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 coming out incidents , coming out issues , transgender incidents , transgender issues

Reply
Old 3rd January 2015, 02:08 PM   #161
Caper
Philosopher
 
Caper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,729
Originally Posted by ThunderChunky View Post
People don't grow out of homosexuality so your comparison is invalid.
I bet some people do. I'd imagine rare. But I bet it happens.
Caper 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 January 2015, 02:16 PM   #162
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,412
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
<snip>

What I actually said was that if you, personally, have a list of things you, personally, would find disgusting and abhorrent, it is, in fact, up to you, personally, to make such clear to a potential sex-partner before engaging in intimacy.

If there are things that you, personally, would find, in retrospect, to be off-putting, it is up to you, personally, to investigate those possibilities before engaging in intimacy.

<snip>

The bottom line: if you would be disgusted to find out that a potential sex partner had had reassignment surgery, or reconstructive surgery, or was not a virgin, or supported the designated hitter rule; it is up to you to discover such before engaging in intimacy than to expect that others will "know" your standards.
Everything you're saying is demonstrating an unwillingness to acknowledge just how unusual someone being a post-op transsexual is, in the grand scheme of human averages... and just how common it is for someone to not want to be in a romantic relationship with one of them, or at least to be informed of it up front.

You have got to take into account the numbers and the normal experience of people when setting any sort of general policy.

That applies whether I'm a cook at a restaurant determining whether I need to put "warning: contains lettuce" and "warning: contains _______" for every possible thing, or if I should only put them for things people actually are known to have allergies to in some sort of appreciable numbers.

It is the responsibility of the unusual person with the deviation from the norm to be the one concerned with the implications of that. Sorry, it sucks, but it will always inherently suck to be abnormal. We can try to mitigate it somewhat, but being a deviation from the norm will always carry challenges, it is the nature of the situation.

So if I have a lettuce allergy, or even a peanut allergy, I need to be the one looking out for myself on that matter. I shouldn't expect every waiter to stand there before taking my table's orders and ask every single possible question about allergies to every ingredient known to mankind, and then spend another hour asking me about whether I'm going to be triggered by loud noises like the other waiters coming by singing happy birthday, or glasses dropping, or whether what's on the TVs in the restaurant is acceptable to me, etc.

The abnormal need to accommodate the normal, because we have limited resources and limited time and society needs to be constructed in a way which reflects the average/normal experience of humanity within it.

The normal accommodating the abnormal to a degree can be a good thing, such as installing a wheel chair ramp on a major building which serves the general public... but it can also be taken too far like say, for instance, someone claiming that every cisgender, normal person in society is under an obligation to interrogate possible sex/romantic partners about things which most possible partners will be deeply offended about being asked ("are you a cannibal? have you ever murdered a previous significant other?" etc.) before getting involved with them.

It obviously makes much more sense, and is much more realistic, for the expectation to be that the odd person with the highly unusual situation which they know is likely to be an issue for most people, to be the one to declare themselves up front and get the issue hashed out.

It is NOT reasonable to expect me to even be considering the idea that a woman I date might have been born a man, because it is an outrageously uncommon, unusual possibility.

Whereas, it is VERY reasonable to expect the transgender to realize their partner might want to know that about them.
Skeptic Tank 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 January 2015, 02:17 PM   #163
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,960
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post

The bottom line: if you would be disgusted to find out that a potential sex partner had had reassignment surgery, or reconstructive surgery, or was not a virgin, or supported the designated hitter rule; it is up to you to discover such before engaging in intimacy than to expect that others will "know" your standards.
Wow, that's a tough one to sell considering every single ciswoman I posed the question "Would you be upset if your date asked you if you had a penis or were born a man ?" answered with a loud yes.

It's really up to the non-standard person to let potential partners know that there might be a little surprise in store.

https://twitter.com/sophiaphotos/sta...27414003347459
Stout 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 January 2015, 02:20 PM   #164
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,412
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
Wow, that's a tough one to sell considering every single ciswoman I posed the question "Would you be upset if your date asked you if you had a penis or were born a man ?" answered with a loud yes.

It's really up to the non-standard person to let potential partners know that there might be a little surprise in store.

https://twitter.com/sophiaphotos/sta...27414003347459
Nice to see someone be rational!

Exactly so... it is not reasonable to expect the average person to go around asking everyone they start getting involved with questions like that.

If they do, they won't be getting involved with most people who will probably storm out based on being asked.
Skeptic Tank 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 January 2015, 02:25 PM   #165
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
You guys are being tongue in cheek but there's some truth to this. Yes, the "agenda" if we want to call it that, is to get to the point where society acts like someone being born with a penis, later having it surgically removed/converted into an approximation of a vagina, and then going around society representing themselves as female is utterly insignificant, a completely mundane, yawn inducing moment.
No, not the least bit tongue-in-cheek.

It should, in fact, be no big deal.

What about those monsters that are born with allopecia vera, later having it surgically corrected into an approximation of hair, and then going around society representing themselves as not-bald? Truly, removing one of lynchpins of society as we know it.

What about those monsters born with only one foot, later having a prosthesis built for the approximation of bipedality, and then going around representing themselves as not-crippled? SUch are the acts of the less-than-human!

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
To get to the point where people who would want to be informed before becoming intimately involved with such a person can be dismissed as intolerant, irrational, hateful throwbacks whose feelings on these matters can be blithely dismissed with no moral qualms whatsoever.
I never suggested your feelings should be "dismissed". Instead, I held that you, personally, ought to be self-actualized enough to take responsibility to see that your personal standards are not violated before into the sack you hop. How is another to know what you, personally, will find a deal breaker?

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
We can see that some in this thread are already at that point, and busily encouraging the rest of us to "catch up."

But I contend that it is incredibly immoral to become sexually intimate with someone, or even just romantic (going out on dates, holding hands, talking for hours on the phone) without informing them of this highly unusual, and very likely inflammatory revelation about yourself VERY early on in that process.
And I contend that it is incredibly foolish to engage in intimacy with someone you do not know well enough to know such about them, if, in fact, such is, to you, a deal-breaker.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
It has already been acknowledged in this thread that not doing so puts the transgender person in well known and very real danger of physical violence being done to them when the information does come out at a time the other person perceives to be later than it should have been disclosed. Earlier we discussed a murder case where a guy was serving life for killing a transgender person he had married under the impression she was a born female, back in the 70's.

Are there people in this thread who are going to say, with a straight face, that they think it would be okay to get married to someone without informing them you were born a man, when you know they believe you were born a woman, and when you have every reason to suspect their reaction to that information would be very negative?
Not I. i will say that if you, personally, would find such an excuse for murder, and you, personally, did not even try to find such out about your intended, then you, personally, are tragically careless. Did you tell her that you would be discussed by such a situation? If not, how would she know?

(Mandatory disclaimer: if you, in fact, did ask, and she, in fact, lied to you about it, that is a different situation. If you did not ask, and can't tell from a "field test", so to speak, why is it her fault?)

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
The problem with this fervent progressivism is that you guys are driven to such ideological extremes that you turn back and can no longer see normality on the horizon. You become completely detached from the experience of the vast bulk of humanity throughout history and to this day. Regular people become the strange ones, to you.
Presuming, of course, that your experience is not only "normal", but should be normative.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
For most people, this revelation would be a huge deal. And again, as I said earlier, plenty of people don't discuss the issue of having children until very far down the road in a relationship. Plenty of people talk a big game about never wanting kids early on, but they change their tune later into the relationship. How can the policy of "I don't have to tell people about how I was born because they're just ignorant if they care" be reconciled with this reality?
If you are sexing someone you know so poorly, this is the least of your problems.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
Progressives start from the point of "it would be unfair if there are any differences between people" and they let that ideological "true north" dictate everything they say, think, and believe after that. It would be unfair for there to be differences between races/sexes/individuals/transgenders vs. cisgenders, THEREFORE there are not!

But sometimes an ambassador from reality has to remind you warmhearted, caring people that life is very much unfair and things are very much different from other things. I'm sorry that it's so, but it is so.

There are differences between people and these differences are important.
...and one of those differences lies on the tangled matrix of sexuality/gneder/gender rôle/sexual orientation. And the differences are important. And you could, in fact, ask about the things you would find murder-worthy before le sport.
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle 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 January 2015, 02:26 PM   #166
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by petrov2500 View Post
This is a bit misleading. The transgender agenda is to get people to accept that they are the gender they claim to be. It is not simply about equality: I believe they should be treated as equals but I do not accept a man claiming to be a woman is actually a woman and I would not engage in a romantic relationship with such a person.

Transgenderism (along with other delusions of people thinking they are aliens or whatever) is a mental disorder, it does not reflect reality (note that this is not to say that these people should be viewed or treated negatively).
I encourage you to provide your support for this.

Ta ever so.
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle 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 January 2015, 02:29 PM   #167
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by Pup View Post
<respectful snip>Actually, I think this divides up into two issues: what an individual wants for their own mate, which is their business, and what an individual thinks society should be like, as far as people choosing mates. It's one thing to say "I'd be horribly disgusted at becoming romantically involved with a transexual" (which might be their personal taste) and another thing to say, "It's normal and expected for people to be horribly disgusted at becoming romantically involved with a transexual." As we all know, we just came through a time when people claimed it was normal to be disgusted by interracial and gay relationships, even if they weren't involved in them themselves. I'd rather not see that same thing for transexual people.
Well said.
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle 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 January 2015, 02:32 PM   #168
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by ThunderChunky View Post
People don't grow out of bisexuality either. You brought up homosexuality, so that's what I discussed.
I wonder what is your authority for your claim that no-one "outgrows" homosexual behaviour; and that no-one "outgrows" bisexual behaviour.

Is this just a "no true deviant" argument?
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle 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 January 2015, 03:01 PM   #169
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,656
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
You guys are being tongue in cheek but there's some truth to this. Yes, the "agenda" if we want to call it that, is to get to the point where society acts like someone being born with a penis, later having it surgically removed/converted into an approximation of a vagina, and then going around society representing themselves as female is utterly insignificant, a completely mundane, yawn inducing moment.
Actually, I think this is true, but doesn't capture the agenda quite completely. Part of the agenda is also that if they are born with a penis, but go around representing themselves as female, that should be utterly insignificant, regardless of whether or not they keep their penis or have it replaced with some other surgically constructed replacement.
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 3rd January 2015, 04:07 PM   #170
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,412
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
<assembled for effect>
Presuming, of course, that your experience is not only "normal", but should be normative.

As long as you pretend to be the arbiter of "normal", you cannot even begin to claim to be understanding the issue.

...

Not anywhere near as much as it sucks to be judgmental, or to arrogate to define "normal". YMMV

...

As long as you get to define "normal", no?

I'm not the one defining the word "normal" - normal means:

Quote:
nor·mal
ˈnôrməl/Submit
adjective
1.
conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected.

synonyms: usual, standard, ordinary, customary, conventional, habitual, accustomed, expected, wonted;

1.
the usual, average, or typical state or condition.

Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
You do not realize that your example supports my point, not yours. You have the "transsexual allergy" (and the habit of hitting the rassle-castle with persons of whom you know only superficials). It is, in fact, up to you to make known your proclivities.
Incorrect, and this goes back to your inability to keep focus on what "normal" actually means. It isn't a hurtful term used to exclude people needlessly, it is a simple designation of what is common and usual.

So the analogy for a "transsexual allergy" would be me being the guy who goes into the restaurant with a poison ivy allergy.

I have a reasonable expectation that the restaurants I go to won't be including poison ivy leaves in their salads, or sprinkling ground poison ivy across their steaks. If they choose to for some reason, I have a reasonable expectation that they will make this abundantly clear.

Because after all, there are people who don't react to poison ivy. It's far less common though than to be someone who does have an allergic reaction to it.

Starting to understand the implications of normality, what is usual, and what that means for who has the logical burden to inform others?

Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
How well do you usually know a person before you do the bone-dance?
I've slept with some women in a pretty casual "hook up" type way, and had a few one night stands. What's wrong with that? Are you slut-shaming me?

Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
I'd love to see your idea of an adequate and appropriate pre-monkeyshines discovery document.
I haven't a clue what you're referring to. Do tell.

Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Actually, I think this is true, but doesn't capture the agenda quite completely. Part of the agenda is also that if they are born with a penis, but go around representing themselves as female, that should be utterly insignificant, regardless of whether or not they keep their penis or have it replaced with some other surgically constructed replacement.
What are your thoughts on that agenda? Desirable outcome for society, or not? Reasonable expectation or not?

Last edited by Skeptic Tank; 3rd January 2015 at 04:08 PM.
Skeptic Tank 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 January 2015, 04:38 PM   #171
ThunderChunky
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,456
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
I wonder what is your authority for your claim that no-one "outgrows" homosexual behaviour; and that no-one "outgrows" bisexual behaviour.

Is this just a "no true deviant" argument?
I didn't say "no one." You strawman in every post you make. That is the "no deviant" behavior I have observed. Are you prepared to say that gay reparative therapy never works? Ted Haggard and others disagree, they say they're cured. I guess we should just take their word for it, right?

Even if a small proportion of people grow out of homosexuality or bisexuality, it doesn't change the point that you are making an invalid comparison. The majority of children displaying transgender tendencies will grow out of them.

Last edited by ThunderChunky; 3rd January 2015 at 04:41 PM.
ThunderChunky 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 January 2015, 04:40 PM   #172
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,727
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
What are your thoughts on that agenda? Desirable outcome for society, or not? Reasonable expectation or not?
It strikes me that making this kind of change to the sexual identity of the rest of the population is a big thing to get done. Acting as if it is inevitable, or is a small and inconsequential thing NOW would be to live in a made up fantasy world.

I hope and suspect that this discussion is about edge cases and that generally people go into these relationships with their eyes open.
shuttlt 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 January 2015, 04:46 PM   #173
Tatyana
Illuminator
 
Tatyana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,701
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
I'm not disagreeing with anything you are saying but i just find the "they/i were born in the wrong body" meme to be ridiculous.

As far as I'm concerned nature makes no mistakes and being uncomfortable with their sex/gender and/or society trying to coerce them into behaving according to some standard template because they happen to be born with certain chromosomes is just one part of this wonderful thing they call nature.

Ok, bad analogy with the 'wrong body', but it is obvious that sexual differentiation in mammals is not binary but more of a continuum.

As well, chromosomes (XX and XY) do not always determine the biological sex of an individual. It would be quite easy to have an XY genotype with a 'female' phenotype.
Tatyana 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 January 2015, 04:49 PM   #174
Tatyana
Illuminator
 
Tatyana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,701
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I'd expect the autopsy results to be available by now. That would settle the gender question at least.
The gender question was already settled. She was female.

If you thinking about biological evidence for her choice, that would have been far easier to determine when she was alive.
Tatyana 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 January 2015, 04:55 PM   #175
Tatyana
Illuminator
 
Tatyana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,701
Originally Posted by anglolawyer View Post
Are people really as involved as the posts above suggest? Well, OK. I basically don't care. Sad story I suppose but I don't really feel sad. I probably lack imagination. I certainly don't think condemnation of anybody is in order. How very weird that is.

What's transgender anyway? Is it biology or psychology?
Biology.

Do a little bit of reading at how wonderfully diverse sexual differentiation can be humans.

It really isn't as simple as two sexes.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8481334
Diagnosis and treatment of 17-hydroxylase deficiency.

We found this enzyme defect in 3 phenotypically female siblings aged 12, 15 and 16 years.

Two of the sibs have a 46,XY chromosome pattern, the third is genetically female.

Pubertal development did not occur. Both of the 46,XY sibs have male internal and female external genitalia.

The 46,XX sister has normal female internal genitalia.

Last edited by Tatyana; 3rd January 2015 at 04:58 PM.
Tatyana 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 January 2015, 05:10 PM   #176
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,656
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
What are your thoughts on that agenda? Desirable outcome for society, or not? Reasonable expectation or not?
Does it really matter? I wasn't expressing an opinion on that agenda, just noting that, as far as the transsexual agenda is concerned, the actual gender reassignment surgery shouldn't matter. If a person identifies as a woman, it should not matter to anyone else whether or not that person has male or female anatomy. Your gender is what you think your gender is, and people should respect that decision.


But since you asked, I think it's utterly insane.
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 3rd January 2015, 05:11 PM   #177
Tatyana
Illuminator
 
Tatyana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,701
Originally Posted by Bikewer View Post
My wife worked in a floral shop for years. It was known in the area as a gay-friendly place, so they did quite a lot of business with a variety of sexually-different folks. They even had a contingent of drag queens who competed in the local (and national) pageants.

Some of the stories these people told were heartbreaking. She had one kid, about 16, come in. He had "come out" to his mother who had promptly thrown him out on the street as being "posessed by the devil".
He'd been living homeless for a couple of weeks. She was able to put him in touch with some folks from child services.
This was not at all unusual.

Don't know why this sort of phobic behavior is so engrained into our culture.... In others it's not. There is an area in some South or Central American country (I confess I forget which one...) where there is a high incidence of a sort of odd sexual dimorphism. Babies present as female, and are raised female... Until they reach puberty when rather suddenly....They start to show male secondary sexual characteristics.
Everything.....

This is apparently accepted with equanimity by the folks there... "Oh, he's one of those!" Off with the dresses, buy some male clothes, and no one thinks twice about it.
5-Alpha Reductase Deficiency. 5 Alpha reductase converts testosterone to dihydrotestosterone, which is far more androgenic.

As the foetus is deficient in the enzyme, full masculinization of the infant doesn't occur, so they appear to be female at birth.

However, as they are XY individuals and have testicles, at puberty, when more testosterone starts to be produced, the often virilize and turn into boys.

This is the simplified version of this genetic condition, there are other variables.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-alpha...ase_deficiency
Tatyana 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 January 2015, 05:13 PM   #178
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,656
Originally Posted by Tatyana View Post
Biology.

Do a little bit of reading at how wonderfully diverse sexual differentiation can be humans.

It really isn't as simple as two sexes.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8481334
Diagnosis and treatment of 17-hydroxylase deficiency.

We found this enzyme defect in 3 phenotypically female siblings aged 12, 15 and 16 years.

Two of the sibs have a 46,XY chromosome pattern, the third is genetically female.

Pubertal development did not occur. Both of the 46,XY sibs have male internal and female external genitalia.

The 46,XX sister has normal female internal genitalia.
The people you are discussing are not transgender. They are intersexed. Totally different things.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 3rd January 2015 at 05:18 PM. Reason: Corrected "transsexual" to "transgender"
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 3rd January 2015, 05:16 PM   #179
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,412
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Does it really matter? I wasn't expressing an opinion on that agenda, just noting that, as far as the transsexual agenda is concerned, the actual gender reassignment surgery shouldn't matter. If a person identifies as a woman, it should not matter to anyone else whether or not that person has male or female anatomy. Your gender is what you think your gender is, and people should respect that decision.


But since you asked, I think it's utterly insane.
Yea, it's sort of amazing isn't it?

When I first asked in this thread for people to tell me whether they felt there was an obligation on the part of transgender people to inform those they are becoming romantically involved with, I honestly thought the common answer was going to be "well yes of course" even from people who were very much in the pro-trans, progressive mindset on the issue.

I guess I've been reminded not to ever underestimate just how extreme and detached from normality progressivism is getting to be these days.
Skeptic Tank 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 January 2015, 05:17 PM   #180
Tatyana
Illuminator
 
Tatyana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,701
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
The people you are discussing are not transsexual. They are intersexed. Totally different things.
No isn't a totally different thing. It is all basically exactly the same thing.



It is just a variable in human sexual differentiation. It just happens that the largest part of the bell curve is XX individuals typically have higher levels of oestrogen and identify as what we call 'female' and XY individuals have higher levels of testosterone and identify as 'male'.

A HUGE part of sexual differentiation is what the various hormones do to the brain.

While we have worked out what happens in the body, we have barely started to work out what varying levels of hormones do to the brain.
Tatyana 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 January 2015, 05:19 PM   #181
Tatyana
Illuminator
 
Tatyana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,701
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
Yea, it's sort of amazing isn't it?

When I first asked in this thread for people to tell me whether they felt there was an obligation on the part of transgender people to inform those they are becoming romantically involved with, I honestly thought the common answer was going to be "well yes of course" even from people who were very much in the pro-trans, progressive mindset on the issue.

I guess I've been reminded not to ever underestimate just how extreme and detached from normality progressivism is getting to be these days.
Why should someone tell you if they are transgender?

I don't understand why you think it is necessary.
Tatyana 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 January 2015, 05:28 PM   #182
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,656
Originally Posted by Tatyana View Post
No isn't a totally different thing. It is all basically exactly the same thing.
You are wrong. Get a dictionary and check it out.
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 3rd January 2015, 05:33 PM   #183
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,727
Originally Posted by Tatyana View Post
Why should someone tell you if they are transgender?

I don't understand why you think it is necessary.
The overwhelming majority of men would have to make quite an adjustment to their sexual identity to knowingly partner/sleep with a trans-sexual. Willfully choosing to disregard this is certainly going to generate some intense situations.
shuttlt 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 January 2015, 05:47 PM   #184
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 7,112
Originally Posted by Beanbag View Post
Why not? No one else appeared to give a rat's patootie.

Beanbag
Can you list in the order of your preference who else should have? Who else was responsible or required to give a "rats patootie"? Is it partly my fault because I couldn't care less?
bluesjnr 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 January 2015, 05:50 PM   #185
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 7,112
Originally Posted by Beanbag View Post
I agree. However, society has made it rather difficult for those people that want to exit it.

Beanbag
If one wants to check out its a cinch. The MA prevents me from describing the myriad ways that don't include a hapless victim in your grand gesture.
bluesjnr 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 January 2015, 05:51 PM   #186
Tatyana
Illuminator
 
Tatyana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,701
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
You are wrong. Get a dictionary and check it out.
No, you are wrong.

Biochemically and biologically, just slight variations on a type.

A colloquial definition is crap in the face of science.
Tatyana 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 January 2015, 05:51 PM   #187
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,412
<snip>

Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
The overwhelming majority of men would have to make quite an adjustment to their sexual identity to knowingly partner/sleep with a trans-sexual. Willfully choosing to disregard this is certainly going to generate some intense situations.
C'mon, stop being such regressive troglodytes.

Sex / age / species / status as alive vs. dead / existing or imaginary are all social constructs, don'tchaknow?

Get with the times.

LGBTQ people can freely disregard the sexuality of cis scum who they want to have sex with because well, duh, they know that their mindset is based on irrational backward thinking!

Of course, if a cis scum hetero pig were to disregard the sexual right to self-determination of an LGBTQ person... they'd basically be the devil.


Edited by Loss Leader:  Edited to remove quote already in AAH

Last edited by Loss Leader; 5th January 2015 at 09:42 PM.
Skeptic Tank 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 January 2015, 05:55 PM   #188
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 7,112
Originally Posted by LorenzoValla View Post
What she did to that driver is wrong and terrible, but it's not the same as a school shooter who consciously decides to harm others. I doubt very much that part of her plan was to inflict pain on the driver. Rather, she probably saw the vehicle as inanimate. All conjecture, of course, but I'll stand by it.
She couldn't have cared less, it was all about her grand exit and how cinematic it might look. All conjecture, but I'll stand by it
bluesjnr 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 January 2015, 05:56 PM   #189
Tatyana
Illuminator
 
Tatyana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,701
Most people wouldn't even recognise that someone has has gender re-assignment surgery.
Tatyana 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 January 2015, 05:58 PM   #190
Tatyana
Illuminator
 
Tatyana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,701
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
C'mon, stop being such regressive troglodytes.

Sex / age / species / status as alive vs. dead / existing or imaginary are all social constructs, don'tchaknow?

Get with the times.

LGBTQ people can freely disregard the sexuality of cis scum who they want to have sex with because well, duh, they know that their mindset is based on irrational backward thinking!

Of course, if a cis scum hetero pig were to disregard the sexual right to self-determination of an LGBTQ person... they'd basically be the devil.
............................................No.


What benefit do you think this post is?


Seriously.

How does this further the discussion?

Last edited by Tatyana; 3rd January 2015 at 05:59 PM.
Tatyana 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 January 2015, 05:58 PM   #191
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,933
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Actually, I think this is true, but doesn't capture the agenda quite completely. Part of the agenda is also that if they are born with a penis, but go around representing themselves as female, that should be utterly insignificant, regardless of whether or not they keep their penis or have it replaced with some other surgically constructed replacement.
If you don't treat people as genitals with a body attached, in most cases it will be utterly insignificant whether someone is male or female and what they are hiding down their pants.
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 3rd January 2015, 06:00 PM   #192
Tatyana
Illuminator
 
Tatyana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,701
Originally Posted by Caper View Post
Are you on crack?
Same with you.

Was this post really necessary?
Tatyana 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 January 2015, 06:02 PM   #193
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,656
Originally Posted by Tatyana View Post
No, you are wrong.

Biochemically and biologically, just slight variations on a type.

A colloquial definition is crap in the face of science.
A "colloquial" definition?

Transgender is a word in the English language that means a certain thing. This meaning can be found in any modern dictionary.

Intersexed is a word in the English language that means a different thing. That meaning, also, can be found in any modern dictionary.

They are not the same thing, and both definitions are perfectly compliant with modern science. In your examples, you described intersexed individuals. You did not describe transgender individuals.
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 3rd January 2015, 06:05 PM   #194
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,727
Originally Posted by Tatyana View Post
Most people wouldn't even recognise that someone has has gender re-assignment surgery.
In the street, or the sack? There are certainly some, Candy Darling comes to mind, who I don't mind admitting looks convincing to me (at least in the famous photograph). My impression is that this level of success is a long way from being universal. It's hardly the point though.
shuttlt 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 January 2015, 06:11 PM   #195
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,656
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
If you don't treat people as genitals with a body attached, in most cases it will be utterly insignificant whether someone is male or female and what they are hiding down their pants.
Surely you aren't suggesting that it is only insignificant if it is hidden, are you?

The point of my post is that whether or not it is hidden, and whether or not it conforms to common male or female expectations, it does not determine gender. Skeptic Tank had suggested that if one had had gender reassignment surgery, it didn't matter what sort of equipment you were born with, at least according to the transgender agenda. I was affirming what he said, but noting that the gender reassignment surgery was not a necessary condition. Even if there had been no surgery, and one still had the original equipment, it was not relevant to gender. Self identification is what determines gender.

ETA: And, by saying "in most cases" are you noting that there are exceptions? Would you care to expound on what conditions might exist that are not "most cases"?

Last edited by Meadmaker; 3rd January 2015 at 06:12 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 3rd January 2015, 06:31 PM   #196
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,960
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
She couldn't have cared less, it was all about her grand exit and how cinematic it might look. All conjecture, but I'll stand by it
Come to think of it, it was a very macho way to do yourself in. Horrifically violent and disfiguring.
Stout 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 January 2015, 06:34 PM   #197
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 7,112
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle

The bottom line: if you would be disgusted to find out that a potential sex partner had had reassignment surgery, or reconstructive surgery, or was not a virgin, or supported the designated hitter rule; it is up to you to discover such before engaging in intimacy than to expect that others will "know" your standards.
This sounds incredibly one sided.
bluesjnr 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 January 2015, 06:37 PM   #198
Caper
Philosopher
 
Caper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,729
Originally Posted by Tatyana View Post
Same with you.

Was this post really necessary?
Maybe not. I didn't mean it in a mean spirited way. I just don't know anyone who wouldn't be completely freaked out by being with a woman that used to be a man... With no prior knowledge. Also, I don't know how a person couldn't tell. Especially if it was a woman that transitioned into a man... Surely the 1/2 inch penis would be a dead give away.
Caper 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 January 2015, 06:48 PM   #199
Dessi
Species Traitor
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 3,615
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
Right but when you are getting involved with someone sexually/romantically it would be a big deal that someone had been born with certain genitalia, to a very great number of people.
Fair enough. You are probably correct on this point. I won't browbeat the issue.

Quote:
There was one point I thought I made that was pretty solid earlier that you didn't respond to, though. If you're willing to here it is again:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dessi
You definitely need to know whether your partner has an STDs, for your own safety and the safety of future partners. You need to know whether your partner has food allergies before you cook for them, for their own safety. You need to know about one another's fertility if you want to start a family.
So the problem with how you're framing this is that you cannot know whether the person will need that information from the point of view of starting a family. Even if they say to you that they don't ever want to have kids, it may just be youth talking and they may change their tune dramatically later on that point. It happens plenty often that someone talks a big game about "I never want to have kids" but finds that as their biological clock is ticking and as they start to get older, they feel differently.

This is why I think people have to be made aware of such an important matter (whether their partner can be a reproductive mate, which is the default assumption) or not. That's pretty huge. If someone is sterile and knows it, or if someone isn't a born female or male and knows it, I think they're obligated to inform any potential partner before any physical intimacy takes place. That's my view.
One partners infertility is definitely a barrier in family planning, but is it ever a deal breaker on the first date?
__________________
>^.^<
Dessi 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 January 2015, 06:48 PM   #200
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,412
Perhaps a lot of my thoughts and comments on this issue are influenced by the fact that I don't have direct or intimate knowledge of what the end result of these surgeries is. Either traditionally or with the state of the art.

But even if it's super obvious with current techniques, a lot of the things we're discussing here re: obligation to disclose are still relevant with relationships that take a while to get to the sexual part, or relationships in the future when the surgeries and treatments and such get more convincing, or relationships where the people don't do a lot of genitalia-examination and just sort of do things in the dark, etc.
Skeptic Tank 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 08:57 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.