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, 04:16 PM   #281
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,492
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
What a strange notion, that problems that don't affect oneself personally don't actually exist.
You have evidence that people are being made to use these terms? Please provide it.

Quote:
Also, you yourself spend a lot of time on this very forum discussing problems that don't affect you personally.
Discussing problems and lamenting manufactured ones are two different things.
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, 04:20 PM   #282
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
I already did, you just missed it because it was directed to someone who is making a full argument.
Well could you tell the person with a full argument, who is obviously not you, to translate it for me? Where are your criteria? And could you make a single post without doing nothing but personalise the discussion?

Quote:
You're using criteria from a different context for 'woman' to justify being rude to people (and in fact, denying that it's rude).
Oh, yes. I'm constantly looking for excuses to be unpleasant to strangers. Totally me.

Quote:
No, you're not arguing in good faith because you continually refuse to clarify
I've clarified every single point I've made. Is Ponderingturtle your mentor or something?

Quote:
You're the one insisting you know the truth of other people's gender.
And again you're lying. It's not like I made up the damned sexes, is it? You're the ones trying to rewrite the dictionary.

Quote:
Again, do you not see the mirror held up?
You really have no argument of your own, do you?

Quote:
Except that doesn't even resemble what I did. I took the form of your argument and used it advancing a different argument from yours.
You did a piss poor job of it. Clearly you don't understand my argument or yours.
__________________
"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, 04:26 PM   #283
sir drinks-a-lot
Master Poster
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 2,784
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
You have evidence that people are being made to use these terms?
Since I know your style, I can already see where your broken line of reasoning is heading. Unless I provide a video of someone being held at gunpoint being forced to say "xim", you'll say they're not being made to do it.

So much for my attempt at using plain English.
__________________
--
Dangerous Link
sir drinks-a-lot 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, 04:27 PM   #284
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 16,958
__________________
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, 04:27 PM   #285
p0lka
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 633
"Transgender female masturbates and semen comes out!"
shocker..
p0lka 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 PM   #286
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
First, let me say thank you for responding!
Of course. Why wouldn't I?

Quote:
What makes you say that? What discipline or objective set of observable facts leads you that claim?
The dictionary, with which we define the terms we use in language. Gender is not defined as how you feel about your gender, as that would be circular.

Quote:
That sounds a lot more like a commonly held definition of sex. What scientific or academic discipline do you draw from when you say it's a definition of gender? I'm not familiar with a field that defines it that way.
While I'm at it, could you tell me which scientific discipline defines the word "table"?

Quote:
Yes, in the majority of humans, sex matches gender matches physical appearance and presentation.
The overwhelming majority of humans, to the exception of a tiny minority.

Quote:
But the thing is, you seem to be saying that looking at someone and insisting that what you see is correct should be acceptable behavior.
I think determining things by observation is acceptable behaviour, yes. But the problem here is that, as usual with this topic, you're trying to mix morality with objective definitions. And also adding "insisting" to the sentence, which seems there to put a spin on the discussion.

Quote:
Even if you consider sex and gender equivalent, that can lead to a bad outcome.
That's true of everything, though. What you need to establish is that the risk is much higher than normal.

Quote:
It may "almost always" work, but the consequences for getting it wrong are at the very least pretty hurtful, and the consequences for letting the person you're talking to make that determination are... what?
The issue is that all of this is based on how hurt people will be if we don't cater to their request. Considering how hurt people are at just about anything (including justifiable reasons) I don't think it's a very good argument in and of itself. Plenty of things hurt my feelings, for instance, and I don't request that people adjust to cater to me.

Quote:
Male and Female are sex terms. A person who is Male(sex) may assert that they are a woman(gender).
Operative word: assert.
__________________
"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, 04:30 PM   #287
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,480
I love the way people want to narrow and restrict the discussion. Let's get one guy to say that he won't call someone by their chosen gender if it doesn't match their actual, biological, reality. Then, we can say that the whole debate is about being rude to people at work.


No, that isn't it. You can probably keep Argumemnon going on that for a while, but that's not the reality of the transgender debate in America today. It's about whether a person who identifies as a woman is really a woman, and it matters because if you accept that argument, then someone will tell your teenage daughter that if she wants to use the locker room, she has to take her clothes off in front of that man, because, you know, even though she sees what is obviously a penis and a set of balls, she doesn't know what a woman really is, and is mistaken in her identification.

And yes. That happens. Really. I'm not making this up.
__________________
On vacation.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 2nd August 2017 at 04:31 PM.
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, 04:35 PM   #288
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,939
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
It does not exclude transmen.
The second sense does, and that's all that's necessary. That is, in the context of gender (which is the dominant context in our day-to-day social lives) transmen are men. It's not reasonable to expect a definition to determine context for you.

The principle reason not to call a transman a woman in the first sense isn't lexical. It's that they don't want you to. Seems pretty easy to avoid--just use male and female wherever you want to indicate sex. I'm pretty great at meeting people a billionth of the way.
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, 04:47 PM   #289
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,480
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
The second sense does, and that's all that's necessary. That is, in the context of gender (which is the dominant context in our day-to-day social lives) transmen are men. It's not reasonable to expect a definition to determine context for you.

The principle reason not to call a transman a woman in the first sense isn't lexical. It's that they don't want you to. Seems pretty easy to avoid--just use male and female wherever you want to indicate sex. I'm pretty great at meeting people a billionth of the way.
If a definition is "this or that", and the object in question satisfies one of those senses, then the definition doesn't exclude the object in question.

If your definition of woman begins with "A biological female or...." and a person is a biological female, then the person is, by that definition, a woman. Transmen are biological females.

Reminder of the challenge for anyone who missed it:

Provide a definition of "woman" that
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, 05:14 PM   #290
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,582
Originally Posted by p0lka View Post
"Transgender female masturbates and semen comes out!"
shocker..
Well hopefully not in public, because I thing there might be laws against that, regardless of what comes out.
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

Polaris (wrt cluelessforum) - Bunch of sewer-chewing douche nozzles.
sylvan8798 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, 05:22 PM   #291
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,582
Posters keep talking about "objective reality" but it seems to me that there is more than one reality in this situation. There is the reality that someone has a biological sex as defined by certain characteristics. There is also the reality that someone has a sense of their self which may not match whatever those biological characteristics are.

Maybe we don't know enough about it yet, but isn't it possible that the set of biological characteristics isn't always 100% binary? That is, a single individual may have biologically male genitals but biologically female brain composition, for example? In that case, are we not defining "gender" based solely on part of the relevant characteristics and claiming that is the objective "reality".
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

Polaris (wrt cluelessforum) - Bunch of sewer-chewing douche nozzles.

Last edited by sylvan8798; 2nd August 2017 at 05:24 PM.
sylvan8798 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, 05:41 PM   #292
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,480
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
Posters keep talking about "objective reality" but it seems to me that there is more than one reality in this situation. There is the reality that someone has a biological sex as defined by certain characteristics. There is also the reality that someone has a sense of their self which may not match whatever those biological characteristics are.

Maybe we don't know enough about it yet, but isn't it possible that the set of biological characteristics isn't always 100% binary? That is, a single individual may have biologically male genitals but biologically female brain composition, for example? In that case, are we not defining "gender" based solely on part of the relevant characteristics and claiming that is the objective "reality".
Certainly biological sex is non binary. There are intersexed people in the world. That's not a myth. While there is an objective reality about people being male or female, it is not true that every human being fits neatly into one category or the other, even if only physical attributes are considered.

To the best of medical knowledge as it exists today, there is no such thing as "female brain composition", but that doesn't exclude the possibility that such a thing will be discovered in the future. We don't know enough to say such a thing does or does not exist.
__________________
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, 05:47 PM   #293
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
You can probably keep Argumemnon going on that for a while
Hey, shame on me for taking the bait, right?
__________________
"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, 05:50 PM   #294
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
Posters keep talking about "objective reality" but it seems to me that there is more than one reality in this situation.
Yes, the objective one and the subjective one.

Let's forget about what's rude or polite or hurtful or bad for a moment and focus on what is. I think that what people are should be based on objective measures observable by others, not just themselves. Do you agree?

Quote:
Maybe we don't know enough about it yet, but isn't it possible that the set of biological characteristics isn't always 100% binary?
Not only is it possible, but it clearly happens, though rarely. I suspect that sex is expressed through a great number of genes, which are usually all to one "setting" or the other. A smaller number of people have a few switches on the "wrong" setting (that is, not the same as the other switches). In a small number of people, that results in gender dysphoria.

However, that still doesn't mean that the person's perceptions trump objective measures.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"

Last edited by Argumemnon; 2nd August 2017 at 05:52 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 2nd August 2017, 05:53 PM   #295
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,400
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
And the outrage of calling a a kike a kike is crazy too.
Virtue signalling by being free with pejoratives. best of both worlds.
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus 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, 05:57 PM   #296
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
It's about whether a person who identifies as a woman is really a woman, and it matters because if you accept that argument, then someone will tell your teenage daughter that if she wants to use the locker room, she has to take her clothes off in front of that man, because, you know, even though she sees what is obviously a penis and a set of balls, she doesn't know what a woman really is, and is mistaken in her identification.
I have it on good authority that telling people that they are mistaken in their identification is dehumanising.
__________________
"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, 05:57 PM   #297
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,480
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Hey, shame on me for taking the bait, right?
I often "take the bait" from posters because I give the benefit of the doubt that they might be arguing honestly and coherently.

Once a given poster proves otherwise, though, I try to stop biting on that line.
__________________
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, 05:58 PM   #298
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I often "take the bait" from posters because I give the benefit of the doubt that they might be arguing honestly and coherently.

Once a given poster proves otherwise, though, I try to stop biting on that line.
I lack that ability, sadly.
__________________
"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, 06:04 PM   #299
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,582
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Yes, the objective one and the subjective one.

Let's forget about what's rude or polite or hurtful or bad for a moment and focus on what is. I think that what people are should be based on objective measures observable by others, not just themselves. Do you agree?
If you mean observable as in visually, tactically, or chemically, then no, I don't agree. Just because I can't observe someone's mental process doesn't in and of itself make it less valid as a measurement. In that case I may need more to go by. How someone FEELS is not "wrong" per se. If I say I feel hot, you can't say that I don't feel hot, just because it's 10 degrees in my house.

Quote:
Not only is it possible, but it clearly happens, though rarely. I suspect that sex is expressed through a great number of genes, which are usually all to one "setting" or the other. A smaller number of people have a few switches on the "wrong" setting (that is, not the same as the other switches). In a small number of people, that results in gender dysphoria.

However, that still doesn't mean that the person's perceptions trump objective measures.
I'm not sure I see that as a mental disorder in the sense that we usually think of them (i.e. as a disease). Yes, it's not what is seen in most individuals, but then genius is also not what is seen in most individuals, and we don't consider that a mental disorder in and of itself.
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

Polaris (wrt cluelessforum) - Bunch of sewer-chewing douche nozzles.
sylvan8798 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, 06:05 PM   #300
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,400
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
That's like saying that losing an arm means you're no longer a tetrapod.
The word is quadruped. and any such not be capable of posting on the internets
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus 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, 06:17 PM   #301
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,134
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
I'm not sure I see that as a mental disorder in the sense that we usually think of them (i.e. as a disease). Yes, it's not what is seen in most individuals, but then genius is also not what is seen in most individuals, and we don't consider that a mental disorder in and of itself.
If a person believes they are not human but actually an alien being, you would say that is unambiguously a mental disorder, yes?

What changes when a female thinks they are a man? The disorder may be organic in origin but it's still a disorder, no?
__________________
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 2nd August 2017, 06:19 PM   #302
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
If you mean observable as in visually, tactically, or chemically, then no, I don't agree. Just because I can't observe someone's mental process doesn't in and of itself make it less valid as a measurement.
Well since it can't be measured, doesn't it make it an invalid measurement by definition? For instance, we never ask people how tall they feel they are, or how much they feel they weigh.

Quote:
How someone FEELS is not "wrong" per se. If I say I feel hot, you can't say that I don't feel hot, just because it's 10 degrees in my house.
That's a bit disingenuous though, isn't it? If you say you feel hot, I can say that you are wrong because it's just 10 degrees in your house. Not that you don't feel hot. See the difference there?

Quote:
I'm not sure I see that as a mental disorder in the sense that we usually think of them (i.e. as a disease).
I would classify a persistent perception that is contradicted by reality to be a mental disorder, personally.
__________________
"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, 06:21 PM   #303
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by Noztradamus View Post
The word is quadruped.
No, quadruped means that you walk on four legs. Tetrapod means you have four limbs. Quadrupeds may all be tetrapods but the reverse is not true (e.g. birds and humans). My point was that losing an arm doesn't mean you're no longer part of that classification.
__________________
"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, 06:37 PM   #304
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,492
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Since I know your style, I can already see where your broken line of reasoning is heading. Unless I provide a video of someone being held at gunpoint being forced to say "xim", you'll say they're not being made to do it.

So much for my attempt at using plain English.
My "broken line of reasoning" is simply asking you to substantiate your claim that you - or any one else - are somehow being forced to learn a list gender variant terms, or whatever they are.

Clearly that substantiation will not be forthcoming, in plain English or any other language.

And coming from someone who delights in mocking those who exaggerate the problem of racially motivated hate crimes, the irony of your hand-wringing over this ridiculous and nonexistent problem is rather enjoyable.
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, 06:40 PM   #305
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,492
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I love the way people want to narrow and restrict the discussion. Let's get one guy to say that he won't call someone by their chosen gender if it doesn't match their actual, biological, reality. Then, we can say that the whole debate is about being rude to people at work.
No one is narrowing or restricting anything.

The question of how to address transgender people is exactly where this thread started:
Originally Posted by Hercules56 View Post
Someone please explain to me why I should be required to call this person a "man", even though "he" has become pregnant and gave birth to a child.
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, 06:52 PM   #306
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,480
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
If you mean observable as in visually, tactically, or chemically, then no, I don't agree. Just because I can't observe someone's mental process doesn't in and of itself make it less valid as a measurement. In that case I may need more to go by. How someone FEELS is not "wrong" per se. If I say I feel hot, you can't say that I don't feel hot, just because it's 10 degrees in my house.



I'm not sure I see that as a mental disorder in the sense that we usually think of them (i.e. as a disease). Yes, it's not what is seen in most individuals, but then genius is also not what is seen in most individuals, and we don't consider that a mental disorder in and of itself.
I would be perfectly willing to consider those individuals as intersexed, and I think it is a sep in the right direction that the phenomenon of intersexed individuals is being recognized and accepted. If that were good enough for the advocates, I doubt there would be any problem.

Unfortunately, that's not good enough. The advocates insist on binary gender identification, and that the gender identification must be based on psychology, not anatomy.
__________________
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, 06:53 PM   #307
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,939
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
If a definition is "this or that", and the object in question satisfies one of those senses, then the definition doesn't exclude the object in question.
It doesn't need to. You determine the relevant sense from context, not the other way around.

The relevant sense is usually "gender" in our day-to-day lives, because that the sense that implicates social differences.

Quote:
If your definition of woman begins with "A biological female or...." and a person is a biological female, then the person is, by that definition, a woman. Transmen are biological females.
Everyone understands that--it's kind of what transman means.

Which is why I think your claim that denying this is part of the trans orthodoxy is silly. It is, at best, a radical view which undermines the case for trans rights.

Quote:
Reminder of the challenge for anyone who missed it:

Provide a definition of "woman" that
1. Includes transwomen
2. Excludes transmen
3. Is not circular.
If it's really that important to you, you can just ignore the first sense I provided. A woman would then be any adult human who exhibits the gender attributes (especially gender identity) traditionally associated with females.

It seems rather pointless, since that's just not how language works.

Originally Posted by Meadmaker
To the best of medical knowledge as it exists today, there is no such thing as "female brain composition", but that doesn't exclude the possibility that such a thing will be discovered in the future. We don't know enough to say such a thing does or does not exist.
There are in fact statistical differences in the brain structure of males and females, and transgendered people cluster with those who share their gender identity.

The only thing that prevents us from calling it as a special case of intersexuality today is that it's not clear which direction the causal arrow points.
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, 06:53 PM   #308
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,480
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
No one is narrowing or restricting anything.

The question of how to address transgender people is exactly where this thread started:
That is one question, but it is not THE question.
__________________
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, 06:57 PM   #309
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,480
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
A woman would then be any adult human who exhibits the gender attributes (especially gender identity) traditionally associated with females.
All that accomplishes is push the circularity aside into the female term. What's a female? A woman.

Quote:
There are in fact statistical differences in the brain structure of males and females, and transgendered people cluster with those who share their gender identity.

The only thing that prevents us from calling it as a special case of intersexuality today is that it's not clear which direction the causal arrow points.
That's interesting, and relevant. I would like to know more about it.....if time permits.
__________________
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, 07:18 PM   #310
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,939
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
All that accomplishes is push the circularity aside into the female term. What's a female? A woman.
No, a female is a member of the sex that produces egg cells.

Quote:
That's interesting, and relevant. I would like to know more about it.....if time permits.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...sgender-brain/
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, 07:26 PM   #311
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,582
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
If a person believes they are not human but actually an alien being, you would say that is unambiguously a mental disorder, yes?

What changes when a female thinks they are a man? The disorder may be organic in origin but it's still a disorder, no?
People who are transgender don't believe that they have "man parts" or "woman parts" contrary to the physical manifestation. They believe that their parts do not correspond to how they perceive themselves in the societal context of male vs female. Still not convinced that constitutes a mental disorder.
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

Polaris (wrt cluelessforum) - Bunch of sewer-chewing douche nozzles.
sylvan8798 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, 09:02 PM   #312
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,134
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
People who are transgender don't believe that they have "man parts" or "woman parts" contrary to the physical manifestation. They believe that their parts do not correspond to how they perceive themselves in the societal context of male vs female. Still not convinced that constitutes a mental disorder.
If one perceives things that don't correspond with objective reality . . .isn't that a delusion -a defining characteristic of many mental illnesses?
__________________
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 2nd August 2017, 09:51 PM   #313
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,161
Originally Posted by Noztradamus View Post
The word is quadruped. and any such not be capable of posting on the internets
Actually not. A quadruped has four feet while a tetrapod has four limbs, including those on which it could never walk.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto 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, 10:00 PM   #314
sylvan8798
Master Poster
 
sylvan8798's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,582
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
If one perceives things that don't correspond with objective reality . . .isn't that a delusion -a defining characteristic of many mental illnesses?
You are assuming an objective reality based on a narrow set of criteria. Suppose the only measure you have to determine someone's gender is their voice. I have been mistaken for a man on the phone MANY times. Does the fact that my perception contradicts what you are using as a metric mean that I am wrong and you are right, or that I am delusional, mentally ill?
__________________
DoYouEverWonder - Engineers and architects don't have to design steel buildings not to collapse from gravity. They already conquered gravity when they built it.

Polaris (wrt cluelessforum) - Bunch of sewer-chewing douche nozzles.

Last edited by sylvan8798; 2nd August 2017 at 10:02 PM.
sylvan8798 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, 10:02 PM   #315
Cavemonster
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,712
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
The dictionary, with which we define the terms we use in language.
Okay, we could discuss dictionaries in general, their descriptive rather than prescriptive nature, their limitations, but we can skip that for the moment. Here's the Merriam Webster definition of gender.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender

Quote:
1)
a : a subclass within a grammatical class (such as noun, pronoun, adjective, or verb) of a language that is partly arbitrary but also partly based on distinguishable characteristics (such as shape, social rank, manner of existence, or sex) and that determines agreement with and selection of other words or grammatical forms
b : membership of a word or a grammatical form in such a subclass
c : an inflectional form (see inflection 3a) showing membership in such a subclass

2)
a : sex the feminine gender
b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex

Clearly, we're not talking about definition #1a, b or c.
You seem to like definition #2a, but it seems clear to me that when trans people refer to their gender they are referring to something closer to 2b.

Now since you said the dictionary was that "with which we define the terms we use in language. " surely you must accept that 2b is a valid use of the word and that it does not in that usage refer to chromosomes or genitals.



Quote:
While I'm at it, could you tell me which scientific discipline defines the word "table"?
If the meaning of table and what qualified as one were in hot dispute, I'd imagine that looking to fields that study tables would be quite useful.

Philosophers and sociologists and psychologists all study gender. If you insist that you're dictating a particular truth about gender, surely academic standards of terminology might come in handy.


Quote:
I think determining things by observation is acceptable behaviour, yes. But the problem here is that, as usual with this topic, you're trying to mix morality with objective definitions. And also adding "insisting" to the sentence, which seems there to put a spin on the discussion.
We're talking about the behavior of calling someone by pronouns that they maintain are not desired or appropriate. Insisting seems like a very mild way of putting it, but if you insist I'll say "firmly maintain" instead.

You're right we're looking at both moral and factual questions. I'll do my best to untangle them.

The question of whether it is right or appropriate to say something is always a moral/ethical question, regardless of whether or not what you say is factual. The factual nature of a statement can impact it's moral standing, it does not determine it.

So, to get back to the issue, let's start with the factual claim.

A trans man claims to have a masculine gender even though his sex is female.

The behavior we're investigating is firmly maintaining the practice of referring to this person as "she" and "her" despite this person's express communication of a preference to be thought of as a man and referred to by the pronouns "he" and "him".

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but your position seems to be that this person is incorrect in maintaining a masculine gender and the use of those pronouns, and because of that fact you feel morally/ethically justified in using "she" and "her" and referring to this person as a woman.

This person is clearly not referring to their DNA or genitalia when they define their gender, so one would not use definition of gender 1a to determine the truth or falsity of this person's statements. The truth or falsity would rest somewhere within behavior, culture or psychology. Now an academic definition would give us more specificity, but since we're not using those, and the dictionary has defined our term, the truth rests on there simply being some element within those three domains that is masculine.

Your previous standard of determining the truth value of their statement seems flawed from this perspective. Not being a psychologist or privy to a detailed psychological definition of gender, it seems from an epistemological point of view that one ought to rely on this person's self report of their psychological state. They have far more access to both the information and the standard than you and no particular reason for dishonesty. While delusion is possible, I suppose, we'd need to more specifically define what psychological state was misperceived.

Now back to the moral/ethical part of it. Engaging in a behavior with no practical workplace value, targeted toward a particular coworker, repeatedly over their objections is hard to justify.

Peeking in someone's cubical and mooing at them, even after they repeatedly made clear it was very unpleasant would be at a minimum, a jerk move. Now if your action directly irritated a reasonable sensitivity, for instance, if you poked your head in an overweight coworker's cubical and yelled "you're fat" on a daily basis, after they made it clear that it hurt them, that would be harassment. Even though the statement "you're fat" is true, it's still a major jerk move.

The behavior we're discussing more broadly is such a jerk move, but to add to that, it isn't even true. The coworker described earlier is not objectively of a feminine gender. So you would be both ethically and factually wrong to insist on referring to him as such.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster 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 3rd August 2017, 12:38 AM   #316
The Nimble Pianist
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco, California Republic
Posts: 737
Cavemonster, thank you for your non-polemical contribution to this thread. Seriously, thank you!

You seem like the person I should ask a question that has been nagging me for a while: How do I make sense of the claim that gender is fluid, with respect to those who use pronouns like 'xim' and 'xer'?

I understand the distinction between sex and gender, I "get" biological males/females having an internal understanding of their gender as woman/man, respectively. What I don't understand is this idea that gender is "fluid", and that there exist third/fourth/fifth, etc. genders. I don't understand what is meant by a trans person saying they are "gender non-conforming". This is where I get lost. Any help?

Last edited by The Nimble Pianist; 3rd August 2017 at 02:13 AM. Reason: Subject-verb agreement. (Grammar)
The Nimble Pianist 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 3rd August 2017, 01:04 AM   #317
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 14,222
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
You could. It would be laughably terrible. But yeah, you could make it.


And the inability of children to give informed consent, the significant imbalance in the power dynamic between and an adult and a child… etc.
I don't disagree with those reasons at all. But the question is at what point does liberalism evolve to the point where it does disagree? If you had asked the average liberal 40 years ago, what they thought of gay marriage, they probably would have laughed. Transgender in the military? It was a running joke on MASH that was a dodge to get out of the military.

Okay, so maybe the liberals don't go for the real predators, the guys raping babies. But they find someone like Mary Kay Letourneau. She got off extraordinarily light as it was; for her first conviction of having sex with a sixth-grader (one whom she was teaching) she got 6 months, 3 suspended. Second time around (with the same kid) she got 7-1/2 years, but served less than 6. And then after she got released, they were married (apparently separated since, but their marriage lasted 13 years, not bad by today's standards).

Those kinds of female teacher/male student caught having sex stories come up periodically. Around here the reaction mostly seems to be, lucky guy! So you start with the women. But then comes the fairness argument. Mary Kay had sex with her student who was 12, why is this guy in prison for 20 years having sex with a female student who was 13? And I assume there will be some gay cause celebre about a man who was after all only showing a youngster how to become comfortable with his own sexuality.

The idea that liberals will cease trying to preen themselves for being more tolerant than their elders is patently absurd. Indeed, that is exactly what the person I was originally responding to was doing. His grandfather was racist. Mom was more tolerant but still homophobic. Him perfectly tolerant in every regard. I'm guessing his descendants will find his blind spot, whether it's pedophobia or something else that we all take for granted.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster 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 3rd August 2017, 01:57 AM   #318
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
My "broken line of reasoning" is simply asking you to substantiate your claim that you - or any one else - are somehow being forced to learn a list gender variant terms, or whatever they are.
Well IF there's a law that says that you can't intentionally or repeatedly fail to use somene's prefered pronouns, and IF the list of pronouns goes well beyond "he" or "she" and into "xer" and others, then it stands to reason that you have to learn the list.
__________________
"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 3rd August 2017, 01:59 AM   #319
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by sylvan8798 View Post
Suppose the only measure you have to determine someone's gender is their voice.
Suppose we get to be told the actual criteria for determining gender?

Quote:
I have been mistaken for a man on the phone MANY times.
Me too. Didn't traumatise me.
__________________
"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 3rd August 2017, 02:09 AM   #320
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,769
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
You seem to like definition #2a, but it seems clear to me that when trans people refer to their gender they are referring to something closer to 2b.
I like both 2a and 2b. I just don't view it as meaning that a biological woman can have a male gender. Gender is the social expression of biological sex.

Quote:
If the meaning of table and what qualified as one were in hot dispute, I'd imagine that looking to fields that study tables would be quite useful.

Philosophers and sociologists and psychologists all study gender. If you insist that you're dictating a particular truth about gender, surely academic standards of terminology might come in handy.
You didn't answer my question: from which scientific field does the definition of "table" come from?

Quote:
We're talking about the behavior of calling someone by pronouns that they maintain are not desired or appropriate.
No, as noted earlier, we're talking about whether someone is a woman because she believes or claims to be a woman. (snip) Anyway, you seem to agree that we should deal with that first:

Quote:
So, to get back to the issue, let's start with the factual claim.
Ok so:

Quote:
A trans man claims to have a masculine gender even though his sex is female.

(snip)

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but your position seems to be that this person is incorrect in maintaining a masculine gender and the use of those pronouns, and because of that fact you feel morally/ethically justified in using "she" and "her" and referring to this person as a woman.
Wait a second. You've just switched from the factual to the behavioural again. And no, that's not my position. My position is that the person is factually incorrect. If they persist in this counter-factual belief, I don't think it's helpful to go along with the delusion and confirm it. However, that does not mean the person shouldn't get support and encouragement if they want to get a sex change and become their target gender.

Quote:
This person is clearly not referring to their DNA or genitalia when they define their gender, so one would not use definition of gender 1a to determine the truth or falsity of this person's statements.
That makes no sense. If I say that my car is a planet because I define planet as things with four wheels, you can sure as hell use the real definition of planet to tell me I'm wrong.

Quote:
Not being a psychologist or privy to a detailed psychological definition of gender, it seems from an epistemological point of view that one ought to rely on this person's self report of their psychological state. They have far more access to both the information and the standard than you and no particular reason for dishonesty.
They really don't. Do you have access to your brain processes? I don't. I mean, true, I'm no shrink, but if someone claims to be Napoleon, I don't think we "ought" to rely on this person's self-report.

The disconnect, of course, is that your definition of gender is simply "what a person feels their gender is like", which I obviously disagree with.

Quote:
Now back to the moral/ethical part of it.
Not yet. Not until we resolve the factual issue.
__________________
"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 12:08 PM.
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.