Still New - Disappointed

[Shadow Wolf]

Oh, I’m fine with that. I actually enjoy diversity. I just detest sjw and woke crap.

How are you defining this?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What about this guy?


Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;' Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’

Is he not qualified?

John Hopkins in general hasn't updated their stuff in decades. Yeah, they had a disastrous program a long time ago and they shut it down. But that was before the development of the Standards of Care and a marked improvement in results by establishing better guidelines and screenings. John Hopkins has just been overall slow in the area to catch up to the current state of science and medicine.

 

[Secret Chief]

That would require consumers to be illiterate.

It would, but then it was obviously just an excuse; the industry simply wants to nobble the threatening competition.
And yes in the UK too, plant-based is usually in its own section/s.

 

[Mock Turtle]

What about this guy?


Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;' Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’

Is he not qualified?

As mentioned by others, this is hardly the best and most definitive expert opinion to cite. From just the Wiki about McHugh, it might have been more about societal reactions then as to why so many who underwent transgender surgery were not fully satisfied with such, and of course the less than adequate treatment presumably resulting from no comprehensive knowledge as to all issues related to any such changes. Hopefully it is better understood now. It seems to me that his views might have been compromised by his Catholic beliefs too - attitude towards homosexuality, for example.

 

[exchemist]

Much as I don't like the direction the Liberal Party has taken over the last 20 years in Australia, it would still meet your criteria at a broad level.

By that I mean these items;
My brand of conservatism includes support for capitalism and a market economy, respect for traditional institutions, including the monarchy and an unelected House of Lords, changing them by evolution rather than revolution, support for a nuclear deterrent and the armed forces, belief in the positive impact of religion on society. However I also support the Welfare State, the need for regulation of business to keep it serving the interests of society, and believe the government has a duty to prevent too big a gap in wealth opening up in society.

That's interesting to know. Our image, in the UK, of the Australian Liberal party is less +ve, largely due to its dinosaur approach to climate change until recently - and I suppose, the general tone of snarling aggression that characterises Ozzie politics and is reminiscent of so many US Republicans.

I fear that today's UK Conservative Party has imported a lot of the extreme social views and angry stupidity of US Republicans, perhaps because they face the particular issue of needing to justify Brexit to themselves, which is getting harder and harder to do without denying reality. So starting a few culture wars is a good distraction, to keep their spirits up while they wait for the unicorns to start prancing through the sunlit uplands. What fools.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

That's interesting to know. Our image, in the UK, of the Australian Liberal party is less +ve, largely due to its dinosaur approach to climate change until recently - and I suppose, the general tone of snarling aggression that characterises Ozzie politics and is reminiscent of so many US Republicans.

Traditionally they were very strong supporters of higher education access, and both sides in Australia support strong healthcare.
They really dropped the ball on climate, and the right wing faction and the centre-right faction started playing too nice with each other, sidelining the moderates. There was a religious elemt

It cost them dearly at the last election, where they lost a ton of their traditional heartland to moderate conservative independents, mostly women, who ran along pretty traditional liberal lines...whilst demanding climate action.

That mix was VERY successful.

Aussie politics generally is pretty childish and nasty though. The current PM is a little more adult than most of our recent examples.

I fear that today's UK Conservative Party has imported a lot of the extreme social views and angry stupidity of US Republicans, perhaps because they face the particular issue of needing to justify Brexit to themselves, which is getting harder and harder to do without denying reality. So starting a few culture wars is a good distraction, to keep their spirits up while they wait for the unicorns to start prancing through the sunlit uplands. What fools.

Yeah...I was sooooo happy with the way the last election went, because moderate conservatives were successful. That is so important to a democracy, I think.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I've been here a little while. Remember when I asked if this was a paradise for woke snowflakes? Well, it seems to be from the responses I've had to a few posts. First, you have the group who can't manage to accept the fact women are a biologically based thing. Second, you have the weird woke group. Is there a forum area for non woke, non sjw people?

There are diverse people here that cover the spectrum of belief. If there is a key attribute to being on this forum it is the capacity to respectfully converse with peoples who have opposing views. Having hatred towards one group and expressing vitriol won't work.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I'm not looking for a place where everyone agrees. I'm looking for a place which isn't saturated by those people. I'm also looking for a space within this place where I can be free of those people.

well I think I tend to like to debate to a fault, and my views absolutely do not fall into the false dichotomy that society says is the correct dichotomy. That is to say, I have a mixture of views from the left and the right, but on each of those nodes, I tend to have strong beliefs. Note that this is does not mean that I am a centrist, even though it may look like it. A centrist would balance out each of their beliefs, but I tend to believe in each of my beliefs strongly.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I've been here a little while. Remember when I asked if this was a paradise for woke snowflakes? Well, it seems to be from the responses I've had to a few posts. First, you have the group who can't manage to accept the fact women are a biologically based thing. Second, you have the weird woke group. Is there a forum area for non woke, non sjw people?

My view on free speech is that it ought to be very free, and that the corrections to 'bad' speech, would come from other speech, instead of regulation. I have always believed that. That said, I have no problem showing most people the respect they want, but I tend to think that if concepts & language are to be changed, the ones wishing to do this should contain this within religion. I also think there are pagan/pre-christian arguments that may loosen the biblical strictures on how humans are supposed to be identified as well. Depends on the religion

As an aspiring tarologist, there does seem to be something about gender/biology that the card system has something to say about. It seems to split such things into energies and ideas, perhaps making all of it rather metaphysical. That's a mysterious area of the tarot, I think

 

[Dao Hao Now]

Given the following rebuttal to the article you cited, I can't help but wonder if you even read the article and understood its content or did you randomly pick it in a Google search because of its title. Besides, as @F1fan noted, the article was written seven years ago, and the issue has changed quite a bit since then. Maybe you should search for more current articles that would support your viewpoint.

Maybe something like…..
https://www.researchgate.net/public...d_Gender_Diversity_Bringing_Data_to_the_Table


This article with Paul McHugh in CNSNews…
(McHugh is a vocal proponent of Catholic-informed and socially conservative stances relating to sexual orientation and transgenderpeople. Some scientists accuse McHugh of misrepresenting scientific research relating to sexual orientation)
Paul R. McHugh - Wikipedia)
….is akin to going Phillip Morris or
R.J. Reynolds for science on the link of smoking tobacco and lung cancer back in the ‘80’s.

CNSNews is a subsidiary of Media Research Center:
Founded in 1987 by L. Brent Bozell III.
Prior to founding the MRC, Bozell was the chairman of the National Conservative Political Action Committee
The nonprofit MRC has received financial support primarily from Robert Mercer, but with several other conservative-leaning sources, including the Bradley, Scaife, Olin, Castle Rock, Carthage and JM foundations, as well as ExxonMobil. It has been described as "one of the most active and best-funded, and yet least known" arms of the modern conservative movement in the United States. The organization rejects the scientific consensus on climate change, and criticizes media coverage that reflects the scientific consensus.
Media Research Center - Wikipedia

According to CNSNews…
“Study after study by the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews, clearly demonstrates a liberal bias in many news outlets – bias by commission and bias by omission…”
“CNSNews was launched on June 16, 1998, as a news source for individuals, news organizations and broadcasters who put a higher premium on balance than spin..”
“CNSNews.com endeavors to fairly present all legitimate sides of a story and debunk popular, albeit incorrect, myths about cultural and policy issues.”
About Us

Let’s put their claims to the test:……
The linked article from CNSNews:
Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;' Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’

vs

An article from Reuters:
Born this way? Researchers explore the science of gender identity

“Reuters is a well-respected unbiased news outlet with a strong focus on clean, accurate reporting. News events on this site are written with some of the most straightforward reporting seen anywhere.”https://www.makeuseof.com/top-unbiased-news-sources/

After reading both, which of the two lives up to
putting “a higher premium on balance than spin”,
and endeavors to fairly present all legitimate sides of a story”?

The results of the study in the Reuters article is the link at the top of this post.

 

[Ella S.]

Or perhaps they just want to make sure they've adequately explained their position.

Quite. There's a reason why many philosophers write books exploring ideas that can be summarized in a paragraph.

 

[Ella S.]

Oh I'm all for that.

What I'm not for is the incessant need by insecure people who feel the need for inclusivity to be forced and pushed into anything and everything that isn't nailed down.

People who don't care about this stuff need their space too.

I see. You aren't opposed to them, you just want nothing to do with them and wish they would stay out of the public space, or at least think they should be segregated away from the spaces you're in so you don't have to deal with them existing around you.

But you're all for equality, really.