|
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. |
1st August 2017, 10:18 AM | #1 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
Transgender man gives birth
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...birth-son.html
Woman feels she is really a man. Woman gets surgery, takes hormones, and lives like a man. Now a transgender Man, "he" gets pregnant and gives birth to a healthy baby. 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. |
1st August 2017, 10:27 AM | #2 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 5,335
|
I guess it's a manner of context. Scientifically, you could build a pretty strong case that they're really a woman that feels like that are a man, or a woman that prefers to live as a man, or some such.
In polite company, it's probably better to use the pronoun "he" out of respect for the individuals choice. It can seem strange at times - like you mentioned, this would leave you saying things like "he gave birth to a beautiful baby girl" which can sound rather awkward. But, at least in most cases with which I am familiar, most people know the "real" by birth gender of transgenders and just look past it. For example, a coworker of mine is a woman that was born as a man. Everyone knows this, even though they refer to the person as "her" or "she" and act as if she was a woman all along. |
__________________
So, if he's doing it by divine means, I can only tell him this: 'Mr. Geller, you're doing it the hard way.' --James Randi |
|
1st August 2017, 10:38 AM | #3 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 20,570
|
What's next? We had Katelyn Jenner, boldly shattering myths about women's athletic abilities by becoming the first-ever woman to win the men's Olympic Decathlon. And now we have the spectacle of a man giving birth. It is indeed a brave new world!
|
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog. |
|
1st August 2017, 10:41 AM | #4 | |||
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 56,421
|
You couldn't do this skit now:
|
|||
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law |
||||
1st August 2017, 12:48 PM | #5 |
Poisoned Waffles
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 68,744
|
|
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
1st August 2017, 12:52 PM | #6 |
Orthogonal Vector
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 53,184
|
|
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin |
|
1st August 2017, 01:15 PM | #7 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 10,927
|
|
1st August 2017, 02:30 PM | #8 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
I have read there are some municipalities that will charge you with sexual harrassment if you intentionally use the "wrong" pronoun when discussing a transgender employee or co-worker.
If transgender men can still become pregnant and bring a healthy child to term, its simply absurd for it to be a crime for me to refer to such person as a "she". As far as I am concerned only a "she" can become pregnant and gestate a fetus. Sorry for sounding "bigoted". |
1st August 2017, 02:36 PM | #9 |
Poisoned Waffles
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 68,744
|
Read where? Is it a reliable source? Or just internet outrage bait?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
1st August 2017, 02:50 PM | #10 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
1st August 2017, 02:53 PM | #11 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/cchr/law/l...ssion.page#3.1
1. Failing To Use an Individual’s Preferred Name or Pronoun The NYCHRL requires employers and covered entities to use an individual’s preferred name, pronoun and title (e.g., Ms./Mrs.) regardless of the individual’s sex assigned at birth, anatomy, gender, medical history, appearance, or the sex indicated on the individual’s identification. Examples of Violations Intentional or repeated refusal to use an individual’s preferred name, pronoun or title. For example, repeatedly calling a transgender woman “him” or “Mr.” after she has made clear which pronouns and title she uses. https://www1.nyc.gov/site/cchr/law/l...ression.page#4 The Commission can impose civil penalties up to $125,000 for violations, and up to $250,000 for violations that are the result of willful, wanton, or malicious conduct. Thankfully I do not live in New York City. |
1st August 2017, 02:55 PM | #12 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 5,335
|
NYC Human Rights Law, Title 8 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York
Examples of Violations Intentional or repeated refusal to use an individual’s preferred name, pronoun or title. For example, repeatedly calling a transgender woman “him” or “Mr.” after she has made clear which pronouns and title she uses. Refusal to use an individual’s preferred name, pronoun, or title because they do not conform to gender stereotypes. For example, calling a woman “Mr.” because her appearance is aligned with traditional gender-based stereotypes of masculinity. |
__________________
So, if he's doing it by divine means, I can only tell him this: 'Mr. Geller, you're doing it the hard way.' --James Randi |
|
1st August 2017, 02:56 PM | #13 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
|
1st August 2017, 02:56 PM | #14 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,688
|
How presumptively bigoted of this man and man to assign their biological child the gender of male without knowing its preferred gender first.
At at least there is some potentially good news for the little tike, it will someday be able to claim a victim status if it decides it's not the gender it was assigned at birth. One question though: will its whiteness overrule its status as a CAMAB (coercively assigned male at birth) on the victimhood hierarchy? |
1st August 2017, 02:56 PM | #15 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 5,335
|
Ninja'd by Hercules56
|
__________________
So, if he's doing it by divine means, I can only tell him this: 'Mr. Geller, you're doing it the hard way.' --James Randi |
|
1st August 2017, 02:58 PM | #16 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
|
1st August 2017, 03:00 PM | #17 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
A $125,000 fine for calling a transgender male co-worker a "she", will certainly deserve a hearing at the Supreme Court. One has the right to their own beliefs regarding this VERY complicated matter.
It is unreasonable to fine someone $125,000 for calling a transgender male "madam". I mean, come on folks. Let's get real. |
1st August 2017, 03:04 PM | #18 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
Wow, that's steep price to pay for something so trivial. You'd think you stole their Aston Martin or something.
Of course, the SJWs will say that this is because not using someone's prefered pronouns is dehumanising, despite the fact that such a claim is ludicrous on its face. I'd invite them to look up real dehumanising behaviours, but it'd probably require a trigger warning. The sad thing is that this all started from a real problem and with good intentions for a solution, but has blown up to ridiculous proportions. By all accounts, trans people represent 0.3% of the population, and yet if one believes some of the stuff we hear online, everybody and their mother has a peculiar sexual orientation or identity (remember Facebook's infamous list of genders?), which seems to indicate that a lot of people have prefered pronouns that have nothing to do with gender dysphoria. In their case, a fad maybe? I guess being part of what your peers see as a super-oppressed minority while at the same time being one of the most comfortable people on the planet sure helps. (This reminds me of some of the stuff in Marvel comics right now. Reading their issues, you'd think LGBTQ folk represent 70% of the population.) The sad thing is that one would hope this is an extremist position, but it's gotten pretty mainstream. |
1st August 2017, 03:09 PM | #19 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 20,145
|
|
1st August 2017, 03:11 PM | #20 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 20,145
|
So is she the mom or dad?
|
1st August 2017, 03:12 PM | #21 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
1st August 2017, 03:16 PM | #22 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
|
1st August 2017, 03:17 PM | #23 |
Poisoned Waffles
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 68,744
|
By being unnecessarily rude to someone. It doesn't hurt you to indulge someone in their choice of pronoun, whether it's "correct" or not in your opinion. Courtesy is the art of making people comfortable. It doesn't hurt me if someone wants to be called "she". So why wouldn't I call them what they want? Is being right more important than being polite in this matter?
You don't have to agree with someone to be polite to them. |
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
1st August 2017, 03:20 PM | #24 |
Poisoned Waffles
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 68,744
|
The funny part is that it's you who are having your tender feelings hurt. Why do you care what someone else calls themselves? I don't. If someone wants to be considered a woman or a man it doesn't hurt me in the least. Or interest me, either. So I'll call them what they like and move on with my life. I see no need to stamp my foot and declare "that ain't right!" and complain about it on the internet. The question is: why do you?
|
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
1st August 2017, 03:20 PM | #25 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
|
1st August 2017, 03:20 PM | #26 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
Oh, ok. You didn't mean in this thread. Sorry.
Quote:
Quote:
(These are honest questions. I don't know the answers.)
Quote:
|
1st August 2017, 03:22 PM | #27 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
Oh, I have zero problem whatsoever if you call yourself he, she, madam, it, dog, cat, horse, Martian, or Jon Snow. Whatever feels best for you.
However I don't believe its fair to require employers and co-workers to comply with the pronoun of a person's choice, under penalty of $125,000. |
1st August 2017, 03:22 PM | #28 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
1st August 2017, 03:23 PM | #29 |
Poisoned Waffles
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 68,744
|
You started a thread to declare your principle unto the world that you would not call someone by a pronoun you don't think they merit.
And of course I don't think a fine is warranted, unless this particular behavior is part of an ongoing harrassment. Which would be a different situation, don't you think? |
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
1st August 2017, 03:24 PM | #30 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
|
1st August 2017, 03:25 PM | #31 |
Species traitor
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,030
|
These are civil (not criminal) penalties, and "up to $125,000" does not mean "exactly $125,000".
It doesn't seem controversial to me that you can rack up liabilities for intentionally demeaning your employees, or for creating a workplace environment where such behavior is tolerated. |
1st August 2017, 03:25 PM | #32 |
Poisoned Waffles
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 68,744
|
|
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
1st August 2017, 03:25 PM | #33 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
|
1st August 2017, 03:30 PM | #34 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
|
|
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave |
|
1st August 2017, 03:30 PM | #35 |
Poisoned Waffles
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 68,744
|
|
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
1st August 2017, 03:31 PM | #36 |
Poisoned Waffles
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 68,744
|
|
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
1st August 2017, 03:32 PM | #37 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
|
|
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave |
|
1st August 2017, 03:32 PM | #38 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
|
1st August 2017, 03:36 PM | #39 |
Poisoned Waffles
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 68,744
|
Is it? To them?
You're drawing a line. You think some behavior, and terminology, is harrassment, and other behavior and terminology is not. Why do you draw that line where you draw it? Why not further one way or another? If you're not willing to call someone "******", are you willing to call them "fag"? What is the difference between those situations that makes you qualify them differently? |
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara. |
|
1st August 2017, 03:47 PM | #40 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,860
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|