Straight People and the LGBT Community getting along.

Hey I remember you! You haven't changed a bit. Here is an answer for you:

Gender is a complex function of psychological, genetic , and other biological factors that influence how a person identifies. Not all people are entirely male or female and it is quite possible to mis-gender a child at birth .

Age on the other hand is not complex. If you were born 15 years ago YOU ARE 15. If you were born a human, you can't be a dog (at least not literally)

Get the idea? See ya around. Or not

 

A man can self identify as a tomato as far as I’m concerned, but he’ll never get me to call him a tomato. He’d be just be a very troubled man.

 

I don't think that men and tomatoes share very much DNA. Men and women, however, do

 

Not enough for them to be the same. In any event, I will never comply with mandated speech.

 

It is just a matter of respect for the preferences of others. It is not mandated. You are free to misgender others, but there may be blowback. You probably would not much like it if someone else decided for you what you are or what you should be called

 

I will make it crystaline for you. You are, (except for those who are hermaphrodite) either a boy or a girl. Gender is a psychological construct. So, you are either a boy, or a girl. You cannot be misgendered because that isn't what sex of a person is. So, you're assuming that you can build an imaginary construct on sex. Ok, Why can't I build an imaginary construct on age? You seem unable or unwilling to share your imaginary construct with others. Don't you find that age is as much a state of mind as gender? So, I can, given your own logic "identify" as literaly any age I want, just as you can "identify" as any "gender" you like. Why? Because you've taken it upon yourself to artificially change the meaning of a word. i can do the same thing, no?

 

Except even sex isn't black and white.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/

 

I would simply point out that the rarity of genetic mutation is just that, it's a failure to react normally to the formation created by the genetic construct of the DNA being referenced in your article. It still doesn't deny the existence of the three options, to which I referred in my comment. The level of hermaphroditism is then included within my range in the comment. Sex is one of three options. Deviation from genetic malfunction is also expected within that range. it does not, however invalidate the identification of them.

As we also know, there is also long established recognition the aging isn't static, and doesn't rely on simple mathematical calculation. Which is why puberty doesn't "happen" in all folks at precisely the same time.

If, as you insist, we must respect the potential "spectrum" aspect of sex, one must also respect the spectrum of time. Your argument is selfish in that you won't attribute other normative constructs because you feel somehow that transgenderism is the only medical potential for spectrum presentation. That is of course a fallacy.

So just as folks in transgenderism want folks to "respect" their story, the same story could literally be applied to any biological differentiation spectrum that exists. Transgender isn't any more special than any other.

So, as I pointed out, I "feel" 21 even though I'm 15 is the same logic based announcement as I feel "female" even though I'm genetically male. Same logic, same biological potential, etc.

 

There are more intersex and trans people than there are gingers. Also, with age, no one arguing that fact you can feel older or younger than you actually.

 

LOL... actually, they were. The logic pretzel they were demanding that we accept was that only trans can use that logic. It's absurd.

Which is of course the danger of self declaration based on the feelings of those who express it. I can declare that I share sufficient genetic attributes with say african americans, and because I can claim sufficient uncertainty about my gender, I can suddenly brand myself as a black female. Why wouldn't we? They are the unicorns of corporate america these days in their rush to fill up the org charts with sufficient diversity hires these days. And it would be legit using your logic model.

 

Break out of the box! Be who you really are.

 

Just a few points :

I will never understand why cisgender people are so freaked out by transexuals. It is a though it was a zombie apocalypse that is threatening to suck the masculinity or femininity out of you and turn you into one of them. They are just people

Trans people have been around for as long as humankind. Many -feeling that they were trapped in the wrong body suffered in silence and played the role they were assigned. Others transitioned and most people never knew. Now, with the evolution of gender awareness and changing gender roles they are coming out. Many of them ( when not persecuted) become well adjusted and productive members of society. They are better off and so are we.

Yes gender is a psychological construct but it is much more. With many trans people, there is a genetic or other biological component which may or may not be apparent at birth. Gender is assigned based strictly on genitalia and sometimes they get it wrong. People should do some research on genetics and hormonal conditions before spouting off about how it is all in their heads and that it's a mental illness.

Even if it is a strictly social/psychological matter for some, so what? Society is not going to go all to **** because a small percentage of people do not conform to their assigned gender. It was not too long ago that people were freaking out about women assuming traditional male roles-some still do. It is all an appeal to tradition logical fallacy and self inflicted hysteria.

This constant bleating about how there are only two genders is ridiculous. The fact is that for whatever reason either identify with the gender opposite the one that they were assigned at birth, or they are gender fluid or gender neutral. You can argue that these people represent some other gender, or you can say that they represent variations on one of the two genders. It is just semantics that does not change the fact that they are what they are, and it is really no one else' business.

You mentioned age. Yes there are similarities. Age, or what age you see yourself as being is, like gender, and function of your mental perception of yourself as well as biological factors. People can and do pass themselves off as being an age other than what they are, and yes, you are free to do that. The difference is that you cannot change the actual date on which you were born. Some have stupidly suggested that id some can change their you can change your species. The fact is that is just a false analogy logical fallacy

You all need to relax and stop obsessing so much about gender. It is not the boogie many that it is made out to be.

Good day friend.

 

See post 162

 

See post 162. And so what if genetic mutations are rare.? So is being left handed and left handed people used to be forced to be right handed. OK, vastly different matters but the fact is that they are all human beings and deserve to be free of ridicule and torment for who or what they are

 

Another false analogy logical fallacy as well as a red herring and non sequitur fallacy. Claiming to be black if you have no black ancestry is cultural appropriation and harmful. Changing your gender harms no one. Your analogies to age , and race are nothing more than distractions intended to derail the real issue. It is a non sequitur fallacy because your premise- if they can do change gender - does not support your conclusion that you can change your age or race.

 

Fundamentally, it all doesn't matter unless we're talking about policy implications. People can identify however they want as long as it's not harming others, and on the other hand the main place for mandatory respect of differences is the workplace and maybe a few other areas. Religious people have delusions (clearly many do, since they can't all be right), but I'm not allowed to chastise them for it if they're my co-worker as it creates a hostile work environment. Same should apply to those religious people vs persons with gender dysphoria.

Gender doesn't have the same policy implications as age, because we strive to treat genders the same. I'm not a big fan of age-based laws, but I recognize they act as a shortcut to account for trends in the maturity usually required to safety do certain things.

The conservative conception of gender is really simplistic and narrow - and for no good reason really - just stupid reasons like tradition, prejudice and fear. Gender isn't only about roles in procreation. Not everybody procreates, not everybody can, and not everybody wants to be confined by traditional concepts of feminine and masculine.

 

Even you cannot be so naive to not understand that humans of all races share enough commonality. I understand you don't want folks being able to use your own logic to tear down all of your lovingly embraced democgraphic idols, but at some point, you have to actually embrace actual science and stop clinging to emotionalism. All of us, meaning ever single person around the planet share the linage of our past which makes all peoples the same basic race.

And to put a super fine point on it, this conversation is nothing more than the notation of what you consider special. And having been alerted to the idea that transgenderism isn't unique in the world, and isn't special, led to this outburst of yours. These aren't "distractions", they are logic models using your own logic. If you find that distracting, apologies that you cannot handle simultaneous examples of your model. I'd point you to any competent plastic surgeon and remind you that folks constantly alter their appearance to effect their outward appearance of age. Again, your comment fails to recognize the most obvious things around you. And how is having a face lift different than using the same plastic surgery process to modify your existing visage to create the illusion of the opposite sex? You biologically are both the same age, and the same sex regardless of those procedures. No? If you use artificial hormonal injections you still haven't fundamentally modified your DNA, regardless of the illusion it might visually provide.

 

And really, no one has argued that folks should be confined, have they? That's the fallacy here. If you want to create the illusion that you've transitioned from FTM or MTF, who cares? As you point out, legally, the law in the US allows equality of the sexes already.

What many folks worry about, however, are those cases where the law/policy then introduce what we know to be unsafe conditions into society. See the Loudin County rape cases. The problem is, if I as an individual simply assume the mantel of transgender, but I don't take measures to transition, am I really a woman at that point? Obviously, the answer is no. And having not transitioned, as was the case in the Loudin County schools, that person was still sexually active as a male, and then used that to gain access to girls he then assaulted sexually because why? He's a lesbian?

I'm going to choose to ignore the religious conversation because it isn't useful here. I understand you have hate for religion, it's obvious, but it has no bearing on this conversation which has been mostly limited to the actual science and the biology of folks. Science is many things at this point, and can, to date, create the illusion that you can transition from being female to male or male to female. It cannot, however, at least to date, change your DNA markers. Simple as that.

 

"Even you cannot be so naive ....." That is pretty damned condescending. Nothing that you are saying here, as true as it may be, refutes my point that comparing race to gender is in appropriate for the reasons that I stated. Issues related to gender and the need to transition are real and manifested in the individual in the here and now, not hundreds of thousands of years ago in Africa. I do not think you are that naive at all. You are knowingly trying to undermine the concept of transgenerism

 

Nice try tapdancing around the issue in an another attempt to trivialize and scorn trans people. Again you fail to refute any points that I made , Rather, you try to distract with more red herrings and false analogies such as asking how a face lift is different from gender transition. You fail to understand, or pretend to not understand , that gender reassignment is far more than just changing ones appearance.

You are clearly biased as evidenced by you reference to trans people having the illusion of being the opposite sex. In addition, you demonstrate you abject ignorance of the topic by your reference to modifying DNA with hormone injections. That is idiotic, to put it as politely as I can. If you bothered to do any research, you would know that trans people are not trying to do that. Rather, they are transitioning to more closely conform to their DNA. You should really do some reading on the topic before you continue to spout of and look foolish. No doubt you will call that another "outburst" but such outbursts are necessary to jolt people into reality. My guess is that you will not do the research because you have a need to avoid any new information that will challenge your views and cause you to have to rethink your antipathy and disdain for trans people

 

As if others care what such a woman as @mswan thinks.

 

Nice try.

 

In that case, I don't see how him claiming to be trans was really required to gain access to the female restrooms in the first place. Somebody willing to rape somebody else isn't going to be stopped by the taboo of entering the wrong bathroom, and if they want to commit a crime they would benefit from entering unseen anyway - and then they can hide in the stall until they think the time is right. Besides, big men with names like Bubba already use public male restrooms. We don't need to do anything to protect the 100-pound men or 50-pound children who also use that restroom other than makes sure Bubba gets put in prison if he does sodomize somebody anywhere.

You missed the point then. Even a devoutly religious person would have to acknowledge that other religions are delusional. The relevance is that conservatives complain about having to respect somebody else's delusion when they are told they should use somebody's preferred pronoun. Due to religion, we all have to respect others dearly-held delusions already, at least in the workplace.

It's not really about science. Gender is a cultural and personal thing. Biologically we have male and female sexes for procreation, but this says basically nothing about what to value and how to act. I guess science could make this biology irrelevant by cloning and artifical womb techniques eventually, and better gender reassignment procedures. Other animals have things like parthogenesis and naturally changing biological sex by differing conditions, after all, so even if appeal to nature weren't a fallacy, there would be precedent for other approaches anyway.

 

Which of these would you call a man?

 

You are doing good work in this thread. Its appreciated.