Family challenges fallen Texas fireman's marriage to transgender woman

Emelye Waldherr wrote:

<quoted text>
Try using the computer to learn the truth instead of pushing old, disproven knowledge. Chromosomes may determine physical sex, in most cases, but they do not necessarily do so all the time. Did you watch the video I linked to about the woman who has XY (male) chromosomes? And I never said anything about someone not having any chromosomes at all. Where did you get that one from?
Your assumption that there are "homosexuals posting on here" is inaccurate as well. Ms Araguz is a heterosexual woman. Besides your mention of a disgusting and inflammatory allegation, your concern over the sexual orientation of the participants of this lawsuit and those who are posting here has nothing to do with the issue. Why are you trying to change the subject?
What you learned back in school about DNA and genetics was incomplete. Doctors and scientists have learned more about it. You need to learn a bit more before posting.

flbadcatowner wrote:

I meant to say bearing its own children.

flbadcatowner wrote:

He broke the law if he did lure her and/or had sex with her. If those allegations of undressed pictures of the girl are true, he is guilty of possessing child porn. Her past or her motivations are no excuse. It is plain and simple. With his previous convictions, it appears that he has not learned from his past punishments. If he is found guilty, he deserves to spend a long time in prison.

Annaleigh wrote:

<quoted text>Why are you referring to another human as an “IT”?
I noticed that when talking about a child molester, you gave him more respect then you are giving this trans woman.
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/weird/T13L3AE...
Is it that you see transsexuals as less human then a child molester?

Finepix wrote:

If my house were to catch on fire I would forbid IT to save me. I don't want dirty little fairies knocking down my front door. Oh, I also don't want a blood transfusion from a black man.

flbadcatowner wrote:

<quoted text>If a man who has had a sex change operation to become looking like a woman,does not reveal this fact to a prospective husband prior to marriage, it is grounds for annulment in some (if not most) states for entering fraudulently into a marriage contract.

flbadcatowner wrote:

<quoted text>A man who undergoes a sex change operation to become a man is a counterfeit woman who is incapable of being its own children. The law may declare in some states that it is a woman, but it doesn't change the fact that the individual in question is a counterfeit and a fraud.

Emelye Waldherr wrote:

<quoted text>
If Ms Araguz deceived her husband or not is one of the questions before the court. She says her husband knew. Of course, her in-laws, the ones who want ALL the money, say different which is no more than anyone would expect. I have to ask, however, do you think there are other medical conditions a person should share with their prospective spouse before they marry? And if there are, do those constitute fraud and justify an annulment?
When a trans man or woman get surgery it is reconstructive in nature, a realignment of the physical that reflects the inner reality of that person. In other words, Ms Araguz was always a woman even if she didn't look like one so she wasn't "a man who has had a sex change operation to become looking like a woman" but a woman who had reconstructive surgery to correct a birth condition. Your premise is based on a flawed assumption.

Emelye Waldherr wrote:

<quoted text>
So in your mind, the only definition of a woman is the ability to conceive a child? That's interesting. Did your mom change into a man when she underwent menopause? I mean, she couldn't conceive children anymore so by your definition she was a man, right? What about infertile women. Do you think they are really men as well, counterfeits and frauds? Do you think that men who, by some unfortunate accident, lose their testes or have a vasectomy stop being men because they can't impregnate a woman and create children? Would you stop being a man if that happened to you?
Not only is your logic found wanting but your dehumanizing use of the word "it" - "The law may declare in some states that it is a woman ..." is rather insulting, don't you think? I mean, calling someone a counterfeit and a fraud based on ignorance is one thing, purposeful dehumanization is quite another. I guess your bias is showing again.
Gender is a complex issue that is based on numerous functions within the human body and mind. Of the most important is the brain sex, the internal gender that gives you the secure knowledge of who you are even if your body doesn't match your assigned sex/gender. Ms Araguz was always a woman.

flbadcatowner wrote:

<quoted text>Not revealing that one is not a real woman is just a monstrous fraud. If I were to get married, I would want the real thing and nothing less. The inner feelings of someone do not in my mind supercede the fact that one who is unquestionably a man with normal xy chromosones cannot become a woman merely by having cosmetic surgery to create the appearance of a woman. In my mind, it is a man in a Halloween costume made to look like a woman with a mental state of gender confusion. Inner feelings in my mind cannot cancel what sex one was born with. I am sorry I cannot say what you want to hear, but that is the way I see it. I do understand why you feel differently. We do see this matter in polar opposition. May I add that if someone has any serious problems physically or mentally, if they really loved the individual, they would be honest about any serious physical or mental problems.

flbadcatowner wrote:

<quoted text>My mother was born a woman and she never gave any thought to changing her sexual. She was a former childbearing woman appearance. Ms.Araquz was a "never was". In my mind, a transexual male being changed surgically is a counterfeit, pure and simple. It is not the real thing. A man who feels like he should be a woman is no more a woman than wearing a collar and burying a bone would make a man a dog. For a man altered to look like a woman in order to deceive a man is the ultimate in deception . BTW, if a ladyboy were to successfully pull off such a deception, the fact remains that the husband would be in love with what he thought that one was and not with the reality.

Emelye Waldherr wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree that not revealing before marriage that one was not a real woman would be fraud. Your problem is that Ms Araguz was and still is a real woman, even though you don't like it. Your outdated and exclusionary standards don't apply. Ms Araguz told the court that her husband knew about her past. Whether or not that is true (I tend to believe her because trans people are all too aware of the consequences if they are not forthcoming with this info) is a question before the court. That they didn't tell Mr Araguz's family is not surprising, especially given their transphobic reaction when they found out.
As far as chromosomes are concerned, again, your information is outdated and inaccurate. I'll refer you to this ABC News video to help clarify things: http://www.youtube.com/watch... Chromosomes do not define gender identity. Here's a blog that shows links to studies that support the same concept: http://aebrain.blogspot.com/2011/03/they-mean...
I'm not surprised that you cannot fathom the concept of having a gender identity that doesn't match your physical sex. The fact that gender identity is so deeply rooted in the human psyche combined with your privileged existence as a cissexual and cisggender person blind you to the possibility of understanding how a mismatch can occur in some people. I'd ask that you stop thinking that your personal experience is universal, or the only "right" one, and start believing the doctors and scientists, as well as the trans people, that are telling you the truth.
I agree that you are perfectly within your rights to hold any opinion that you wish. I am sorry I cannot say what you want to hear, but scientific and medical evidence shows that your opinion is baseless and thus false.

Judged:

1

1

1

flbadcatowner wrote:

<quoted text>Because I recognize them as disguised males physically, even though they feel like women inside. I cannot bring myself to see a male who is surgically altered to look female as being a she. Any one trying to pass himself as a genetic female to a heterosexual man is committing a dastardly act of fraud.

Annaleigh wrote:

<quoted text>Since you wrote this reply, I have been trying to think of what to reply back with.
I cant seem to find the right words. You see I am wondering,
How in the world do you deal rationally with someone that is so hate filled in their heart that they dehumanize a whole segment of humanity?
How do you deal rationally with someone who professes to be a devout Christian and uses their religion justify their inner hatred towards another group of Creators Children and displays that hatred and disgust in public?
Where in the world does your bible teach you to act this way FLB?
No matter what, we are ALL HUMAN BEINGS and at the least worthy of being recognized as human.
I often mention atrocities and genocides committed by Christians. Those christens that slaughter people without mercy did not see their victims as human either.
If you see some of your brothers and sisters as "IT"s", then you are most of the way there FLB..

Elliott wrote:

<quoted text>
OMG so much phail. Chromosomes are how the zygote transcribes gender, ie, if you don't have chromosomes, YOU DO NOT HAVE A VIABLE HUMAN, NOR DO YOU IN FACT HAVE ANYTHING AT ALL. Which then leads us to, chromosomes are the method by which the zygote determines gender.
These homosexual activists are disgusting. Simply disgusting. I'll bet most of the homosexuals posting on here have been to mexico or jamaica to butt rape a 6-yo boy. Disgusting.

Emelye Waldherr wrote:

Annaleigh, people like him seem to find it easy to ignore reality, or just put it aside for a spell, when they want to hold onto their own familiar and comforting prejudices. It's called having a willingness to accommodate cognitive dissonance.
So, no, it isn't rational at all. That's the key to these trolls. They've built a defense against a reality that they don't understand or like very much by throwing up walls between reality and their beliefs. Giving up their beliefs makes them feel very insecure and very uncomfortable. It's to avoid that feeling that they do this.

flbadcatowner wrote:

<quoted text>I am not debating one way or the other if that dead man knew whether he was married to a converted male. I do not know enough about it to make an informed statement about it one way or the other. Being that I am not licensed to practice law in Texas, I am not qualified to make a final legal determination either. I will just have to see how the case plays out.
You seem to think that everybody has an obligation to see things 199% your way 100% of the time on the subject of transgender/transsexualism. It may come as a shock to you. but there is such a thing as diversity of opinion.
As far as I am concerned, What goes on between someones ears does not overrule one's inherited genetic makeup. I realize that there are rare chromosonal oddities that can make one's sexuality ambiguous, but I am not referring to those cases which must be evaluated on a case by case basis. I bought my wife a real diamond engagement ring before marriage and not a fake diamond. She would have felt shortchanged with anything less. In the same manner, I would want the real thing for a wife and not a feminized reconstructed male. Perhaps the deceased man's wife has legally been declared a woman in the eyes of the law. It does not necessarily mean that such an individual is a real woman.
Whether or not the widow is or isn't a real woman is a legitimate subject for debate. There is no clear cut right or wrong position on the debate. According to my values, we have nothing more than a man disguised as a woman. You believe totally differently by your set of values. We can argue for the rest of our lives about this and never settle anything. I would hardly consider your argument as completely right and mine as completely wrong.