In fairness, it should be asked: What is the definition of...

[Saint Frankenstein]

First and foremost - to defend the biological fact that the "other one" is a woman/female and she can never become a man/male and vice versa.

There are only two biological sexes or genders, and no one can become a member of the opposing biological sex or gender.

Second - the "other one" is suffering from some kind of mental health crisis and needs us to not affirm her delusions - but give her actual help.

You may not be able to become the opposite sex completely, due to the current limits of medical science, but you certainly can socially. No one knows I am a trans man unless I tell them. Otherwise, I'm just a another man. You do not see DNA, chromosomes or genitals when interacting with someone in a normal social setting, even having someone as a friend or coworker. So obviously being a man or a woman is a bit more than just those things.

Honestly, this whole blowup in "trans issues" is rather artificial. People who are called transsexuals now have always existed, going back to ancient history and are found in cultures the world ever. It's nothing new. There have always been people who, for whatever reason, are more comfortable being perceived and living as the opposite sex to which they were born. We don't really know what causes it, just like we don't know what causes homosexuality. Both phenomenons seem to have underlying biological factors that cause them, especially hormonal influences in the womb.

It's not a choice or some delusion. I know I'm not making it up or delusional. It doesn't fit the definition of a delusion in mental health terms, which is a product of psychosis. I've known psychotic people and can recognize the signs of it. I actually thought I was crazy in my younger years for feeling this way. But actually crazy people never believe they're crazy. With me, it's just how I am and I've felt like this for my whole life. I understand most people will never be understand it fully, but it doesn't mean people like me are insane or it isn't real.

I actually agree with most of your post (the parts below that I didn't quote here), but what gets me about the current politicization is that the left are being radical deconstructionist nihilists and then the right are being cruel and not even want to accept that it actually exists at all. Certainly not all are behaving that way, but it's a prominent theme.

It totally ignores that there's a large number of transsexual men and women who are against the far-left social engineering that is currently occuring (and that is a new thing), and who live fairly normal lives as the men or women we transitioned into being. Most of us you would never know we are trans. It's not hard to go "stealth" after years on hormones alone, let alone any surgeries we may have. A lot of us don't bring it up because it's not relevant and we transition to move beyond it, not to have it brought up all the time. I went a long time, myself, not really thinking about it at all until it blew up everywhere in the last couple of years.

A lot of us are fairly conservative and don't want to destroy the sex binary or whatever. Many of us are Christians, go to church and so on. When I transitioned, it was something for adults to do. It wasn't about schools, sports and bathrooms. It's come to the point were transsexual people no longer feel at home in the trans community (since it has become a free for all that denies the reality of male and female, or even dysphoria and the need to transition), but then the conservatives reject us, too. So we're exiled from our own communities and then "the alternative" tells us we don't even exist.

It's a mess all around.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Rather circular reasoning.

Can't tell the difference between a statement and an argument, eh?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

First and foremost - to defend the biological fact that the "other one" is a woman/female and she can never become a man/male and vice versa.

There are only two biological sexes or genders, and no one can become a member of the opposing biological sex or gender.

Second - the "other one" is suffering from some kind of mental health crisis and needs us to not affirm her delusions - but give her actual help.

Suicidality is incredibly high among "transgender" individuals because they are not receiving the help they need.

Third - to avoid all the confusion that has spread throughout our society when we began to replace facts with ideologies - which is being taught to vulnerable and impressionable children.

The number of youths that identify as "LGBTQ+" has risen exponentially over the last couple decades - not naturally - but by the intervention of media and academia - a true slippery slope.

Fourth - to defend the "safe spaces" of the biological sexes - such as changing rooms, bathrooms, shelters and prisons - from incursion by members of the opposite sex.

"Transgender" males have been admitted into women's prisons and shelters and have abused women while staying there.

Fifth - to defend women - who are having medals, honors, accolades, opportunities - and their very identities taken from them.

Lia Thomas stole the first place medal from a woman.

Rachel Levine was not the "first female four-star admiral in the commissioned corps".

Clarence Thomas could have been the "first Black female" Supreme Court Justice by claiming to be trans?

How many women's scholarships, grants, loans, etc are going to be taken from women and given to men?

Why are we referring to mothers as "birthing persons"? And claiming that men can also have periods or have babies?

"Transgender" ideology is an attack on women.

First off - super sexist hypothetical - you don't think females or "trans-women" can be programmers?

Second - a female can be masculine and still identify as female - masculinity and femininity do not determine biological sex.

Third - why are you assuming these "masculine fellows" clearly identify as male?

Aren't you assuming their gender?

Fourth - the people who come up with these hypotheticals and ask these questions are the same that demand that women need more representation in STEM fields - like programming.

Yet - they also claim that "trans-women" are women and that "trans-men" are men - so wtf are we supposed to do?

Hiring based on ability, qualifications and merit isn't good enough for the liberals seeking "gender-based" or "race-based" quotas - but then they cannot answer the simple question, "What is a woman?"

I would love it if people were hired based solely on their ability, qualifications and merit - but liberal morons whose ideologies change with each passing wind have made that impossible.

They just voted in Kentaji Brown Jackson - not based on her LSAT scores, past experience of leniency on sex offenders, or inability to define what a "woman" is - all of that stuff is sexist and racist to focus on - but based simple on the fact that she was a Black woman.

So - no - you don't get to present these hypotheticals and ask me these stupid questions when you and others like you don't even know what you are advocating for anymore, and you don't even know what a "woman" is.

Get your ducks in a row first - then return to reality and we can have a discussion.

Wow, since you are so very wise, have you considered taking over the entire medical profession and setting those dummies straight?

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Can't tell the difference between a statement and an argument, eh?

You should be asking yourself that.

You shouldn't be stating an idea as if it were a fact before you have even argued for it to be considered as such.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Wow, since you are so very wise, have you considered taking over the entire medical profession and setting those dummies straight?

You believe that "the entire medical profession" agrees on this topic?

You believe that the scientific method is one of consensus? Truth is established by a majority vote?

And nice job at completely ignoring all the points I made - including those that point out your hypocrisy.

You should become a politician - you have a knack for it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You should be asking yourself that.

You shouldn't be stating an idea as if it were a fact before you have even argued for it to be considered as such.

Okay, sea lion.

 

[Debater Slayer]

lot of us are fairly conservative and don't want to destroy the sex binary or whatever. Many of us are Christians, go to church and so on. When I transitioned, it was something for adults to do. It wasn't about schools, sports and bathrooms. It's come to the point were transsexual people no longer feel at home in the trans community (since it has become a free for all that denies the reality of male and female, or even dysphoria and the need to transition), but then the conservatives reject us, too. So we're exiled from our own communities and then "the alternative" tells us we don't even exist.

I'm not sure what you mean by the "reality of male and female," but even though I fully identify as a male and know that my gender identity matches my biological sex, I wouldn't cite biology as the reason if you asked me why I identify as male rather than female. I don't know exactly what makes me male either: I can't give you a list of attributes that sum up my gender identity. My biological sex isn't why, but I know that there's such a thing as male and female due to identifying with one so strongly.

It's an area of science that I think has a long way to go before we can rigorously define gender-related terms (whether male/female or otherwise). I don't think a rigorous definition exists yet, but I don't deny the existence of male and female identities either because most people (me included) clearly identify as one or the other even during childhood.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

First and foremost - to defend the biological fact that the "other one" is a woman/female and she can never become a man/male and vice versa.

There are only two biological sexes or genders, and no one can become a member of the opposing biological sex or gender.

In my previous response to this, I did indeed, as you put it "ignore all the points" you made, including those that also, as you put it "point out [my] hypocrisy.

Let me say first, what I've said many times. I do not understand gender dysphoria. I have never experienced it -- and I lack necessary training in the appropriate sciences.

So first, what is your "experience" on the issue, and what "necessary training the appropriate sciences" do you have?

Second - the "other one" is suffering from some kind of mental health crisis and needs us to not affirm her delusions - but give her actual help.

Suicidality is incredibly high among "transgender" individuals because they are not receiving the help they need.

Third - to avoid all the confusion that has spread throughout our society when we began to replace facts with ideologies - which is being taught to vulnerable and impressionable children.

The number of youths that identify as "LGBTQ+" has risen exponentially over the last couple decades - not naturally - but by the intervention of media and academia - a true slippery slope.

Fourth - to defend the "safe spaces" of the biological sexes - such as changing rooms, bathrooms, shelters and prisons - from incursion by members of the opposite sex.

"Transgender" males have been admitted into women's prisons and shelters and have abused women while staying there.

Fifth - to defend women - who are having medals, honors, accolades, opportunities - and their very identities taken from them.

Lia Thomas stole the first place medal from a woman.

Rachel Levine was not the "first female four-star admiral in the commissioned corps".

Clarence Thomas could have been the "first Black female" Supreme Court Justice by claiming to be trans?

How many women's scholarships, grants, loans, etc are going to be taken from women and given to men?

Why are we referring to mothers as "birthing persons"? And claiming that men can also have periods or have babies?

"Transgender" ideology is an attack on women.

First off - super sexist hypothetical - you don't think females or "trans-women" can be programmers?

Second - a female can be masculine and still identify as female - masculinity and femininity do not determine biological sex.

Third - why are you assuming these "masculine fellows" clearly identify as male?

Aren't you assuming their gender?

Fourth - the people who come up with these hypotheticals and ask these questions are the same that demand that women need more representation in STEM fields - like programming.

Yet - they also claim that "trans-women" are women and that "trans-men" are men - so wtf are we supposed to do?

Hiring based on ability, qualifications and merit isn't good enough for the liberals seeking "gender-based" or "race-based" quotas - but then they cannot answer the simple question, "What is a woman?"

I would love it if people were hired based solely on their ability, qualifications and merit - but liberal morons whose ideologies change with each passing wind have made that impossible.

They just voted in Kentaji Brown Jackson - not based on her LSAT scores, past experience of leniency on sex offenders, or inability to define what a "woman" is - all of that stuff is sexist and racist to focus on - but based simple on the fact that she was a Black woman.

So - no - you don't get to present these hypotheticals and ask me these stupid questions when you and others like you don't even know what you are advocating for anymore, and you don't even know what a "woman" is.

Get your ducks in a row first - then return to reality and we can have a discussion.

And second, a lot of the things you wrote above are simply false. I'm not going to go through and answer all of them. But let's look at a couple:

Second - the "other one" is suffering from some kind of mental health crisis and needs us to not affirm her delusions - but give her actual help.

Suicidality is incredibly high among "transgender" individuals because they are not receiving the help they need.

You may notice here that you are making either medical or psychological diagnoses and proposing treatment. That, of course, is why I asked about your credentials. For myself, since I lack those credentials, I have to at least pay some attention to the people who have them, and who have often been engaged by the parents or patients for that precise reason.

The number of youths that identify as "LGBTQ+" has risen exponentially over the last couple decades - not naturally - but by the intervention of media and academia - a true slippery slope.

Now this is actually something that I do know about, have been an LGBTQ+ youth myself (in the distant path, being no longer remotely youthful). And one thing I do know is back when it was socially near-fatal to out oneself, a lot of people hid carefully behind their closet doors. It was a better solution to live a public life pretending to be something you're not, than be a social pariah, unable to find work, and who even the police felt quite comfortable beating the **** out of. Or worse.

I knew many such people -- people who eventually were caught out trying to privately be themselves, and ruining families in the process. Even now, as I write this, I find myself becoming angrier at your garbage than I should, and will therefore stop before I say something that attracts unwanted moderator attention.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Okay, sea lion.

I identify as an attack helicopter.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm not sure what you mean by the "reality of male and female," but even though I fully identify as a male and know that my gender identity matches my biological sex, I wouldn't cite biology as the reason if you asked me why I identify as male rather than female. I don't know exactly what makes me male either: I can't give you a list of attributes that sum up my gender identity. My biological sex isn't why, but I know that there's such a thing as male and female due to identifying with one so strongly.

It's an area of science that I think has a long way to go before we can rigorously define gender-related terms (whether male/female or otherwise). I don't think a rigorous definition exists yet, but I don't deny the existence of male and female identities either because most people (me included) clearly identify as one or the other even during childhood.

I'm referring to the trans activists and gender theorists basically negating the biological reality of sex, instead making it all abstract and psychological. It's all about how you personally identify now, regardless of if you actually have sex/gender dysphoria or even want to transition to the opposite sex. There's a lot of examples of people simply declaring that they want to use they/them pronouns but that's all they ever do and I'm supposed to consider them just as trans as me when I have nothing in common with them.

This is because ivory tower gender theory gibberish from people like Judith Butler has seeped down into the public by way of activists. The politicization of being "trans" is a recent thing, that has occurred within the past 20 years. We've been having medical sex changes since the 1930s and no one cared or bothered us about it until now.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I identify as an attack helicopter.

Yes, of course you do.

But since that is certainly not true (attack helicopters would not even begin to imagine they could type messages on the internet), what it says, instead, is that you are quite deliberately poking fun at people who really do identify as they say they do.

Nice.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Yes, of course you do.

But since that is certainly not true (attack helicopters would not even begin to imagine they could type messages on the internet), what it says, instead, is that you are quite deliberately poking fun at people who really do identify as they say they do.

Nice.

Thank you for proving my point.

I cannot be an attack helicopter - no matter how much I may "identify" as one.

I can be as much as an attack helicopter as a man can be a woman.

A man has just as much ability to imagine himself being a woman as I do an attack helicopter.

I am not so much "poking fun" as I am "establishing reality".

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Thank you for proving my point.

I cannot be an attack helicopter - no matter how much I may "identify" as one.

I can be as much as an attack helicopter as a man can be a woman.

A man has just as much ability to imagine himself being a woman as I do an attack helicopter.

I am not so much "poking fun" as I am "establishing reality".

And your reality is this: your dick matters, your brain doesn't.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

And your reality is this: your dick matters, your brain doesn't.

Reality is this - when it comes to biological sex and gender - a person's genitals do matter - not their beliefs or delusions.

You want to make this into something it isn't - because you want to deny reality.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Reality is this - when it comes to biological sex and gender - a person's genitals do matter - not their beliefs or delusions.

You want to make this into something it isn't - because you want to deny reality.

You are mistaken about what I "want." Frankly, I'm happily cis-gender male -- got the bits and the brain to match.

But I am aware, through reading the science (as you are apparently not, and haven't) that a small number of people really do identify -- in their brains, they only place in a human being that an "I" exists -- that they are not the gender that rests between their legs. As a humanist, I care about them, too. You, I presume, would like to see their brains "fixed" so that they become another person than who they are at present.. Frankly, I think that is terrible. It really does smack to me of extinguishing a person in favour of a bit of meat.

 

[Sheldon]

Reality is this - when it comes to biological sex and gender - a person's genitals do matter - not their beliefs or delusions.

Matter how? And gender is a social construct, it differs from the fact of biological sex in at least that sense.

You want to make this into something it isn't - because you want to deny reality.

That looks like a circular reasoning fallacy to me. Since gender is a social construct, a word we assign arbitrarily, how is it being used to deny reality? That a persons gender identity differs sometimes from their biological sex is a pretty well evidenced fact, as is gender dysphoria. Those facts are real, and yet some people seem so sorely exercised by them, that they attempt to deny the reality of them. You just seem to be accusing someone of denying your position, and asserting that position as reality, yet you offered nothing to support that.

Do you accept the reality that a person's gender identity can differ from the fact o the their biological sex? Do you accept this sometimes causes gender dysphoria and can be harmful?

If not, then why not?

 

[Sheldon]

You are mistaken about what I "want." Frankly, I'm happily cis-gender male -- got the bits and the brain to match.

But I am aware, through reading the science (as you are apparently not, and haven't) that a small number of people really do identify -- in their brains, they only place in a human being that an "I" exists -- that they are not the gender that rests between their legs. As a humanist, I care about them, too. You, I presume, would like to see their brains "fixed" so that they become another person than who they are at present.. Frankly, I think that is terrible. It really does smack to me of extinguishing a person in favour of a bit of meat.

A well reasoned post, like you I am aware that gender dysphoria can be deeply pernicious. I am also aware that a person's gender identity need not always match their biological sex, and this can be the root cause. Now this is where it gets subjective, but how we proceed from there ought, in my opinion, to try and avoid, and where possible prevent, any unnecessary suffering or harm.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Reality is this - when it comes to biological sex and gender - a person's genitals do matter - not their beliefs or delusions.

But biological sex and gender aren't the same thing.

"A person's genitals do matter?" Why? Do you check the genitals of every person you converse with just to make sure they're identifying properly, according to your opinions on the subject?
Why do you care so much?

You want to make this into something it isn't - because you want to deny reality.

You seem to be denying reality quite well.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

You are mistaken about what I "want." Frankly, I'm happily cis-gender male -- got the bits and the brain to match.

You have used the term "cis-gender" and "gender" - which an actual "humanist" would never use - since they are concepts devoid of reason that create more problems for human beings - and proves that you have been brainwashed.

You want to deny basic biology in order to pursue a radical leftist narrative - you want to deny reality.

There is no such thing as "gender" or "cis-gender" - there are only males and females - men and women.

You are a male - and nothing you or anyone else believes will ever change that.

But I am aware, through reading the science (as you are apparently not, and haven't) that a small number of people really do identify -- in their brains, they only place in a human being that an "I" exists -- that they are not the gender that rests between their legs.

You need to assume that I am ignorant. It is your security blanket. Something to throw in my face after you are unable to answer simple questions such as, "What is a woman?"

In your thoroughly brainwashed mind there is no way that anyone could simply disagree with you.

Anyways - I am fully aware that there are a very minute number of people who have been convinced that they are not the "gender" they were "assigned" at birth - they are uncomfortable in their own bodies for a myriad number of reasons and they cling to the idea posed by degenerate perverts that they can be "fixed" by poisoning themselves and mutilating their bodies.

What I think is funny though is your claim that "gender" can "[rest] between [our] legs".

I thought that "gender" was considered a "social construct" - therefore - would have nothing to do with the biology found between our legs.

This is more proof that you are a victim of the "gender activists" agenda of confusing "gender" with biological sex - in order to get men to compete with women in sports and give awards to men that start with "First Female..."

We all remember what the headlines said about Rachel Levine and Lia Thomas - describing them as "female".

You want to deny reality.

As a humanist, I care about them, too.

When did being a "humanist" and caring about other people require us to throw away biological facts?

You, I presume, would like to see their brains "fixed" so that they become another person than who they are at present..

That is rich coming from someone who believes that their bodies should be "fixed" in order to make them into something they are not.

I am against the side of aisle that wants to indoctrinate children - convince students that they are "trans" without parental consent and pushing to pump children with experimental hormones and "puberty blockers".

All of the "gender activism" has been aimed at our children.

Frankly, I think that is terrible.

You believe that virtue signaling as a "humanist" is more important than actually helping people.

That is terrible.

It really does smack to me of extinguishing a person in favour of a bit of meat.

A person is a totality of their being - which includes both their brain and their body.

Helping someone who suffers from delusions does not "extinguish" anyone.

There are a lot of people out there who have "detransitioned" because they realized that nothing they did to their bodies solved their issues.

What the "gender activists" are doing is experimenting on those they have brainwashed and that is terrible.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Matter how? And gender is a social construct, it differs from the fact of biological sex in at least that sense.

Sorry - but the cat is out of the bag on this one - this used to be their argument - but no longer - and it was always a deception.

The concept of "gender" - outside of linguistics - is made up garbage used to confuse people to push some degenerate ideology.

Today - we notice how media and activists refer to Rachel Levine and Lia Thomas as "female" - not "woman".

They are claiming that "men can menstruate" or "men can get pregnant" or "women can get erections" - which are all biological functions - not social constructs.

The term "female" and menstruation, pregnancy and erections are not social constructs - but you wouldn't know that when reading headlines or listening to "gender activists".

And they are using this confusion to push for biological men to enter into fields that have always been decided on biology - not social constructs.

Women's restrooms, changing rooms, prisons, shelters, sports, etc. - have always been spaces and activities decided and set aside based on biology - not social constructs.

Yet - now the media and these activists are switching "gender" in for "biological sex" - which has always been their goal.

That looks like a circular reasoning fallacy to me.

I liked your work in TBBT.

Since gender is a social construct, a word we assign arbitrarily, how is it being used to deny reality?

The term "gender" is being used in the stead of "biological sex" and it is being used to deny the reality that men are men and women are women and no one can change their biological sex or "gender".

That a persons gender identity differs sometimes from their biological sex is a pretty well evidenced fact, as is gender dysphoria.

Yes - these are deluded people who need actual help and compassion.

Those facts are real, and yet some people seem so sorely exercised by them, that they attempt to deny the reality of them.

No - I am not denying that these people exist - I simply deny that their delusions are reality or that their delusions should be accepted as reality.

I deny the goals of the "gender activists" who are working toward social upheaval and the indoctrination of children.

You just seem to be accusing someone of denying your position, and asserting that position as reality, yet you offered nothing to support that.

Biology and all human history support my claim that men are men and women are women and it is not possible for a man to become a woman and vice versa.

My claims have been well and firmly established. It is those who demand change that need to prove their position - not I.

Do you accept the reality that a person's gender identity can differ from the fact o the their biological sex?

I accept that a person can believe that they are a member of the opposing biological sex or gender - just like how I accept that there are people who hold different opinions than I do.

But having those opinions does not make them reality.

Do you accept this sometimes causes gender dysphoria and can be harmful?

I accept that whatever mental disorder a person who believes they are a member of the opposing biological sex or gender has can be harmful - because it distorts their perception of reality - and can lead to them harming themselves or others.

I also believe that injecting hormones and mutilating one's genitals is harmful and does not solve the underlying mental disorder - whatever it may be.

If not, then why not?

I actually want to help people - not take advantage of them to line the pockets of big pharma or push a social agenda or political narrative.