ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags LGBT issues , transgender incidents , transgender issues

Reply
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:17 AM   #121
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Why do you have to utter at all? Who asked you? Is it your place to pass judgment, aloud, on everybody else?
Of course it is, didn't you notice he is the emperor of the world.

Next people are going to say that witnessing and calling out that atheists are damned to hell is harassment instead of objective fact.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:21 AM   #122
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Not confronting people needlessly about their gender issues is an ideology? Minding your own business about things that don't concern you--that's an ideology? I would have thought an ideology would require positive action, not lack of action. Live and let live, that's an ideology, I guess. What a terrible one to follow! I should be ashamed.
They are obligated to witness to the unbelievers their one true faith. To do anything else is immoral to such believers.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:23 AM   #123
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Yes she is, and I will not humor your delusions to the contrary. I'll also decline to be polite about it. You're simply wrong and don't know what a woman is.
But the only proper response to someone say wishing you a merry christmass is to point out how first the story was clearly not set in december near the winter solstice, and second was apocryphal to get Jesus to meet prophesy. Anything else would be denying objective reality.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:25 AM   #124
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
Far be it for me to be defending it, but psychology and psychiatry are sciences and study real phenomena. Science and objective reality includes more than genitalia and chromosomes (which I haven't observed in 99.99% of the people I have gendered).

The question of gender identity, dysphoria, its nature, how society and culture interact and vice versa, language, permanence, whether quixotic ones exist, etc. are much more relevant. I certainly have counter-trending views that rile those darned SJWs on these matters, but at least I am addressing the actual issues.

Some look to MRI scans and "x brain in y body" if they need crude physicalist explanations.
You are trying to bring science into a religious debate here.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:26 AM   #125
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Perhaps the concept of sexes is hazier than previously conceived. Maybe it's the definitions that should be reconsidered, rather than attempting to force reality to fit the definitions we should make the definitions more flexible to describe reality?

Just because Ug and Grug perceived exactly two distinct sexes a hundred thousand years ago doesn't mean we're stuck with that forever, does it?
That is simple heresy. This isn't a matter of facts and science to the faithful but of belief. Science and facts will never win them over.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:27 AM   #126
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
Even if there is some "objective reality" to gender, it's not like I ask for DNA samples when I meet people. If I think someone is a man and she tells me she's a woman, I'm not going to predicate my embarrassed apology on whether or not she's trans. I probably wouldn't even give her an ocular pat-down. I'd do the right thing and immediately begin objectifying her.
Look we can all agree the only things that matter are the basic examination of their genitals when they are born. That is the word of God and the last time their gender can be questioned.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:29 AM   #127
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
Yes it does. You can make up *different* social construct and have 23442534653 genders if you wish, nobody forced to recognize such definition. But there is and will always be 2 sexes, baring evolution of a third over millions of years. The male and the female. There may be error during the development, like many X chromosome kilfner , testosterone resistance, hermaphroditic, but those are errors. Why is it important ? Because you define biology by the normal case, and not by the pathological errors. Thus as such there are only male and female among mammals. If you want something else, pray strongly for a miracle and become, say, a frog or certain species of fish which can change, or something unicellular which has neither. Until that miracle happens there are only male and female.

But You can define what You want as social gender constructs.
With no guarantee that the rest of the world agree on it.
So while I *may* out of politesse call that woman by "he" , she is a surgically changed female biologically.
Just like former women who have had hysterectomies are no longer biologically female.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:37 AM   #128
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Just like former women who have had hysterectomies are no longer biologically female.
And again you are using a pathological case.

If this all you have, then you have nothing.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:39 AM   #129
Porpoise of Life
Master Poster
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,932
You might have a point, but phrasing it like that is never going to convince or even engage someone who believes they are being perfectly objective and scientific.

Anyway, I think you are correct in your assertion that it is more about preconceptions and feelings than some posters might realize or admit.
Reducing the science of gender, sex and identity to clear-cut divisions by chromosomes and genitalia sounds like a scientific sounding justification for existing viewpoints without addressing the complexity of the matter. The 'my opinion is more scientific than yours' line of argument often appears like cherry picking to me.
Like people used to argue that being gay was unnatural, or that there were scientific reasons to view blacks as inferior. (Note that I'm not accusing our posters of those views, don't want to derail the thread).

Biology is complex. The mind is complex. Sometimes nature ***** up, and all we can do is deal with it.
If that means addressing people who have been dealt certain cards differently than I might initially expect, that's a very small price to pay for not making someone who already has more to deal with than the average person uncomfortable.

Last edited by Porpoise of Life; 2nd August 2017 at 03:47 AM.
Porpoise of Life is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:39 AM   #130
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,866
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Like all forms of harassment it can not be a big deal.
Ah, yes. The tried-and-true ponderingturtle strawman. I was wondering what was taking you so long.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:46 AM   #131
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,866
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
It is to someone who has spent years or even decades not wanting to be a 'him'.
I spent decades wanting and not wanting tons of things. The question is whether reality fits the desire. You wouldn't indugle someone claiming to be Napoleon Bonaparte by giving them the first French empire. Similarily, I wouldn't call a biological male a woman unless they went through most of the transition.

Quote:
Just like there's a difference between accidentally using the wrong pronoun, and insisting that you call someone a man or woman because you assert your knowledge of biology trumps theirs.
You say that as if knowledge of biology doesn't trump one's feelings.

Quote:
There are neurological and hormonal factors that cause transgenderism. Those are just as biological as chromosomes and dangly bits. Just because biology doesn't always play by the rules we think we've discovered doesn't make it less biological.
You're redefining "biology" here, to include psychology. That's like saying that moon rockets are natural because they arise from natural processes.

Quote:
I'd say that the fact transgender people exist, and cannot change their gender identity is just as objective and/or arbitrary as judging chromosomes or 'looking' male or female.
The fact that other people have delusions is objective too, but it doesn't make the delusion real. Your argument conflates the existence of the feeling itself with the feeling's basis in fact.

Quote:
But you were talking about biological truth. And this is not some kind of rhetorical trick, I'm genuinely interested... Why does this transition matter to you? It seems a little arbitrary to me to on the one hand define genders by the biological definitions of chromosomes, birth sex, and so on, and at the same time accept that hormonal and surgical alterations can change it 'enough' to warrant a different pronoun.
Well maybe that's because you're making all that up. To answer your question, because transition sufficiently alters the person's body to match the desired sex. Biologically, they are still what they were before the transition.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:47 AM   #132
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,866
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
They are obligated to witness to the unbelievers their one true faith. To do anything else is immoral to such believers.
Considering how much of an ideology the social justice movement is, your comment here is quite ironic. In this case, the one true faith is that one's feelings are the most important thing in the universe.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:53 AM   #133
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
You might have a point, but phrasing it like that is never going to convince or even engage someone who believes they are being perfectly objective and scientific.

Anyway, I think you are correct in your assertion that it is more about preconceptions and feelings than some posters might realize or admit.
Reducing the science of gender, sex and identity to clear-cut divisions by chromosomes and genitalia sounds like a scientific sounding justification for existing viewpoints without addressing the complexity of the matter.
Like people used to argue that being gay was unnatural, or that there were scientific reasons to view blacks as inferior. (Note that I'm not accusing our posters of those views, don't want to derail the thread).

Biology is complex. The mind is complex. Sometimes nature ***** up, and all we can do is deal with it.
If that means addressing people who have been dealt certain cards differently than I might initially expect, that's a very small price to pay for not making someone who already has more to deal with than the average person uncomfortable.
Thee is always inherent bias, some positive some negative. If one start to state human are bipedial, and you object saying some are born without leg, some lose them later in life, some are in rollchair, you missed utterly the point. Biologically human are bipedial mammals, and as with all mammals have two sexes. There may be uneasy cases but they are all pathological. That is an important point.

You want to bring more to the conversation, like gender identity, and feel free to this, but sex is far more clear cut. The individual in the op, was pregnant, and gave birth. There is nothing more clear cut than that. Now by CHOICE they may chose the GI of male and by choice we may chose to call use man, he, his, but there is nothing mor eclear cut in this case they are born biologically female.

There may be bias against TG for various reason, but keep in mind you bring your own bias the othee way around when you refuse to admit that people may have a point that she is a surgically changed female a (TG) man. Note how the first part of the sentence is about sex, the second GI.

And no, bringing pathological cases like kilfner syndrom does not make a better case that sex is murky like gender.it only serves to illustrate thatthose cases are pathological, contrary to the case inop which is pretty clear : the person ws born a fertile female and changed it surgically. Pretending that peoplehave "bias" or as i sawin other thread "phobia""icky factor" only illustrate your own prejudice.

Thatsaid would i be before that person would i call her"he"? no,politesse i would use "she" etc...but in common conversation talking about the case, i have no qualm saying it was a female, a pregnant female.

Last edited by Aepervius; 2nd August 2017 at 03:56 AM. Reason: removed german added sticky spaces
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:56 AM   #134
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
And again you are using a pathological case.

If this all you have, then you have nothing.
I have as much as you do. It isn't like the actual scientists who study gender agree with you remotely.

Here is a simple question what would it take to convince you that transgender people exist?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:57 AM   #135
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Ah, yes. The tried-and-true ponderingturtle strawman. I was wondering what was taking you so long.
It is a simple stating of your position. You are here arguing for workplace harassment. If you do a really good job you get a gold star when they kill themselves.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:59 AM   #136
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,646
I have a solution to this "problem".

When you are faced with a situation in which someone you are sure is a man biologically asks to be referred to with a female pronoun, just remember this simple abbreviation:

DBAD

Don't Be A Dick.

That's all.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 03:59 AM   #137
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
You might have a point, but phrasing it like that is never going to convince or even engage someone who believes they are being perfectly objective and scientific.

Anyway, I think you are correct in your assertion that it is more about preconceptions and feelings than some posters might realize or admit.
Reducing the science of gender, sex and identity to clear-cut divisions by chromosomes and genitalia sounds like a scientific sounding justification for existing viewpoints without addressing the complexity of the matter. The 'my opinion is more scientific than yours' line of argument often appears like cherry picking to me.
Like people used to argue that being gay was unnatural, or that there were scientific reasons to view blacks as inferior. (Note that I'm not accusing our posters of those views, don't want to derail the thread).

Biology is complex. The mind is complex. Sometimes nature ***** up, and all we can do is deal with it.
If that means addressing people who have been dealt certain cards differently than I might initially expect, that's a very small price to pay for not making someone who already has more to deal with than the average person uncomfortable.
Which is why their insistence about knowing the fundamental truths of reality is best seen as a statement of faith. They know the truth and don't need scientists to tell them what is or isn't real.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:00 AM   #138
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Considering how much of an ideology the social justice movement is, your comment here is quite ironic. In this case, the one true faith is that one's feelings are the most important thing in the universe.
And like with global warming all the scientists who study it are all wrong as well. There are no transgender people.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:04 AM   #139
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
Thee is always inherent bias, some positive some negative. If one start to state human are bipedial, and you object saying some are born without leg, some lose them later in life, some are in rollchair, you missed utterly the point. Biologically human are bipedial mammals, and as with all mammals have two sexes. There may be uneasy cases but they are all pathological. That is an important point.

You want to bring more to the conversation, like gender identity, and feel free to this, but sex is far more clear cut. The individual in the op, was pregnant, and gave birth. There is nothing more clear cut than that.
Which is why only fertile people can ever really be viewed as male or female. So if someone is postmenopausal or has a hysterectomy their sex is no longer female but neuter. Just like a male after castration.

No one ever considers a Eunuch a Man after all.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:04 AM   #140
Porpoise of Life
Master Poster
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,932
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
Thee is always inherent bias, some positive some negative. If one start to state human are bipedial, and you object saying some are born without leg, some lose them later in life, some are in rollchair, you missed utterly the point. Biologically human are bipedial mammals, and as with all mammals have two sexes. There may be uneasy cases but they are all pathological. That is an important point.

You want to bring more to the conversation, like gender identity, and feel free to this, but sex is far more clear cut. The individual in the op, was pregnant, and gave birth. There is nothing more clear cut than that. Now by CHOICE they may chose the GI of male and by choice we may chose to call use man, he, his, but there is nothing mor eclear cut in this case they are biologically female.

There may be bias against TG for various reason, but keep in mind you bring your own bias the othee way around when you refuse to admit that people may have a point that she is a surgically changed female a (TG) man. Note how the first part of the sentence is about sex, the second GI.

And no, bringing pathological cases like kilfner syndrom does not make a better case that sex is murky like gender.it only serves to illustrate thatthose cases are pathological, contrary to the case inop which is pretty clear : the person ws born a fertile female and changed it surgically. Pretending that peoplehave "bias" or as i sawin other thread "phobia""icky factor" only illustrate your own prejudice.

Thatsaid would i be before that person would i call her"she"? no,politesse etc...but in common conversation talking about the case, i have no qualm saying it was a female, a pregnant female.
Sure. The problem is that we have two words for a whole lot of related and interdependent but separate concepts. Sex, gender, gender roles. We use man and woman for all of those.
Sometimes one word applied in one context, and the other in another. Sometimes the distinction isn't that clear-cut.
Of course the person in the OP has to have a female anatomy in order to give birth. And of course we'd expect medical and scientific literature to use the terminology that is most appropriate. I don't think anyone is suggesting that we let 'feelings' dictate reality, and that we should ignore science because it might hurt someone's feelings.
And yes, transgender and intersex people are a tiny minority, and from a purely clinical standpoint their conditions can be called pathological. But if we use those words outside of a purely clinical context, they carry certain value judgments.

The OP asked why he should call the person described in the article a man. The answer is politeness.
Being polite in a social context does not preclude being truthful or conscious or thorough in a scientific or clinical context. It isn't all black and white, pure fact versus pure feeling.
Porpoise of Life is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:06 AM   #141
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
Sure. The problem is that we have two words for a whole lot of related and interdependent but separate concepts. Sex, gender, gender roles. We use man and woman for all of those.
Sometimes one word applied in one context, and the other in another. Sometimes the distinction isn't that clear-cut.
Of course the person in the OP has to have a female anatomy in order to give birth. And of course we'd expect medical and scientific literature to use the terminology that is most appropriate. I don't think anyone is suggesting that we let 'feelings' dictate reality, and that we should ignore science because it might hurt someone's feelings.
And yes, transgender and intersex people are a tiny minority, and from a purely clinical standpoint their conditions can be called pathological. But if we use those words outside of a purely clinical context, they carry certain value judgments.

The OP asked why he should call the person described in the article a man. The answer is politeness.
Being polite in a social context does not preclude being truthful or conscious or thorough in a scientific or clinical context. It isn't all black and white, pure fact versus pure feeling.
But people need to be able to harass their coworkers for some reason. And this is one of the last few that they can. Why else would we see so many people in support of harassment?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:06 AM   #142
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
I have as much as you do. It isn't like the actual scientists who study gender agree with you remotely.

Here is a simple question what would it take to convince you that transgender people exist?
Again, read ,you use gender indifferentely for both gender and sex. I do not.

Homo sapiens has only two sex, female and male. Patholigical cases may require look at the context, but there is no third sex.

Gender (gender identity) is another thing, and you keep missing the point i am making.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:23 AM   #143
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 16,959
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Considering how much of an ideology the social justice movement is, your comment here is quite ironic. In this case, the one true faith is that one's feelings are the most important thing in the universe.
Morris Albert agrees
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:24 AM   #144
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 16,959
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post

DBAD

Don't Be A Dick.

That's all.
Surgery may be required.
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:28 AM   #145
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,769
How did they end up pregnant?
__________________
Some seem to think the UK leaving the EU is like Robbie leaving Take That.
In reality it's more like Pete leaving The Beatles.

We are lions, not tigers.
Turns out I don't know a lot about tigers.
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:29 AM   #146
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,866
Pixie dust, I'm sure.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:37 AM   #147
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,866
It's quite funny that some people can only see two sides to this issue; the moral victors and the enemy, instead of the great range of views that exist on this topic, and in so doing antagonise those who would normally be their allies in the fight for civil rights, while at the same time chastising those same potential allies for seeing gender as a binary rather than a spectrum.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:45 AM   #148
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,487
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
Even if there is some "objective reality" to gender, it's not like I ask for DNA samples when I meet people.
No, but there are certain visual cues which, if you happen to be sharing a locker room with someone, are extremely good indicators of sex.

(I might add that the same goes for maternity wards.)

And this is where, some years ago, I parted company with the orthodox transgender rights supporters. I'm all about being liberal and allowing people to live their lives the way they wish to live them. I supported the rights of people to present themselves as females even if they weren't really females. No problem. Takes all kinds to make a world.

However, reading about the phenomenon right here on these pages, I realized that wasn't enough for the hard liners. They insisted that that person who was clearly a biological male, really was actually a woman. She wasn't someone who thought she was a woman. She wasn't someone who felt like a woman. She wasn't someone who identified as a woman. By gum, she was, really and truly a woman, and must be treated by society as such in every way.

And most of the time, even that doesn't really cause problems, but there is a certain point where there has to be some reality that sets in. There are certain situations where it is unreasonable for everyone else to ignore the reality of what they see and instead treat someone based on their own psychological state. There have been many, many threads on those subjects, so I won't rehash them here. Anyone interested has seen them before. For the purposes of this thread, at least for now, I will simply say that the person who gave birth in Oregon the other day was a woman, regardless of how she felt about herself or how she lives most of her life. To say otherwise is to say that the word "woman" has no real meaning.
__________________
On vacation.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 04:59 AM   #149
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 43,501
Reminds me of arguments with my grandpa, trying to convince him that Russians can be consdered white. He thinks that because of Genghis Khan and miscegenation that Russians are all Chinamen. He knows this. From science. And anyone who thinks differently is in league against him, with sinister intent (possibly a global syndicate headed by Dr Fu Manchu) preparing for the upcoming race war.

That other people just have a looser definition of "white" (and "Chinaman") and no motives beyond living and let live does not register with him. He knows what he knows, damn it, and telling him different is proof of pernicious Catholic influence inherited from my grandmother.
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 05:01 AM   #150
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,866
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Reminds me of arguments with my grandpa, trying to convince him that Russians can be consdered white. He thinks that because of Genghis Khan and miscegenation that Russians are all Chinamen. He knows this. From science. And anyone who thinks differently is in league against him, with sinister intent (possibly a global syndicate headed by Dr Fu Manchu) preparing for the upcoming race war.

That other people just have a looser definition of "white" (and "Chinaman") and no motives beyond living and let live does not register with him. He knows what he knows, damn it, and telling him different is proof of pernicious Catholic influence inherited from my grandmother.
Considering that this has nothing to do with the discussion, it's odd that it reminds you of it.

ETA: Unless you think that some loon disagreeing with you on one thing means that people who disagree with you are loons.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"

Last edited by Argumemnon; 2nd August 2017 at 05:04 AM.
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 05:34 AM   #151
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
Again, read ,you use gender indifferentely for both gender and sex. I do not.

Homo sapiens has only two sex, female and male. Patholigical cases may require look at the context, but there is no third sex.
Exactly there are a lot of people who are neither biologically male or female. A hysterectomy for example would mean that you should not longer refer to them as women in the work place.

The thing is that the only ones who care about sex are a persons doctors. None of the people objecting here are doctors they want to be able to pretend that transgender people don't exist. They want to be able to harass transgender coworkers freely. That is what they are arguing for. And you are agreeing with them.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 05:36 AM   #152
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,866
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Exactly there are a lot of people who are neither biologically male or female. A hysterectomy for example would mean that you should not longer refer to them as women in the work place.
That's like saying that losing an arm means you're no longer a tetrapod.

Quote:
The thing is that the only ones who care about sex are a persons doctors.
Spouses may care as well.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 05:37 AM   #153
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,487
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Reminds me of arguments with my grandpa, trying to convince him that Russians can be consdered white. He thinks that because of Genghis Khan and miscegenation that Russians are all Chinamen. He knows this. From science. And anyone who thinks differently is in league against him, with sinister intent (possibly a global syndicate headed by Dr Fu Manchu) preparing for the upcoming race war.

That other people just have a looser definition of "white" (and "Chinaman") and no motives beyond living and let live does not register with him. He knows what he knows, damn it, and telling him different is proof of pernicious Catholic influence inherited from my grandmother.
All non-sequiturs aside, the thing is that you don't have a "looser definition" of "woman" that excludes the fellow who just gave birth. You have no definition at all.

Give it a shot. Provide a definition of "woman" that meets the following conditions.

1. Includes transwomen
2. excludes transmen
3. Is not circular
__________________
On vacation.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 05:42 AM   #154
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
No, but there are certain visual cues which, if you happen to be sharing a locker room with someone, are extremely good indicators of sex.
Which is why males with androgen insensitivity need to use the men's locker rooms. It is simple biology people.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 05:42 AM   #155
Ryokan
Insert something funny here
 
Ryokan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Norway
Posts: 9,706
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
How did they end up pregnant?
Ask your parents.
Ryokan is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 05:43 AM   #156
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
That's like saying that losing an arm means you're no longer a tetrapod.
And you would never call a man with androgen insensitivity a woman no matter what appearance or personal preference matter.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 05:44 AM   #157
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,506
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
If it's insignificant then both sides are guilty.
The insignificance I'm referring to is in the effort and impact on ones life to refer to a transgender person by their preferred gender. You may not agree with it or even understand it, but it literally costs you nothing. So why make an issue of it?

It's the exact same insignificance of effort and impact for a non-black person to not use the N-word.

So when I see someone arguing so vehemently against something that is ultimately inconsequential to their lives, I have to wonder about their underlying motives.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 05:45 AM   #158
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
All non-sequiturs aside, the thing is that you don't have a "looser definition" of "woman" that excludes the fellow who just gave birth. You have no definition at all.

Give it a shot. Provide a definition of "woman" that meets the following conditions.

1. Includes transwomen
2. excludes transmen
3. Is not circular
You are the one arguing for strict definitions, why don't you provide your one that fits everyone nicely into either male or female with not large other group we would then need to treat as some third gender?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 05:46 AM   #159
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 38,828
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
The insignificance I'm referring to is in the effort and impact on ones life to refer to a transgender person by their preferred gender. You may not agree with it or even understand it, but it literally costs you nothing. So why make an issue of it?

It's the exact same insignificance of effort and impact for a non-black person to not use the N-word.

So when I see someone arguing so vehemently against something that is ultimately inconsequential to their lives, I have to wonder about their underlying motives.
Gertrude there will always need to state what ever they view is fact no matter how rude or insulting it is to others.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd August 2017, 06:20 AM   #160
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,866
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
The insignificance I'm referring to is in the effort and impact on ones life to refer to a transgender person by their preferred gender. You may not agree with it or even understand it, but it literally costs you nothing. So why make an issue of it?
Is that your criterion?

Hopefully you never argue against creationists. I mean, it's no effort to just pretend that their beliefs are true. So why make an issue of it?
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:49 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.