ' that requires law.. I would gladly appreciate such info.

Hoverfly:

What about the mental health of the children? Protecting them from the reality, truth and for those who need early treatment is way worse? In Western Europe the mentally ill is around 40 percent of the population! Apply that static in the U.S., does that mean those children who are mentally ill and undiagnosed just get thrown away? Dam, to me that's typical Christianity mind washing. If you don't fit into this category of just man and women you should be thrown into the fire.

Christianity mind washing? Throwing away children?

That being said, if you look at todays ' society ' in general, theres more hatred being displayed, more ' us against them ' types of mentalities and more violent crime in raw numbers. More women are raped, more people are hungry..

From your comment of ' christian mind washing ', I bet you would rather be worse off then a ' convert '. Im sure some of those christians might not appreciate your attitude. You and those you seem to despise ( you may or may not ) are BOTH part of the problem and no where in the vicinity of helping with a solution in any regards.

Im quite religious, and I dont categorize anyone outside of being human or being an animal/reptile. But in the same method of what your not in appreciation for, your standards could be applied to yourself, to which Im sure you wouldnt like the labels or what was said.

Most people DONT CARE. They are going to preach on about whats right or wrong and be damned if they dont pay-off some political type with money or guaranteed votes just to have an influence on those they wish to control. It goes both ways all the time.

2 wrongs dont make things ' right ', and it sure the hell doesnt make it ' even '. 2 wrongs make a bigger wrong and that why people like Allyson are discriminated against.

A mindset as Heelguy pointed out:

This is the exact kind of redneck-hillbilly mentality that keeps other countries believing that the majority of Americans are fat, stupid hicks still living in the stone age.

A mindset many in the US feels exist as Heelster stated :

I live amongst them - they exist - They are not going away any time soon, and they propagate.

Its a HUGE circle of outright HATE. Disdain for other human beings.

Everyone points to past transgressions: Blacks were owned, Gays were bashed and spread AIDS which infected everyone, the NAACP wont give a white guy a scholarship.. The list is infinite! Its disgusting!

Whenever I see comments talking about rednecks, niggers, faggots, spics, kikes, dykes, crackers, daigos, wops, ginnies, Micks, Spooks, Polocks.. ( did I leave anyone out? ) I question how long humanity has till it destroys itself.

What many of the people whom argue both for and against what Allyson is doing NEVER realize that theres no ' one size fits all ' in the US of A. The Nation wasnt designed or built for such and it CANNOT happen without the system looking like a communist state with one ' central control ' or failing miserably like it is now. To be political, its not just 1 person, its MILLIONS of all walks/flavors/mindsets of life. They are all ' guilty '.

By putting ANY ' Bill ' into the hands of the Feds, your taking away from the Civil Liberties of one person without giving anything to anyone else. Its a situation of diminishment and nothing more.

What would the woman talking down to Allyson gain if that bill passed? Would she have a great job handed to her? Million bucks magically appears? Would it automatically make all those ' transgendered people ' go away as if they never existed? *I* dont think so.

This is why such issues need to be handed down to the individual states and let those whom want such congregate of like minds. You dont need ' papers ' to go from one state to the other ( this might change soon enough at the present rate of hate going on ).

None of us here have ever met either of the women or news person in that video yet we all have an ' opinion ' about each of them. We can comment all we want yet its none of our business what either does so long as they arent infringing or restricting upon anything we do.

The whole situation should be what Allyson wants to do with her body is HER decision, not anyone elses. Not mine or anyone reading this. So long as shes not stating *I* should become a woman ( which I have been unfortunately mistaken for all too often ) or trying to implement such a policy, I couldnt care less what shes doing. The same should be said for the woman standing against this legislation. She should read what the 10th amendment to the Constitution states and keep things in her own ' yard ' and stay out of others.

There cannot be a law/bill that puts ANY agendas of a ' group ' into law. It should be left to individual states as if you dont like your home states laws, you can move to a different State ( which Im in the process of doing this fall specifically for reasons I have stated. My present state hates me for working/doing things on my own and Im tired of being punished for not committing any crimes. ). You cannot push YOUR will onto others and not expect hatred going both ways.

Im leaving where Im at because of all the outright hatred I have received. Its not because Im a guy in heels, but because of local legislatures falling in line with whats going on ( The mentality behind it, not the subject matter ) in the video in discussion.

Right now, I can go to a different state thats more ' friendly ' to my business so that I can actually hire others/expand and move forward.

There cannot be ' blanket ' types of law outside the Bill of Rights.

Dr. Shoe :

However, I have found that since my transition that I have been truly happy. I am so happy that I actually laugh out loud at times.

Pics or your lying!

On a sidetrack: what has happened to that bill? (the comments about the videoclip KH linked to, are from summer 2010, so about 2 years ago)

ENDA has been introduced in every Congress since 1994 (except the 109th). Similar legislation had been introduced without passage since 1974. The bill gained its best chance at passing after the Democratic Party broke twelve years of Republican Congressional rule in the 2006 midterm elections. In 2007,gender identity protections were added to the legislation for the first time. Some sponsors believed that even with a Democratic majority, ENDA did not have enough votes to pass the House of Representatives with transgender inclusion and dropped it from the bill, which passed the House and then died in the Senate. LGBT advocacy organizations and the LGBT community were divided over support of the modified bill.

In 2009, following the 2008 elections that strengthened the Democratic majority, and after the divisiveness of the 2007 debate, a transgender-inclusive version of ENDA was introduced by Rep. Barney Frank. He introduced the bill again in 2011, and Sen. Jeff Merkley introduced it in the Senate.

President Barack Obama supports the bill's passage.

(((Its still dead in the water. BUT ( as I have been implying ))) :

Wisconsin was the first state to ban employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, in 1982, while Minnesota was the first state to ban employment discrimination based on both sexual orientation and gender identity when it passed the Human Rights Act in 1993.^[11] Sixteen states and the District of Columbia have policies that protect against both sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in employment: California,Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey(see Law Against Discrimination), New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington in the public and private sector. An additional five states–Delaware, Maryland, New Hampshire, New York, and Wisconsin–have state laws that protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation only.

Five states have an executive order, administrative order, or personnel regulation prohibiting discrimination against public employees based on sexual orientation and gender identity: Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, andPennsylvania. Delaware, Maryland, and New York prohibit discrimination based on gender identity in public employment only. An additional five states prohibit discrimination against public employees based on sexual orientation only: Alaska, Arizona, Missouri, Montana, and Ohio. Ohio previously included gender identity, until Governor John Kasich let this executive order expire in January 2011.

Fifteen other states have laws that have been interpreted to protect transgender persons.

A number of cities and counties have implemented non-discrimination laws. At least 185 cities and counties prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity for both public and private employees. In addition, at least 20 cities and counties prohibit such discrimination in public employment only. By and large, these city and county laws exist in states that already have a statewide non-discrimination policy for sexual orientation and/or gender identity. However, this is not true in all cases.

Things work much better in a smaller environment. It suits the people in one given area and doesnt impose upon another. In the same frame of mind, those not being imposed upon dont have to retaliate or go against anything as it has nothing to do with them. Its a system that WORKS.

Edited June 17, 2012 by ilikekicks

[roniheels]

Here's another case of someone or someones fearing people who are "different and free-thinking" and those people trying to get other people riled up to over-react. I'm glad this video was shared because in my little slice of the world I didn't realize there was this nation-wide discrimination toward these people trying to live normal lives. Doesn't this country and especially world have more important things about which to worry?

[Gudulitooo]

KH, I remember my philo courses. The prof always quoted philosophers bringing examples from animals (monkeys) or primitive societies. My idea is through evolution (in decades, not even centuries), male and female have struggled to decide who does what. E.g. in western society, women always had the role of taking care of the children, not by nature. The outcome determines numerous things, amongst them clothing, and who's parading for sexual activities, (for some animals, males have colors, not the female), etc. The outcome of the struggle may not be the same everywhere depending on local economic specificities (e.g. where women can make more income with their agile hands and where men have no utility). Anyway once a community has evolved a bit - say 50 years - the roles are fixed and anybody breaking these unspoken rules is a bit out of place. Yet I heard once that anywhere around the globe, the ones looking for beauty are women, and men far less. This being said, we can also imagine that the outcome is different invidual by individual, not by entire groups. This is possible when in the same group, say a western city, each individual has a different role from the others. There we can imagine a individual evolution of clothing (e.g. sub groups geeks, etc.) Do you know about remote communities where male and female swap their role (transgender), together with their clothes ? I mean human communities, not snails or spiders.... ! Eric

Edited June 18, 2012 by Gudulitooo

[Olounda]

How would you reframe this issue if someone ever confronted your wearing of heels as a man? I've never been challenged with this issue personally and doubt it will ever really be an issue on a personal level, but the issue did light a fire within my heart. This TVC argument is BS as is the DSM diagnostic.

I have to ask, at what point would wearing heels as a man be considered even remotely to gay or transgenderdism? Such thinking is what gets people into these situations anyway. The idea that people can be classified and set aside based on skin color, hair color, type of clothing they wear, type of shoes they wear, the way they speak, where they were born, is the same idea that is causing such hatred in the communities right now.

I wear high heels, as a male, and last I checked i dont suffer from what they call GID. I wear them because I enjoy them, and they give me confidence. Moreso, they put me in a position to where others can ask me questions and I can respond with love and kindness that their assumptions they made of me (which they probably have made) were false. You should see the look on peoples faces when you tell them that you are straight, married, and have 2 kids, and wear high heels. it almost flabbergasts them because they were brought up to determine who people are before they know them.

This is the story of this video clip. Most employers screen their employees to determine their qualifications for the position, a process to determine the best fit for the company, as well as the person. the same should be had in our schools. the school districts should screen their applicants to find the best fit for the schools (whether it is someone TG'd or not). I think, however, that the politicians and the school districts are hiding behind the idea of "safe environment for the kids," as a way to cover their butts. Do you think that educators who come into class hung over, or high, or any manner of inhibited provides a more safe environment for the kids? Another thought, the BEST way for people to change their ideas is THROUGH education. If you want to raise your kids to be accepting of everyone, why not send them to a school with a bit of diversity among the staff? If you want to raise your kids with your own bigoted opinions (speaking in general, not at anyone here), then home school them.

Having many friends who are in this category, i feel bad for them, and want for them to succeed, especially against such overwhelming odds, but at the same time, you can't force diversity in a business or a culture, you just have to pick the best people for the jobs without a sense of bias, and the diversity will come. It is a fine line. a VERY fine line.

TL;DR - go back and read it, cuz i dont know if any of it made any sense

[kneehighs]

The original question is more like a media training class question. If you are on national tv like Allyson was and have very limited time to reply, the answers have to be brief to be effective. So "if you were in Allyson's position on National TV, where your time was limited, how would you reply?" would be an improved articulation of the original question.

[ilikekicks]

I have to ask, at what point would wearing heels as a man be considered even remotely to gay or transgenderdism? Such thinking is what gets people into these situations anyway. The idea that people can be classified and set aside based on skin color, hair color, type of clothing they wear, type of shoes they wear, the way they speak, where they were born, is the same idea that is causing such hatred in the communities right now.

I would strongly disagree in what your saying. What gets people at odds right now is the FORCED and sometimes MANDATED theme of ' multiculturalism '.

As an example, most people whom might say " I dont care for Obama " they are INSTANTLY attacked or called racist, just in the same way, men whom wear heels are thought ' Gay '.. Just as someone whom doesnt agree with same-sex marriage is a ' homophobe '.. Everyone is instantly guilty until such is proven to the different.

Theres no system that ' works for everyone '.

Another thought, the BEST way for people to change their ideas is THROUGH education. If you want to raise your kids to be accepting of everyone, why not send them to a school with a bit of diversity among the staff?

Education.. Define ' education '. The schools in my area just announced a 53% failure rate on the basics of Math, Sciences, History and English. I believe such to be more important in life then ' social engineering ' on which the schools seem to stress MORE then the basics. ( more on this in a moment.. )

If you want to raise your kids with your own bigoted opinions (speaking in general, not at anyone here), then home school them.

Bigoted? How about my kid not being shot while attending school? How about my kid not being subject to gang violence? How about my kid being in a drug-free environment? How about my kid learning of those 4 basic entities in their education BEFORE worrying about whom they may offend? Your speaking in ' General ' about ' Bigotry ', yet you seemed upset about men whom wearing heels being ' assumed ' gay.. Really?

Heres some ' facts ' about the education you spoke of above:

In *MY* area:

- 1 in 15 kids was involved in a fight that required medical attention of somekind in the public schools.

- 3 in 10 kids were subjected to ' drugs ' or alcohol while on school grounds.

- 1 in 9 girls under the age of 15 were either pregnant, had an abortion or were part of a ( supposed/alledged ) rape situation.

- Half the kids failed to achieve the minimum requirements to pass the grade they attended.

If not wanting to put *MY* children in such an environment advertised as being so rich in ' diversity ' makes me a ' bigot ', I will gladly accept such a title and wear it with absolute honor. What parent wouldnt?

I will have you know that my children ( *If* I have any ) will NEVER attend ' Public Education '. I have no need for what some presume to be ' diversity ' as its a blatant LIE. ' Diversity ' means a group of people from different walks of life all having the same mindset/thought pattern. How is that ' diverse '? Thats what the ' public ' or ' diverse ' schools in my area are like. Im sure its quite the same all over.

(( Sidenote : There was a thread on this site about a high school guy from Niagara Falls, NY whom wore his heels to school and was shunned for it. I posted MANY facts from the local news and the statistics from the school system and their lack of achievement in that thread. Those figures are facts, not some misconception or ' feel good ' responses. They are reality for as ugly as it IS. )

This is the main problem we ALL face as ' Humanity '. People for the last 20 years have been SHAMED into feeling a specific way. ' Everyone has to be accepted ', I say RUBBISH!

If YOU ( anyone that is ) wish to be accepted, you EARN acceptance. If you wish to be respected, you EARN the respect of others. If you wish your views to be accepted, you build the credibility behind them and express them in ways others can relate to and come to an agreeable position or at least one of mutual respect ( even though the positions may differ ).

The failures of Humanity/Society and why WOMEN ( Note: I believe gender is defined by our minds, not physicality ) like Allyson are pointed out are due to a LOT of people wishing to think for themselves. "Free Thought" is the greatest gift/asset mankind has. By polarizing humanity through ( supposed ) ' education ' being taught to the public.. things are going backwards at a very fast pace.

I dont say this to ruffle feathers, I say it because most people are just to damn afraid of speaking whats OBVIOUS. Nobody wants to the the ' bad guy '. As the late Rodney King stated ' Cant we all just get along? '. The answer is ' no '.

There will always be that divide of ' Thinking for myself ' and the opposition called ' Collectivism/Multiculturalism '. People are FORCED to choose a side. Thats why the answer of ' no ' is correct when answering Mr. Kings question is given.

People should be free to choose what they think and feel so long as they harm nobody else. People SHOULD be offended! People SHOULD Offend others. People should also be allowed to pick and choose whom they take company with.

People should be looked upon as individuals and judged by their own individual merits/failings. *I* should be judged by my own doings/actions, not someone elses.

[kneehighs]

Guys! Can we keep this thread on the topic of "How would you reframe this issue if you were on national TV like Allyson was?" before it derails into a thread better suited for a Political Message Board? Thanks!

[ilikekicks]

I offer an Apology Kneehighs.

[kneehighs]

ilikekicks--apology accepted!

[Shafted]

Honestly, the fact that they both interrupted each other undermined their ability to behave like mature adults. I can't take either one of them seriously if they are going to argue and behave like children.

[Guest]

When debating against someone within this political situation it's a question of balance. Knowing the opposition, their motives and strengths. I think Allyson was quite outgunned against this woman opposite, even if Allyson is top within her knowledge with this situation she wasn't going to win, that is clear 1/3 of the way in, she was going to be "talked over". I have found this before be it with a politician, union boss, company Chief exec. If you are weaker/less experienced or short on the facts. YOU WILL LOOSE! The argument will be controlled by the stronger because of their belief. Allyson didn't fail, some very good points put across but she wasn't fully prepared for this "ladies" scaremongering. Often and I'm sure Doc will confirm most transgenders relocate for a fresh start in the UK, even a few within the UK Ministry of Defence are transferred post op one way or another. I think she did well and I probably couldn't have done better. Al

[Shafted]

I think Allyson was quite outgunned against this woman opposite, even if Allyson is top within her knowledge with this situation she wasn't going to win, that is clear 1/3 of the way in, she was going to be "talked over".

It was Allyson who made the first attempt at talking over the others response. Bad move on her part because she opened herself up to the same behavior from the other woman. As I eluded to in my previous post.

[ilikekicks]

I think both of the women arent looking at the whole picture of ' everyone ' and only their personal concerns/emotions of the situation. It makes for a very weak topic of discussion and can only become a ' pissing match ' with no merit.