Students Are Pushing Back Against Gender Ideology In Their Schools

[Kfox]

Do I really have to explain something as basic as we have different expectations when it comes to men or women passing gas or using restrooms? You seriously have never encountered that?

Not only have I not encountered that, I’m not convinced such an expectation even exist. However if you are convinced it does, explain.

In the sense that we people call you "he" they are referring to you with association to a characteristic, not describing you in the same way that someone would when they refer to you as a "black man".


No, we don't. We can DESCRIBE someone according to their race, but we don't refer to people exclusively via there race. There are no pronouns for black or white people.

Okay. So what evidence do you have that our culture will continue to develop specific roles and expectations for people along sex lines if we discouraged it? While true, race is different than sex, that does not mean the same trick that works for race will not also work for sex!

No, they're not always. People talk about identified racial characteristics all the time and are not always called bigots. It makes up a huge proportion of black stand up comedy.

Bigotry is alive and well in many comedy routines.

Except they aren't. The idea that men should not wear dresses is, according to your standard, bigotry. But that bigotry is very, very widely accepted.

For a man to wear a “Kilt” is socially acceptable in the US.

I'm speaking broadly. I don't care about your example of an exception. If you don't think gay or trans people face more abuse and discrimination than black Trump voters you are just objectively and obviously wrong.

Just because you say it; doesn’t make it true.

 

[fantome profane]

To identify as a woman is based on subjectivity, not objectivity.

Yes, and that applies to everyone who identifies as a woman, not just trans women.

And everyone who identifies as a man.

 

[Kfox]

Restating it doesn't make it true. Not only have there been active debates about changing leap years (and the already changed leap years) in Gregorian calendars, (even some fighting about how religious influence to keep the spring equinox and easter the same dates corrupted the long term accuracy) but also other calendars which would displace leap years alltogether.

My point is that attempting to get only hard line single definitions is worthless as it intentionally or unintentionally ignores nuance for brevity. Aka reductionism.

Which countries do not recognize our leap year?

 

[Kfox]

Yes, and that applies to everyone who identifies as a woman, not just trans women.

And everyone who identifies as a man.

I agree. But when you base your subjective identity on something objective; like biology, then your subjective identity is based objective realities.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Which countries do not recognize our leap year?

Many Eastern countries, including Korea, Japan, and Taiwan. As well as individual groups within nations, such as some Jews and Jewishwhich use the Hebrew calendar, some Hindu which use a Hindu calendar, Russian East Orthodox has a revised calandar, and Islamic nations which use a similar calendar without Gregorian rules.

There is no universal calendar.

 

[fantome profane]

I agree. But when you base your subjective identity on something objective; like biology, then your subjective identity is based objective realities.

And this is where we start the loop all over again.

You say you are basing it on something objective. Then somebody will ask (me this time), “are you checking people‘s pants”, to which you reply “of course not”. So if you are not checking genitals and you are not checking chromosomes either, then you are not basing it on anything objective. You are looking at their appearance and judging based on subjective cultural standards. You are dealing with Gender, not sex. You are just pretending that you are basing it on something objective, but you are not.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Magical thinking always makes things better, eh?

What's so magical about it? Is it magic that makes kilometers per hour have a higher number than miles per hour when the speed of an object is measured?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

There is no universal calendar.

I sorely wish science would ditch the Christian influence in dating and just being more specific with things like referring to whatever year something happened during the Upper Triassic period or whatever. It seems so silly for science and secular usage to rely on some split that is useless ams meaningless outside of Christianity, with an itty bitty speck getting 2,000 years while the other gets billions just because we had no inkling of a clue how old the Earth and Cosmes really are when that divide was formally decided for the Christian world.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

To identify as a woman is based on subjectivity, not objectivity.

But a person who identifies a woman is objectively different to one who identifies as a man. Those are objective differences.

Your identity is based on your thoughts.

If you want to put it that way, sure. I think identity is more complex than just "thoughts".

 

[YmirGF]

What's so magical about it? Is it magic that makes kilometers per hour have a higher number than miles per hour when the speed of an object is measured?

Before we go down this rabbit hole of delirium, I'd perfer to know more about the society that precipitated this side point. To your somewhat vapid point, yes, to an extent, units of measure are arbitrary units at their point of inception.

 

[YmirGF]

But a person who identifies a woman is objectively different to one who identifies as a man. Those are objective differences.

To be quite honest, this is where you folks lose me in these discussions. The above statement doesn't even make sense from my standpoint. I'd love to hear examples of those alleged differences. What are you meaning, exactly.

If you want to put it that way, sure. I think identity is more complex than just "thoughts".

If gender identity is a social construct, sadly, it is then, just thoughts and perhaps some wounded feelings.

 

[metis]

A lot of people have no problem with adults receiving such care, but such care on children is where they draw the line.

That's your personal decision, so why not let others make their own decision and not the government?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

To be quite honest, this is where you folks lose me in these discussions. The above statement doesn't even make sense from my standpoint. I'd love to hear examples of those alleged differences. What are you meaning, exactly.

There are two people.

One identifies as a fan of the red football team, and not the blue football team.

The other identifies as as a fan of the blue football team, and not the red football team.

These are two different things that the people identify as. It is, by any standard, an objective difference between them.

It really isn't that complicated.

If gender identity is a social construct, sadly, it is then, just thoughts and perhaps some wounded feelings.

Like literally all forms of categorisation we use.

 

[SkepticThinker]

No; everybody agrees on when leap years are.

They actually don't. You should Google this history of calendar\time formation, it's pretty fascinating.
I just listened to a great podcast about it. If I can remember what it was called, I'll let ya know.

 

[YmirGF]

There are two people.

One identifies as a fan of the red football team, and not the blue football team.

The other identifies as as a fan of the blue football team, and not the red football team.

These are two different things that the people identify as. It is, by any standard, an objective difference between them.

It really isn't that complicated.

No, it is not complicated. It's just highly superficial markers.

 

[YmirGF]

Like literally all forms of categorisation we use.

If you want to put it that way, sure. I think identity is more complex than just "thoughts".

You had implied that there was more to this. Which is it?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

No, it is not complicated. It's just highly superficial markers.

Whatever you say, I guess. All I am saying is that a person who identifies as one thing can be differentiated from a person who identifies as a different thing, because the fact that they both identify as different thing is an objective fact.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You had implied that there was more to this. Which is it?

Why do you think there is a contradiction between saying that why people identify with a particular label is more complicated than just "thoughts", while saying social categories are subjective labels subject entirely to how we think about them?

 

[Kfox]

And this is where we start the loop all over again.

You say you are basing it on something objective. Then somebody will ask (me this time), “are you checking people‘s pants”, to which you reply “of course not”. So if you are not checking genitals and you are not checking chromosomes either, then you are not basing it on anything objective.

If the law says only biological females are allowed in these spaces, that is objective. Now if the law is enforced in a way that makes it easy to break (nobody checking underwear) the fact that people will choose to break this law does not take away from the fact that the law is objective.

 

[fantome profane]

No, it is not complicated. It's just highly superficial markers.

A "marker" is pretty much by definition "superficial". It is something that can be seen on the surface that can often have deep complex meaning.

The map is not the territory is a very true statement. But it does not mean that maps are useless or should be ignored.