IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags LGBT issues , transgender incidents , transgender issues

Reply
Old 4th August 2017, 03:30 AM   #401
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Just go back a few posts and read the half dozen times I or someone else has explained exactly what it's about. It's not normal that so many of you seem to not read the thread, but then pretend that you understand the discussion.
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
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 03:59 AM   #402
Meadmaker
Guest
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
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.
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.
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 4th August 2017, 04:10 AM   #403
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
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.
Ok, so you look at the pictures I posted above and tell me what locker-room you would prefer those people to enter. Go through them one by one, please.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 04:27 AM   #404
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
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]
3point14 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 4th August 2017, 04:47 AM   #405
p0lka
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: near trees, houses and a lake.
Posts: 3,229
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Since it has been explained that this is about the locker-room issue and not about calling people by their preferred pronoun, which locker-room would you prefer this person enter? How about this person? This person? How about this person? This person?
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.

Last edited by p0lka; 4th August 2017 at 04:50 AM.
p0lka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 04:51 AM   #406
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by p0lka View Post
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.
Why do you care? Serious question.

As for looking at the chromosomes of the pictured people, do you think that would be a resonable request before we let them into the locker room?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 05:15 AM   #407
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,950
Originally Posted by p0lka View Post
, I just have an issue with thinking calling yourself female or male magically changes your biological makeup.
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.
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 4th August 2017, 05:35 AM   #408
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,838
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Since it has been explained that this is about the locker-room issue and not about calling people by their preferred pronoun, which locker-room would you prefer person enter? How about person? person? How about person? person?
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
Wolrab 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 4th August 2017, 06:06 AM   #409
Meadmaker
Guest
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Ok, so you look at the pictures I posted above and tell me what locker-room you would prefer those people to enter. Go through them one by one, please.
I didn't click on the links, but unless they are naked in the pictures, with the naughty bits displayed, I can't answer the question.

Yes, I am actually saying it. Genitalia trumps all.
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 4th August 2017, 06:09 AM   #410
CosCos
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.
CosCos 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 4th August 2017, 06:15 AM   #411
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
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.

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]
3point14 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 4th August 2017, 06:18 AM   #412
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Wolrab View Post
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.
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?

Originally Posted by Wolrab View Post
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.
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
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 06:19 AM   #413
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I didn't click on the links, but unless they are naked in the pictures, with the naughty bits displayed, I can't answer the question.

Yes, I am actually saying it. Genitalia trumps all.
So a post-op trans-man should change in the men's locker room, but a pre-op one should not?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 06:20 AM   #414
CosCos
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.
CosCos 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 4th August 2017, 06:26 AM   #415
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
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.
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
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 06:27 AM   #416
Joe Random
Illuminator
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,083
Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
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.
<...>
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.

Last edited by Joe Random; 4th August 2017 at 06:29 AM.
Joe Random 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 4th August 2017, 06:30 AM   #417
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
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?

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:
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.
Again, this, I presume, is different to your normal vocabulary. The words you're being asked to use in this instance are in your regular vocabulary and, as I say, you use them for half the people you meet.


Quote:
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.

No, I call people, sir or miss or Mrss x or Mr x all the time as, I suspect, do you.

Quote:
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.

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]
3point14 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 4th August 2017, 06:35 AM   #418
Meadmaker
Guest
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
So a post-op trans-man should change in the men's locker room, but a pre-op one should not?
That is my opinion.
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 4th August 2017, 06:37 AM   #419
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
That is my opinion.
That would indicate that you believe that the operation itself makes a woman into a man or a man into a 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
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 06:39 AM   #420
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
That is my opinion.

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]
3point14 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 4th August 2017, 06:43 AM   #421
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
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.
Why is it an odd question? It's a factual question like any other.


Quote:
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.
Why do you presume to speak for any of those? Furthermore, the question is objective. It either applies to all or none.

Quote:
The thing is, we're not talking about just "claiming" to be a specific gender.
Yes we are. We're often told that whatever you feel you are, you are. This is ridiculous on its face, and those who in this thread have said that it isn't the sole criteria for identity seem to agree, but we're yet to see a list of criteria from those who ask _us_ for a liste of criteria.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 4th August 2017, 06:45 AM   #422
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Why is it an odd question? It's a factual question like any other.
I try to explain it later in the post.



Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Why do you presume to speak for any of those? Furthermore, the question is objective. It either applies to all or none.
I speak only to my understanding of the issue.


Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Yes we are.
No, we're not.

Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
We're often told that whatever you feel you are, you are.
By whom? Examples please.

Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
This is ridiculous on its face, and those who in this thread have said that it isn't the sole criteria for identity seem to agree, but we're yet to see a list of criteria from those who ask _us_ for a liste of criteria.
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
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 06:48 AM   #423
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
What are we worried will happen in locker rooms?


Does this mean we need a different locker room for homosexuals?
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?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 4th August 2017, 06:50 AM   #424
CosCos
Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 198
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
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?
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.
CosCos 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 4th August 2017, 06:53 AM   #425
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Why do you care? Serious question.
I think we can reduce the answer to this, in the end: the fear that counter-factual beliefs could affect legislation.

Quote:
Let's say the person on the pic you could see has a vagina.
That's some picture angle, then. Did you mean "vulva"?

Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life View Post
Nobody thinks that.
Few people think that. There are some who actually think biological sex is a social construct.

Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
We are not the odd ones here, we are not abnormal
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.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 4th August 2017, 06:53 AM   #426
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
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?
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
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 06:54 AM   #427
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,950
Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
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.
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.

Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
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.
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.

Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
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.
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.

Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
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.
How is the existence of transgender people a left-right thing?
What would a proper 'right wing' treatment of these people be?
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 4th August 2017, 06:55 AM   #428
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
How would you refer to this person? Him or her?
Could you do CosCos the courtesey of answering his questions before insisting that they answer your own?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 4th August 2017, 06:55 AM   #429
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
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.
What are you talking about? Who's requiring you to walk around naked and unafraid?

Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
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.
Nobody's asking you to move heaven and Earth. We're only asking that you are polite to people and that when you're in a locker room, keep your eyes to yourself.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 06:55 AM   #430
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
Originally Posted by CosCos View Post
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.
It is fairly normal behavior in a locker room though, isn't it?


Quote:
I'm not going to get into this argument, I already stated that we are not the odd ones out.
The world changes, things move on. Sometimes we have to change with it.

Quote:
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.
But you can say that about any social shift in the last umpteen years.

"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]
3point14 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 4th August 2017, 06:56 AM   #431
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Could you do CosCos the courtesey of answering his questions before insisting that they answer your own?
Those questions were answered by another poster below my post. His turn. Or yours.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 06:57 AM   #432
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
No, we're not.
So the person's self-identification is largely irrelevant, then? Then what the hell are you guys arguing?

Quote:
By whom? Examples please.
Just type the phrase into google. The point is that I've seen it done before, by the most extremists of the left.

Quote:
I've given you a shortlist and you quoted it. It's by no means conclusive, but it's better than you've done.
I've done the same, so how is it better?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 4th August 2017, 06:58 AM   #433
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Would you (or your hypothetical man) be comfortable changing in the same room as this person?
How the hell could I tell without seeing the plumbing?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 4th August 2017, 06:58 AM   #434
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
So the person's self-identification is largely irrelevant, then? Then what the hell are you guys arguing?
No it isn't. Perhaps if you read the thread you would understand?


Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Just type the phrase into google. The point is that I've seen it done before, by the most extremists of the left.
Please provide evidence for your own assertions. It shouldn't be a problem because as you say, it happens 'often'.


Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
I've done the same, so how is it better?
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
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 06:59 AM   #435
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
How the hell could I tell without seeing the plumbing?
Do you scan the genitals of all people in the locker room?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 07:00 AM   #436
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
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?

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]
3point14 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 4th August 2017, 07:02 AM   #437
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,423
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
I think we can reduce the answer to this, in the end: the fear that counter-factual beliefs could affect legislation.
Counter factual beliefs like what?


Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
That's some picture angle, then. Did you mean "vulva"?
No, I meant vagina, because that's what the poster I quoted said.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 07:05 AM   #438
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I assume you're not working on:

Can have babies = Woman
Cannot have babies = Man.
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.

Last edited by theprestige; 4th August 2017 at 07:06 AM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th August 2017, 07:05 AM   #439
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 21,797
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Do you scan the genitals of all people in the locker room?
Isn't that the concern in the first place?

I want to scan your junk to see if you're going to want to scan my junk...
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 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 4th August 2017, 07:17 AM   #440
Porpoise of Life
Illuminator
 
Porpoise of Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,950
Originally Posted by Joe Random View Post
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.
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.
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
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

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 01:01 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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.