Of course. Who on earth would be satisfied with a polygonal definition?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What Age Is Acceptable To Identify As The Opposite Sex?
- Thread starter Jimmy
- Start date
Well we're voluntarily participating in a debate forum, and silly me, I thought we'd be using the normal tools of debate
Tomef
Well-Known Member
Now I want one.
I find debating opinion to be an exercise in futility. You asked a question, and it has been answered and elaborated upon with supporting evidence. All you've brought to the table ITT is a question and a rejection of the answer based on your personal opinion. I'm not inclined to play.Well we're voluntarily participating in a debate forum, and silly me, I thought we'd be using the normal tools of debate
Sand Dancer
Currently catless
That's what I learned in my college psychology classes. What about their cognitive development negates what I said?
Gender identity, gender diversity and gender dysphoria: children and teenagers
Gender identity is knowing you’re a boy, girl, both or neither. Gender dysphoria is distress caused by knowing your gender differs from your presumed gender.
raisingchildren.net.au
At What Age Does Gender Identity Develop?
What to know about gender identity in children. Learn about when it develops and what parents can do if their child has gender dysphoria.
They're currently on backorder.
No, you sidestep.
The question is not when you think you have grounds to judge but, rather, when a person has the right to self-identify.
There are rules of logical discourse. One of them is that circular definitions are not accepted as valid. This is not my opinion, this is how logical discourse proceeds.
It's not your opinion that they are accepted as valid. It's your opinion that these definitions are circular.
Well step one is to define "gender". What I see on this forum is that even adults struggle with the concept. So to expect children to understand it seems like a stretch.That's what I learned in my college psychology classes. What about their cognitive development negates what I said?
Gender identity, gender diversity and gender dysphoria: children and teenagers
Gender identity is knowing you’re a boy, girl, both or neither. Gender dysphoria is distress caused by knowing your gender differs from your presumed gender.At What Age Does Gender Identity Develop?
What to know about gender identity in children. Learn about when it develops and what parents can do if their child has gender dysphoria.www.medicinenet.com
The definitions provided several posts back refer to each other. That makes them circular.
With that said, I think it's best for me to back away now, have a fine day.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well we're voluntarily participating in a debate forum, and silly me, I thought we'd be using the normal tools of debate
Well, there is a life beyond debate and thus if you want this to be nomative, you have to show evidence for that.
Circular definitions refer back to themselves, not to other definitions.
Can you define allergic reaction without referring to allergy?
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
It depends on whether you use science or politics/propaganda criteria. Science considered this pathology. It is not coincidence that transgender behavior increased after the brain washing in public schools and brain washing by the media and Hollywood.
This timing shows us this is mostly learned behavior. If it was innate you would not have to teach it. Nobody has to teach you to eat, but knowing which fork or spoon to use for a formal multicourse meal, needs to be taught; that is like gender training. You can either teach and learn properly or teach or learn improperly and appear out of whack. Redefining out of whack does not change anything in a science sense.
For example, everyone, whether biological male or female has some level of sexual desire. Gender is more like learning to eat with the spoons and forks in various configurations based on what you are taught and observed, with some ways not meshing up to the courses in the meal. This will make the simple natural task more confused requiring more props.
We all have an urge to eat and an older brother can messed with his little brother, teaching him to put his peas up his nose since they fit. Why would nature evolve the human nose to fit peas and not put peas there? That is Liberalism in schools. Conservatives are like the parents who catch the little boy putting peas in his nose, and his older brother encouraging him. They put an end to the nonsense training, before the little guy has to go the emergency room. Little kids are vulnerable to pranks and misinformation.
Back in the 1960's, the classic nuclear family of male and female; mother and father was described by the Progressive psychologists as a social construct. They did not believe this was a natural order but was a many thousand year tradition learned by each generation from the previous. Based on your genitals; biological sex, you learned what side you were on and did the same stuff.
The younger Progressive movement wanted to experiment based on the social construct theory and mess up the spoons and forks, where you could now eat spaghetti with a teaspoon, and soup with a fork shrimp and all other combinations, to see if this could create alternate ways doing the same thing just as effectively. It was sort of successful, but mostly as a way to mess up the classic family in favor of experimental families to see the impact on children. What we have are the Progressives of today. I was not involved but thought it bizarre but I was also open and did not wish to judge.
More recently, they have added transgender, claiming what had been considered pathological by science for decades, was now natural and not patholgy or a conditioned social construct, created in part by the alternate role games of the past. It turned out to be one of their classic bait and switch two faced scams.
The compromise for children with peas in their nose, is not allow this be further trained in schools. It should be an adult decision at 18, at their own future expense. If you have big government or insurance pay, that is still coaching. If this is real, people will make the sacrifice to get it done for themselves. If they cannot be bothered, it was a fad.
This timing shows us this is mostly learned behavior. If it was innate you would not have to teach it. Nobody has to teach you to eat, but knowing which fork or spoon to use for a formal multicourse meal, needs to be taught; that is like gender training. You can either teach and learn properly or teach or learn improperly and appear out of whack. Redefining out of whack does not change anything in a science sense.
For example, everyone, whether biological male or female has some level of sexual desire. Gender is more like learning to eat with the spoons and forks in various configurations based on what you are taught and observed, with some ways not meshing up to the courses in the meal. This will make the simple natural task more confused requiring more props.
We all have an urge to eat and an older brother can messed with his little brother, teaching him to put his peas up his nose since they fit. Why would nature evolve the human nose to fit peas and not put peas there? That is Liberalism in schools. Conservatives are like the parents who catch the little boy putting peas in his nose, and his older brother encouraging him. They put an end to the nonsense training, before the little guy has to go the emergency room. Little kids are vulnerable to pranks and misinformation.
Back in the 1960's, the classic nuclear family of male and female; mother and father was described by the Progressive psychologists as a social construct. They did not believe this was a natural order but was a many thousand year tradition learned by each generation from the previous. Based on your genitals; biological sex, you learned what side you were on and did the same stuff.
The younger Progressive movement wanted to experiment based on the social construct theory and mess up the spoons and forks, where you could now eat spaghetti with a teaspoon, and soup with a fork shrimp and all other combinations, to see if this could create alternate ways doing the same thing just as effectively. It was sort of successful, but mostly as a way to mess up the classic family in favor of experimental families to see the impact on children. What we have are the Progressives of today. I was not involved but thought it bizarre but I was also open and did not wish to judge.
More recently, they have added transgender, claiming what had been considered pathological by science for decades, was now natural and not patholgy or a conditioned social construct, created in part by the alternate role games of the past. It turned out to be one of their classic bait and switch two faced scams.
The compromise for children with peas in their nose, is not allow this be further trained in schools. It should be an adult decision at 18, at their own future expense. If you have big government or insurance pay, that is still coaching. If this is real, people will make the sacrifice to get it done for themselves. If they cannot be bothered, it was a fad.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Got any reasoning for that?
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I have since 3 or 4.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
As for the age of 18, what makes you think you know better than researchers and healthcare providers?
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Well tough. We do it anyway, amd we'll keep doing it.
