Instigator / Pro
21
1706
rating
33
debates
80.3%
won
Topic
#2539

Resolved: Gender is not a binary

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
9
0
Better sources
6
4
Better legibility
3
3
Better conduct
3
0

After 3 votes and with 14 points ahead, the winner is...

Theweakeredge
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
7
1687
rating
555
debates
68.11%
won
Description

Resolution: Gender is not a binary

Theweakeredge’s position: Affirmative (Pro)
Contender’s Position: Negative (Con)

As the claim is phrased as a: “x is true” or “x is not true”, debaters share a BoP. Pro’s goalpost’s is “Gender is not a binary”; whereas, Con’s goalpost is “Gender is a binary”

Definitions:

Gender - “refers to the attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that a given culture associates with a person’s biological sex, : the condition of being male, female, or neuter.” [1] Where Neuter is synonymous with Neither

Binary - “a division into two groups or classes that are considered diametrically opposite” [2]

Sources:

[1] https://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/sexuality-definitions.pdf
[2] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/binary

-->
@Theweakeredge

Welcome to the club. I've had to wait almost a month too on the flat earth debate lol

-->
@DebateArt.com

Is there any way that you could lower the debate time? Considering that RationalMadman said in the forums that he was leaving the site.

-->
@TheUnderdog

There is a fundamental difference between the two that makes this a false equivalence, that I have already explained.

-->
@Theweakeredge

Climate change effects people worse than misgendering does. It's not directly effecting people, but it's still effecting people. If we don't jail climate deniers, we shouldn't jail misgenderers.

-->
@Theweakeredge

Many paths to victory for both sides here, I look forward to it.

-->
@RationalMadman

That's cool... I guess... I don't need that, nor do I care. Thank you? The entire axiom of your argument is fallacious, I think I'll attack that instead.

-->
@Theweakeredge

By the way, birds have many more exceptions than just the one mentioned there. Birds don't have XX vs XY they have it flipped. In birds, males are the identical chromosome and females are the opposite one. I'm letting you know this because it's a five-round debate and I saved comebacks and points for later. I want your attack on my 'masculine females in other species' to be fully equipped.

-->
@TheUnderdog

Yes but it affects people "differently" and that is my point. Global warming does not affect people's psychological state as directly as being transgender does, as being transgender is about an individual's gender, i.e, they're psychological perspective.

-->
@TheUnderdog

I think we fundamentally agree that people generally shouldn’t be jailed for misgendering people.

-->
@Theweakeredge

People with depression should take meds to deal with it. I have mental problems and I take meds. It works effectively.

"Climate change does not directly relate to these people's psychological states."

I could argue that climate change is a more serious issue than transgenderism because it effects everyone. Transgender rights only effect transgenders and their families primarily. We don't jail climate deniers for denying climate change even though it is something much more serious to be "wrong" about. We shouldn't jail people for misgendering regardless on whether or not such people are "wrong".

-->
@Kbub530

Care workers aren't bullying transgenders by using non preferred pronouns. Ultimately, the transgender person should find a therapist that is fine with using preferred pronouns. There is enough therapists for them to pick from.

-->
@TheUnderdog

Did you finish the article, where it explained how jail time almost certainly wouldn’t happen?

Also, does not apply to the general public—it refers specifically to care workers who are using pronouns to bully their patients.

-->
@Kbub530

A quote from the article is,

"Violations of the bill could, under limited circumstances, be treated as a misdemeanor with punishment of up to one year in jail and/or a $1,000 fine."

This is off topic, but if you don't believe anyone should go to jail, how would you punish murderers?

-->
@TheUnderdog

Your understanding of the bill is misleading. No one is going to jail.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2017/sep/26/claims-mislead-about-california-bill-forcing-jail-/

-->
@TheUnderdog

Who has gone to jail for misgendering someone? Do you have an example? I personally don’t think people should go to jail period.

-->
@TheUnderdog

That's like saying people with depression ought to, "Grow a thick skin" what the actual h*ll? That kind of rhetoric is what increases the suicide rate in America, "Ah we shouldn't do anything to help people who are at risk, let's just tell em' to deal with it." or "Ah, that woman has been sexually harassed, tell her to get over it." Both are insanely harmful and are wrong.

As for the majority offense, that's a false equivalence - as well as the pro-choice example. Yes, hate speech is protected, but if you read the actual bill it's not covering it on the basis of hate speech but of equality and non-discriminatory laws. Most of which have already been established and are already in law. Climate change does not directly relate to these people's psychological states. It is a major phenomenon that has the potential to wipe life on earth, they do not correlate. The same to the abortion thing, that is relating to something that does not yet have human rights, they do not correlate.

-->
@Theweakeredge

Whether or not one is factually wrong is up to the facts isn't it? For example, many people say that climate change is a fact. Yet we don't jail climate change deniers. If a transgender person gets psychologically damaged by someone misgendering them, they need to grow a thick skin. A majority of America believes that there are only 2 genders and they should not be put in jail for this.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/11/08/transgender-issues-divide-republicans-and-democrats/

For example, imagine if saying something pro choice was deemed hate speech towards the unborn. Every open pro choicer would go to jail. Yet hate speech is protected by the first amendment and the supreme court ruled this multiple times.

-->
@TheUnderdog

Except your factually wrong, saying there are two genders. Not to mention the clear psychological damage done to the trans person. It's not a violation of the first amendment under certain exceptions, this can just be another one of them.

-->
@Theweakeredge

"Willfully and repeatedly fail to use a resident’s preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns."

"And the punishment is a misdeamnor which is: "Standard California misdemeanors are offenses that are usually punishable by a maximum of: 6 months in county jail, and /or. A fine of up to $1,000.""

So this means that if you believe that there are only 2 genders and you act on that in a peaceful manner by misgendering on ideological grounds, you get punished? If so, that is a violation of the 1st amendment.

-->
@TheUnderdog

Have you read the actual law? I have:

1439.51. (a) - (5) reads: "Willfully and repeatedly fail to use a resident’s preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns."

And the punishment is a misdeamnor which is: "Standard California misdemeanors are offenses that are usually punishable by a maximum of: 6 months in county jail, and /or. A fine of up to $1,000."

Notice the "Up to" part? You are drastically taking this out of context. Not to mention, basing the misdeamnor charge on Texas standards instead of california standards. This is why we actually research things please.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB219
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/laws/misdemeanor/#:~:text=1.1.-,Punishment%20for%20a%20standard%20misdemeanor,fine%20of%20up%20to%20%241%2C000.

-->
@Theweakeredge

In California, misgendering on ideological grounds gets you put in jail for a year. By comparison, willingly spread HIV/AIDS is punishable by 6 months in jail in the state of CA. Now you know why people are fleeing the state. The state needs to sort out its priorities.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2017/sep/26/claims-mislead-about-california-bill-forcing-jail-/

-->
@RationalMadman

Interesting, I suppose I'll see for my self whenever you post your arguments. To a good debate and all.

Of course it is binary. Us vs Them.

-->
@Theweakeredge

Digital vs analogue isn't the same as binary vs multi-polar.

I believe genders are real and inescapable but that a very masculine female should be allowed to refer to herself by pronouns he/they feel/s comfortable with. Same goes for feminine males. I'm not one to make fun of people.

-->
@RationalMadman

Are you devil's advocate or do you genuinely hold the position?

Your answer has no bearings on the debate itself, just curious.

I've got enough debates on my plate, maybe another time!

Looking forward to reading this

-->
@9.9.9

Yeah?

-->
@Theweakeredge

I see, that makes more sense.

-->
@Fruit_Inspector

They can argue the definitions, or try to provide a better one. I simply gave a definition of gender which is topical.

-->
@Theweakeredge

Your definition of gender includes three groups - male, female, and neuter. Wouldn't that definition already contradict the idea of gender being binary? I'm just thinking it would be hard to argue if the provided definition already assumes more than two groups.

-->
@TheUnderdog

As someone who's dated Transgender people, and has spent a lot time researching the subject, and it's implications and things of that nature, I would be inclined to agree. Unless maliciousness could be proven, that shouldn't be a thing. Of course I'm not familiar with the law there, so there could be context we're both missing.

-->
@Theweakeredge

I don't know enough about this issue to argue it but the notion that you can get jailed for misgendering in California is insane.

-->
@seldiora

Hmm, I would disagree. Hypotheticals can be interesting and all, but not when the thesis is completely contradictory. Gender is itself, definitionally non binary. Of course, if someone could demonstrate this untrue, or provide a definition that does not imply this, then fine. Until then, I find the topic insensitive to say the least. Not to say I would report it, simply a matter of fact on my feelings on it.

-->
@Theweakeredge

Never mind. I thought it over and I feel like the "assigning roles" in society is probably outdated. If we were arguing about 1600's, Binary vs non-binary might be worth a shot.

Here's an interesting philosophical topic though: In an alternate universe where Gender was binary, would this world be superior to live in than our world? After all, now there are no transgender people being made fun of. And yet, if Gender WAS binary, that could reinforce the stereotypes of man being strong and brave, and women being weak and kind.

-->
@seldiora

Nah, Con can argue the definitions, or just make a convincing argument in opposing. If I were to tweak it, how would you suggest I do so?

-->
@Theweakeredge

this debate is impossible for con to win. A bit of tweak, please?

-->
@9.9.9

This debate may interest you.

-->
@MisterChris

Wouldn't have been my main argument, but okay then.

-->
@Barney

I've been wanting to debate this for a bit, but I thought no one would accept. I have a feeling our pro of a new debater, 9.9.9, might have something to say to this.

In my opinion, a dictionary saying something is something does not mean that it is true unless it is corroborated by evidence... Still, good luck fighting the "this is a truism" battle..

If anyone accepts this, they will probably argue that it should be because of their precious feelings.