|
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. |
4th August 2017, 03:30 AM | #401 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
I did read it. You are saying that it's about whether someone claiming to be of a specific gender is enough to make that person that gender, which is an odd question. Someone else is saying it's about the locker-rooms. That's why I'm confused.
As to your specific problem, the answer is both yes and no. It's enough for that person, and any person interacting with that person on a casual level. Or at least it should be. The thing is, we're not talking about just "claiming" to be a specific gender. We are talking about a mindset, a personality and quite often medical procedures. |
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 03:59 AM | #402 |
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
|
So since I'm the one who brought up locker rooms, I'll chime in.
The locker room is a concrete example of a more general situation. The question is about whether someone feeling like/identifying as a particular gender actually made him that gender. Is a biological male who identifies as female, really female?* That's a rather abstract question. We can debate if this fellow who just gave birth is "really" a man or not. Our answer will not have any real significance all by itself. He/she will be exactly the same person, regardless of whether we call him/her a woman or a man. (To refer to an oft-quoted story, usually attributed to Abraham Lincoln, if we call a tail a leg, a dog still has four legs, because calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg.) The question becomes more concrete, though, when, we take it out of the abstract theater, and realize that in addition to a hypothetical question about someone's true nature, we realize that what is being asked is that society should change its behavior toward that person. What is being asked is that the rest of us, all who interact with a transgender person, ought to do something different. Now that becomes more concrete, and different people have different thresholds of exactly what they are willing to do in order to go along with the belief that the transgender is "really" the sex they identify with. For example, we are expected to use gendered pronouns to refer to their preferred gender, rather than their biological identity. That's a rather small thing. Some people refuse, as a matter of principle, or out of a fear of a slippery slope effect, but most people wouldn't be bothered to put up a fuss. On the other hand, there are situations where we, in our society, have occasion to be naked or seen in our underwear by strangers. In those cases, we try to restrict the sex of those strangers to be the same sex as ourselves, and in the modern world, we are being asked o view the sex of the transgender as their preferred sex, rather than their anatomical one. That's a line that an awful lot of people would prefer not to cross. To put it more bluntly, if you want to be called "Ma'am", when you are ordering coffee at Starbucks, fine, but if you have a penis, stay out of the girls' locker room. More generally, in situations where there are no consequences to treating someone as a man or a woman, we are willing to go along with the preferred gender. However, in situations where we really care whether we are dealing with a woman or a man, and we would behave differently depending on the gender, we might insist on using biology as the criterion for deciding who is what. *I've decided that for this post, I'm going to use the terms "sex" and "gender" the way they would have been used 10 years ago, when they were considered interchangeable synonyms. The distinction was a linguistic device created in small part to help distinguish between self identification versus biology, but in large part as a way of advancing an agenda and making some people feel much smarter because they could "correct" other people about their language use. |
4th August 2017, 04:10 AM | #403 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
|
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 04:27 AM | #404 |
Pi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
|
What are we worried will happen in locker rooms?
Does this mean we need a different locker room for homosexuals? |
__________________
Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted] |
|
4th August 2017, 04:47 AM | #405 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: near trees, houses and a lake.
Posts: 3,229
|
Not enough info, you would have to look at their chromosomes.
I'm not bothered about locker rooms, they could be unisex for all I care, I just have an issue with thinking calling yourself female or male magically changes your biological makeup. You can live as the opposite sex If you want, I'm cool with that but the reality is that you are what your chromosomes say you are. |
4th August 2017, 04:51 AM | #406 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
|
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 05:15 AM | #407 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,950
|
Nobody thinks that. Transgendered people want to be treated as the gender they present as in social settings.
No transman is going to go to a doctor and demand to get a prostate check and no transwoman is going to apply for IVF because they're wondering why they're not getting pregnant. They know their birth sex does not match their gender identity and that no amount of surgery and hormones can alter their genes or certain aspects of their biology. They just want to be treated like the gender they identify as. No, whether gender identity is determined by genetics, endocrinology, in utero environment, neurology, or something else hasn't been definitively shown. But we do know that it can't be 'cured' in the sense that we can change someone's gender identity in order to make them want to identify as their biological sex. So we do the best we can, and insisting on a narrow definition of 'biological truth' out of a zeal to be rational (or perhaps subconscious cultural norms that form a blind spot) does not help anyone. |
4th August 2017, 05:35 AM | #408 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,838
|
I was only able to see the first pic. The answer to your question is do they have a penis or a vagina. Then we know if they are male or female. This is a locker room we are discussing where nudity is an expected occurrence.
I don't mind, hell, I'd definitely look if a woman was nude in the men's locker room. The problem is people that do care or children. With children, it is not up to anyone but their parents or guardian to decide what they are exposed to. |
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov |
|
4th August 2017, 06:06 AM | #409 |
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
|
|
4th August 2017, 06:09 AM | #410 |
Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 198
|
So many open-minded and progressive people on here that don't give a hoot about locker rooms and who should go in which. That's just great, bully for you. But please realize you are the VAST minority of people.
I have body image issues, it's hard enough for me to use a men's only locker room, having women in there, regardless of their own mental health issues would cause me great discomfort. My wife relayed to me that she would feel extremely uncomfortable if there were a man in the locker room at the gym, regardless of their "identity." We are not the odd ones here, we are not abnormal, this is how society has been for years and you can't just toss it aside and call us bigots to try and protect the feelings of a tiny minority of the population who suddenly became the cause celebre of leftists everywhere. For people who care so much about others' feelings you sure don't seem to care a whole lot about mine or my wife's or the billions of other people out there who don't share your thoughts on the matter. |
4th August 2017, 06:15 AM | #411 |
Pi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
|
How do you feel about gay men in the locker room? How does your wife feel about gay women in the locker room? Do you really think people are there to look at you and judge or do you think they're there just to, you know, change and go home. My issue with the above is that, as you describe, you have an issue. If it's your issue, shouldn't it be you that deals with it? |
__________________
Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted] |
|
4th August 2017, 06:18 AM | #412 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
Let's say the person on the pic you could see has a vagina. Would you be comfortable letting your daughter change in the same locker room as that person? How about letting your son do the same?
Now let's say the person had a vagina, but no longer does. Would that change your opinion? Would you throw a cheeky glance if the woman in the picture you could see was nude in the locker room? Would you be afraid of having children change around that woman? |
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 06:19 AM | #413 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
|
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 06:20 AM | #414 |
Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 198
|
As for this whole issue of "it's a small thing to call someone by their preferred pronouns, why is it a big deal?"
To me, it's about the idea of control. When you insist that someone use phrases and terms that they don't believe in you are immediately creating a power imbalance in the relationship. The military understood this a long time ago with its use of "sir" for example. This can be taken to extremes as has been mentioned in this very thread. What if I believe I'm the Queen of England and you should address me as "your majesty," how many would cater to my whim? Why not? It's a little thing, what do you have to lose? What if I am a devout Christian who insists that each mention of Jesus should be followed by "our lord and savior forever amen." Why wouldn't you humor me and do that, it's just a few extra words, what's the big deal. There are good reasons to not go with that but it will always come down to special pleading. You choose to protect the feelings of transpeople by obliging their fantasies, but you refuse to do so for christians because reasons. The sad thing is I was going to use mohammed and PBUH as the example and then I realized that leftists would probably go along with that to protect muslims' fragile feelings. So at the end of the day ideology trumps all as usual. Leftists are willing to cater to their own in groups and will pat themselves on the back for being oh so compassionate while coming up with all sorts of silly rationalizations to not giving the outgroups the same treatment. |
4th August 2017, 06:26 AM | #415 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
How would you refer to this person? Him or her?
|
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 06:27 AM | #416 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,083
|
Serious question, not a setup or anything : how would said treatment differ if one identified as a man vs if one identified as a woman? I'm not talking about pronoun or first name use, and I don't want to focus on the locker/bathroom portion (I personally don't care who uses which room at all). In an average social situation if I were to (at their request) call an outwardly appearing male "Jane", and use "her/she", what other differences in treatment would be expected or desired as compared to if they prefered "Jim" and "his/he"?
I've asked here and elsewhere about the nuts and bolts of 'what does it mean, at a practical level, to identify as <x>', and various people have tried to explain, but I still don't really understand. I'm not trying to reject the concept out of hand, but I honestly don't understand how a word like "man" has any utility or meaning if it's so wide that someone can be a "man" can give birth. What then, precisely, would differentiate a man from a woman in that sort of circumstance, from the PoV of people saying that a man gave birth in the stated example? Edit to add : if the answer is something along the lines of the way they feel inside, then what is that feeling? What specific things would feel differently inside when identifying as one vs. the other? This really isn't any sort of trap. If there's a request or demand that people be 'treated as <x>', can we at least start with defining what <x> and <not x> are, because to me at least it's confusing and not at all clear, and I've tried for some time to get various people to explain it. |
4th August 2017, 06:30 AM | #417 |
Pi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
|
How many people in your daily life do you refer to like that? No-one's asking you to use language you don't already use, which is what the above is. They're asking you to use language that you use, roughly half the time, for them.
Quote:
Quote:
No, I call people, sir or miss or Mrss x or Mr x all the time as, I suspect, do you.
Quote:
They're just asking you to be nice - is that so very difficult? What on earth does it cost you? Nobody's asking you to kowtow, as in your first example, nobody's asking you to accept the existence of a divine being, as in your second example. They're just asking you to be nice. I don't get why that's so difficult. |
__________________
Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted] |
|
4th August 2017, 06:35 AM | #418 |
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
|
|
4th August 2017, 06:37 AM | #419 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
|
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 06:39 AM | #420 |
Pi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
|
This doesn't match up with the 'I don't want people looking at me' or 'the 'won't somebody think of the children' arguments. The (bizarrely ascribed, are we sure it's actually an issue?) problem some have is that they believe that people with a sexual interest in their junk are going to look. The person you describe above is definitely going to manage to get an eyeful of what they're after at some point. Not, I must add again, that I think there's really any validity in the 'oh my god, what if they see me naked' argument. |
__________________
Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted] |
|
4th August 2017, 06:43 AM | #421 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
Why is it an odd question? It's a factual question like any other.
Quote:
Quote:
|
4th August 2017, 06:45 AM | #422 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
I try to explain it later in the post.
I speak only to my understanding of the issue. No, we're not. By whom? Examples please. I've given you a shortlist and you quoted it. It's by no means conclusive, but it's better than you've done. |
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 06:48 AM | #423 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
The second question is interesting, and in both cases we're talking about minorities. To your first question, however, I think it has to do with people in general not being comfortable (to say the least) with being nude in front of people of the opposite sex. Your self-identification doesn't change your body, and everybody around you can see that. It's a social barrier, mind you, and that can change, I suppose, over time, but in the mean time it's no wonder that many, perhaps most people would be uncomfortable in such a situation. And personally I prefer the solution with the fewer people made uncomfortable, all else being equal.
Does that make any sense to you? |
4th August 2017, 06:50 AM | #424 |
Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 198
|
My "issue" is shared by billions of people around the world. It is not normal for people to walk around naked and unafraid. It is basic human nature and codified in law. I'm not going to get into this argument, I already stated that we are not the odd ones out.
Funny that you think an "issue" shared by billions of people is "our problem" but the transgender issue, which is shared by a tiny fraction of a minority, is also our problem. WE are the ones that must move the heavens and the earth to cater to these people lest we be called bigots. |
4th August 2017, 06:53 AM | #425 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
I think we can reduce the answer to this, in the end: the fear that counter-factual beliefs could affect legislation.
Quote:
Few people think that. There are some who actually think biological sex is a social construct. Ah, but in the SJW mindset, the majority is always wrong. It's a kind of bizarro nonsense to the reverse, equally idiotic mindset that minorities are irrelevant. |
4th August 2017, 06:53 AM | #426 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
Would you (or your hypothetical man) be comfortable changing in the same room as this person?
|
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 06:54 AM | #427 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,950
|
Nobody is forcing you to use any pronoun (except when you're an employer in NYC apccording to the harrassment law cited upthread). You can call people anything you want, and they can think what they want about how you call them.
If you think that the pronouns in "Excuse me sir/madam, do you know where the train station is?" are somehow about controlling you, then you could always leave the pronouns out and nothing about the question would change. I'd say there's a difference between addressing someone directly and talking about a third party. If you're talking to someone, you're going to have to call them something sooner or later. And the way English works, that's probably going to involve a gendered pronoun. Of course, you could always decide not to talk about Jesus to people who demand you address Jesus in a certain way, and you could always decide not to use gendered pronouns or talk to transgender peopleat all, if they want you to call them something you feel they aren't. Sure, they won't like that, but just as they can't force you to call them sir/madam, you can't force them to like that or shut up about it. Sure they would, those nasty leftists. No strawman there... I (apparently a leftist for diagreeing with you) would have the same reaction no matter which god or prophet people would want me to grovel before: You can call them whatever you like, but I'm not a part of your religion, so I won't. How is the existence of transgender people a left-right thing? What would a proper 'right wing' treatment of these people be? |
4th August 2017, 06:55 AM | #428 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
4th August 2017, 06:55 AM | #429 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
|
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 06:55 AM | #430 |
Pi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
|
It is fairly normal behavior in a locker room though, isn't it?
Quote:
Quote:
"Why should I have to put up with women in the workplace, it's 1950, there's only a few women want to come work here, why should we majority, the men in the office, have to put up with women here. They're the minority, why should we change our attitude and actions?" |
__________________
Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted] |
|
4th August 2017, 06:56 AM | #431 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
|
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 06:57 AM | #432 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
So the person's self-identification is largely irrelevant, then? Then what the hell are you guys arguing?
Quote:
Quote:
|
4th August 2017, 06:58 AM | #433 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
4th August 2017, 06:58 AM | #434 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
No it isn't. Perhaps if you read the thread you would understand?
Please provide evidence for your own assertions. It shouldn't be a problem because as you say, it happens 'often'. I must have missed it. Linky to post? |
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 06:59 AM | #435 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
|
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 07:00 AM | #436 |
Pi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
|
In that it's logically consistent, yes. As I mention above, things move on, all sorts of things have made the majority uncomfortable that we now realise were driven by societal bigotry. I hope we're slowly getting over that. there are a lot of unpleasant things that would still be happening if we just went by what made the majority most comfortable. I don't think society actually works like that. In fact, the phrase 'tyranny of the majority' sprigs to mind. |
__________________
Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted] |
|
4th August 2017, 07:02 AM | #437 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
|
|
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list. "If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1 |
|
4th August 2017, 07:05 AM | #438 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
|
Inverted in Albania. If the family patriarch dies without a male successor, a woman from the family takes over the role. Thenceforward, she dresses like a man, acts like a man and represents the family to the community as if she were a man. Which, to the eyes of the community, she now is. She is admitted to the village council, which admits only men. She is no longer permitted to socialize with women, but must instead participate in the social activity reserved to men in the community. It is at once an amazingly sexist, and an amazingly gender fluid society. A society in which man = cannot have babies.
This signature is intended to irradiate people. |
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division. |
|
4th August 2017, 07:17 AM | #440 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,950
|
I honestly don't know. I just treat people as people, regardless of their gender. In nearly all instances, I wouldn't treat a man differently than I would a woman. So for me, the pronoun thing would be purely cosmetic.
I've never had to think about my gender identity much, because mine matches my body. So I probably can't fully grasp how it feels for transgender people to just know that something is wrong with their body. Or how it feels when someone uses the 'wrong' pronoun. To me sir/madam is just an interjection or a courtesy, and I don't really think about it. But I can imagine that the distinction is more important to someone who has struggled with their identity and how they are percieved for years or decades. I don't know how it feels to have a gender identity that doesn't match my sex. I could try to imagine what it would be like to wake up tomorrow in a body that I'm sure isn't mine, while people treat me as if nothing was wrong, and that would be horrifying. But I'm probably not the right guy to ask for an explanation. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|