The Instigator
Pro (for)
2 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
5 Points

Transsexuals are stupid.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/23/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,627 times Debate No: 34090
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)




I was walking down the road the other day with my son, little Jimmy. Thinking about it, it wasn't the best idea. We got run over.

I was walking along the street the next day with my poor little innocent son, little Timmy. But Timmy would not maintain his perfect personality for long, as we came across this bloke. Well, I say bloke. (s)He was wearing all this make-up and a feminine wig. Immediately when my poor little innocent son saw (s)him, he changed. He immediately developed the following symptoms:

- Dying his hair all these queer colours
- Dodging hair cuts
- Shouting at normal people
- Holding placards with messages such as 'Stop trans phobia now!", "Proud to be different!" and "SOCIETY DOESN'T UNDERSTAND ME !!!"
- Drawing rainbows on all personal possessions
- Eating weird foods
- Rambling on about stuff that noone else cares about
- Frequently bragging about (s)his new tutu in an annoying fashion

My son was no longer little Timmy, he was now "People of all sizes are equal Rina" which is a really stupid thing to legally change your name to, in my opinion.

All of this tragic stuff happened when he saw this travesty more widely known as a 'Transsexual'. So that's what I want to debate today, whether transsexuals are stupid. I hope for a good debate.

I thank you.


Transsexuals are in disguise; which means they are probably up to something clever. Thus, the resolution has been negated. The burden of proof has not been met anyway .
Debate Round No. 1


I thank Con for accepting this debate.

Contrary to his comments, transsexuals are not in disguise. They are really easy to spot. Imagine a normal day in a city, everything is black and white and all the people look exactly the same. Glasses, a sensible haircut, a smart suit, etc. Then a dancing buffoon comes along wearing a red dress, red high heels and an obviously fake blond wig. It also has facial hair and an 'Adam's apple' so you know that thing is a dude. That is how easy transsexuals are to spot. They are obviously not in disguise.
Normal guys and one odd one.
(Now you don't even have to imagine it. I'm so kind)

So, to the argument. All of these transsexual types blabber on about equality and accepting a person for who they are [1] [2] [3], so you'd think they would be all about equality and accepting people for who they are right? Wrong! You're an idiot, you wouldn't think of something as intellectual and sophisticated as that.

So they're all about equality and accepting people for who they are, correct? No! If that were true, they'd still be all queer and weird, but they'd still have the same gender they were born with. Accept it, they've been through more sex changes than you've had hot dinners.

What Con may try and do is one of those sneaky tricks where he rambles on about how I've not defined the terms and I therefore have proved nothing, so in an attempt to stop him cheating, I'm going to define these terms now:

Stupid - Adjective to describe someone whose actions demonstrate their lack of knowledge, e.g: claiming that equality and accepting people for who they are are good things and then altering who you are.
Transsexual - A person who has undergone a sex change operation.

I think it's safe to say that I've proven that Transsexuals are stupid.

I thank you.

[1] ;(the video)



I urge voters to deduct Pro conduct points for implying I was an "idiot", and for providing a definition that I "must adhere to" after the debate was already accepted. This is not a show of good character or conduct at all.


What about arguments? Well, my opponent's argument about being able to spot a transsexual out of a crowd implies they are not in disguise was sufficient to rebut my brief argument in the last round. However, does he deserve the argument vote? The answer is of course, no. The reasons for this is he has not shown that Transsexuals are actually less intelligent than your average human being or lack more knowledge. The burden of proof is on my opponent, and it has not been met. He tried to make the claim that transsexuals are hypocrites because if they really believed in accepting who they are, they would not try to change themselves in the first place. However, this is a fallacy of equivocation [1]. "Who they are" can refer to:

(i) Who they are biologically
(ii) Who they are subjectively

They want people to accept them for (ii) not (i). Therefore, there is no hypocrisy involved here.


My opponent has not met his burden of proof, and I tore down his argument that they are hypocrites because it is based on a fallacy of equivocation. Thus, the resolution has been negated according to the debate outline.


Debate Round No. 2
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Legitdebater 3 years ago
@KingDebater, you claim you have a son, however, according to your profile, you're 14. I doubt you have a son unless you have serious issues. Your R1 argument is hard to believe and almost sounds like a joke.
Posted by KingDebater 3 years ago
Excuse me.
Posted by The_argueonator 3 years ago
pro you say you have a son but you look no older then ten yourself
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by YYW 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO's argument reduces to "I don't like transexuals because they do weird things." That's insufficent to affirm the claim that "transexuals are stupid." As CON prudently notes, PRO failed to satisfy his BOP. PRO also insulted CON, so CON takes conduct.
Vote Placed by mananlak 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:21 
Reasons for voting decision: I saw equal arguements and S/G. Sources goes to pro for more sources. Conduct was a close one, but Pro's insults and the entire topic itself gives conduct to Con.