How the Law (doesn't really), define "gender identity"

[icehorse]

That you demand we use logic in the everyday life.

I'm not making a demand, I'm making an observation

We all DO use logic and we rely on logic in most bit of technology we use.

It seems to me you want to eat your cake and have it too.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I'm not making a demand, I'm making an observation

We all DO use logic and we rely on logic in most bit of technology we use.

It seems to me you want to eat your cake and have it too.

So STEM and the legal law and morality are all the same, because you say so, because it is so for STEM.

 

[icehorse]

So STEM and the legal law and morality are all the same, because you say so, because it is so for STEM.

Please stop putting words in my mouth

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Please stop putting words in my mouth

So logic is not about the legal and morality, but only technology. What is it logic about, if we depend on it?

 

[icehorse]

So STEM and the legal law and morality are all the same, because you say so, because it is so for STEM.

Please stop putting words in my mouth

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Please stop putting words in my mouth

So what is it you have evidence for as to what we use logic to do?
Technology? Anything else?
Remember evidence!

 

[icehorse]

So what is it you have evidence for as to what we use logic to do?
Technology? Anything else?
Remember evidence!

You're using it right now You yourself rely on logic for almost all of your posts, except when it doesn't suit you

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You're using it right now You yourself rely on logic for almost all of your posts, except when it doesn't suit you

Okay, technology. I agree.
Now it is time for the legal and your bad men as morality.
Any evidence for that?

 

[icehorse]

Okay, technology. I agree.
Now it is time for the legal and your bad men as morality.
Any evidence for that?

What we've seen on this thread is that definitions for "gender identity" are mostly illogical in some way. Given that, laws that use the term "gender identity" are easy for bad people to take advantage of.

Once again, below is a link to a post on RF that provides 10 examples of bad men using these poor laws to abuse women:

Gender reassignment/affirming surgery

Is this really how you want to try to wiggle out of our conversation where we're examining just one of your examples that you keep citing? You're now going to accuse a woman of "desperately" trying to make it easier for bad men to abuse me? Like, for real? Let me know when you're able to...

www.religiousforums.com

post 598

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

What we've seen on this thread is that definitions for "gender identity" are mostly illogical in some way. Given that, laws that use the term "gender identity" are easy for bad people to take advantage of.

Once again, below is a link to a post on RF that provides 10 examples of bad men using these poor laws to abuse women:

Gender reassignment/affirming surgery

Is this really how you want to try to wiggle out of our conversation where we're examining just one of your examples that you keep citing? You're now going to accuse a woman of "desperately" trying to make it easier for bad men to abuse me? Like, for real? Let me know when you're able to...

www.religiousforums.com

post 598

Yeah, but can you do it with logic?
You have pointed out that some do it with out logic. I accept that. Now I am asking you to do it with logic yourself. Do the legal and morality with logic.

 

[icehorse]

Yeah, but can you do it with logic?
You have pointed out that some do it with out logic. I accept that. Now I am asking you to do it with logic yourself. Do the legal and morality with logic.

Sorry dude. You asked for evidence. I gave you evidence.

Evidence is a part of logic.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Sorry dude. You asked for evidence. I gave you evidence.

Evidence is a part of logic.

So how do you observe as through external sensory experince that there are bad men? Can you explain what you observe?

 

[icehorse]

So how do you observe as through external sensory experince that there are bad men? Can you explain what you observe?

Start a new thread in the philosophy forum and ask this question there and I will respond there.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Start a new thread in the philosophy forum and ask this question there and I will respond there.

No, you claim bad men. You deliever that actual evidence. That is that simple. You made the claim, you explain how you know that you know and how you know bad men.
That is the norm we use here and not just in the philodophy forum.

 

[icehorse]

No, you claim bad men. You deliever that actual evidence. That is that simple. You made the claim, you explain how you know that you know and how you know bad men.
That is the norm we use here and not just in the philodophy forum.

I will make the bold claim (ffs), that when a man rapes a woman, that is a "bad" man.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I will make the bold claim (ffs), that when a man rapes a woman, that is a "bad" man.

Yeah, than is not even a valid deduction. So so much for logic. Now for sound that is in part evidence for which there is more to that than just claiming it.
As for you subjectively make it a claim, means that it is in effect not absolute as long as there is not evidence and thus relative to you making the claim. That is what relative means in this context. Someone subjectively claim something as for morality.

So okay, relative morality it is. Well, I will claim that they are not bad men. They just do something I don't like and that is relative to me.

 

[icehorse]

Yeah, than is not even a valid deduction. So so much for logic. Now for sound that is in part evidence for which there is more to that than just claiming it.
As for you subjectively make it a claim, means that it is in effect not absolute as long as there is not evidence and thus relative to you making the claim. That is what relative means in this context. Someone subjectively claim something as for morality.

So okay, relative morality it is. Well, I will claim that they are not bad men. They just do something I don't like and that is relative to me.

That's a good example of relativism in action, I think your stance is despicable, and I'm done responding to you in this thread.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

That's a good example of relativism in action, I think your stance is despicable, and I'm done responding to you in this thread.

So you think "your stance is despicable". Well, I dont think that is evidence at all, but rather it is yet another case of relativism.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It would appear you put the well being of trans people above the well being of women.

This was in response to, "I support treating people as human beings."

I'm trying to put everyone's well-being on the same footing where it belongs.

Well, that was the 11th example, so.. yes.

This was in response to, "Do you have something other than Ted Cruz grandstanding in a Congressional hearing?"

Cool, so where is it?

Now how about that "hormones were entirely female" claim? Try to step back from the grip this ideology has on you and think about that...

LOL Oh, I'm gripped by ideology, am I?

I have no idea what the person meant and I don't have any additional information. What makes you think this judge is entrenched in some kind of "ideology?" It sounds like she's saying the person has transitioned, but who knows.

This serial rapist had male hormones while he was growing to be 6'2". His bones and muscles were developed as a male. He has a long history of violence towards women. So you think "entirely female hormones" counteract all of that? Really?

Seems like this might be an argument in favour of allowing transgender people to use puberty blockers, should they so choose.
You want them to wait until it's too late, and now they're 6'2" muscly man.

The 6'2" male, serial rapist used gender ideology as the basis to request being held in a women's prison, did you really not get that?

Apparently, from what I can tell, this person is serving time in a male prison.

The Scottish Prison Service had initially made plans to house he person in a women's prison, but that was changed to a male prison.

His ex-wife has said that she believed "Bryson had hoped to serve the sentence in a woman's jail and have an easier time - but that this had not worked." That's just her speculation though, as far as I can tell.

So it didn't work out and no women were harmed.

 

[SkepticThinker]

What specifically are you waiting for?

I"m still waiting for you to respond to my question about 'what does this example even mean" from several pages back now.
But I've given up on that.

When provided with 11 examples of bad men taking advantage of poorly conceived "gender ideology" you have so far refused to acknowledge that this is a problem. Instead, you've contorted yourself this way and that trying to steer the conversation away from the main point.

You didn't, and we've been over this.

You brought this conversation away from the main point when you refused to respond to my question about the only example you provided that I could see.

I'd say this thread is perhaps a new low for you

Oops, you've just repeated what I said and projected it back at me.

When presented with evidence of bad man being violent towards women you put your blinders on. If you want to fight misogyny, why won't you look at the evidence you've been provided?

You've not provided this.

The only explanation I can come up with is that you're driven by some ideas of intersectionality, i.e. the "oppression olympics", and so you care more about trans women than women. I might be wrong, but I can see no other reason why you refuse to look at the evidence you've been given?

The "evidence" provided is poorly sourced and too spotty in details to make any comments about.
As pointed out, I don't know how many times, before.