-->
@Lucy
People sometimes find it difficult to argue against common sense.
So, a woman who identified as a man.
Posts
Total:
48
-->
@drafterman
I've never seen people so vehemently and vitriolically argue against something that doesn't affect them in the slightest.
Welcome to life as a trans person, lol. People feel threatened by our existence, sometimes because they just don't know anything about us, sometimes because we're "easy" targets, sometimes even because they're repressing their gender identity themselves. So, I just try to be as visible as I can and show that I'm a normal, sane, competent human being. People do with that what they will, and hopefully something reaches their hearts.
-->
@bmdrocks21
It doesn't say ideally three. It frames being three and old enough to say what they want as equally viable choices.
Again, full quote: "Intersex advocacy groups have therefore argued that doctors and parents should at least wait [to perform surgery] until a child is old enough to communicate their gender identity, which typically manifests around the age of three, or old enough to decide whether they want surgery at all." In context this is saying that: 1) performing surgery on the genitals of intersex infants is extremely risky and may result in gender dysphoria down the line, and 2) therefore parents should wait before making that decision. And it further says that parents should wait at least until their child's gender identity is clear to make a decision for them, or ideally wait until the child is old enough to decide for their self (notably, not three).
I'm not really sure what to say other than you're reading the sentence incorrectly. The phrase, "which typically manifests around the age of three," is a parenthetical clause describing gender identity. If we take out the parenthetical clause, the sentence becomes, "Intersex advocacy groups have therefore argued that doctors and parents should at least wait [to perform surgery] until a child is old enough to communicate their gender identity or old enough to decide whether they want surgery at all."
Sex and ten toes are normative. Normative:"establishing, relating to, or deriving from a standard or norm, especially of behavior.". It is normal to have ten toes and be either male or female, and therefore sex is normative.Mutations and genetic defects can happen. They don't make you non-human, but they also don't create some new category of what humans are. A biology textbook will say we have ten toes. It shouldn't say that we can have any number of toes and that every number is equally valid.
You're using normal in the sense of "usual" or "typical". I repeat:
In other words, the categories we have for the sexes exist only to the extent that they are practical and don't reflect any underlying truth about the universe that everyone ought to conform to. For example, you mention the example of "humans have ten toes". But some humans do not have ten toes, and yet are still humans. Other animals have ten toes and yet are not humans. But yes, humans generally have ten toes. "Ten toes" is descriptive and not normative. Sex is descriptive and not normative. This is a major reason why gender identity, one's sense of self, should not be lumped together with one's sex, and why one's sex may appear to be one way while an individual nonetheless expresses an incongruous gender identity.I'll add that it's especially a reason why criticisms of trans people as "delusional," etc., are incoherent. To call it a delusion presumes you have an objective, external standard of what their gender is to compare with their internal conception of their gender. That's especially odd because my argument is that gender is this internal conception. Regardless, it's on you to provide that objective standard.
And sure, some people might think they are a gender they are not. If I thought that I was president Obama or an 80 year old potato, I would be incorrect. Sometimes your perception denies reality. That is the case with transgender folks.
Those aren't genders, and your conception of reality leaves much to be desired.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I am male because I was born with a penis etc, that makes me a male. If you are saying you don't need a penis to be a male then what am I? If you are saying you can choose to be male or female, those terms are meaningless because they can be defined and redefined anyway anyone chooses.
You are what you are. Your internal sense of gender identity is presumably that you are male, which would make you a male. As far as choosing it... well, try choosing to feel female, or agender, or anything other than what you are, then report back on how that went lol.
Again if you want people to lie to you and call you female when they really don't believe it that's up to you to live that lie. A name is different and people should use your name.You have to decide if you want people to be real towards you or fake to appease you.[. . .]any artificial physical changes done to look like me and my kind doesn't make you one of us, no more than me changing the color of my skin makes me the race of which I look like. That's my opinion and I am and should be entitled to it shouldn't I?
To the extent that you or someone else doesn't believe me, you are incorrect. You have the right to be wrong, but "it's all just opinions" is an attempt to sweep important discussion under the rug.
I've provide customer service and care to transpeople in my job. I never try to treat anyone different and everyone the same. I'd like to think I've done a good job at doing that generally. Naturally how I'm treated does make a difference, I'm only human after all. No one should be treated unkindly or badly, most people anyway.A: Did Lucy take a turn?B: Yeah, Lucy built a castle.
I'm sure you don't harbor a grudge against trans people or anything like that. Let me ask you this: why do think using a trans person's chosen name is good, but not their pronouns?
-->
@zedvictor4
People sometimes find it difficult to argue against common sense.
True, because it's a meaningless phrase. It's just an assertion that "most people believe it, and it seems obvious to me, so it's true". In my circles, it is common sense that you're wrong lol.
-->
@drafterman
nope, having a discussion with them, it's interesting, which is a form of entertainment, your post kind of struck me as funny.
-->
@Lucy
Your internal sense of gender identity is presumably that you are male,
maybe, but don't blind people know if they are male or female?
well, try choosing to feel female
I could no more know how a female feels than anyone else, nor could I explain how it feels to be male/man, it doesn't have anything to do with feelings, just biology. If you disagree or see it differently that's fine, but I don't think your views should be imposed on mine, just like I wouldn't impose mine on you. You may wish to be called x or considered x (that's a request) and that's your prerogative only in so far as you don't attempt to force that one me.
Again would you like someone to lie to you and tell you want you want to hear or be honest with you?
why do think using a trans person's chosen name is good, but not their pronouns?
because I am not Lucy, but I am a man
the real issue is when someone unintentionally uses incorrect words, even to the point people want to make it a crime, I mean wtf, seriously?
I make a conscious effort to avoid all pronouns for those very reasons.
People generally don't want to be forced or threatened into doing things they don't want to do.
I guess since this is such an issue we'd need to go back to the creation of the words male/female as well as how other languages use them etc.
We look at an animal and say whether it's female or male yet the criteria for the human animal is different somehow? That difference in criteria is choice? This doesn't seem to be consistent.
-->
@Lucy
Yes, but they say that this identity arises around the age of three. So, it was used to give more information around when the identity arises.That would be when they could communicate the identity because it has arisen. I'm hoping and guessing this wouldn't ever happen, though.
I gave the definition of normative. It said was it usual or typical. I am going to have to say that I believe our disagreement stems from gender vs sex. I think they are the same thing. That is why I believe in an objective standard for "gender". Because sex is concrete and objective. Gender, from what you are saying, is how you see yourself. That would make it an opinion, completely unfounded in facts. Therefore, I wouldn't consider it anything tangible or "real" under that definition.
I don't care that Obama or potatoes aren't genders. They are personal, delusional perceptions of my body and identity. The same thing as transgenders.
-->
@Lucy
People feel threatened by our existence
This is completely untrue. No one (with the probable exception of real-life internet trolls, but there aren't too many of those) feels threatened by your existence. They feel threatened because there are people pushing for laws that force them to use preferred pronouns. They feel threatened because biological males are being allowed into their daughter's bathrooms. Are some of them good people? Sure. Are some of them predators pretending to be transgender to gain access to women's bathrooms? You would have to be a fool to say no. It's not the existence of trans people that makes people feel threatened; it's the radical activism of a few trans people and leftists that threatens them.
why do chromosomes determine your sex or your gender?
Why does the fact that it isn't day mean that it's night? Why does the fact that an object has pages covered in words mean it's a book, magazine, or pamphlet? Why is a circle round? I say that it's possible for circles to be square; if you disagree, then why are you threatened by the existence of square circles?
Concerning your discussion of intersex people, it is irrelevant for one simple reason (probably more than one, but one is all I need at the moment): intersex is reflected in biological reality, whereas transgenderism is not. You may protest that transgender people's brains are similar to the opposite sex, but that proves nothing. When the brain disagrees with the body, the body isn't the one that's wrong.
It is common knowledge that the suicide rates among trans people is abnormally high, and that many blame that rate on "transphobia" and discrimination. However, this is complete nonsense. The suicide rate among trasngender people is higher than that of blacks during slavery and Jews in the Holocaust. It is only comparable to people with mental illnesses. Can you explain this?
Now, I want to be absolutely clear that I don't think this makes you any less valuable as a person. I'm not trying to dehumanize you, deny your existence, or any of the other things that the left accuses those who disagree with them of doing. I am not saying this because I am a bigot or a "transphobe" (which I put in quotes because it is such an abuse of the English language to label something that has nothing to do with fear as a phobia) or a hater. I don't hate anyone. I don't think that having mental issues makes you less valuable, and I don't think it means that you need to be put in an institution or anything like that.
Let me ask you this: why do think using a trans person's chosen name is good, but not their pronouns?
There is - in all seriousness, I am not joking nor jesting, the truth testifies that I do not lie - an idiot out there who changed his name to the number on his football uniform. You can change your name to whatever you want.
-->
@SirAnonymous
They feel threatened because there are people pushing for laws that force them to use preferred pronouns. They feel threatened because biological males are being allowed into their daughter's bathrooms. Are some of them good people? Sure. Are some of them predators pretending to be transgender to gain access to women's bathrooms? You would have to be a fool to say no. It's not the existence of trans people that makes people feel threatened; it's the radical activism of a few trans people and leftists that threatens them.
Outlawing discrimination isn't radical, and "Trans people shouldn't have the right to pee in peace because cis people will abuse it" is the most backward logic in the world lmao.
Why does the fact that it isn't day mean that it's night? Why does the fact that an object has pages covered in words mean it's a book, magazine, or pamphlet? Why is a circle round? I say that it's possible for circles to be square; if you disagree, then why are you threatened by the existence of square circles?Concerning your discussion of intersex people, it is irrelevant for one simple reason (probably more than one, but one is all I need at the moment): intersex is reflected in biological reality, whereas [being transgender] is not. You may protest that transgender people's brains are similar to the opposite sex, but that proves nothing. When the brain disagrees with the body, the body isn't the one that's wrong.
The Enlightenment called. They want their mind-body dualism back.
To the extent you believe this, you haven't paid attention to a word I've written and you have no idea what you're talking about. You are at odds with both basic biology and the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community.
It is common knowledge that the suicide rates among trans people is abnormally high, and that many blame that rate on "transphobia" and discrimination. However, this is complete nonsense. The suicide rate among trasngender people is higher than that of blacks during slavery and Jews in the Holocaust. It is only comparable to people with mental illnesses. Can you explain this?
Here's a report on trans people and suicide. It's very limited in that it only records whether a person has or hasn't attempted suicide at some point in their life (i.e. when it was in relation to their transition isn't recorded, so this doesn't tell us if and how transition changed them). But the results show a dramatic correlation between discrimination and suicide attempts. The prevalence in the general trans population is 41%. Among trans people who have experienced various forms of housing discrimination, it's about 60%. Among those who lost close friends, 50%. Among those ostracized by their family, 57%. On the other hand, among those with strong family relationships, it's 33%.
That report also shows a distinct effect of mental illness. 67% of trans women who reported having a mental health disability attempted suicide at least once, compared to 37% of trans women who did not report that. The difference is similarly dramatic across the spectrum.
Again, this says nothing about the effect of medical intervention. A review of the literature found that "although the levels of psychopathology and psychiatric disorders in trans people attending services at the time of assessment are higher than in the cis population, they do improve following gender-confirming medical intervention, in many cases reaching normative values. The main Axis I psychiatric disorders were found to be depression and anxiety disorder. Other major psychiatric disorders, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, were rare and were no more prevalent than in the general population." Most other literature I've seen supports that as well.
I'm bowing out from the echo chamber. I've made my case, most people are basically just reasserting the same few points, and after reflection, I'm satisfied that what I argued stands. Most of the critiques betray either willful ignorance of my points or else miss them entirely, and I am uninterested in being called delusional and so on by multiple people only to have the same bad arguments thrown at me. If anyone thinks they have an actual, well-thought out critique, challenge me to a debate or PM me.
-->
@Lucy
Life choices is life choices. No one is denying you that.
But unalterable facts are unalterable facts.
And to get back to the point. A woman that "identifies" as a man, who then goes on to conceive and give birth is undeniably a hypocrite.
And such hypocrisy proves two things:
1. Assumed post-natal "gender dysfunction" is nothing more than a current socio-psychological trend.
2. No amount of cosmetic padding can alter the base reality of gender.
Have a nice day.
-->
@Lucy
I'm bowing out from the echo chamber.
I completely understand. I once tried to debate three different people with no one on my side, and they didn't even come at the same time. I was almost overwhelmed. I can only imagine what it's like to debate 5 to 10 people at the same time. I also remember how I felt when one of them kept refuting what I had said after I had stated I was finished. I will not inflict that upon you, except by responding to a personal attack.
To the extent you believe this, you haven't paid attention to a word I've written and you have no idea what you're talking about.
While I admit to skimming some of your posts, I did indeed pay attention to the ones I responded to, and I do know what I'm talking about.
If anyone thinks they have an actual, well-thought out critique, challenge me to a debate or PM me.
If I have the time, I may take you up on that offer.
-->
@SirAnonymous
@Lucy
A debate is more often than not based on a difference of opinion.
Therefore it must be expected that a challenger will refute your argument and vice versa.
Freedom of opinion, and freedom of expression are paramount for both sides of the argument.
And the chamber will continue to echo, despite the liberal media's attempts to stifle alternative opinion.
59 days later
If someone who believes they are transgender wants to believe that, then fine.
However, when they try to implement legislation that forces other people to believe the same thing, which goes against their beliefs, then it goes too far.
California made misgendering a felony because of the transgenders. In the state, misgendering carries a harsher sentence than willingly spreading AIDS.
Because of this, not all, but many transgenders are a threat to the 1st amendment. I met a transgender person once and they tried to get me in trouble for me stating my opinion.
-->
@Alec
Yep.
There are two sides to every argument and both sides have a right to be voiced.
And offence is make believe.
And ignorance is bliss.
-->
@zedvictor4
Woman { Xx } has a womb ---that is why their called womb-man.
Man { Xy } have no womb and will never bear a fetus to birth.
Some believe humans be able to create life within 30 years. I'm skeptical that will ever happen and feel the same way about a functional womb every be implanted into a woman.
Penis envy by women only occurs when a woman is in a more public place and wish they could just whip it nearly anywhere to pee, instead of having to find a place to drop their pants-ties.
More men strive to be a woman than a man, and that is because men have and X chromosome that has some genes actively inducing their envy of womanhood.
-->
@Alec
If someone who believes they are transgender wants to believe that, then fine.However, when they try to implement legislation that forces other people to believe the same thing, which goes against their beliefs, then it goes too far.California made misgendering a felony because of the transgenders. In the state, misgendering carries a harsher sentence than willingly spreading AIDS.Because of this, not all, but many transgenders are a threat to the 1st amendment. I met a transgender person once and they tried to get me in trouble for me stating my opinion.
I am immediately skeptical when I hear claims like this as they are almost always distortions of truths, mutated through various internet forms of the telephone game which ultimately leads to a source which misrepresents the facts.
Is it true to say that "California made misgendering a felony because of the transgenders?" No, it is not.
The bill in question is SB219. It's primary target is on long-term care facilities and how they may treat their residents. This includes, yes, misgendering, if it is repeated and willful.
The penalty for violation of this law is a fine up to $1,000 and/or up to one year in jail which falls under the category of misdemeanor, rather than felony.
So, no, misgendering is not a felony in California. Abuse and discrimination of residents in long-term care facilities, of which misgendering is one example of, is a misdemeanor.
I'm sorry that a transgendered person hurt your feelings once. This does not make them a threat to the first amendment (the bill was sponsored by Scott Wiener and signed into law by Jerry Brown, both of whom are cisgendered individuals as far as I can tell).