You sure went on a round-about, passive agressive way to tell me my post about the woman with two vaginas (hoo-hoo?) was offensive to your delicate sensibilities.

Here's a couple of tips: 1.You don't like the subject, don't read it or post a rebuttal. 2. Report it if you're upset 3.Get it through your head that you don't get to control what other people post. That's admins job, not yours.

In the interest of self-disclosure, lemme explain a few things to you:

I'm a psychology student who focuses on sexology and gender issues. Yes, this would include Cassandra and her genital anomaly. Because I grew up in a cult that has narrow definitions of what makes a man or what makes a woman and their respective roles, I find these kinds of stories fascinating and relevant to this forum, especially since I know many here would be interested in these types of stories. It's not out of some creepy, voyeuristic desire, it's from a compassionate, social science POV.

But all you seemed to see was something salacious in my post rather than an issue that may or may not affect someone here. Congratulations on being so narrow minded. If you don't like what I have to say, DON'T READ IT.

Hoo-ha!

I'm not opposed to various slang for vagina and vulva depending on the context, but when it's related to something biological and some-what serious topic, I prefer to use the correct terminology.

I'm reminded of when Maude asks The Dude if he's afraid to say the word vagina in "The Big Lebowski" and how many men are afraid of that word and prefer to use crude slang. I don't know if sassanech is a man or woman, but that's what his or her "taking me to task" reminded me of.

I think that the post was very much on topic since the Mormon church has very rigid gender roles and seems to have an issue with anyone who falls outside of the norm.

We've had stories shared on this board about people who were born with an indeterminate gender, were assigned a gender, and who later decided to change their gender (and were subject to church discipline for doing so.)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 08:59AM by summer.

There's enough intelligent, curious, open-minded people on the board that I knew would find it interesting. I want people who have dealt with intersex and transgender issues to know they're not alone in this.

It wasn't from a "surfing the web, posting any weird thing I might see" place of voyeuristic intention. I read about these issues on a daily basis because these issues are close to my heart and mind, both as an ex-mormon and a (hopefully) future sexologist/sex therapist.

Thanks for getting it! :)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 09:14AM by Itzpapalotl.

I understood it that way also, summer. Good example about the church discipline for biological and personal issues.

I would have clicked on that topic anyway as I am always interested in medical matters.

I have always said it - there is almost nothing that is really off topic when it comes to Mormonism. Especially as the Mormon Church controls every aspect of its members' lives.

For examples of truly 'off topic' posts (which are allowed here in any case) better to point out the 'where I spent my summer vacation' types than anything that touches on human gender and sexuality.

But even the vacation posts can be very much on topic if someone is describing how good they felt outside 'Zion'.

I suspected from sassanech's initial post yours was the loan
"offender."

I am one who didn't read your post about Cassandra's genital anomaly because I wasn't interested, NOT BECAUSE it offended me, which it did not. I suggest others, like sassanech, do the same if they have a problem with the topic of a post or do what tevai suggests: hit the report button and let Admin. sort it out.

sighh.
I dream of a world where people can post interesting off topic threads and not be taken to task by spurious complaints.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 09:56AM by wine country girl.

I suspected that as well, but wasn't sure.

Anyone who has read my posts and understands (some)what kind of person I am, knows I will not be cowed nor shamed into silence.

If you (in the general sense) got something to say to me, then grow a spine and say it, don't be passive-aggressive. You'll get more more respect that way.

Same here. If I don't like a certain topic or find it distasteful, I move on. There's too many new threads here ongoing for me to take it personally why others aren't interested in reading my few threads or vice verse. This is an extremely busy forum!

I don't envy the moderators who try to stay on top of what's going on.

I personally appreciate the diversity of topics. We live in a diverse and amazing world that I find wonder in many subjects.

People born with anomalies and mutations I honestly feel pity for, because they and we live in a society that places values on conformity and fitting in. The things that may make someone genetically different makes us a subject for ridicule, slander or worse.

Modified to add: Mormonism places even more value on same and conformity. Breaking free from that helps us to find our own path to where we want to be, while embracing what makes us different. Yet at the same time try to fit in with the environ outside the church.

There are so many paths to travel, there still can be no "one size fits all." In mormon think, that possibility wasn't even feasible.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 10:00AM by amyjo.

The idea of someone controlling what we should put in our posts

here is too much like being back in church. NO the fucking

thanks. We are all grown ups here... well most of us. We can

decide for ourselves what we want to see and what we don't.

Its just a click away or not. Being raised as a mormon

where any discussion involving sex or sexual parts was

strictly taboo unless it was the church telling who, how

and what kind of sex we had was the norm was a horrid

way to be raised. Let's not replicate it here. Thank Karma

for my own mother who taught me that sex is a normal and

beautiful part of life. So bring on the Hoo hoo news and

what ever else we might have missed out on hearing as a

person growning up in the mormon church.

Thank you, thank you and thanks again.

Conformity conformity, mind numbing conformity.

It does sound familiar, only a different strain of.

When people get offended by the proper terminology of genitals I remember my last semester at BYU in Abnormal psych. My prof was a never-mo and was bemused by the culture of censorship and naivete in Happy Valley. When we started on the chapter about philias and sexual issues, he made the class all yell out proper terminology so those uncomfortable could get used to talking about these issues in an adult manner.

Part of my goal to get into sexology is to take away the shame, guilt, and fear of human sexuality. People are woefully uneducated and have the most inane ideas about sexuality overall or they're offended by it.

Again, I will not be silenced because of someone's delicate sensibilities.

I'm with you all the way on this !!!!!!!

Fact-checking that stuff is a pain-in-the-patoot, and there's a lot of shinola on the Internet out there.

I had no problem reading the story about the-woman-with-two-kuters; I do acknowledge that those newly-out-of-the-church who come here might find it offensive, so I think some retraint is always the wiser course. Safer as well...

XX

But back to the "two vaginas" story: I'm really skeptical about that one; it may be true but it smacks of attention-getting to me...

I'd volunteer my scholarly services as a clever language student--a cunning linguist--to do the research, but that one's over-the-top and an old joke anyway...

Question for Izzy: Is that professor still teaching at YBU?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 07:07PM by Maude.

He didn't want to stay more than the period he was required by contract, I think.

You can be skeptical about the whole thing, I get it, but like I explained in my first post, having two penises is a real thing, having genital characteristics of both sexes is a thing, is it really that much of a stretch to think a woman could be born with two vaginas? Whaddya want? Photographic evidence?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARxfNM3vBrI
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uterus_didelphys
http://jezebel.com/this-woman-is-telling-the-whole-world-about-her-two-vag-1701322744
http://www.oddee.com/item_98828.aspx
http://www.babycenter.com/0_strange-but-true-some-women-have-more-than-one-uterus-8211-a_10364947.bc

So let's get this straight, it's cool to talk about...
War
Rape
Cult mind control
Hate crimes
Child abuse

...but two vaginas= no because ICKY. Grow up, people.

Some women are born with two uteri. This sometimes leads to their having two vaginas.

In theory, it is possible for them to be pregnant in both wombs at the same time.

Men and women can also be born with more than two nipples.

I love medical stories.

Itzpapalotl, your posts are always interesting because they are informative and many times have a human interest or "psychological" or "sociological" angle.

Thanks for posting this story.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 03:58PM by Senoritalamanita.

I stumbled across a story of a woman with a pair of uteri and vaginas and was able to give birth to twins!
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=6992987

And thank you for appreciating my posts. I'm very lucky to have the rare objective quality about sexuality and gender issues so i can go into this line of work. It's not an easy field to work in and you can't be too squeamish.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 04:05PM by Itzpapalotl.

I had actually read about it elsewhere already (Guardian or Independent?), but I agree that it was interesting (which was why I read it ;-) and raised some important points.

But then I always read your posts, Itzapapalotl, because they're always interesting (and you have a great name ;-)

Have a great weekend all

Tom in Paris (who's on holiday at home)

sassanech has the right to express an opinion on O/T posts just as much as you have the right to post them. I didn't see anywhere where sassanech suggested he/she should be the ultimate arbiter of what can and can not be posted. Don't claim to be all about free expression, while on the other hand publicly shaming another poster for exercising that very thing.

If you didn't like the sassanech post about O/T, you could have 1. Not read it. 2. Reported it. 3. Gotten it through your head that you don't decide what people post on here, admin does.

Do I think rfm has some "troll like" folk that just enjoy getting attention...sure! Is it up to me, or sassanech to censor them...no!
But we can certainly voice an opinion. In the end, we all know the admins will make the final decision on what can be posted.

And for that thankless task, I thank them!!

I missed the part where Itzpapalotl said sassanech had no right to express an opinion on O/T posts.

And you missed something on "1. Don't read it." Itzpapalotl also suggested a rebuttal post, like this entire thread.

I left out "rebuttal post" for the very reason that he had done that. The other points still stand.

I just don't like to see a mob mentality attack on a poster. Sassanech stated several times that they did not want to name anyone specific, they were just trying to make a point about excessive O/T's

So why the personal attack from itzpapalotl. It's ugly.

But expect to be challenged or have a rebuttal made. It's the nature of this forum. I've seen debates go on for days and years and nothing is ever completely reconciled.

You, too, are free to ignore what I post and I will do the same for you if desired.

ETA: Also in the +6000 posts I've made on this forum, most have been about the cult. And who gets to decide what's excessive for O/T posts? Admin.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 09:07PM by Itzpapalotl.

Extra parts. Cool. I'm interested because in my family extra parts are not uncommon. And that includes me.

Itzpapalotl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You sure went on a round-about, passive agressive
> way to tell me my post about the woman with two
> vaginas (hoo-hoo?) was offensive to your delicate
> sensibilities.


It is you who outed yourself as posting irrelevant, internet surfing interests on the previous thread. And are now trying to defend your irrelevant posts.


> Here's a couple of tips: 1.You don't like the
> subject, don't read it or post a rebuttal. 2.
> Report it if you're upset 3.Get it through your
> head that you don't get to control what other
> people post. That's admins job, not yours


You don't get it. My thread IS a rebuttal to the irrelevant, internet surfing O/T threads you and others start on this forum.


> In the interest of self-disclosure, lemme explain
> a few things to you:
>
> I'm a psychology student who focuses on sexology
> and gender issues. Yes, this would include
> Cassandra and her genital anomaly. Because I grew
> up in a cult that has narrow definitions of what
> makes a man or what makes a woman and their
> respective roles, I find these kinds of stories
> fascinating and relevant to this forum,
> especially since I know many here would be
> interested in these types of stories. It's not out
> of some creepy, voyeuristic desire, it's from a
> compassionate, social science POV.


I couldn't care less that you are a psychology student. The fact that I am an investment banker that is interested in the dynamics of stock market movements doesn't predispose me to post random stock market charts here for all of you to read and comment on, because it is IRRELEVANT to the purpose of this forum.


> But all you seemed to see was something salacious
> in my post rather than an issue that may or may
> not affect someone here. Congratulations on being
> so narrow minded. If you don't like what I have to
> say, DON'T READ IT.


I didn't think any part of your irrelevant post was salacious in any respect. If anything, as SL Cabbie pointed out, it is more likely an unverifiable, attention-craving tactic of an irrelevant internet personality, and you fell for it. Who cares if she has two vaginas, eleven fingers, or three breasts? It is irrelevant to the purpose of this forum.

ETA: Thank you, crunchynevmo. :)



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 08:55PM by sassenach.

You're welcome. I totally get where you are coming from.

Look, you called me out first in a passive-aggressive manner. I'm not going to back down to you just because you find something irrelevant. I see several posts that are irrelevant to the forum and you know what I do? I move on.

If you had stock market numbers that were in relation to the cult , then yes, by all means post them. If they're interesting, I'll read it. I won't make passive aggressive posts about it or tell people what they can or cannot write. I'll tell you straight up how it is.

Again, you don't have to read what I write. The only reason I read your post last night is because I thought a differing POV was needed. And no, I will not self-regulate and it's hilarious you think you can tell me what I should and shouldn't post here.

Obviously posters were interested or they would have ignored it. Why not do the same?

You are not admin and if admin thought the post was irrelevant, it would be deleted.

You don't or can't understand how it is relevant to the cult or what non-gender conforming people or people with ambiguous genitalia (or other issues) deal with in the cult, fine. But don't expect someone (like me) to not post a rebuttal when you decide to tell them what they should or shouldn't post here.

If Cassandra is pulling a PR stunt, then so be it. Uterus didelphys is a real thing and those who are intersexed or deal with other genital anomalies need support and be given a voice.

You don't like it, tough;Don't respond or engage with me, then, and I will do the same courtesy to you.

I did not engage with you. You engaged on my thread, and forget the passive shit, you engaged with your outright aggressive vitriol.

You didn't like my post, you shouldn't have responded or engaged. You do not have the right to tell me that I can have no opinion of your irrelevant posts.

Most people here self regulate, as a student of psychology, it is a social skill set you ought to learn.

That makes me aggressive and vitriolic? Boy are you in the wrong forum.
I'm not going to coddle you or anyone else who thinks they can tell someone what they can or can't post.

If you think this is aggressive, you are lacking a thick skin, something you'll need here.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 09:20PM by Itzpapalotl.

I think he's still got that "I'm a mormon man" complex.

Excuse me.... but you don't get to decide what gets posted

here. I'll decide for myself instead of being inflicted by

your choices for me.

Sort of "physician, heal thyself?"

Good point matt. He also doesn't have the right to tell

Itzpapalotl what she should learn.... he sounds like he

still has that paternalistic preisthood holder, mysogynistic

complex where he can tell women what to do. No Bueno Sass.

Who said I was a man?

It appears that there are a lot of assumptions made here. You only reveal your own misandry.

Personally, I don't give a rat's ass if you're male, female, or somewhere in between.

I gave you some insight into how this forum works and you decided to take me to task in your original post. I give the same advice to most (relatively) new posters.

If you can't handle someone who's frank about such matters, then don't respond back to them.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2015 09:29PM by Itzpapalotl.

If you're not, my bad. Your sense of entitlement and aggressive

preisthood holder "I'm gonna tell the women what to do" attitude

made me think that. Even if you're a woman , you are not

entitled to chose what belongs on this board.

And no Sass... I'm not predjudice against men..... just the kind who tries to edit what I do .

You all have certainly revealed a very key component of your disposition toward not only men, but anyone who disagrees with you. I feel sorry for you.