Gender Identity/ Sexual Orientation

[BotanyBoy]

Again, still waiting for actual evidence.

I'm betting you can't even define your criteria for "actual evidence", considering the shit is all over the place practically daily throughout the western 1st world.

Anyone who doesn't have their head up their ass has noticed the MASSIVE push of pro-trans everything, everywhere in the last few years. If you refuse to acknowledge that then that's your problem not mine.

That's what I was referring to. I've given a shit about people obsessing about the putative 'cause' of transgender for some time. Keep up.

LOL!!!!

You're not the one who's ahead cupcake I was just trying to give you more credit than you were apparently owed.

 

[BotanyBoy]

If white people identify as black, do we look the other way when they exercise their right to apply to scholarships set aside for minorities?

LMFAO!!!

Of course not, that's RACIST NAZI SHIT!!!

I have a new question for you. Is separate, but equal, the law of the land?

The social justice crowd is DESPERATE for it to be.

 

[RobDownSouth]

That is pretty childish behavior on your part.

Well, you have to admit that thread is full of childish behavior to begin with. Two aging underemployed men with no significant accomplishments to their name bemoaning a world that is rapidly passing them by.

....it's like a relic from a different age! Could be! Oooo-eeeee!

 

[Rightguide]

Have you contributed anything at all to this thread? If so, how did I miss your pearls of wisdom.

You're a fucking TROLL, dude. PISS OFF!

He'll have to sit down to piss off.

 

[Aglaopheme]

For you two to tell me that 3 out of 100 people suffer from this condition sounds a bit exaggerated. If you were to say 1 out of 1,000, that is more believable. To get to your 3% number, it seems that you have to pull in all sorts of behaviors including men who put on dresses as a fetish and a fetish only. I do not for a second think that the number of people who feel their gender is different from their sex is that high and what Silver's group is saying is that these are accepted, but unverifiable estimates. The issue is contaminated by Social Justice politics.

The challenge was to explain what rights are being violated. You offered nothing more than entities which have caved to the political pressure of activists.

Nor have you even tried to explain how hard-wired brains allow for Lesbians to stop being Lesbians anymore that you have shown any test, or scan, that can determine how a person will identify. Is counseling ever an option in your world? If white people identify as black, do we look the other way when they exercise their right to apply to scholarships set aside for minorities?

I have a new question for you. Is separate, but equal, the law of the land?

I never said 3% it's not "my number".

Why do you call it "caving"? Do you think that transfolk should legally allowed to be discriminated against across the board?

I don't know anything about the woman's sexuality or how she identifies that you keep harping on, why would I comment on it? I think counseling is very important, because of the attitudes of folks like you the people face every single day. I witness it all the time.

 

[KimGordon67]

I'm betting you can't even define your criteria for "actual evidence", considering the shit is all over the place practically daily throughout the western 1st world.

Anyone who doesn't have their head up their ass has noticed the MASSIVE push of pro-trans everything, everywhere in the last few years. If you refuse to acknowledge that then that's your problem not mine.



LOL!!!!

You're not the one who's ahead cupcake I was just trying to give you more credit than you were apparently owed.

'Actual evidence' generally constitutes peer reviewed research (although obviously that's always able to be challenged on various bases - e.g. I don't really agree with the link that was originally posted, but at least there's some actual research to engage with, rather than people's random and unsubstiated opinions about things. But peer-reviewed research is pretty much as good as it gets).

The bolded above is not the same as people being 'forced' to be pro-trans. You're shifting your argument. (I also think 'massive' is a bit of an over-statement, but it's such an ambiguous term that it has no real meaning anyway.)

And honestly, I don't give a toss how much 'credit' you give me. I just find it amusing how righteous people can be without being able to maintain a logical train of thought on the topic they're being righteous about. But of course, they tend to think that the virtual impossibility of engaging in their circuitous, shifting, unsubstantiated, and illogical arguments means they've 'won'.

 

[BotanyBoy]

'Actual evidence' generally constitutes peer reviewed research.

They don't do peer reviewed research on what the latest Social Justice pet classes are.

If you don't think there has been a pro-trans agenda lately then there is nothing I can do for you except advise you to get out more, turn on a TV or look around the internet sometime.

The bolded above is not the same as people being 'forced' to be pro-trans.

I never said anyone was being forced, I said the left wants to force.

Unfortunately for them there are still some civil rights kinda still sorta intact.

You're shifting your argument.

Not at all.

And honestly, I don't give a toss how much 'credit' you give me. I just find it amusing how righteous people can be without being able to maintain a logical train of thought on the topic they're being righteous about. But of course, they tend to think that the virtual impossibility of engaging in their circuitous, shifting, unsubstantiated, and illogical arguments means they've 'won'.

Your lack of reading skills and or intellectual dishonesty is not a lack of logic or a shifting, unsubstantiated argument on my part.

 

[KimGordon67]

I've never denied an increase in pro-trans movements - I simply queried this being 'massive'.

I'm assuming your semantic quibbling over 'force' vs 'attempting to force' is due to a lack of evidence for either state of affairs. It's a fairly classic move for someone who can't back up their argument in even the most general sense.

I"d accept any other evidence that seemed reliable and not blatantly transphobic. Just a reminder - we're looking for a clear and significant trend (not isolated incidents) of attempts to force people into changing their views on trans folk - is that a fair summation?

They don't do peer reviewed research on what the latest Social Justice pet classes are.

If you don't think there has been a pro-trans agenda lately then there is nothing I can do for you except advise you to get out more, turn on a TV or look around the internet sometime.



I never said anyone was being forced, I said the left wants to force.

Unfortunately for them there are still some civil rights kinda still sorta intact.



Not at all.



Your lack of reading skills and or intellectual dishonesty is not a lack of logic or a shifting, unsubstantiated argument on my part.

 

[Freudian_Slit]

For you two to tell me that 3 out of 100 people suffer from this condition sounds a bit exaggerated. If you were to say 1 out of 1,000, that is more believable.

.3% of 1,000 is 3. No one in this thread claimed 3% of the general population is transgender. I thought you said you had a degree in mathematics?

 

[Freudian_Slit]

There is some, and perhaps mounting, evidence for a biological basis for the transgender brain. Though I am not prepared to say the science is at all robust. People are enormously complex gene expression networks, and I believe it's prudent to have humility for what we do not yet know. There is still plenty we don't know about the biological basis of human sexuality.

 

[KimGordon67]

There is some, and perhaps mounting, evidence for a biological basis for the transgender brain. Though I am not prepared to say the science is at all robust. People are enormously complex gene expression networks, and I believe it's prudent to have humility for what we do not yet know. There is still plenty we don't know about the biological basis of human sexuality.

I take your point and don't necessarily disagree - my query is more about why it matters so much ... tinged with a concern that locating a definitive 'cause' will lead to a subsequent push to 'correct ' whatever that 'cause' is.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I'm assuming your semantic quibbling over 'force' vs 'attempting to force' is due to a lack of evidence for either state of affairs.

No it's due to what I said vs. what you wish I said, learn to read.

There is only a lack of evidence if you've got your head up your ass AND live under a rock.

From campus admin throwing kids out for microagressing LGBQT for incorrect pronoun usage to special interest groups trying to get certain "offensive" speech banned under the context of "hate speech" like the eurotrash idols do.

This shit has been all over the MSM/Internet as a hot topic for well over a year now, did you really miss that?

we're looking for a clear and significant trend (not isolated incidents) of attempts to force people into changing their views on trans folk - is that a fair summation?

Berkeley in the 60's....Liberalism.
http://ethanrussell.com/americanstory/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/FSMMARCH.jpg

Berkeley in the 2010's....social justice, champion ideology of the pro-trans movement.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/freespeech.SamGraham.Flickr-370x277.jpg

Check your pronouns or it's hate speech!!
http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-...ill-extending-transgender-protections-n773421

American Social Justice Democrats are desperate to end free speech in the US in the same manner.

Clear enough?

Do you need more or do you think you can manage to pull your head out on your own?



http://imagineathena.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/south-park-political-correctness.png

 

[Freudian_Slit]

I take your point and don't necessarily disagree - my query is more about why it matters so much ... tinged with a concern that locating a definitive 'cause' will lead to a subsequent push to 'correct ' whatever that 'cause' is.

Well, my concern was more evaluative than normative. I have no desire to change people from their natures, so long as they are happy. But I do have a passing interest in the biological basis of sexuality.

 

[KimGordon67]

I'll check the link when I'm not on a phone.

Surprised there's only one, given the apparently tidal wave size of this issue, but I'm assuming that one link contains clear evidence of the endemic nature of this apparent problem.

(I don't live in the US and the whole place seems so batshit crazy that I mostly ignore it.)

No it's due to what I said vs. what you wish I said, learn to read.

There is only a lack of evidence if you've got your head up your ass AND live under a rock.

From campus admin throwing kids out for microagressing LGBQT for incorrect pronoun usage to special interest groups trying to get certain "offensive" speech banned under the context of "hate speech" like the eurotrash idols do.

This shit has been all over the MSM/Internet as a hot topic for well over a year now, did you really miss that?



Berkeley in the 60's....Liberalism.
http://ethanrussell.com/americanstory/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/FSMMARCH.jpg

Berkeley in the 2010's....social justice, champion ideology of the pro-trans movement.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/freespeech.SamGraham.Flickr-370x277.jpg

Check your pronouns or it's hate speech!!
http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-...ill-extending-transgender-protections-n773421

American Social Justice Democrats are desperate to end free speech in the US in the same manner.

Clear enough?

Do you need more or do you think you can manage to pull your head out on your own?



http://imagineathena.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/south-park-political-correctness.png

 

[hsnh]

1.Well, my concern was more evaluative than normative. I have no desire to change people from their natures, so long as they are happy.

2.But I do have a passing interest in the biological basis of sexuality.

2.Similar here.
I actually don't care that much about these specific topics per se, as for the common thread: how people with different backgrouds and values view and shape the world.


1.I think in this day and age, it's easy to suffer from Google IQ- itis.
-- But having information at one's fingertips doesn't automatically mean that one has the in depth basal knowledge to understand things properly.

You and I and others might debate online things that we weren't trained about, but we know our limitations in that we keep things only in these forums.
-- But what's scary about some of the more radical Transgender advocates is that they are gradually trying to tell psychologists and doctors how to do things.
Wait until they start lawsuits against professionals who refuse to refer ever Dick and Jane who say "I'm trangender" for surgery.

.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Surprised there's only one, given the apparently tidal wave size of this issue,

There are more, but you'll have to crawl out from under your rock to notice it.

(I don't live in the US and the whole place seems so batshit crazy that I mostly ignore it.)

Oh well then you might have missed the part where our society has just been a flood of pro-trans propaganda from pretty much every (D) source of media available.

 

[KimGordon67]

There are more, but you'll have to crawl out from under your rock to notice it.



Oh well then you might have missed the part where our society has just been a flood of pro-trans propaganda from pretty much every (D) source of media available.

Righto, I've cycled back to what seemed to be your original actual problem - there were a few statements before that, but when we boiled down to the actual issue, it's this: "forcing others to care about the lives of others".

... and I'm reading through the link you've sent me and cannot see anywhere in there where this is happening. You can no longer discriminate against someone on the basis of their gender identity - that's not the same as being forced to care about their lives. There's a whole heap of people I'm not allowed to discriminate against, and I manage to do that without caring about them in any particular way.
The embedded link within the article you linked to seems to make it quite clear that incorrect pronoun use isn't be criminalised, so that doesn't seem to be an issue.
So this article isn't really evidence of your claim at all - but if I've missed something, please do let me know.

And re: your last post, a "flood of pro trans" discourse in the media also is neither forcing nor attempting to force you to care about anything. The key word there seems to be 'propaganda' - if you can show me anything that fits that definition, I'd be interested to see it.

So that's a couple of things now:

1. evidence of (attempts to) force people to care about the lives of others;
2. and pro-trans propaganda.

Given that North American society is apparently awash with both of these things, I don't expect it'll be too difficult to locate. Looking forward to it.

I guess we need definition of 'propaganda' ... OED's is "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view". I sort of feel that the 'biased/misleading' bit needs to be present, otherwise it's just 'information used to promote a political cause/pov', and I can't really see the problem with that. Agreed?

 

[KimGordon67]

[I'm not responding to memes or poorly photoshopped photos - neither of those things have any actual content.]

No it's due to what I said vs. what you wish I said, learn to read.

There is only a lack of evidence if you've got your head up your ass AND live under a rock.

From campus admin throwing kids out for microagressing LGBQT for incorrect pronoun usage to special interest groups trying to get certain "offensive" speech banned under the context of "hate speech" like the eurotrash idols do.

This shit has been all over the MSM/Internet as a hot topic for well over a year now, did you really miss that?



Berkeley in the 60's....Liberalism.
http://ethanrussell.com/americanstory/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/FSMMARCH.jpg

Berkeley in the 2010's....social justice, champion ideology of the pro-trans movement.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/freespeech.SamGraham.Flickr-370x277.jpg

Check your pronouns or it's hate speech!!
http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-...ill-extending-transgender-protections-n773421

American Social Justice Democrats are desperate to end free speech in the US in the same manner.

Clear enough?

Do you need more or do you think you can manage to pull your head out on your own?



http://imagineathena.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/south-park-political-correctness.png

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I never said 3% it's not "my number".

Why do you call it "caving"? Do you think that transfolk should legally allowed to be discriminated against across the board?

I don't know anything about the woman's sexuality or how she identifies that you keep harping on, why would I comment on it? I think counseling is very important, because of the attitudes of folks like you the people face every single day. I witness it all the time.

What is this discrimination?

What rights are being abrogated?

Do you support separate but equal treatment?

Well, I "harp" on it because it outlines the underlying fallacy of the claim that gender is naturally hardwired just as we were told that homosexuality was "hardwired" in the brain (as is schizophrenia). So if Mayor DeBlasio's wife has led two lives, which one is the lie, i.e., how can she make such a choice.

Oh, that's is just too fucking funny. They need counseling not because they are suffering from a form of mental illness, but because there are people out there willing to point out that the Emperor has no clothes on...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

'Actual evidence' generally constitutes peer reviewed research (although obviously that's always able to be challenged on various bases - e.g. I don't really agree with the link that was originally posted, but at least there's some actual research to engage with, rather than people's random and unsubstiated opinions about things. But peer-reviewed research is pretty much as good as it gets).

The bolded above is not the same as people being 'forced' to be pro-trans. You're shifting your argument. (I also think 'massive' is a bit of an over-statement, but it's such an ambiguous term that it has no real meaning anyway.)

And honestly, I don't give a toss how much 'credit' you give me. I just find it amusing how righteous people can be without being able to maintain a logical train of thought on the topic they're being righteous about. But of course, they tend to think that the virtual impossibility of engaging in their circuitous, shifting, unsubstantiated, and illogical arguments means they've 'won'.

Peer review in the soft sciences is a load of horse shit. Show me the test, show me the scan show me this hardwiring that determines gender...

Until then, there is no proof that the hard-wiring is is virtual or figurative.

 

[KimGordon67]

Peer review in the soft sciences is a load of horse shit. Show me the test, show me the scan show me this hardwiring that determines gender...

Until then, there is no proof that the hard-wiring is is virtual or figurative.

I was asking for evidence of a social fact (being 'forced' to care about other people) - nothing to do with wiring of any sort.

And I hate to break it it to, but 'facts' in the hard sciences shift all the time too.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Yes, but the difference is experimentation and replication of results in the hard sciences, like a byte with a parity bit, they are self-correcting.


The soft science are vulnerable to socially-driven outcomes.

Do we next, as I asked yesterday, mainstream race identification and scream discrimination when white people are denied scholarships set aside for minorities? Once you allow the camel's nose under the tent...


Furthermore, let me throw a monkey-wrench into the inner workings of this movement, which is trying to pass itself off as a civil rights movement instead of a mental health issue, why is the Left focusing like a laser on the discrimination against bathroom gender choices? Because it a divisive issue, one which gives them built in enemies to rail against, demean and impugn when their radical demands are not met. As I have been hinting, the real civil rights issue here is the separate, but equal facilities in the public domain based upon sexual exclusion (discrimination).

Now, if you did not wish to be divisive and wanted to create the larger and more proper conversation, then we should honestly ask, as in any civil rights case, is not equal access the underlying principle? If we're going to allow people to select gender, then maybe the larger fight is to make all public bathroom/shower facilities unisex?

Let's see if that Led Zeppelin will fly when you remove the logical (and fallacious) rhetorical tool known as the "unassailable victim."

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Sorry about the misunderstand too...

 

[KimGordon67]

Yes, but the difference is experimentation and replication of results in the hard sciences, like a byte with a parity bit, they are self-correcting.


The soft science are vulnerable to socially-driven outcomes.

Do we next, as I asked yesterday, mainstream race identification and scream discrimination when white people are denied scholarships set aside for minorities? Once you allow the camel's nose under the tent...


Furthermore, let me throw a monkey-wrench into the inner workings of this movement, which is trying to pass itself off as a civil rights movement instead of a mental health issue, why is the Left focusing like a laser on the discrimination against bathroom gender choices? Because it a divisive issue, one which gives them built in enemies to rail against, demean and impugn when their radical demands are not met. As I have been hinting, the real civil rights issue here is the separate, but equal facilities in the public domain based upon sexual exclusion (discrimination).

Now, if you did not wish to be divisive and wanted to create the larger and more proper conversation, then we should honestly ask, as in any civil rights case, is not equal access the underlying principle? If we're going to allow people to select gender, then maybe the larger fight is to make all public bathroom/shower facilities unisex?

Let's see if that Led Zeppelin will fly when you remove the logical (and fallacious) rhetorical tool known as the "unassailable victim."

The first bolded point is just one in a number of silly 'if this, then that' arguments. We dealt with the same rubbish when legalising same-sex marriage ... amazingly, no one is now demanding the right to more than one spouse (which I would actually be fine with), or to marry their pig. And the sky is right where it's always been.

I don't really understand the second bolded point. Can you make it more clearly?

Re: the third one - most trans people don't understand themselves to be 'selecting' their gender. They just ARE that gender, like I just AM a woman. But yeah, I'm all for unisex loos etc - our one at home seems to work perfectly fine on that basis. I don't understand how that's relevant to BB's weird argument though?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

That's the point.

The silly argument turned out to be true.

That's the nature of mass movements; the goal is never achieved, the target just keeps getting sillier until people throw up their hands and allow everything in order to not become the targets of hate. They learn to accept the absurd as normal and then when people are rounded up and marched off they look the other way or fire up the band.



Is it not illegal to discriminate by sex (or race)? Why tolerate the idea that women have to use this bathroom and men have to use that bathroom as if they were white and black drinking fountains? If a baker must bake a cake for a gay wedding, then, in the name of civil rights should we end the idea of separate, but equal, when it comes to public bathrooms and showers thusly rendering the subject of "gender identification" moot. In that scenario, there is no unassailable victim.


Again, there is no proof that they "are" that gender. If bathrooms are designated for use by sex, then that implies that everyone use the bathroom of their sex. If, as a society, we decide we don't like that separation (with the caveat, that as pointed out previously, the name-calling and aspersion on the part of this mass movement prevents honest conversation and causes many simply to keep their mouths shut and go along to get along, my wife, who voted for Trump learned very quickly not to talk about any politics on social media; long-time friends turned into hostile enemies) then we need to end the separation, period, rather than create exceptions, especially when the mere claim can give the predatory white male (you know, campus rape, white privilege, yada, yada, yada) access to the women's bathroom.

I know, I know, this is when everyone jumps up to say how rare a thing like that is (despite the firm conviction that rape happens to what, three out of five women on campus, and this contradictory thinking is also the purview of a mass movement), but if it just prevents one rape or underage molestation, isn't it worth it?