"Her penis" - not at all Orwellian - argh

[wellwisher]

Why are you always hating on trans people?

It is not about hate. It is about helping people differentiate objective versus subjective reality, in a world of con artists.

Trans is highly subjective, since there is no good objective way to measure this as real, genuine or not. We need to take the word of the people making and supporting the claim. However, people lie to themselves and to each other. Plus, we now live in the world of the internet, where make believe, aliases, and celebrity, help people make money, showing off and sensationalizing. These are the modern lessons of the youth. It is not character and truth but more like actor tryouts playing your best role.

Gender can be a lie; to self or social, or just pretend, and there is no good way to know the truth. Sex is different and is more scientific and objective. Even if you play dress up for the camera and lie to yourself and others, effectively; Academy Award, a simply blood test can tell you the objective truth. There is a way to come out of the gender rabbit hole with hard facts. The other way around has no objective path forward, which is why fantasy will confront reality in the future; depression.

Politics adds to this. For example, with all the problems that immigration is causing, now the political Left is trying sell us, that the immigration problem is not due to Biden, but is Trump's fault. They lie too much to be associated with objective reality. It is all about the sales pitch, and pretending an opinion is the same as objective truth. If your leaders do it, it must be OK?

To me it is a subjective fad that will run its course, leaving behind lost souls, once the fad is done. The blood test will not change at any step in the fad, since all your 200 or so different types of cells, have been assigned at birth, and no cosmetic or hormonal changing of a few, will ever be enough to make this body objective. It appears to be a new religion of the Left based on Hollywood fantasy.

 

[Brian2]

That's kinda discriminatory against males who are perfectly decent beings. Again: if we could just battle harmful gender stereotypes and and combat violence against women in general, they hopefully wouldn't be so scared.
Also, it's statistically a stupid strategy... They are far more likely to face violence from familiar males.

It is a natural thing to protect children and yourself from perceived threats.

Again: if males are behaving like decent human beings I don't feel like I need privacy away from them

Good for you.

Usually, nobody is claiming anything. I don't make a declaration if I'm using a bathroom... I just walk in, and if my outward appearance is close enough to the local stereotype, I'll pass

And that seems to be the problem. People claim to be female and want to use women's toilets etc when their outward appearance is not close to the local stereotype.
It could be a problem with the law that enables someone to decide that they are not their biological gender.

That's because they are women, by my definition.

The crux of the problem seems to be the definition of male and female and what the changes to laws that reflect gender fluid ideology should be allowed to alter in society.
eg. should statistics on what males and females do etc be altered and skewed because someone has a piece of paper that says they are a woman when they are biologically a man? If the statistics only record what is on the piece of paper then the whole of the statistical knowledge about the difference between male and female can be altered.

Yes, exactly. Consideration, understanding, trying our best not to exclude anyone... Neither the traumatized woman who's fearful of a male gendered appearance, nor the trans woman doing her best to find an identity and body she can be comfortable in.

imo learning to be comfortable in the male or female body we have is a good thing even if it can be hard to do.

 

[Brian2]

This should help: Debunking Bathroom Myths

It's good that assaults have not increased. Maybe the whole thing about toilets and changerooms is a storm in a teacup.

 

[Tamino]

It is a natural thing to protect children and yourself from perceived threats.

It's also a stupid thing to protect against the perceived threat and ingnore the real one.

And that seems to be the problem. People claim to be female and want to use women's toilets etc when their outward appearance is not close to the local stereotype.

one - it's still a super rare exception. Because, you know... trans people who don't pass in public tend to AVOID situations like this like the plague. (which is the ACTUAL issue with bathrooms btw.)
two - A man that wants to go into a women's toilet on purpose to harass or make them uncompfortable doesn't need to change his official gender: he can just go in and do that.

It could be a problem with the law that enables someone to decide that they are not their biological gender.

Gender is not biological, that's the whole point of having that word.

The crux of the problem seems to be the definition of male and female and what the changes to laws that reflect gender fluid ideology should be allowed to alter in society.

True. I fully support an "ideology" that sees gender as more fluid and I want it to alter society. I fully believe that this will lead to more freedom, equality and happiness for all.
I really don't get what the danger is supposed to be. It feels to me like those religious sects preaching an apocalypse that never arrives... First it was feminism that would ruin the gentle sensibilities of the woman and render her infertile. It didn't. then it was homosexuals that would ruin society and destroy the family. they didn't. So now it's trans people, that are going to ruin gender identity? I think not.

eg. should statistics on what males and females do etc be altered and skewed because someone has a piece of paper that says they are a woman when they are biologically a man?

we have plenty of statistics on male and female behavior and characteristics. It will actually be interesting and helpful to see how trans people factor in, to gain more data in the good old "nature versus nurture" debate

If the statistics only record what is on the piece of paper then the whole of the statistical knowledge about the difference between male and female can be altered.

Any sociologist or data scientist worth their title will be easily able to account for transgender persons in their statistics.

imo learning to be comfortable in the male or female body we have is a good thing even if it can be hard to do.

What you need to understand is that trans people are not taking anything away from you. If you and I feel comfortable in the body we have and the identity that was assigned to us at birth: That's great! Go for it! Enjoy it!!
But allow other people the very fundamental human right to be an individual have control over their own body and identity. It's not on you or anyone else to decide if other people do or can feel comfortable.
And, you know, there's still the tiny little problem that some people do not possess a "male or female" body. Because there are all types of hormonal or genetic dispositions that may lead to a body that has no clear sex or possesses traits of both.

 

[Father Heathen]

It's good that assaults have not increased. Maybe the whole thing about toilets and changerooms is a storm in a teacup.

The whole trans witch hunt thing is just a part of the culture war that the right uses to distract and rile up their base so they can dupe them into voting against their own interests.

 

[Firenze]

The whole trans witch hunt thing is just a part of the culture war that the right uses to distract and rile up their base so they can dupe them into voting against their own interests.

And the same arguments were used to keep black soldiers out of white units. The bigoted beat goes on.....

 

[Father Heathen]

And the same arguments were used to keep black soldiers out of white units. The bigoted beat goes on.....

It reminds me of seeing old black and white pictures of protestors holding signs that read "race mixing is communism", using the red scare to justify racism, even though it's a complete non sequitur.

 

[Brian2]

What you need to understand is that trans people are not taking anything away from you. If you and I feel comfortable in the body we have and the identity that was assigned to us at birth: That's great! Go for it! Enjoy it!!
But allow other people the very fundamental human right to be an individual have control over their own body and identity. It's not on you or anyone else to decide if other people do or can feel comfortable.
And, you know, there's still the tiny little problem that some people do not possess a "male or female" body. Because there are all types of hormonal or genetic dispositions that may lead to a body that has no clear sex or possesses traits of both.

There is a small percentage of people who have been identified at birth as one gender when they are not.
These people are probably best left to decide their gender for themselves later in life.
I don't think that anyone is wanting to decide if people do or can feel comfortable.
From what I see, the whole thing has been to allow people to decide who they are when they get old enough to do so.
Most young people who go through times of confusion as teens do end up deciding later in life and come down on the side of being their biologically defined gender.

 

[Soandso]

It is not about hate. It is about helping people differentiate objective versus subjective reality, in a world of con artists.

Trans is highly subjective, since there is no good objective way to measure this as real, genuine or not. We need to take the word of the people making and supporting the claim. However, people lie to themselves and to each other. Plus, we now live in the world of the internet, where make believe, aliases, and celebrity, help people make money, showing off and sensationalizing. These are the modern lessons of the youth. It is not character and truth but more like actor tryouts playing your best role.

Gender can be a lie; to self or social, or just pretend, and there is no good way to know the truth. Sex is different and is more scientific and objective. Even if you play dress up for the camera and lie to yourself and others, effectively; Academy Award, a simply blood test can tell you the objective truth. There is a way to come out of the gender rabbit hole with hard facts. The other way around has no objective path forward, which is why fantasy will confront reality in the future; depression.

Politics adds to this. For example, with all the problems that immigration is causing, now the political Left is trying sell us, that the immigration problem is not due to Biden, but is Trump's fault. They lie too much to be associated with objective reality. It is all about the sales pitch, and pretending an opinion is the same as objective truth. If your leaders do it, it must be OK?

To me it is a subjective fad that will run its course, leaving behind lost souls, once the fad is done. The blood test will not change at any step in the fad, since all your 200 or so different types of cells, have been assigned at birth, and no cosmetic or hormonal changing of a few, will ever be enough to make this body objective. It appears to be a new religion of the Left based on Hollywood fantasy.

That's a lot of paragraphs to convey the very simple concept of "trans people are liars, or they are mind controlled products of the left who are lying to them." One reason I rarely reply to your posts is that I oftentimes find myself skipping past them. They are unnecessarily long

Back to the topic at hand though, your argument isn't compelling for me given the fact that I know trans folks in real life. I have real world experiences with them, and some are even my friends. They certainly do exist, and the ones I know are certainly down to earth and genuine people. I don't assume people are liars or are mentally controlled because they belong to a specific people group. To do so would make me a bigot. No thanks, I'm good

 

[Tamino]

There is a small percentage of people who have been identified at birth as one gender when they are not.
These people are probably best left to decide their gender for themselves later in life.

Yes. I can completely agree with the above.

I don't think that anyone is wanting to decide if people do or can feel comfortable.

Excellent, then we're in agreement again

From what I see, the whole thing has been to allow people to decide who they are when they get old enough to do so.

We might have to argue about what, exactly, is "old enough", but I still agree with this idea.

Most young people who go through times of confusion as teens do end up deciding later in life and come down on the side of being their biologically defined gender.

Yeah, well, we're all pretty confused when our brains get rewired during puberty. And I also estimate that a majority of people have no substantial trouble with their assigned gender.

We're still in agreement, as long as it's very clear that those who "come down" on another side than what was assigned to them are taken seriously and allowed to transition.

 

[Brian2]

Yeah, well, we're all pretty confused when our brains get rewired during puberty. And I also estimate that a majority of people have no substantial trouble with their assigned gender.

Except for the small percentage of people, we are all assigned our gender by our biology, it is not a choice made by our parents or any doctors.

We're still in agreement, as long as it's very clear that those who "come down" on another side than what was assigned to them are taken seriously and allowed to transition.

It is not a matter of being allowed to transition or not if a person is old enough to make up their own mind.
The age thing seems to be an area of concern, as just what age is old enough.
There have been plenty of people who have regretted transition too young.
Plenty of people go through a time of confusion and end up being gay instead of taking the more radical step of hormones and the knife.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Except for the small percentage of people, we are all assigned our gender by our biology, it is not a choice made by our parents or any doctors.

Yes, it is. There is nothing about our genitals, or our bodily makeup, which means that we HAVE to be referred to with certain pronouns, be given certain names, dressed in certain clothes, be encouraged to play with certain dolls, etc.. These things ARE chosen FOR US by the culture we are in. They are not biologically determined. It is instead determined that these things and our biology are somehow intrinsically linked.

There have been plenty of people who have regretted transition too young.

There have also been plenty of people who regretted transitioning too late, and a very large number of people who only stop transitioning because of social pressure and cost. There's not just one regret rate, there's two; and the way you improve both is not to dismiss transitioning altogether, but to improve the diagnostics and increase understanding of the issue, so as to avoid misdiagnosis or potential future regret rates.

Right now, the regret rate for gender affirming surgery is around 1%. (SOURCE: Regret after Gender-affirmation Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prevalence) For comparison, regret rate for knee replacement surgery is around 18% (SOURCE: Patients’ experiences of discontentment one year after total knee arthroplasty- a qualitative study) and the regret rate for breast cancer treatments in young people is around 42% (SOURCE: POST-TREATMENT REGRET AMONG YOUNG BREAST CANCER SURVIVORS).

Plenty of people go through a time of confusion and end up being gay instead of taking the more radical step of hormones and the knife.

Being gay has nothing to do with being trans. Sexuality is not a determining factor in whether or not a person is trans. And not all GAC involves "hormones" or "the knife".

 

[Brian2]

Yes, it is. There is nothing about our genitals, or our bodily makeup, which means that we HAVE to be referred to with certain pronouns, be given certain names, dressed in certain clothes, be encouraged to play with certain dolls, etc.. These things ARE chosen FOR US by the culture we are in. They are not biologically determined. It is instead determined that these things and our biology are somehow intrinsically linked.

Bringing biological boys up as girls does not change them into girls, and the same can be said for bringing up biological girls as boys. Masculine traits remain in the boys and feminine traits in the girls.

There have also been plenty of people who regretted transitioning too late, and a very large number of people who only stop transitioning because of social pressure and cost. There's not just one regret rate, there's two; and the way you improve both is not to dismiss transitioning altogether, but to improve the diagnostics and increase understanding of the issue, so as to avoid misdiagnosis or potential future regret rates.

Right now, the regret rate for gender affirming surgery is around 1%. (SOURCE: Regret after Gender-affirmation Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prevalence) For comparison, regret rate for knee replacement surgery is around 18% (SOURCE: Patients’ experiences of discontentment one year after total knee arthroplasty- a qualitative study) and the regret rate for breast cancer treatments in young people is around 42% (SOURCE: POST-TREATMENT REGRET AMONG YOUNG BREAST CANCER SURVIVORS).

Sure, improve diagnosis and etc and increase the age of consent for such things.
I noticed in that study, in the tables, that the average age was mainly way past the teen years. Maybe that is what pushed the regret rate down. It would be good to have a study where we could see the regret rate based on the ages of having Gender altering surgery or other treatments.

Being gay has nothing to do with being trans. Sexuality is not a determining factor in whether or not a person is trans. And not all GAC involves "hormones" or "the knife".

If people are confused about their sexuality and/or gender as teens and are not given gender altering treatment, most of them go through the stage, with some of them deciding that they are gay.
Waiting till after teen years to start treatment can avoid mistakes.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Bringing biological boys up as girls does not change them into girls, and the same can be said for bringing up biological girls as boys. Masculine traits remain in the boys and feminine traits in the girls.

Are you seriously suggesting that the way we are treated and social expectations have absolutely no impact whatsoever on how we behave or identify? What exactly are you designating "traits" in this sentence?

Sure, improve diagnosis and etc and increase the age of consent for such things.

What would increasing the age of consent do?

I noticed in that study, in the tables, that the average age was mainly way past the teen years. Maybe that is what pushed the regret rate down. It would be good to have a study where we could see the regret rate based on the ages of having Gender altering surgery or other treatments.

Invasive procedures generally only occur in consenting adults.

If people are confused about their sexuality and/or gender as teens and are not given gender altering treatment, most of them go through the stage, with some of them deciding that they are gay.

But that has nothing to do with them being or not being trans.

Waiting till after teen years to start treatment can avoid mistakes.

So would waiting for years before starting cancer treatment, or limb amputation, or hysterectomies. These decisions aren't made lightly, and before adulthood the procedures are almost entirely reversible. What we need is not to delay treatment for no good reason, but to have better diagnostic tools so that treatment is given when needed, including in youth.

If a teenager who would otherwise have delayed their puberty ends up killing themselves because they were forced to go through a natural puberty, I doubt you would argue "Well, at least it was good that we waited before they made a decision that could have saved their life".

 

[Tamino]

Bringing biological boys up as girls does not change them into girls, and the same can be said for bringing up biological girls as boys. Masculine traits remain in the boys and feminine traits in the girls.

Why don't we just bring them up a humans and see what happens?
I mean, if the biology is really that strong, and people aren't pushed into certain patterns, then they would "naturally" manifest their male or female traits. And that would be fine.

If people are confused about their sexuality and/or gender as teens and are not given gender altering treatment, most of them go through the stage, with some of them deciding that they are gay.
Waiting till after teen years to start treatment can avoid mistakes.

Yes, but there's one big problem with this idea: the hormone changes during puberty change your body, and it can be difficult later to undo those changes.
For those people who truly want and need the treatment, waiting till after puberty is just needless torture

 

[Father Heathen]

Bringing biological boys up as girls does not change them into girls, and the same can be said for bringing up biological girls as boys. Masculine traits remain in the boys and feminine traits in the girls.

1.) Nobody is "bringing up" boys to be girls or vice versa. 2.) That's not how gender dysphoria works. Also, there are many men with feminine traits and women with masculine traits; it's not always 100% one or the other. They're innate and not instilled.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I'm all for helping trans people live their best lives... as long as it's not via zero-sum solutions.

It seems that you are saying that you don't object to accommodating trans people as long as nobody else is inconvenienced. Elsewhere, you wrote, "Public policy is usually utilitarian in nature. We should try to find solutions in keeping with that approach." Utilitarianism seeks to maximize social and economic opportunity for all law-abiding citizens. That necessarily limits freedoms. So we limit the less reasonable desires, like driving at any speed one prefers.

What makes you imagine that your ignorance on this topic should be the gold standard for what's common knowledge and what's not?

Was he doing that? I think he was inviting you to substantiate your claims. Suppose that you are correct on a point that he is ignorant about. Make your best case, and if it is sound, you'll change the minds of critical thinkers. Absent that, why should he change his mind and make YOUR ideas his gold standard?

But many, many women have different experiences. They don't want intact males to share their locker rooms or their safe houses or their prisons. I'm sure you're not proposing telling those women to just "toughen up" are you?

In a sense, yes. I skipped two years of school, and lagged behind the older boys physically, in front of whom I had to undress and shower, which made me uncomfortable. How was I accommodated? I wasn't. I was effectively told to just toughen up, and that was the correct answer. People didn't like having to give up their slaves, but they did, and were told to just live with it. A century later, they didn't like seeing mixed-race couples, but the answer was the same: deal with it privately. And a woman with an exaggerated sense of the risk to her of a trans-woman sharing the bathroom can be told the same.

Zooming out, we need to find compassionate solutions for trans people. But we should not negatively impact the rights of ALL WOMEN to do so.

I don't think anyone has the right to be in a no-trans-women bathroom or prison - certainly not in the legals sense of the word - and most women wouldn't be impacted at all by either of those.

I see no solution that doesn't require compromise, which is what I assume you mean by zero-sum in this context - for somebody to get more, somebody has to get less. Even if one builds a third and fourth bathroom and prison to segregate trans people from cis, which ought to offend nobody, you still have to ask society to compromise to foot the increased expenditures.

To negatively impact ALL WOMEN is misogynistic, wouldn't you say?

No, not if that's not the purpose, and not if the change that impacts them is a compromise with a competing group off people. Assuming that there was a time when only men paid child support, how about when women were first required to do the same? That negatively impacted only women, but it benefitted their exes and their children.

I just saw your post #619. How do you think that would go over in a meeting of women who have been assaulted? that post is positively reprehensible.

The meme was mocking the idea that cis-women have a "right" to be comfortable in a public bathroom but not trans-women. And yes, presenting that at a meeting of survivors of sexual assault would be reprehensible, but that's not where you saw it. Presenting it to you was not reprehensible. If you let it, it might be constructive for you to consider. It seems that you are unwilling to cause any discomfort for cis-women and are indifferent to the discomfort of trans women if resolving any of it requires those that object any discomfort at all.

 

[icehorse]

It seems that you are unwilling to cause any discomfort for cis-women and are indifferent to the discomfort of trans women if resolving any of it requires those that object any discomfort at all.

First off, I'm talking about more than "discomfort", I'm talking about increased risk of assault. And again - I'm not talking about trans women being the assaulters, I'm talking about bad men taking advantage of the normalization of people who look like men being allowed in women's safe spaces. In addition, we're seeing cases where convicted men declare that they're trans and are sent to women's prisons where - to no one's surprise - they rape inmates.

So "discomfort" is really not what I'm talking about here.

To negatively impact ALL WOMEN is misogynistic, wouldn't you say?

it ain't: No, not if that's not the purpose, and not if the change that impacts them is a compromise with a competing group off people.

I think we have to look at both purpose AND results. Good intentions don't make a dangerous policy less dangerous. This decision impacts women far more than it does men. So I think a "compromise" that mostly impacts women is misogynistic, and other solutions must be found.

There are very few trans people. So let's say we had the same concern for short people. Would we say that all cars and buildings are "height-phobic"? Would we compromise and make the driver's seat dimensions on all cars smaller?

Again, I think we tend to do some utilitarian math in situations like this, such math being admittedly complex and imperfect.

 

[Brian2]

Are you seriously suggesting that the way we are treated and social expectations have absolutely no impact whatsoever on how we behave or identify?

I did not say that.

What exactly are you designating "traits" in this sentence?

Something that comes to mind is that males are generally more thing oriented and females are more person and relationship oriented.

What would increasing the age of consent do?

Take people past adolescence and to an age of more clarity and maturity about sexual orientation and/or gender.

Invasive procedures generally only occur in consenting adults.

And probably for good reason.

But that has nothing to do with them being or not being trans.

If some young people think they are not their biological gender and come out the other side of that confusion thinking that they actually are their biological gender but are actually homosexual, then plainly it has a lot to do with them either being of not being trans.

So would waiting for years before starting cancer treatment, or limb amputation, or hysterectomies. These decisions aren't made lightly, and before adulthood the procedures are almost entirely reversible. What we need is not to delay treatment for no good reason, but to have better diagnostic tools so that treatment is given when needed, including in youth.

If a teenager who would otherwise have delayed their puberty ends up killing themselves because they were forced to go through a natural puberty, I doubt you would argue "Well, at least it was good that we waited before they made a decision that could have saved their life".

Puberty is not a disease, it is something we all go through to reach adulthood and hopefully more maturity about who we are and what we want to be.

 

[Brian2]

Why don't we just bring them up a humans and see what happens?
I mean, if the biology is really that strong, and people aren't pushed into certain patterns, then they would "naturally" manifest their male or female traits. And that would be fine.

Sounds good.

Yes, but there's one big problem with this idea: the hormone changes during puberty change your body, and it can be difficult later to undo those changes.
For those people who truly want and need the treatment, waiting till after puberty is just needless torture

Puberty is not a disease and "needing" the treatment sounds too strong a term.
We all go through tough things in puberty and no treatment is going to make a male into a female or a female into a male, whether it is started earlier or later.