• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • Done now. Domine miserere nobis.

RB vs. the World: Trangenderism (split from Policy Change thread)

The Gopher

President
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
4,674
---
Re: INTPf Policy Change

Okay, let's bring the tone down to a dull roar again please.

Has RB demonstrated that it's biological? No.

Does he need to? No. Not unless it's offensive to someone affected.

That's the entire point of this change. The onus is on the derogatory party to evidence their criticisms. So if RB could please stop getting baited, and the rest of you stop splitting hairs that are irrelevant to this policy, that'd be great.

Focus ppl.

Hi Hado, did you have a problem with any of my posts or were you talking to someone else. I didn't intend for any roar.

I'm very good at being offended I think this rule is fine. I would however like to see RB back up his statements that various people are idiots with logical well reasoned arguments and evidence. Particularly myself, I am offended at being called an idiot and marginalised so I would like evidence that I am an idiot. If he can not provide it I would appreciate if he stops or is banned.

Gopher said Quick twist made his statement because he was an idiot that did not know how offensive it would be to make them.

Speaking of. :D I should clarify I called quick an idiot colloquially. I am an idiot when it comes to many things as is everyone in the world on various topics. That said I can not backup if QT is or is not an idiot so I'll drop the topic.

----------

When given a jet plane and a free ride to any location in the world RB chooses to search for the moral high ground in Coober Pedy.
 

Ex-User (14663)

Prolific Member
Local time
Today 8:40 AM
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
2,939
---
Re: INTPf Policy Change

RB knows Jews who were not offended by his avatar, so therefore it's all cool. I.e. whether something is offensive, really amounts to whether he knows someone who gets offended.
 

redbaron

irony based lifeform
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,253
---
Location
69S 69E
Re: INTPf Policy Change

Have you read the policy Gopher?

Calling someone an idiot is vastly different to discriminating against people based on their innate qualities, be it race, sex or sexual orientation.

Calling people who do those things, ignorant, is vastly different.

If people were sitting here saying the sort of shit about black people that gets said about trans people, no one would bat an eyelid if I called them out on their shit. But because the trans issue is vastly less understood and has less historical significance right now, there's still a grey area for "neutral" parties to piss all over the few people who will actually stick up for them.

Trans people don't get involved because the whole issue is hurtful to them, and without anyone saying 'stop' they turn into some side experiment for "neutral" parties to assess whether gender can be innate, or if they're just retards or something while in the meantime, they just keep getting fucking abused and marginalised.

So Serac, are you offended by my avatar? I've used this in so many places and never been met by offense. Also how is it that this is suddenly a problem now, when I've used it for more than a year? Literally people have been seeing this for ages and have had no issue but suddenly it's a problem.

Or are you actually silly enough to insist that this avatar means what I say about the sort of arguments Grayman and QT were making is somehow invalid?
 

redbaron

irony based lifeform
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,253
---
Location
69S 69E
Re: INTPf Policy Change

Also yes, if no one is offended then something would obviously not be offensive. Should I somehow gauge whether things are offensive without any kind of feedback? :rolleyes:

What's the alternative to assessing whether something is offensive, if not literally by what people find offensive?
 

redbaron

irony based lifeform
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,253
---
Location
69S 69E
Re: INTPf Policy Change

@Grayman you're obviously not going to get any good science that says "this is now proven to be X". In the realm of Neuroscience, its very rare to ever see such a hardline statement anyway.

But it is absolutely an undismissable aspect of transgender that just cannot be ignored in any fair or serious discussion about it. My point does not change at all and the need for this policy is still apparent.
 

Ex-User (14663)

Prolific Member
Local time
Today 8:40 AM
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
2,939
---
Re: INTPf Policy Change

Also yes, if no one is offended then something would obviously not be offensive. Should I somehow gauge whether things are offensive without any kind of feedback? :rolleyes:

What's the alternative to assessing whether something is offensive, if not literally by what people find offensive?
:facepalm:

Sorry dude but this conversation is beyond dumb at this point. The sophistry factor in your posts has reached 100% now so I'll rest my case.
 

redbaron

irony based lifeform
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,253
---
Location
69S 69E
Re: INTPf Policy Change

You're the one strawmanning and misrepping my point in the first place, apparently a "neutral" on the issue but with zero actual interest in understanding the issue sparking this debate and how there are literally trans people on this forum who don't deserve to have this place be a free-for-all on them.

Anyone with empathy for or understanding of what a typical trans person goes through would understand just how fucking awful it is to deal with this sort of bullshit day in and day out.

This isn't an intellectual debate, it's drawing a line on what sort of shit is okay to say about marginalised groups without some sort of evidence.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 12:40 AM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
Re: INTPf Policy Change

@Grayman you're obviously not going to get any good science that says "this is now proven to be X". In the realm of Neuroscience, its very rare to ever see such a hardline statement anyway.

But it is absolutely an undismissable aspect of transgender that just cannot be ignored in any fair or serious discussion about it. My point does not change at all and the need for this policy is still apparent.

The that it is not proven to be biological is all over the internet. Maybe you used the wrong search engine or are too stupid or too ignorant to know how science works. I suggest you get educated about it before white knighting.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 12:40 AM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
Re: INTPf Policy Change

This a great response from this transwoman/reasearcher.

https://www.quora.com/Can-gender-identity-be-determined-with-biological-tests

Notice that the 'No's have no references. That is because you cannot provide evidence for something that does not exist, like god. You can only rebut the evidence that something does exist. Since, no one has provided actual evidence as to why the believe it is proven to be neurological my only course of action to say that Transgender is not proven to be neurological is to appeal to the authority on the matter and present it. So here we have transgender women who is not only a researcher but also an advocate for transgenders who, based on this, has every reason to be biased in favor of saying that it is proven to be neurological but does not.

Also see this
http://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/gender-ideology-harms-children
"2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy forward. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.2,3,4"


Finally if you don't believe me then go get a test to see if you are transgender or cisgender. If you cannot test for it then how can it be proven that such a thing exists outside of a mental construct?

Lastly psychological disorders are not categorized by the source of the problem like medical maladies. They are categorzied based on their symptoms. They are too complex and differ too much based on each individuals condition and situation. Therefor it is impossible to provide evidence that anything causes a psychological disorder and we can only call it a psychological because it isn't known to be caused by other factors. How do you prove that gender disphoria is psychological? Simply by showing that proof that is something else has yet to be given. Keep in mind such disorders are only disorders if the symptoms are extreme enough to disrupt a persons health or life.
 

Jennywocky

Creepy Clown Chick
Local time
Today 3:40 AM
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,739
---
Location
Charn
Re: INTPf Policy Change

maybe this deserves a split.

It was supposed to be a thread to just discuss the broad policy Hado was trying to implement, and instead it's just become a rehash of the trans thread between the folks you'd expect.
 

redbaron

irony based lifeform
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,253
---
Location
69S 69E
Re: INTPf Policy Change

Hey Grayman, notice how at the end of that woman's post she also says:

For right now, the only way to know that a person is trans is if they tell you they're trans.

Then contrast that with you saying trans doesn't exist, there's only two genders, people are simply overcomplicating it etc.

This woman is NOT invalidating their plight, she actually DOES remain objective about the topic and respectful of the fact that the area is one that is not black and white, WITHOUT invalidating or suggesting trans people are just confused/fucked up.

None of this changes the fact that you're ignorant and also, the question being answered here is if transgender can be tested for specifically, which of course the answer is no, and that the science is still emerging.

As part of her argument, she acknowledges all the reaearch that DOES indicate trans having a potential basis in biology, BUT that it isn't a hardline yes/no test indicator.

Your comments in that other thread were bigoted bile, and they still are - even worse is the fake civility you put on and how desperately you try (and yet still fail) to somehow twist this argument and "get me" but you can't because I'm right - you were being a bigot, and it was bigotry born of ignorance.

You still are, and I suggest you bring your arguments more in line with being like this trans lady's from Quora.

(oh wait, but then you'd have to stop being a bigot).
 

redbaron

irony based lifeform
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,253
---
Location
69S 69E
Re: INTPf Policy Change

maybe this deserves a split.

It was supposed to be a thread to just discuss the broad policy Hado was trying to implement, and instead it's just become a rehash of the trans thread between the folks you'd expect.

I would but I'm a phone.
 

The Gopher

President
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
4,674
---
Re: INTPf Policy Change

maybe this deserves a split.

It was supposed to be a thread to just discuss the broad policy Hado was trying to implement, and instead it's just become a rehash of the trans thread between the folks you'd expect.

Yeah that's a good idea. Probably best for Auburn or Hado to do the split since they are more divorced from the conversation.
 

JR_IsP

Overthinker in Chief
Local time
Today 4:40 AM
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
285
---
Location
Venezuela, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy
Re: INTPf Policy Change

Greetings, fellow intpf lurkers, would some explain to me what the heck happened while I was offline? (like starting for the bannings and the intpc war).

Thanks.

PS: Sorry for interrupting the debate above :D
 

redbaron

irony based lifeform
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,253
---
Location
69S 69E
Re: INTPf Policy Change

Excuse me I'm an HTC.
 

QuickTwist

Spiritual "Woo"
Local time
Today 2:40 AM
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
7,182
---
Location
...
Re: INTPf Policy Change

maybe this deserves a split.

It was supposed to be a thread to just discuss the broad policy Hado was trying to implement, and instead it's just become a rehash of the trans thread between the folks you'd expect.

Go on.
 

Hadoblado

think again losers
Local time
Today 6:10 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
7,065
---
A bit of a messy split sorry guys.

I basically dumped everything here that detracted from the clarity of the Policy Change thread. Kind of.

This is our fifth thread on trans stuff in the last 10 or so days. I doubt it would have got half the traction it did if the conversation wasn't suppressed, but I think it's necessary for the forum to move forward. So, apologies for all those affected, I'm still confident it will eventually be worth it.
Even now, through all the flame and rage, I'm seeing people talk about the actual evidence and stats behind their opinion more than is normal, which is a huge win in my books.
 

redbaron

irony based lifeform
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,253
---
Location
69S 69E
Even now, through all the flame and rage, I'm seeing people talk about the actual evidence and stats behind their opinion more than is normal, which is a huge win in my books.

Ya.

Although to be fair Grayman usually does this in response to me showing him how wrong he is about stuff. He's going to cling to this issue and obsess over me for a while until he begrudgingly comes to the realisation that he was being a bigot. He's still kinda being one but at least it's more palatable now, I think.

At the very least it's going to take him more effort to be a bigot in such a way that it isn't a bannable offence, so that's good too. If you're going to be bigoted you should at least have to work for it.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 12:40 AM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
@Redbaron Before I respond can you tell me what fake civility is? I am having issues applying fake to "formal politeness and courtesy in behavior or speech".
 

QuickTwist

Spiritual "Woo"
Local time
Today 2:40 AM
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
7,182
---
Location
...
I learned something today. You can use Transgender as an "ism."
 

The Gopher

President
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
4,674
---
I'm really not sure why my posts are here. I guess it's a messy merge and RB was talking at me about the transgender topic?
 

Hadoblado

think again losers
Local time
Today 6:10 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
7,065
---
Because I was short on time and had to make a decision for every single post in that thread. Where your posts ended up is probably not a particularly valid measure of their worth or content. Sorry.
 

The Gopher

President
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
4,674
---
Because I was short on time and had to make a decision for every single post in that thread. Where your posts ended up is probably not a particularly valid measure of their worth or content. Sorry.

Oh no problem. Just as I was attempting to be laser focused on the policy itself it seemed odd.
 

Hadoblado

think again losers
Local time
Today 6:10 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
7,065
---
Just did a quick look through, looks like I put everything that was fluff or responding to redbaron here. It's just nicer to have the post and the response in the same thread.

Possible exception includes #51, but the majority of that post was aimed at RB, or clarifying for AK.

If you feel like I've somehow misrepresented or dismissed you, I'll hear requests to revert the change selectively.

Also, your "laser focus" appears more like a strobe light to the untrained eye :PPP
 

Reluctantly

Resident disMember
Local time
Yesterday 10:40 PM
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
3,135
---
Re: INTPf Policy Change

If you are making the claim that it is biological then supply me wth the data. Something you have read, can support, and stand by. Or the data that was instrumental in convincing you that it is in fact biological. I won't make claim to a specific psychological issue without data but I am not required to believe in something without evidence.

I didn't realize you were setting a trap with that thread. I had thought you were genuinely curious as to why people have issues believing that it is bilogical.

You've been shown evidence before, but you insist on focusing on those with psychological issues or impressionable children thinking they are trans when they aren't.

In all honesty I can't take you seriously. All kinds of people can have psychological issues and get confused about their own identity. That's nothing new.

But what the hell. I'll just post links supporting one side cause that's what you do.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ne...ssexual-differences-caught-on-brain-scan/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.pa...e-proves-trans-people-arent-making-it-up.html
 

Hadoblado

think again losers
Local time
Today 6:10 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
7,065
---
That's what both sides do. It's what everyone does.

There are benefits and limitations to an adversarial system of discussion, but it seems like the one everybody gravitates to if they have any investment in an outcome whatsoever.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 12:40 AM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
Re: INTPf Policy Change


The first talks about the same things as the second. The second offers referneces to the studies as well as some other things. I am going to reply only to the second since it covers everything in the first link but I am doing it in a thread of its own tomorrow or the next when I can fully read it and all the referenced documents.

Right now I will address the last one since it insinuates something that, to me, creates a destructive thought process.

The title is "Science Proves Trans People Aren't Making It Up" and follows to try to prove that their condition is biologically based. I want to start that 'gender dysphoria' is not made up, their experiences are not made up and the lengths they go to and the stuff they have to go through is strong evidence that their experiences are real.
Their suffering is real. Their feelings cannot and should not be invalidated.

Let me explain before I give you my next response...

My wife has anxiety and confidence issues. Many of her issues are from thinking into things too much. She sees problems as larger than they are and sees all possibilities as probable when they could be damaging. She can start worrying about people and what they are thinking creating webs of concern and doubt all based on unproven ideas of how that other person feels about her or what she may have done or did not do. Now as a consequence of this she has many painful experiences and suffers a lot of anxiety but none of these feelings are an accurate representation of reality. At no point does the fact that her feelings are not a real representation of reality does that mean her feelings are not valid. I care very much about her experiences and feelings.

That being said, if identity is found to not have a gender and is not proven to be based on biology but transcend it and/or be more psychologically based at no point does this ever invalidate a transgenders experience or feelings as a consequence of their gender dysphoria. What I am trying to say is that heir plight is real no matter what the science says.
 

0neKiwi

Unstable
Local time
Today 1:40 AM
Joined
Sep 9, 2016
Messages
96
---
Location
(this universe)
(Kind of off-topic?)
I remember reading QuickTwist's transgender idea. It wasn't particular offensive to me (since I was not involved), but those could be (and could be taken as) personal insults (since I don't really remember). It depends on interpretation of his words I suppose (and anonymity online makes this progressively worse as one imagines the other person's tone).

I'd think transgender isn't that big of a deal... Human's are basically their brains, and theoretically, one's brain can live outside the body. When taking brains to account, "male" and "female" brains have no tremendous differences (according to an article I am too lazy to cite). Basically, brains are brains, and physical features are not part of our "thinking" system- which I would say is the nervous system (own thought), so things like gender, race, eye color, physical features and etc do not particularly matter. One can easily get contacts to change their eye color or dye their hair; what is so different about transgenderism?
---
Personal insults are probably not allowed.

Freedom of opinions beyond that should be though (I may be straw manning here): there's bound to be someone offended by some statement. If one argues that this should be decided by majority, I don't think it is reasonable to conduct majority votes over every subject to decide if the topic is discuss-able or not. I'm sure that INTPf is not for such purposes.:rolleyes:
 

Reluctantly

Resident disMember
Local time
Yesterday 10:40 PM
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
3,135
---
Re: INTPf Policy Change

The first talks about the same things as the second. The second offers referneces to the studies as well as some other things. I am going to reply only to the second since it covers everything in the first link but I am doing it in a thread of its own tomorrow or the next when I can fully read it and all the referenced documents.

Right now I will address the last one since it insinuates something that, to me, creates a destructive thought process.

The title is "Science Proves Trans People Aren't Making It Up" and follows to try to prove that their condition is biologically based. I want to start that 'gender dysphoria' is not made up, their experiences are not made up and the lengths they go to and the stuff they have to go through is strong evidence that their experiences are real.
Their suffering is real. Their feelings cannot and should not be invalidated.

Let me explain before I give you my next response...

My wife has anxiety and confidence issues. Many of her issues are from thinking into things too much. She sees problems as larger than they are and sees all possibilities as probable when they could be damaging. She can start worrying about people and what they are thinking creating webs of concern and doubt all based on unproven ideas of how that other person feels about her or what she may have done or did not do. Now as a consequence of this she has many painful experiences and suffers a lot of anxiety but none of these feelings are an accurate representation of reality. At no point does the fact that her feelings are not a real representation of reality does that mean her feelings are not valid. I care very much about her experiences and feelings.

That being said, if identity is found to not have a gender and is not proven to be based on biology but transcend it and/or be more psychologically based at no point does this ever invalidate a transgenders experience or feelings as a consequence of their gender dysphoria. What I am trying to say is that heir plight is real no matter what the science says.

Well that's fine. But it's a fallacy to equate someone that obsesses about gender with gender dysphoria. Sure, some people do that and can even "confuse" themselves for being trans. And there are plenty of people on the internet that will tell you they were confused. The problem is they assume everyone that says they are trans has the same experience as them.

For example, my dysphoria doesn't come from obsession. I lived most of my life not really caring about gender and it only became a problem past puberty when I had major incongruences with the gender I supposedly am and the one I feel a natural proclivity too. The dysphoria came from a realization that I was suppressing natural feelings and urges or trying to justify why I was different without knowing why. It caused problems in relationships and caused me to try and overcompensate by being really masculine (lol). Maybe I was afraid of being seen as a fruitcake or something (lol). But in that sense, I did think into things too much because who the fuck wants to accept that they are transgender? In fact, that's probably the last thing I would even have thought of. And it's kind of sad that I looked at so many other reasons to justify how I'm different. Let's see I used to think I had mild Autism, I was just a "sensitive" guy, "male lesbian" at one point, had this idea that all guys were repulsed by their bodies and that women were the only one's that liked their bodies. Or even that maybe I was just mentally ill or too sensitive or something. I struggled a lot with men that seemed overly callous. That was very difficult growing up. It was always easier to relate with women in that respect. I mean it's silly. When I realized I was trans I was very depressed for an entire week (it was a pretty big shock) and it has really been a thing of reluctance for me, not obsession.

But I honestly don't see how it's any different than being gay. You just have natural proclivities and either you can accept that or not. At least that's how it is for me. But I get that everybody is different to some degree and people have different ideas and feelings about their gender incongruity, so fine whatever...and so that doesn't mean people have to transition or whatever or change their body, but I don't see why it's anyone's business if somebody wants to do that either. I mean if I want to change my body so I can feel comfortable in my own skin, why does that have to bother so many people and why does it automatically make people think their must be something "wrong" with me? Honest question. And I know I'm not the most "sane" person in a lot of respects, but that has mostly to do with a rocky upbringing and a shitty fucked up family (it's just the truth, don't care about sympathy or whatever), not really being trans, so why the obsession with explaining trans as the result of faulty or obsessive psychology? I mean I guess I could obsess about my appearance, but isn't that just obsessing about my appearance? How would you even draw the line between someone that obsesses about gender and someone that obsesses about their appearance? If I got facial feminization surgery (which I probably will at some point), does that mean I'm obsessed? Is a woman that gets a boob job obsessed about herself? Or does she just want to do something that makes her feel better about herself? And why does it even matter to anyone, but her?
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 12:40 AM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
Were is the thing about obsession comming from?
 

Black Rose

An unbreakable bond
Local time
Today 1:40 AM
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
11,431
---
Location
with mama
so why the obsession with explaining trans as the result of faulty or obsessive psychology?

Quick Twist made one statement about trans being a psychological issue. Besides me saying his views were incorrect I remember it rarely mentioned in all the threads that sprang from it. Redbaron keeps mentioning that its wrong to call trans people wrong or fucked up. And I think that came from the other forums because I never read anything like that about trans people being called such things on INTP forum so I was perplexed why he said it so many times.
 

onesteptwostep

Junior Hegelian
Local time
Today 5:40 PM
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
4,253
---
Er am I not getting something here? Aren't trans people just people who happen to have both reproductive organs, and that's all?
 

onesteptwostep

Junior Hegelian
Local time
Today 5:40 PM
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
4,253
---
aka transgender? wow if I'm wrong I seemed to have understood the entire issue completely wrong all along >_>

so much for being informed.

edit: oh god it looks like i've been understanding transgender just as 'intersex'. what an educational day
 

Ex-User (14663)

Prolific Member
Local time
Today 8:40 AM
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
2,939
---
I have a 100% acceptance of trans people and I think people should be whatever they want to be. However, I will never accept being disciplined, as it were, into walking on eggshells for particular groups of people. I trust that most people, yes even trans people, are adults who know the difference between hostility and on the other hand uncourtly or "insensitive" jokes or remarks which amount to nothing material. I don't buy this theory that if you say the wrong words, the whole world will suddenly change as if transfigured by a magic spell.
 

onesteptwostep

Junior Hegelian
Local time
Today 5:40 PM
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
4,253
---
Eh either way it seems like the word 'transgender' is an umbrella term for all sort of gender related issues, not just gender identity problems. So basically, a fully functioning female with all the female organs with a masculine personality could be called a 'transgender', meaning transgenders both could and could not have biological basis for their transgenderism.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 12:40 AM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
aka transgender? wow if I'm wrong I seemed to have understood the entire issue completely wrong all along >_>

so much for being informed.

edit: oh god it looks like i've been understanding transgender just as 'intersex'. what an educational day

You said both sex organs!
Just because boobs are fun to play with during sex doesnt make them a sex organ! Men have them but they are not fully developed. The developement is considered a secondary sex characteristic like chest hair on men.
 

Grayman

Soul Shade
Local time
Today 12:40 AM
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
4,418
---
Location
You basement
Eh either way it seems like the word 'transgender' is an umbrella term for all sort of gender related issues, not just gender identity problems. So basically, a fully functioning female with all the female organs with a masculine personality could be called a 'transgender', meaning transgenders both could and could not have biological basis for their transgenderism.


Sara Palin
http://malialitman.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/palin-hunter.jpg

Is now a Transgender - ie Female who with a mans personality
Likes guns, politics, math, wears mans clothing, and likes taking control! Has an assertive and dominant personality.
Get er done trans man Palin!
 

Hadoblado

think again losers
Local time
Today 6:10 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
7,065
---
I have a 100% acceptance of trans people and I think people should be whatever they want to be. However, I will never accept being disciplined, as it were, into walking on eggshells for particular groups of people. I trust that most people, yes even trans people, are adults who know the difference between hostility and on the other hand uncourtly or "insensitive" jokes or remarks which amount to nothing material. I don't buy this theory that if you say the wrong words, the whole world will suddenly change as if transfigured by a magic spell.

Yeah this is a common issue that polarises the left and right frequently.

The extremes of the left will sort of insist that everything is intolerance, and not take into account that things can just be humour, or unthinking, or that people are human and make mistakes. They get reeeaaaal sensitive.

But then the extremes of the right (honestly not that extreme, it seems a lot of the centrists are on this train too), will sort of use the existence of humour and the 'meaninglessness' of words to assume that the intolerance doesn't exist. They get reeeeaaal selective with the pedantry.

So all intolerance need do is be masked as humour and it gets a free pass. Any reaction the left shows to this intolerance makes them look worse because they can't tell the difference between humour and intolerance.

So the hair-splitting we're oh so very good at over here actually sort of makes us vulnerable to intolerance. We want clear-cut logical examples of intolerance before we are willing to act against it, but a lot of how this stuff works these days has to be inferred from a greater picture. Given any amount of room to maneuver, blatant intolerance can get away with almost anything.

Anyone can take heat once. But systematic misrepresentation and intolerance is something you live with in your day-to-day, and the way the conversation happens at the moment you get further attacked for even pointing it out.

I think the solution is to not get caught in semantics even if that plays to our strengths, but to look to the sum of someone's actions. This also means not getting caught up in every possible little 'microaggression'.
 

Artsu Tharaz

The Lamb
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
3,134
---
Ok, so to make sure I am understanding transgenderism correctly:

it's like, something goes wrong in the genetic code or in the foetal development or whatever, and it leads to a person whose brain is a mismatch for their body,

so it's not just a male who thinks in a more stereotypically female manner, no, this is someone born with a penis and XY chromosone but who is literally female (or the other way around) - their brain is wired in such a way that they think so much like a female that they have body dysmorphia such that it feels that their penis should not be there and that a vagina should be there instead, sort of life phantom limb syndrome.

For example, take this thought experiment:

Suppose that there was a society in which all people in it were males and females who we would say are transgender, and suppose they had never come in contact with people who are their born gender (ignore how I phrased this bit), so that they never knew of males with a penis etc.

Would every member of this society still be transgender?


The answer is:

Yes. Yes they would. Even though they wouldn't quite understand what was going on, they would all be transgender, and all feel that they were born into the wrong body. All the people in this society who had penises would think they were supposed to have vaginas and all the people who had vaginas would think they were supposed to have penises. They would all have gender/body dysmorphia and require sex changes to feel normal.

I think it is easy to see how this seems like a pretty out-there view to most people (I don't know about most, but certainly a fair portion).


my own opinion:

I go back and forth on it, but I think that gender, sexuality, as well as mental disorder and personality type, all kind of go together, in a "are humans psychologically typable" sort of way? When I think one exists, I tend to think they all do, but when one goes away, they all do
 

PmjPmj

Full of stars.
Local time
Today 8:40 AM
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
1,396
---
Location
UK
You'll have to excuse my ignorance here, because my attitude through and through is that - so long as no harm is done to others - people can do whatever the fuck they want.

Last I heard, we don't understand the causes behind gender dysphoria. What we do know is that 'corrective' surgery oft ins't the answer, as the suicide rate in the trans demographic is something like 40%, thus making it one of the highest in any demographic the world over. Ergo, more study is required so that we can better aid these individuals in finding an effective solution(s).

All that aside, fuck anyone who decides to treat another human being without due dignity simply because their brain is wired a little differently. Start that shit around me and I'll cleave your fucking jaw off.

Cunts.
 

Jennywocky

Creepy Clown Chick
Local time
Today 3:40 AM
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,739
---
Location
Charn
Look, they've been doing surgeries starting in the 1950's and studying this phenomena since before that point in time. In the 60's and 70's, they were still gathering information about surgical viability because there were no long-term results, complicated by the fact that typically transpeople wanted to just disappear after surgery so they had a very limited study pool. (And just like in customer service and Yelp reviews, guess who most wants to be vocal?)

At the time people were down on surgery, there were lots of mitigating factors (and this is at least the USA environment, I can't speak for Europe):

- People who transitioned typically lost their jobs. So they could go from a lucrative career to part-time service work at best, at a time when they needed money to survive and to pay for treatment.

- They lost their families (including access to their kids) because everyone thought they were sexual deviants, just like gays.

- They were kicked out churches that they might have been members of for decades (and sometimes in positions of authority) regardless of their moral practice over the years.

- People transitioned later in life after secondary sex development was established so they were visibly recognizable as trans. Medical intervention was not nearly as good as it is now.

It's not really a wonder the ones who survived and did well either went totally incognito and were never in any studies, or they entered the sex/entertainment trade because the money was lucrative (compared to anything else they could do) but of course this creates other issues, the same as cisgens who go into sex work as well as sexualizing the entire visible demographic of transpeople.

What matters is the context of why suicide rates are up for transpeople... and it's not because of surgery. I don't hear about transpeople committing suicide because they had surgery; I hear about them killing themselves because

1. They can't get housing.
2. Their friends all reject them.
3. Their family ostracizes them socially and financially.
4. They lose their children.
5. They lose their marriage if they were married.
6. They become social pariahs.
7. Other members of their faith label them as evil or perverse and shun them.
8. They lose their jobs.
9. No one will date them, so there is no romantic future for them.
10. People are allowed to beat, abuse, and even kill them for being trans.
11. They are regularly viewed as mentally ill and "fucked up" -- in the broad sense and that's the extent to which some people talk about them.

Teens kill themselves because they don't even have the benefits of adulthood -- income, their OWN support network, self-sustainability. Typically it's the rejection by friends and family and the feeling that they have no future (romantically and occupationally) that lead them to an act of self-destruction.

So in other words:
- They lose the ability to actually survive, practically speaking
- They become pariahs and lose everything they cared about.
- They believe their lives are over, so why live?

And people wonder why suicide rates are up for that population?

More study? After decades of the studying, the American institutes of the AMA and the APA (the main medical and psychological bodies of the United States) have affirmed medical intervention for transsexuals when warranted for a decade now. And Johns Hopkins, the most major institute that said, "Hey, let's wait and see" because of issues happening back in the 60's and 70's, as of this past year now have a medical intervention transsexual wing again because they believe it is warranted with proper screening. Johns Hopkins... they have always wanted to protect their reputation, and even THEY now are convinced enough to reopen their medical help resource wing. Last I knew, this was also considered tax-deductable by the IRS now and was covered by many of the major health insurance providers on at least one plan each offers (just in the last few years), although Trump and his religious conservative sub-coalition are now mucking around with stuff and there's a hell of a lot of fighting politically... typically driven by the evangelical coalitions.

I've heard in some surveys that satisfaction with medical intervention (depending on whether you are dealing with competent doctors obviously) is higher than standard operations like heart surgery, which are commonly accepted. I think people don't realize what the actual satisfaction ratings are with MOST surgeries, let alone anything related to this condition. Every surgery has complications, recovery periods, and impact on a person's life.

What else can really be said? It's really bizarre to me how the main medical bodies in the USA -- the most highly respected professionals -- continue to move in one direction, but the average joe without medical background seems to just cling to outdated viewpoints that make it harder for transsexuals to be integrated into society and be happy, and instead end up denying them medical intervention when proper screening has been done. I mean, along with this, none of this intervention gets approved without some years of psychological and medical screening, and there's a world-wide platform of care that provides the groundwork for what this screening is (WPATH) to make sure that certain treatments are only provided to those who fit the right diagnosis, to avoid any kind of regret. This is also why there's more emphasis on hormonal treatment versus surgical, because most hormonal treatment can be reversed.

The USA has a mindset problem, though -- distrust of science and investment in certain faith institutions. I mean, the same folks worried about transsexuals using their assigned bathrooms are represented far more heavily in terms of who actually molests kids and assaults women. I'm getting tired of hearing about white cisgen males, many conservative and often political figures who are anti-LGBT, who keep getting dragged out for assaulting and molesting people. Here a lot of the misinformation is just another part of the culture wars; for me, if I'm going to make a decision about a medical process, I am going to look at what medical professionals seem to be saying, not what religious groups or certain movements (like the feministas or the alt-rights) are pushing.

All that aside, fuck anyone who decides to treat another human being without due dignity simply because their brain is wired a little differently. Start that shit around me and I'll cleave your fucking jaw off. Cunts.

Yeah, totally.
 

PmjPmj

Full of stars.
Local time
Today 8:40 AM
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
1,396
---
Location
UK
*Swept away by Jen's Ti tsunami*

I'm on your side.


:ahh:
 

gps

INTP 5w4 Iconoclast
Local time
Today 3:40 AM
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
200
---
Location
Upstate NY, USA, Earth
Re: INTPf Policy Change

Are you trans or do you have close trans friends?

This reply seems to re-affirm the bias inquired about by Serac.

Shall we forumulaically morph this into a sacred cow question which reveals the implicate favoritism?

Are qua ARE -- sans any criteria of the sort those coming down on QT are demanding from him via this obvious double standard -- <noun revealing sacred cow status> or do you have close <noun revealing sacred cow status> friends?

I don't have a dog in this fight and most of the build up TRANSpired before I started participating of late.
I DO have a gay brother and wouldn't care less if he decided he'd rather be my sister.

I lurked on this thread over the course of the last week or two and noticed some `fucked up' double standards seemingly arising from IDENITY over behavior.
Someone attains a status via IDENTITY, such as TRANS.
A decidedly POLITICAL -- full guns favoritism over `fair and equal application of the laws/rules -- Fight ensues.

The word `group' was used by someone ... as if identifying with a GROUP grants one more privileges those granting the more-equal status would have us believe ARE `rights'.

So if `trans' individuals -- however this status is arbitrated -- in this example are members of an Orwellian more-equal Pig club then how many other group memberships allow those individuals NOT in pre-approved more-equal status GROUPS to live out less-equal roles to play while tip toeing around all the Sacred Cows and More-Equal Pigs?
What's wrong with `The Fair and Equal application of the laws/rules'?
What's wrong with suing the ass off someone for libel and defamation?
What's wrong with litigating harasment?
If someone talks disparagingly about my race, gender, age, or such IN THE ABSTRACT do I have a `right' to personalize such comments?
Though if some disparages my PERSON or behavior ... what then?
Did the would-be offense qualify as menacing, harassment?
I'm asking; I don't know.

Yes, sacred cows, victims, and snow flakes have more PRIVILEGES than those cast in roles as cow killers, victimizes, and flake flamers.
Am I mistaken?

Did someone call Fire! in a crowed theater?
Was someone perhaps libeled or defamed?

Aren't there ALREADY enough exceptions to Freedom of Expression on the legal books from various countries around the world featuring Free Speech to guide us in how to proceed?
 

redbaron

irony based lifeform
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Jun 10, 2012
Messages
7,253
---
Location
69S 69E
*Swept away by Jen's Ti tsunami*

I'm on your side.


:ahh:

I mean I believe that you're emotionally and ethically on the same side but I think the sweeping generalisation about suicide rates and attributing that to an apparently lack of effectiveness in HRT/surgery undermines a lot of the surrounding context of the issue.

It's the sort of comment that is very often made by those who want to undermine or diminish trans people, where they ignore a lot of the context surrounding why trans suicide rates are high, both with and without surgery - and it pretty much lines up with all the reasons anyone commits suicide. Rejection by family, friends, social ostracising, bullying etc.

In fairness, you have to take into account that trans people experience much more of this as a general rule, and the higher suicide rates may have little to do specifically with them being trans at all - and is instead much more about how they're treated.

Which is probably why Jenny felt compelled to hit you with that wall. I was as well, and she said all that I would have said (and more) but I didn't bother because I felt like you were just innocently misunderstanding it and that your overall stance was fine.

<3 you Pmj xoxo
 

crippli

disturbed
Local time
Today 9:40 AM
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
1,779
---
Re: INTPf Policy Change

This reply seems to re-affirm the bias inquired about by Serac.

Bias?

Usually one gets 'a bad' logical conclusion if one doesn't check the the premise thoroughly.

IMO the premise is the challenge, not the answer.

I suppose I wonder, should one use logic on non logic? Especially apply logic from an ill defined premise?


A decidedly POLITICAL -- full guns favoritism over `fair and equal application of the laws/rules -- Fight ensues.
I thought the rules have been clear. #2. No attack on groups. Probably the hardest and most abused rule. Regardless. From a forum pov, it shouldn't be to difficult to understand why that rule is there, and always have been.

So, exactly, even if biased, what relevance would it have? Like what premise do you work from? Is it the word attack that creates a grey area?
 

The Gopher

President
Local time
Today 7:40 PM
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
4,674
---
I was about to say suicide rates is a misleading statistic as it doesn't take into account various factors. However I think Jenny already brought out the nukes for that one.
 
Top Bottom