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 1st August 2017, 06:40 PM   #81
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,078
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Hey, this is the third time I have to repeat myself to you. Pay attention:

I'd like them to be treated to the truth. The truth doesn't have to be told in a way that hurts, but is it wrong of me to want my utterances to correspond to objective reality?
We've seen your argument.

Here's what you've failed to do: Show us how you'd "treat" (<gag>) someone to your truth in a way doesn't hurt? In the absence of a working example, what both TM and I are telling you is that you can't do it because it's fundamentally rude to respond to someone correcting you as to their gender by telling them they're wrong.
Babbylonian 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 1st August 2017, 06:41 PM   #82
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,643
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
You think you don't have that problem but apparently you do.
No, disagreeing with your ideology is no problem at all. You only think it's a problem because it's an ideology. That's the nature of the beast.

Quote:
You seem to have some compulsion to dwell on the sex of whoever you're talking to
More inventions by you. Apparently you've chosen to forget -- because there's no way you don't know this -- that many languages, English included, differentiate men from women and thus when addressing people there are different words to use depending on who you're talking to. Once you've been taught this you do it automatically. So far I haven't met a person (in real life) that my brain can't determine the sex of.

Quote:
to the extreme of arguing with them if you think they've gotten it wrong.
Wow, you have a vivid imagination. Where have I argued with them, since I've just told you I've never encountered this situation? ...snip...

Edited by jsfisher:  Edited for compliance with Rules 0 and 12 of the Membership Agreement.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか


Last edited by jsfisher; 5th August 2017 at 05:30 PM.
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 1st August 2017, 06:47 PM   #83
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,085
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
I said I was Emperor of the World, Tyr. I think I know my rank better than you do.
You don't. Rank isn't self-bestowed. You don't have to figure out your rank, or question your rank growing up. It's unlikely you'll be tortured for your rank.

A transwoman wants to be called 'her' because she is a woman. A transman wants to be called 'he' because he is a man. You want to be called Emperor even though you don't think you are one because you don't know who is a man and who is a woman. It's a way of thinking I just can't mentally parse.

Quote:
See how that works? No. I'm not emperor of the world, and there are objective measures of who's a he and who's a she.
You don't seem to understand what measures are used to determine who is a 'he' and who is a 'she', and insist on using your 'truth' on others who know better. More than that, you insist you can do this in a polite fashion. This is multiple layers of wrong. It's like the Christians who think they can let atheists know the 'truth' that the atheist will be burning in hell politely.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 1st August 2017, 06:48 PM   #84
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,643
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
We've seen your argument.

Here's what you've failed to do: Show us how you'd "treat" (<gag>) someone to your truth in a way doesn't hurt? In the absence of a working example, what both TM and I are telling you is that you can't do it because it's fundamentally rude to respond to someone correcting you as to their gender by telling them they're wrong.
You know, this is very amusing. Had I omitted the highlighted part, I know for a fact, by experience, that you or someone else would've concocted a nice hypothetical where I call people fat in the streets for no reason. Apparently in that situation, which has happened not long ago right here on the forum, I'm speaking of the general case. And now that I added the highlighted to cover the general case, suddenly it can only apply to the specific and I must argue with trans people.

You will interpret my words in the way that best suits your need to be outraged about my disagreement.

So how about you spare us all that and instead make an actual case? I've made mine, distinguishing being polite and respectful with telling people what they want to hear because they want to be told a lie. So yes, I'm sure it hurts their feelings that I'm not going along with the lie. But what of it? My feelings are hurt all the time and I don't demand others change to protect them. Are we now in a world where the safe space in our mind is paramount and objective reality is unimportant?

That's a crucial distinction I'm making. How about we deal with that?
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

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 1st August 2017, 06:51 PM   #85
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,643
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
You don't. Rank isn't self-bestowed.
Neither is gender.

Quote:
A transwoman wants to be called 'her' because she is a woman.
No, a trans woman wants to be called "her" because he feels like a woman. Fine. Go through the hormone therapy and surgeries and I'll be glad to oblige, because at that point, objective reality matches her feelings.

Quote:
You don't seem to understand what measures are used to determine who is a 'he' and who is a 'she', and insist on using your 'truth' on others who know better.
Oh, no, I understand exactly what measures are used. It's precisely because they are measures that they are not dependant on what the person feels like.

Quote:
More than that, you insist you can do this in a polite fashion.
Of course you can. You can tell someone the worst thing in the world in a polite fashion. Some people make careers out of it.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

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 1st August 2017, 06:56 PM   #86
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,085
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Neither is gender.
Sex. The word you're thinking of is sex.



Quote:
No, a trans woman wants to be called "her" because he feels like a woman. Fine. Go through the hormone therapy and surgeries and I'll be glad to oblige, because at that point, objective reality matches her feelings.
A transwoman is a woman. The hint is in the name. Again, the word you're thinking of is sex.



Quote:
Oh, no, I understand exactly what measures are used. It's precisely because they are measures that they are not dependant on what the person feels like.
Again, you don't understand the measures. Yes, what a person feels like is in fact, part of it. It isn't the whole of it, but it is part of it. That you don't believe this means you don't actually have a 'truth' to tell.


Quote:
Of course you can. You can tell someone the worst thing in the world in a polite fashion. Some people make careers out of it.
Yeah, it's perfectly polite to tell someone they're the wrong gender or they're going to hell. The trick is in the tone. Just say it soft, which doesn't sound rudely condescending at all.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 1st August 2017, 07:04 PM   #87
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,463
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I agree. I also said he was sounding like a jerk, not that he is one.
Sophistry.

If I told you what I thought you sounded like, would you take it personally?

Last edited by theprestige; 1st August 2017 at 07:06 PM.
theprestige 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 1st August 2017, 07:12 PM   #88
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,658
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
A transwoman is a woman. The hint is in the name. Again, the word you're thinking of is sex.
No, he is not. It's perfectly fine for folks to humor him in his delusion, just as it's fine for them to pretend that they appreciate the eggs from the man down the street who thinks he's a chicken.

A transwoman is a woman you say, don't confuse gender with sex. Okay, well what words applying to women then do not apply to transwomen? When we talk about animals and sex we tend to use the words "male" and "female." Is a transwoman a female?
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

Last edited by Brainster; 1st August 2017 at 07:26 PM.
Brainster 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 1st August 2017, 07:14 PM   #89
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 44,074
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
No, disagreeing with your ideology is no problem at all. You only think it's a problem because it's an ideology. That's the nature of the beast.
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.

Quote:
More inventions by you. Apparently you've chosen to forget -- because there's no way you don't know this -- that many languages, English included, differentiate men from women and thus when addressing people there are different words to use depending on who you're talking to. Once you've been taught this you do it automatically. So far I haven't met a person (in real life) that my brain can't determine the sex of.
You really think you have to use the words "sir" or "ma'am" in every conversation with another human being? There's no way out of it? You MUST call them one or the other, and find out which is the appropriate one. And you've never had a single doubt or made a single mistake on the subject, ever. Even with small children, or the very elderly, or people with ambiguous haircuts. Not once.

Quote:
Wow, you have a vivid imagination. Where have I argued with them, since I've just told you I've never encountered this situation? You live in fantasy land. Leave reality for the rest of us.
If you've never encountered a single transgendered person in your entire life, why are you so adamant on insisting that if and when you do you'll call them the gender they don't identify as? It's an important principle of yours, apparently, because TRUTH...but it hasn't come up yet? Then why are you bugging about it so hard? So you'll be ready when it comes? You'll show them, yes SIR or MA'AM! Ha! Those wacky kids don't know what'll hit them when you address them by a term they don't identify as. That'll...teach 'em...something. Or other.
__________________
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 1st August 2017, 07:18 PM   #90
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,085
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
No, he is not. It's perfectly fine for folks to humor him in his delusion, just as it's fine for them to pretend that they appreciate the eggs from the man down the street who thinks he's a chicken.
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.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 1st August 2017, 07:20 PM   #91
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,463
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
I'd like them to be treated to the truth. The truth doesn't have to be told in a way that hurts, but is it wrong of me to want my utterances to correspond to objective reality?
What is the objective reality of a gendered pronoun?

This signature is intended to irradiate people.
theprestige 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 1st August 2017, 07:26 PM   #92
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,057
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.
The only way that you can insist that a transfemale is really and objectively a woman is if we define "woman" as "someone who identifies as a woman." It's a circular definition. The word ceases to have any meaning at all, and saying "what a woman is" becomes a meaningless phrase.
__________________
See you in 2018, maybe.
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 1st August 2017, 07:34 PM   #93
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,771
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
It's absolutely nothing like it at all. "Him" is not a derogatory word.
I didn't claim it was. Nor does it need to be for my analogy to be valid.

The similarity lies in the motivation of people who cry foul over something so insignificant.
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 1st August 2017, 07:40 PM   #94
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NeverLand
Posts: 14,174
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.
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha 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 1st August 2017, 07:45 PM   #95
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 44,074
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
The only way that you can insist that a transfemale is really and objectively a woman is if we define "woman" as "someone who identifies as a woman." It's a circular definition. The word ceases to have any meaning at all, and saying "what a woman is" becomes a meaningless phrase.
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?
__________________
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 1st August 2017, 08:15 PM   #96
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,982
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.

Last edited by mumblethrax; 1st August 2017 at 08:26 PM.
mumblethrax 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 1st August 2017, 09:33 PM   #97
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,473
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Lady, if you think you know the 'truth' of someone else's gender better than they do themselves and can tell them in a 'polite' way, you don't know what 'polite' means.
Perhaps the giving of birth was a clue that he is a she?

It seems rather odd to me that a woman who identifies as a man would even want to give birth. They are a man, no? Men don't do that. Or are we now living in a world where we can't even say, "Men don't give birth," without offending someone.

"Your world frightens and confuses me." -Caveman Lawyer.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 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 1st August 2017, 09:35 PM   #98
portlandatheist
Master Poster
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,713
Girls will be boys, and boys will be girls.
It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world,
Except for Lola. Lo lo lo lo Lola.
portlandatheist 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 1st August 2017, 09:45 PM   #99
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 3,010
Originally Posted by portlandatheist View Post
Girls will be boys, and boys will be girls.
It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world,
Except for Lola. Lo lo lo lo Lola.
Here comes Dick, he's wearing a skirt
Here comes Jane, you know she's sporting a chain
Same hair, revolution
Same build, evolution
Tomorrow who's gonna fuss
__________________
I drink to the general joy o' th' whole table. --William Shakespeare
sir drinks-a-lot 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 1st August 2017, 10:09 PM   #100
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,658
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
My grandfather was born in 1914. He's a racist. During the civil rights struggle he repeatedly said that he'd never call a black person "sir", never shake one's hand, etc etc. My mother was born in 1944. She's not racist. She found her father's racism to be insane. Why would he be like that? Why can't he see that there's no sense in racism? she'd say. But you know what? She herself is homophobic. And she can't see the parallel. As unreasonable as she finds her father's notions, she still finds her own to be perfectly rational and thinks people are crazy to question her homophobia.

I think transgenderism is the current generation's thing like that. People my age tend to be non-racist, okay with the gays...but iffy on those weird transgender people. But that's the thing about blind spots--you can't see that they are blind spots. Future generations will look back on today's anti-transgenderism with the same bemusement (and contempt) that we look back on homophobic Baby Boomers and racist whatever you call people born during WWI. Flappers?
And just think, forty years from now your grandkids will be talking about how pedophobic you were.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster 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, 12:08 AM   #101
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
You started a thread to declare your principle unto the world that you would not call someone by a pronoun you don't think they merit.

And of course I don't think a fine is warranted, unless this particular behavior is part of an ongoing harrassment. Which would be a different situation, don't you think?
There are already laws on harassment on the book. Therefore such a specific law is unwarranted. In fact it is probably unconstitutional , as it is government imposing onto people a fine against their speech between 2 private entity , none of which is threatening libelous or slandering, so abridging their free speech.
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, 12:17 AM   #102
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
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?
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.
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, 12:35 AM   #103
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,036
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
And just think, forty years from now your grandkids will be talking about how pedophobic you were.
Are you making the argument that if we accept that trans-women want to be called 'she', it's a slippery slope to accepting pedophilia?

Yes, you are making that argument. Aren't you ashamed?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
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, 12:57 AM   #104
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,982
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
There are already laws on harassment on the book. Therefore such a specific law is unwarranted.
Yes. The relevant law is called "The New York City Human Rights Law", which was amended to protect gender identity in 2000-something, and that's the law that these guidelines are about. That is, the law we already have is the same law people are having a daily wail about.

Quote:
In fact it is probably unconstitutional , as it is government imposing onto people a fine against their speech between 2 private entity , none of which is threatening libelous or slandering, so abridging their free speech.
Workplace harassment falls under the aegis of anti-discrimination law in the US. You might as well argue that you can't tell employers that they can't discriminate on the basis of race, because we have constitutionally protected freedom of association.

If every conversation you have with one of your employees goes something like "Hey, Jew. How's it going, Jew? Did you finish those TPS reports, Jew?" you're going to lose the resultant lawsuit if you can't manage a better defense than "free speech!", even though it's perfectly legal to treat people that shoddily outside of an employment relationship.
mumblethrax 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, 02:03 AM   #105
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,643
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Sex. The word you're thinking of is sex.
No, I know what I said.

Quote:
A transwoman is a woman.
Not until the transition, they aren't. The difference between our positions should be obvious: you just ask them what they feel like; I rely on more objective measures.

Quote:
Again, you don't understand the measures. Yes, what a person feels like is in fact, part of it. It isn't the whole of it, but it is part of it.
So if it's just part of it, why is that the only criterion you're using?

Quote:
Yeah, it's perfectly polite to tell someone they're the wrong gender or they're going to hell.
Again, someone is making up my own position. That sounds like fun, given how often it's been done here.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

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, 02:06 AM   #106
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,643
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Not confronting people needlessly about their gender issues is an ideology?
And AGAIN asking me to defend a position I did not take. Is this a game?

Quote:
Minding your own business about things that don't concern you--that's an ideology?
Don't play games with trans issues, please. You're doing a disservice to them by a) treating them like children and b) refusing to discuss the issue dispassionately.

Quote:
You really think you have to use the words "sir" or "ma'am" in every conversation with another human being?
Another thing I have not said or implied. You're going for a home run, there.

Quote:
If you've never encountered a single transgendered person in your entire life, why are you so adamant on insisting that if and when you do you'll call them the gender they don't identify as?
Because unless they tell me I have no way to know, most probably. The only issue would be pre-transition ones, and I suspect that most of them wouldn't care quite as much as the white knights who keep ranting about them online.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

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, 02:09 AM   #107
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,643
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What is the objective reality of a gendered pronoun?
What is the objective reality of "kilogram"? As you well know, it's not the name of the measure, but the measure itself.

Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
I didn't claim it was. Nor does it need to be for my analogy to be valid.

The similarity lies in the motivation of people who cry foul over something so insignificant.
If it's insignificant then both sides are guilty.

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Perhaps the concept of sexes is hazier than previously conceived.
Perhaps. Or perhaps you're wrong.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

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, 02:10 AM   #108
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,643
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Are you making the argument that if we accept that trans-women want to be called 'she', it's a slippery slope to accepting pedophilia?

Yes, you are making that argument. Aren't you ashamed?
No, I think rather he's saying that society is moving towards being accepting of just about anything. Not that I agree. I don't think pedophilia is likely to become accepted in the forseable future.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

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, 02:24 AM   #109
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,036
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
No, I think rather he's saying that society is moving towards being accepting of just about anything. Not that I agree. I don't think pedophilia is likely to become accepted in the forseable future.
That's the slipperly slope argument I was referring to.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
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, 02:26 AM   #110
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,643
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
That's the slipperly slope argument I was referring to.
Yeah but he's not saying (I think) that if we accept X we eventually accept Y. He's saying that accepting X is part of a larger movement that may also lead to accepting Y. Does that make sense?
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

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, 02:27 AM   #111
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,036
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Yeah but he's not saying (I think) that if we accept X we eventually accept Y. He's saying that accepting X is part of a larger movement that may also lead to accepting Y. Does that make sense?
I don't think there's any discernable difference.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
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, 02:59 AM   #112
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,643
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
I don't think there's any discernable difference.
Well there's no causality link, for one. I think that's a rather important difference.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

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, 03:00 AM   #113
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,260
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
A $125,000 fine for calling a transgender male co-worker a "she", will certainly deserve a hearing at the Supreme Court. One has the right to their own beliefs regarding this VERY complicated matter.

It is unreasonable to fine someone $125,000 for calling a transgender male "madam".

I mean, come on folks. Let's get real.
And the outrage of calling a a kike a kike is crazy too.
__________________
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, 03:01 AM   #114
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,260
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Wow, that's steep price to pay for something so trivial. You'd think you stole their Aston Martin or something.
Like all forms of harassment it can not be a big deal.
__________________
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, 03:06 AM   #115
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,260
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
Calling someone a faggot is not the same as calling someone "sir".

I understand this issue is of significant emotional importance to you, but you cannot order me under penalty of $125,000 to call a woman "sir".
And the law doesn't actually do that. It punishes harassment campaigns based on their gender. Kind of like making a pass at a coworker is fine, but repeated unwanted passes opens you up to large civil penalties. Clearly you are against sexual harassment being punishable too, because you get millions for simply making a pass at someone.
__________________
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, 03:08 AM   #116
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,260
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
The Constitution protects Freedom of Speech.

It does not protect persons from feeling offended.
And yet they destroyed Bill O'reilly for his free speech, just for wanting to rub falafel on his female employee in the shower. Outrageous that free speech like that would get him millions in punishment. Down right unconstitutional.
__________________
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, 03:10 AM   #117
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,260
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
I understand this is what you currently think.

But I disagree.

I think gender is hardwired into our DNA, biology and phenotype. We dont yet have the technology to turn a man into a woman or a woman into a man.
So it is your religion then.
__________________
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, 03:12 AM   #118
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,414
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
It's absolutely nothing like it at all. "Him" is not a derogatory word.
It is to someone who has spent years or even decades not wanting to be a 'him'.
It's about context. 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.
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.
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.

Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Not until the transition, they aren't. The difference between our positions should be obvious: you just ask them what they feel like; I rely on more objective measures.
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.

Especially in everyday situations, which is where these questions about how to address someone arise.
I don't think I could reliably judge by looking at someone whether they are an unusual looking 'regular' man or woman, trans, pre- or post-op, what kinds of surgeries they have had or are planning on having, if they're on hormones, and whether or not that meets certain criteria. And I am not going to ask them about any of that in order to decide which pronoun I'm going to use.
Porpoise of Life 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, 03:12 AM   #119
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,260
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
As far as pronouns are concerned I have come up with a fair compromise.

Always call a transgender person by their NAME, if this is an issue for you.

Jake is always Jake. Not sir, he, him, etc. Always Jake.

Susan is always Susan. Not her, madam, ma'am, she, etc. Always Susan.
And if Jake changes his name to Tom, he is still always Jake, just like he can never be Jacob. That is why you would never refer to someone by a married name. Names are fundamental immutable facts.
__________________
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, 03:14 AM   #120
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,260
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
What is a covered entity?

As far as the law is concerned, it seems to be rather "nannyish". I don't need that kind of protect, I think.

Ranb
Like those BS laws against sexual harassment. It is outrageous how much fox news has been punished for the free speech rights of their workers.
__________________
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
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 02:37 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.