What is a female??

[ADigitalArtist]

But still; regardless of what they called it, nobody was claiming men have Fallopian tubes, and could get pregnant until recently.

Yes they did. You just weren't around to hear it. I doubt you've ever read Judith Butler or Dora Richter (who was a trans man who had sex assignment surgery back in 1891 and was, in fact, a man with fallopian tubes and could get pregnant.)

The link I provided did not speak of the mean, it spoke of the average age of 3. And the link you provided did not refute that claim

The study referenced by the link you gave said mean, which is why I pointed it out. The link you gave incorrectly called it average.
And I wrote at length refuting it and will not repeat it here.

Whether you believe it or not, the fact of the matter is autistic people are getting diagnosed as preteens, teens and adults through verbal and written screening. Which is why I used that fact, through my experience, to relate it to transgender people going through gender dysphoria screening.

 

[Kfox]

Yes they did. You just weren't around to hear it. I doubt you've ever read Judith Butler or Dora Richter (who was a trans man who had sex assignment surgery back in 1891 and was, in fact, a man with fallopian tubes and could get pregnant.)

Dora Richter didn't have Fallopian tubes, nor could he get pregnant. And Judith Butler was lesbian; not a man. Again; nobody during that time were claiming some men have Fallopian tubes, and could get pregnant; that is a recent thing.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

How ‘peer contagion’ may play into the rise of teen girls transitioning

In the last decade, diagnosis of “gender dysphoria” — severe discomfort in one’s biological sex — has exploded across the West. Between 2016 and 2017, the number of gender surgeries for natal femal…

nypost.com

Teens are becoming transgender because it's trendy, expert says - LifeSite

Gender confusion is such a fad that an Australian children's hospital operates a specialized clinic.

www.lifesitenews.com

These are both just opinion pieces that present very little actual studies or reliable facts. Are there any? I mean, I don't doubt that there are some kids who claim to be trans in order to be "trendy", I just want to know if there are any actual figures.

 

[Zwing]

Transvestite was a term that was coined in 1910, which lumped crossdressers and transgender people together until decades later in 1949, when transsexual was coined (owed in part to the aforementioned burned sexology university in Germany.) Transgender as a term wasn't coined until 1971 and didn't start making rounds in society until right around when Rocky Horror had its debut. 'Trans' as a generic term encompassing both transgender and transsexual as concepts didn't arise until the 90's.

I have the idea that the term “transgender”, being at once more reflective of reality and somewhat broader in meaning, has largely replaced “transvestite” as understanding and acceptance of the situation of gender dysphoria have grown. That is, I don’t think that anybody without gender dysphoria would be likely to dress in the clothing of the apparently opposing gender (unless he is a member of Hasty Pudding over there at Harvard!), and those having gender dysphoria who do cross dress are now known as “transgender” people. To my mind, a “transvestite” is a man or woman without gender dysphoria, who cross-dresses for reasons not associated with gender dysphoria. For instance, a guy dressing in drag for the annual “Hasty Pudding” celebration, or a woman dressing like a man for some playful or provocative reason not associated with GD.

I do have an abiding question about the meaning of the term “transsexual”. It would appear that a person cannot actually “change their sex”, so could…should somebody who has had “reassignment surgery” not simply also be called “transgender”? Is there any valid distinction between the two terms by which we should maintain the term “transsexual”? I think that most people by now understand gender to be, more than anything, a social construct which is historically but casually related to biological sex. Is there any good reason for us to not simply dispense with the term “transsexual” in favor of the apparently more correct “transgender” at this juncture?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Dora Richter didn't have Fallopian tubes,

That was my bad. I was thinking of Laurence Michael Dillon, who was a trans man and had a phalloplasty and was referred to as a man despite having female internal anatomy.

And Judith Butler was lesbian; not a man.

Judith Butler was a philosopher and talked at great length about breaking down barriers of manhood and masculinity from being born as a man.

 

[Kfox]

These are both just opinion pieces that present very little actual studies or reliable facts. Are there any? I mean, I don't doubt that there are some kids who claim to be trans in order to be "trendy", I just want to know if there are any actual figures.

One article was written by a Psychiatrist who runs a gender clinic, the second was written by an author who did do research. What were you looking for? What type of facts could actually come from such a study?

 

[Kfox]

That was my bad. I was thinking of Laurence Michael Dillon, who was a trans man and had a phalloplasty and was referred to as a man despite having female internal anatomy.

Dillon lived in Ireland. Was it common for people in Ireland to refer to women who identified as men, as men? Was she refered to a man because she presented as a man? Or was it because people in Ireland thought regardless of biology, if you think you are a man, you are a man. I ask because I'm not familiar with what was going on in Ireland during that time.

Judith Butler was a philosopher and talked at great length about breaking down barriers of manhood and masculinity from being born as a man.

I must have missed it. Where in your link does it mention Butler was born male?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

One article was written by a Psychiatrist who runs a gender clinic,

No, it wasn't. It just quotes them as saying that they have encountered children who think it's trendy. That says nothing about the statistical significance of such a group, nor does it say anything of the phenomenon's significance.

the second was written by an author who did do research.

But it doesn't present any research. It even admits "studies of detransitioners are only now being done", and what few conclusions are stated in the article are drawn from interviewing "over four dozen families whose teen daughters became caught in this current". Do I have to explain why interviewing only around fifty families ("families", remember, not necessarily even the individuals themselves who are more likely to give an accurate account of their own experiences) isn't exactly stellar research, and how unbelievably obvious it is from the language of this article alone that this research is biased?

What were you looking for? What type of facts could actually come from such a study?

The facts that these two articles are claiming. It's one thing to say "there are people claiming to be trans because it's trendy", and a very different thing to allege that this is either a widespread or significant problem. I just want to know if there are any facts, studies or statistics that suggest trans-trenders represent a significant amount of people.

I mean, you would definitely agree that there ARE people who CLAIM to be gay but aren't, right? But would you say that reflects, in any way, on the broader homosexual community? Would you say that such people exist in large enough numbers to indicate that it constitutes a significant problem?

 

[wellwisher]

You have several good points, here. The one thing that stands out with which I cannot agree is your characterization of sex as having been “designed for procreation”. Trust me, this is noteworthy rebuttal coming from a guy like me, because for my own personal life, I have come to believe that sex reserved for procreation is best, while sex in order to attain physical or emotional pleasure is folly, and a needless distraction (if I need an orgasm, five or six minutes in the bathroom alone will allow me to ‘kill the worm’).

I do not believe that sex, or any other biological imperative, can be properly described as the product of design with a ‘designated purpose’, as of procreation. This is not how natural selection works…with an end goal or a purpose in mind. Rather, it simply selects for those abilities and behaviors which enable the survival and breeding of individual organisms within a species. It seems more likely that what has been selected for with regards to sex is a strong libido, and the ability to produce many offspring. Of course, procreation is easily seen as the natural adjunct to this, but I do not think it to have been a goal in mind “ab initio”. Do you see where I’m coming from?

The reason there is so much need for abortion is unplanned procreation. The end game can make you forget to take the needed precautions. The carrot on the stick is the pleasure and excitement but the end game has it own needs and can cheat your choices by tweaking the carrot.

I remember in College going South for spring break with the track team, to train with the track team at a warmer prestigious southern university; Duke. It was still cold up north, and this trip was designed to get us ready for the spring season. They had a world class track.

Many of the girls at that university were Southern Bell types, with the cute and proper accents, all dressed up in their spring dresses, instead of sweat shirts. When we went back north, the girls that once looked pretty lost their luster, after being around the southern bells for a week. But as time went on, their shine came back. The carrot on the string helps one get back in the game and this can become relative to the situation. This affect occurs each summer during bathing suit season where the stimulus increases and then moderates.

In terms of the end game of procreation, male and female have two different end games. The female is not done after sex and fertilization. She has to go through pregnancy and since human children are not self sufficient at birth, she then needs to care for them many years after birth. The endgame for the male can be over in one day.

Altering secondary sexual characteristics with drugs and surgery will not change this. One would need to alter the DNA. This explains why gay men are often ho's. They still have the male end game, even if the carrot on the stick has been modified toward the same sex. Will and choice and culture can tweak the carrot on the stick, but the end game is assigned at birth, based on DNA; survival of species.

When you have biological males in female sports, the endgames of the male are not the same as that of the females, even if you dress up like a girl. The longer time scale endgame of the female often involves the village; female cooperation, whereas the endgame of the biological male is more individual; charm, glory today, and move on. Girls fall for the charm, but when they get used, that turns to scorn. Sports separated by biological sex takes into account the similar needs of the female and/or male end games.

 

[Zwing]

The reason there is so much need for abortion is unplanned procreation. The end game can make you forget to take the needed precautions. The carrot on the stick is the pleasure and excitement but the end game has it own needs and can cheat your choices by tweaking the carrot.

I remember in College going South for spring break with the track team, to train with the track team at a warmer prestigious southern university; Duke. It was still cold up north, and this trip was designed to get us ready for the spring season. They had a world class track.

Many of the girls at that university were Southern Bell types, with the cute and proper accents, all dressed up in their spring dresses, instead of sweat shirts. When we went back north, the girls that once looked pretty lost their luster, after being around the southern bells for a week. But as time went on, their shine came back. The carrot on the string helps one get back in the game and this can become relative to the situation. This affect occurs each summer during bathing suit season where the stimulus increases and then moderates.

In terms of the end game of procreation, male and female have two different end games. The female is not done after sex and fertilization. She has to go through pregnancy and since human children are not self sufficient at birth, she then needs to care for them many years after birth. The endgame for the male can be over in one day.

Altering secondary sexual characteristics with drugs and surgery will not change this. One would need to alter the DNA. This explains why gay men are often ho's. They still have the male end game, even if the carrot on the stick has been modified toward the same sex. Will and choice and culture can tweak the carrot on the stick, but the end game is assigned at birth, based on DNA; survival of species.

When you have biological males in female sports, the endgames of the male are not the same as that of the females, even if you dress up like a girl. The longer time scale endgame of the female often involves the village; female cooperation, whereas the endgame of the biological male is more individual; charm, glory today, and move on. Girls fall for the charm, but when they get used, that turns to scorn. Sports separated by biological sex takes into account the similar needs of the female and/or male end games.

Okay, I am up upon my soapbox.

I frankly think that the problem you allude to lies in the permissiveness and irresponsible self-absorption of our culture, wherein the consequences of giving offense are disallowed. Try going to Saudi Arabia and impregnating someone’s daughter…you would be able to consider yourself very fortunate if all the males of her family do is cut (all) your “junk” off; don’t let them catch you, because they would probably kill you in a public, demonstrable manner. We have a culture wherein “the law” has proscribed serious, immediate consequences for such irresponsible actions as wanton sex, with the results that one would expect.

Another aspect of the permissiveness of our western cultures lies in the situation which has resulted in our culture being hugely hypersexualized. Young children are perpetually exposed, because of the irresponsible actions of adults, to the most overt and often lewd expressions of sexuality that they are often heard talking about sex as is they were sailors. Improper revelations of the body, overtly descriptive speech, and even pornography are readily able to be seen and heard, and all this is taking its toll upon the fabric of our society, wherein people make far too much of sex, and ascribe to it an unhealthy, hedonistic purpose. Just because sexual pleasure was undoubtedly the trait selected for in our species does not mean that the proper purpose of sex for a rational, thinking animal like a human being should be the pursuit of pleasure. No wonder our society cannot even produce enough medical doctors to fulfill its needs…everybody is shamefully obsessing on how they can continually indulge themselves by getting laid to an externally predetermined extent.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Okay, I am up upon my soapbox.

I frankly think that the problem you allude to lies in the permissiveness and irresponsible self-absorption of our culture, wherein the consequences of giving offense are disallowed. Try going to Saudi Arabia and impregnating someone’s daughter…you would be able to consider yourself very fortunate if all the males of her family do is cut (all) your “junk” off; don’t let them catch you, because they would probably kill you in a public, demonstrable manner. We have a culture wherein “the law” has proscribed serious, immediate consequences for such irresponsible actions as wanton sex, with the results that one would expect.

And do you think that's a good thing? What point do you think that proves? Because, to me, all it suggests you're trying to say is that Saudi Arabia is lawless, violent, and treats women like property.

Another aspect of the permissiveness of our western cultures lies in the situation which has resulted in our culture being hugely hypersexualized. Young children are exposed to the most overt and often lewd expressions of sexuality that they are often heard talking about sex as is they were sailors.

Are they, really? What exactly do you think young children are being exposed to, specifically? Please provide examples.

Improper revelations of the body, overtly descriptive speech, and even pornography are readily able to be seen and heard, and all this is taking its toll upon the fabric of our society, wherein people make far too much of sex, and ascribe to it an unhealthy, hedonistic purpose.

Interesting. And yet, if you check web traffic statistics, it's often extremely religious countries that drive up the majority of traffic to porn sites.

Just because sexual pleasure was undoubtedly the trait selected for in our species does not mean that the proper purpose of sex for a rational, thinking animal like a human being should be the pursuit of pleasure.

Why can't that be a choice entirely up to individuals, and if individuals prefer to use it for pleasure then let that be absolutely fine?

No wonder our society cannot even produce enough medical doctors to fulfill it’s needs…everybody is obsessing on how they can continually indulge themselves by getting laid to an externally predetermined extent.

I would absolutely LOVE for you to produce any evidence whatsoever that a lack of medical professions is directly attributable to a preoccupation with sex. Citation, please.

 

[Zwing]

And do you think that's a good thing? What point do you think that proves? Because, to me, all it suggests you're trying to say is that Saudi Arabia is lawless, violent, and treats women like property.

Please do not so obviously mischaracterize my comments. I admire several aspects of Arab culture, and of all cultures wherein cultural tradition has not been completely obliterated by the logic of a legal code, and my statements were obviously not made in denigration thereof. What I think it proves is that our western culture and the political systems that it has created (particularly at the expense of the family) have created the environment within which an unhealthy, degenerative relationship with, and expression of, sexuality have come to flourish. In more traditional cultures there exist social norms, traditions and structures which seem to prevent that from happening. Such was the “gist” of my post.

Do I think that the family should be able to protect its members within a society, and seek vengeance for transgressions? Absolutely. The state and the legal system simply suck at maintaining healthy social norms, being far too bureaucratic to be effective. In rural northern Albania, you don’t commit murder because you know with certainty that it will result in a gjakmarrje (a “blood settlement”) against you by the victim’s family, in other words…you will be killed for your crime, usually without much adieu, and nobody will come to arrest the killer(s). Yes, in some ways I think this a good thing.

As for the rest, it’s all opinion, which is what one usually gets from “the soapbox”.

 

[Zwing]

Why can't that be a choice entirely up to individuals, and if individuals prefer to use it for pleasure then let that be absolutely fine?

I do not think that having sex for pleasure is a bad thing in and of itself; pleasure remains a valid instigation to sexual activity, but when that impetus is unrestrained it must lead to problems. Again, the defect does not lie in sex itself, but rather in the amount of mental and physical resource devoted to it. My feelings about engaging in sex for the pleasure of it must be understood within the context of my general philosophy of life. I believe, as did Kierkegaard and others, that a life lived primarily in the pursuit of pleasure is one of irresponsibility and what used to be called “dissipation”. Kierkegaard’s opus Either/Or deals with this in some detail, and the continual pursuit of (tactile, auditory, visual, etc.) stimulative pleasure would seem to me to be one of the major problems in modern, western society, with everybody wanting to continually be made to “feel good” while ignoring responsibilities and purpose. Within such a philosophical context, the idea of having sex for stimulative pleasure is only a good thing within certain bounds. In short, I feel that the pursuit of sensual pleasure is good on occasion, but is bad for being irresponsible when pursued as a way of life. In this, the problem is not sex or pleasure, but is self-indulgence. Modern western societies seem extraordinarily self-indulgent.

 

[Kfox]

No, it wasn't. It just quotes them as saying that they have encountered children who think it's trendy. That says nothing about the statistical significance of such a group, nor does it say anything of the phenomenon's significance.

Neither did I. All I said was that there was evidence some teens claim transgenderism because it is trendy.

But it doesn't present any research. It even admits "studies of detransitioners are only now being done", and what few conclusions are stated in the article are drawn from interviewing "over four dozen families whose teen daughters became caught in this current". Do I have to explain why interviewing only around fifty families ("families", remember, not necessarily even the individuals themselves who are more likely to give an accurate account of their own experiences) isn't exactly stellar research, and how unbelievably obvious it is from the language of this article alone that this research is biased?

I said nothing about stellar research, all I said was that there was evidence some teens claim this due to being trendy.

The facts that these two articles are claiming. It's one thing to say "there are people claiming to be trans because it's trendy", and a very different thing to allege that this is either a widespread or significant problem. I just want to know if there are any facts, studies or statistics that suggest trans-trenders represent a significant amount of people.

I said nothing about a widespread significant problem, all I said was that there was evidence some teens claim transgenderism because it is trendy.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I said nothing about a widespread significant problem, all I said was that there was evidence some teens claim transgenderism because it is trendy.

Which isn't new at all with girls and young women. For example, it was a trend in the 2000s for girls to claim to be bisexual, and you saw many young famous women claiming it, too. Many of them weren't bi but doing it to impress boys and be seen as open minded and cool.

 

[Zwing]

Which isn't new at all with girls and young women. For example, it was a trend in the 2000s for girls to claim to be bisexual, and you saw many young famous women claiming it, too. Many of them weren't bi but doing it to impress boys and be seen as open minded and cool.

We live in a world of followers…

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

We live in a world of followers…

Indeed, but girls and young women are especially hit hard by it for sociological reasons. They are more susceptible to peer pressure due to expectations, how their social groups are structured, psychological reasons, etc. It's like how females are more likely to be addicted to social media than males (whereas young males are more likely to form addictions to porn and video games). You can also see this with other social contagions like eating disorders and suicide attempts spreading through mostly young female peer groups in high school.

 

[metis]

The reason there is so much need for abortion is unplanned procreation. The end game can make you forget to take the needed precautions. The carrot on the stick is the pleasure and excitement but the end game has it own needs and can cheat your choices by tweaking the carrot.

I remember in College going South for spring break with the track team, to train with the track team at a warmer prestigious southern university; Duke. It was still cold up north, and this trip was designed to get us ready for the spring season. They had a world class track.

Many of the girls at that university were Southern Bell types, with the cute and proper accents, all dressed up in their spring dresses, instead of sweat shirts. When we went back north, the girls that once looked pretty lost their luster, after being around the southern bells for a week. But as time went on, their shine came back. The carrot on the string helps one get back in the game and this can become relative to the situation. This affect occurs each summer during bathing suit season where the stimulus increases and then moderates.

In terms of the end game of procreation, male and female have two different end games. The female is not done after sex and fertilization. She has to go through pregnancy and since human children are not self sufficient at birth, she then needs to care for them many years after birth. The endgame for the male can be over in one day.

Altering secondary sexual characteristics with drugs and surgery will not change this. One would need to alter the DNA. This explains why gay men are often ho's. They still have the male end game, even if the carrot on the stick has been modified toward the same sex. Will and choice and culture can tweak the carrot on the stick, but the end game is assigned at birth, based on DNA; survival of species.

When you have biological males in female sports, the endgames of the male are not the same as that of the females, even if you dress up like a girl. The longer time scale endgame of the female often involves the village; female cooperation, whereas the endgame of the biological male is more individual; charm, glory today, and move on. Girls fall for the charm, but when they get used, that turns to scorn. Sports separated by biological sex takes into account the similar needs of the female and/or male end games.

You simply cannot for whatever reason seemingly understand that it's the hormones that mostly determine one's sex drive and choices, and this just is basic Biology 101.

 

[metis]

Indeed, but girls and young women are especially hit hard by it for sociological reasons. They are more susceptible to peer pressure due to expectations, how their social groups are structured, psychological reasons, etc. It's like how females are more likely to be addicted to social media than males (whereas young males are more likely to form addictions to porn and video games). You can also see this with other social contagions like eating disorders and suicide attempts spreading through mostly young female peer groups in high school.

Let me just say I'm 101% with you on this.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Please do not so obviously mischaracterize my comments. I admire several aspects of Arab culture, and of all cultures wherein cultural tradition has not been completely obliterated by the logic of a legal code, and my statements were obviously not made in denigration thereof. What I think it proves is that our western culture and the political systems that it has created (particularly at the expense of the family) have created the environment within which an unhealthy, degenerative relationship with, and expression of, sexuality have come to flourish. In more traditional cultures there exist social norms, traditions and structures which seem to prevent that from happening. Such was the “gist” of my post.

So, to be clear, you agree that a society in which people do NOT remove people's genitals in public for impregnating a woman, and do NOT treat women like property, is less "degenerative" than a society that does?

Do I think that the family should be able to protect its members within a society, and seek vengeance for transgressions? Absolutely.

That's not the example you gave. Your example was men killing and/or mutilating a person for impregnating a member of their family. That isn't "protecting" anyone, not avenging any "transgressions". That's just misogynistic mob justice, and I would argue that any society that tolerates that is vastly more degenerate than one that doesn't.

The state and the legal system simply suck at maintaining healthy social norms, being far too bureaucratic to be effective. In rural northern Albania, you don’t commit murder because you know with certainty that it will result in a gjakmarrje (a “blood settlement”) against you by the victim’s family, in other words…you will be killed for your crime, usually without much adieu, and nobody will come to arrest the killer(s). Yes, in some ways I think this a good thing.

Cool. So you think retributive justice without due process, appeal or investigation is "in some of ways" a "good thing".

Sounds great!

Y'know, except in reality. Where it's just plain objectively worse in every possible way than a reasonable application of law and a judiciary. But, hey, that's just me. I like it when rules exist that make the world better, not worse.

As for the rest, it’s all opinion, which is what one usually gets from “the soapbox”.

Opinions that are very, very bad.