Genitalia vs Chromosomes: what makes you male of female?

No, that’s not the issue. The issue is that gender dysphoria exists far beyond the mathematical realm of equivalency of said chromosome abnormalities. Thus this doesn’t explain transgenderism in the slightest of any logical sense.

 

You made up a ridiculous number and when confronted with the actual facts, you double down. You're making up stuff again. I actually provided you the real stat from the group who actually counts this bs....

 

Picture...thousand words...

 

The post you responded to doesn't take into account that the very professionals that are advocating on this are certainly economically well compensated and have a financial gain to be made by this becoming mainstreamed. The estimates are hundreds of billions of annualized recurring revenue... Why would said professionals be tempted by the money? It doesn't make them right.

The issue is tolerating a crazy condition and trying to mainstream it as if there's nothing wrong.

 

I must have missed your thousand words because I didn't even see one.

 

I'm no fan of Jordan Peterson, but his battles with Trans/non binary folks is interesting, and I think he has a point.

In debate with one 'non binary' fellow, the guy (I forgot his name, a non binary type) accused Jordan of 'hate' for not accepting his 'pronoun'. I think the non binary guy was wrong, and Peterson was right. You can ask folks to treat you a certain way (that his historically uncommon, and not grammatical, to boot) but you are not entitled to it.

I mean, it's really getting out of hand, they have several dozen new pronouns, completely made up words for the many 'genders'. I think that is batshit crazy. One lady said she has an 'app' that lists someone's name she knows, and their 'pronoun'.

That's just bananas.

There are two genders, and there is the category of anomalies (intersex, etc).

Where the debate is, on how should we treat our trans brothers and sisters?

I'm more than willing to oblige them, I do not want to fight and it isn't that important to me. Live and let live.

But, if someone asks me 'do I think a transfemale is a real woman'?

No, I don't, and I can't help what I think, and until I find a more compelling
argument to change my mind (and I will listen) that's my position.

If we want to get into the grey areas, that's more complicated but the grey ares fall into the category of anomalies.

And to anyone who asks the question 'what is a woman'?

That is a disingenuous question, why are the asking it?

What they want to find out if you believe there are more than two sexes.

Well, since that is what they are trying to find out, I tell them, 'why don't you ask me the question you really want to ask (because I find that question an insult to my intelligence)?

 

That's on you.

"They have eyes, but they cannot see"

If cannot force you to see if you will not look.

 

Jordan Peterson disagrees. We’re also being asked to call them by their preferred pronouns and if we don’t there are consequences. How about they leave us alone too.?

 

Where, aside from your workplace, are their consequences? I'm familiar with Peterson's overdramatic lies about this. And why can't conservatives leave trans people alone instead of outlawing their care?

 

And paying for it.

 

What nonsense people who expect to be called things they are clearly not ought to at least wear a sign informing the rest of us of there weirdness,

 

Jews, Christians, and Muslims call God something that "he" is not. What sort of sign should they wear?

 

That is the issue of this thread.

Which is already addressed in the OP.

 

Why can't we put the male rapist who identifies as a woman into women's prison?
Why can't we let men who say they are women shower with the women and girls?
Why can't we let teachers talk to 5 years about what gender they identify as?
Why can't we force employees to pay for the gender mutilation of their co-workers?
Why can't men in wigs dominate women's sports, beauty contests and women of the year award shows?

This is what you want to teaching your children in high school. You and I simply cannot coexist in the same community. I do not what people with your worldview to have the slightest amount of control over myself and my kids. I could care less what goes in your community. Just keep it there and let us have our own community apart from yours.

 

You didn't answer my question. I will begin addressing yours after you address mine.

 

I don't know who that is, but anybody who is famous because they "battle" with trans/non binary folks sounds very suspicious already.

I don't care about pronouns. Using them is just a matter of respect. Nobody is required to be respectful. But I just happen to believe that better people are those who are respectful about the conditions, preferences, personal attributes... of others that are personal.

Still don't know what you mean by "entitled". "Prima facie" people should be treated with respect. If you address a person who was born without the capacity to speak, by calling them "dumb"... that might be linguistically correct, because originally the word "dumb" simply referred to the inability to speak. But it's not respectful.

On the other hand, there's this word... "entitled". I don't know, for example, if somebody who has sexually assaulted women, who has tortured children, ... is necessarily "entitled" to being referred to as "Sir". On the same token, if a transgender person is disrespectful, they are not entitled to respect either. So this word you use "entitled", sounds to me like a cop-out.

Well, a dozen "new pronouns" is just ridiculous. I want to keep my feet on the ground: transgender people deserve respect. That's my whole point. Individuals who are ridiculous are just ... ridiculous. Regardless of whether they are transgender or not. But these are individuals. Not a whole group of people. When they start ascribing the faults of individuals to groups of people, that's where bigotry begins.

Bottom line: I see no problem with referring to somebody who was born a man, but identifies as a woman with the pronoun "she", or vice versa as "he". That's just respect. Now... if you demand that you be called "it"... that might be going into the realm of the ridiculous, but it has nothing to do with this thread.

So what if she isn't?

So what if it falls into the category of anomalies? Now... if you want to say to somebody you don't know who is transgender right in their face "you're an anomaly".... that's a DIFFERENT thing.

I'm afraid you're trying to read way too much into the purpose of this thread. My whole point is that DSD is something that can be explained through genetics. And, for that reason, all this disdain on the right (especially) against LGBTQ is pure bigotry. Period! It's not about pronouns but it IS about respect. Whether or not there are two sexes is an irrelevant question. You need two sexes to reproduce. But there are infinite number of sexual behaviors and preferences. In EITHER case, the question doesn't need to be asked because it answers itself. Now... if you want to consider the biological aspects of the question, the answer is that the majority of people are of one of two sexes, but that the boundary between the two is much more blurry than people are used to thinking. My hope is that knowing this people will understand that a man identifying more with characteristics typically ascribed to a woman is very much based on genetic traits, and not with malice.

 

You should set the example. How about YOU put in your profile a sign informing as about your...

Argh!!! Unfortunately I can't finish this post without violating forum rules.

 

Why are people obsessed with pronouns? Who gives a crap!! NOT what this thread is about.

 

Ridiculous question. Your chromosomes/DNA determine your genitalia.

There is male.

There is female.

And then there are genetic abnormalities that are not normal. They are defects.

 

A. We don't care
B. They expect us to participate in their delusions
C. They want to expose children to this idiocy

If they want to wear dresses and call themselves women they are welcome to do so.

Just don't expect us to call you "she" or let you near the kids.

Other than that, they can do whatever they want.

 

Ask the transgender people creating them and demanding their usage.

 

Reality is exactly the issue.

If you can't define "woman", you have a problem with reality.

 

You give yourself too much importance. Nobody is demanding ANYTHING from YOU.

 

Some may want it to be about reality, or protecting children, or whatever other BS they can come up with, because otherwise they are left to admit to being jerks to people for no good reason.

Woman - An adult who lives and acts according to the cultural norms of those of the female sex in their society.

It cannot be defined by chromosomes, see androgen insensitivity syndrome and other intersex disorders. It cannot be defined by genitals - some cultures have more than two genders and are not defined by genitals. And unless we're romantically or medically involved with somebody, we don't normally get to evaluate this anyway. It cannot be defined by reproductive potential; old women are still women.

 

Peterson is famous and well known, I'm suprised you haven't heard of him. He's not primarily known for his skirmishes with the trans and non binary folks, he's known for a lot of other things,

Well, let's look at it by an example. If you were a transfemale, and if someone you asked 'Am I a real woman?' who denied that you were a real woman, and you then accused that person of bigotry, that would be a transfemale who believes they are entitled for everyone to think of them as they think of themselves.

Now, I''m more than happy to treat that person with respect, everyone is entitled to that, but they are not entitled to demand others 'believe they are a real woman', how can one demand such a thing?

No, it's monitored by what is fair and reasonable. Respect, of course, has to be earned, but if unknown, it should be the default. One can lose the right to be respected, of course, the overriding factor is what is fair and just.

This is what I was talking about:
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2022/08/incomplete-list-gender-pronouns/

I think that is taking things way too far. And it's getting out of hand, really, they have a gazillion pronouns now, and now I'm seeing some form applications asking me what my 'pronoun' is, I think that is ridiculous, as well.

I also think the idea of removing sex from a birth certificate is insanee, same goes for driver's license.

Where there is a debate is this, at what point does a Transgender person have the right to change their driver's license? That's a tough one, I don't know the answer. I'm leaning on the side that, if you are born a male, and you have XY chromosomes, you are male. If you prefer to dress as a woman, try and act like one, on hormones, etc., you are an effeminate male, but a male, nevertheless, and think the DL should state, male/transfemale. I think the qualifier would be acceptable.

Well, yeah, but that isn't the point. If Trans female asks me if she is a 'real woman', I'm only going to answer truthfully, I cannot do otherwise. I believe, in all sincerity, a transfemale is an effeminate male. As long as she respects my answer, we're okay. Where the problem lies is if she calls me a bigot for my answer (assuming I tried my darndest to be respectful as I could). That would be problematic for me. I think then, she would be in the wrong. Now, we could have a discussion about it, who knows, maybe she could change my mind, and I'm open to discussion, etc., but off hand, that's my position until a more compelling argument changes my mind.

Of course, you have very good point. Would I call a clearly obese and sexually unattractive woman (by societal standards, for better or worse) 'you're unattractive'? No, I wouldn't. We should be mindful of people's sensitivities. Same goes for TG. I would be respectful, unless they pressed the point and got it out of me, and even then, I would be as diplomatic about it as I could.

the 'disdain' is what is bigotry. If a republican refuses to address a TG female as she, though I would be inclined to oblige her, that is that is that Republican's right, as long as he or she were being diplomatic about it, mindful of sensitivities, and being a respectful as possible. However, if delivered with a disdainful attitude, then you could ascribe bigotry to their action. It's all about the attitude.

Yes, it's all about respect, that's the bottom line, and I think we agree.

We might disagree on what a 'real woman' is ( I don't know, do we disagree?) but on respect, I think we are on the same page.

For me, the 'blurry' only comes into play when there exist biological ambiguity, intersex, etc.

As far as personality, there are shades of blue, and shades of red, but the shades of blue are still blue, and the shades of red are still red. Mix them and you have purple/lavender but as to which, biology solves the question.