The Trans Movement Just Hit Home.......

[*Nately120*]

(05-11-2023, 03:24 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: But that doesn't mean people can't be swayed into believing they're something they're not. 

True, and in a general sense we tend to think people who are swayed into agreeing with us have seen the light or come to their senses, while people who are swayed into something we don't agree with are seen as people who have been deviously brainwashed and duped.  We are a society based upon consumption, and our entire lives we are being bombarded with advertisements, threats, and other manners of changing our mind, earning our membership, and/or separating us from our money.

So it goes.

[Matt_Crimson]

(05-11-2023, 04:29 PM)Nately120 Wrote: True, and in a general sense we tend to think people who are swayed into agreeing with us have seen the light or come to their senses, while people who are swayed into something we don't agree with are seen as people who have been deviously brainwashed and duped.  We are a society based upon consumption, and our entire lives we are being bombarded with advertisements, threats, and other manners of changing our mind, earning our membership, and/or separating us from our money.

So it goes.

Yes, we are constantly told how to think, but different things have different impacts. Personally I just can't jump on board the ship that has sailed here. I'm being asked to distort my own reality with no compelling reason to do such a thing. I want people to believe in God, yet they won't because they feel the same way.

It's like if you spent months building a house and some people come by and say "Hey, you should tear your house down and build it 9 miles that way because I feel like it's a better spot." And I respond, "Well how's it a better spot?" and they say "Because I feel like it is".

You know what I'm going to do? Keep my house right where it is.

[Belsnickel]

(05-11-2023, 03:19 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: We're talking about belief. People saying they're born in the wrong body is literally a belief.

The existence of trans people as well as the separation between sex, gender expression, and gender identity are rooted in science.

[Matt_Crimson]

(05-11-2023, 05:13 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The existence of trans people as well as the separation between sex, gender expression, and gender identity are rooted in science.

There's a difference between saying someone can be the opposite sex and saying someone can feel like the opposite sex.

[Belsnickel]

(05-11-2023, 05:33 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: There's a difference between saying someone can be the opposite sex and saying someone can feel like the opposite sex.

Except they aren't saying you can be the opposite sex. They are saying that the gender of the individual is different than their sex.

[Matt_Crimson]

(05-11-2023, 05:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Except they aren't saying you can be the opposite sex. They are saying that the gender of the individual is different than their sex.

Who is "they"?

[Dill]

(05-11-2023, 06:10 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Who is "they"?

Them. Who else?

[*Nately120*]

(05-11-2023, 04:50 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Yes, we are constantly told how to think, but different things have different impacts. Personally I just can't jump on board the ship that has sailed here. I'm being asked to distort my own reality with no compelling reason to do such a thing. I want people to believe in God, yet they won't because they feel the same way.

It's like if you spent months building a house and some people come by and say "Hey, you should tear your house down and build it 9 miles that way because I feel like it's a better spot." And I respond, "Well how's it a better spot?" and they say "Because I feel like it is".

You know what I'm going to do? Keep my house right where it is.

Well, you don't have any reason to move your house so why would you?  Same with the whole god thing.  There is a reason the god stuff is pushed the hardest on people when they are kids or when they are in a compromised situation dealing with desperate life situations or addictions or illness and death.


I'm not exactly the first mate on the Trans ship lollipop myself, but I'm just more willing to leave it all up to people and not a government that is often made up of people who have shown they have no interest or ability in looking beyond the black and white aspects of things. 

So if a guy who makes a living working in a bowling alley tells me to move my house 9 miles away I'll say "Maybe I will, bye and thanks." but if a seismologist tells me the same thing I may take more note of it.  At the end of the day, I'm free to roll the dice, regardless.  

[Belsnickel]

(05-11-2023, 06:10 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Who is "they"?

Trans people. Doctors. I don't know, everyone who is knowledgeable about this topic.

[Lucidus]

(05-11-2023, 03:24 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Except people are having reassignment surgery. How is that not wanting to be the opposite sex?

Those procedures are for the purposes of gender-affirmation. They occur when the individual desires to have certain normative physical traits associated with a biological classification [male / female]. If a biological male identifies as a woman in terms of their gender, they may also desire to possess certain physical traits / features of the biological classification they feel aligns more accurately with their gender. This is not a desire to be "the opposite sex" -- but rather, a more accurate external representation of their true internal self. Of course, this doesn't apply to all transgender people, as some neither desire the physical attributes of one classification or another, nor feel that any aspect of their gender is comprised of, or derived from, the physical.

If a gay man wears makeup and feminine clothing, does it follow that he wants to be the opposite sex?
If a cis women wants to become incredibly muscular, does it follow that she wants to be a the opposite sex?

If a biological female feels that a penis more accurately represents their internal identity, it doesn't automatically follow they want to be the opposite sex, or instead, does it points to a desire to be more physically consistent within the framework of their own identity? There are transgender people who have both a penis and breasts. What "sex" do you think they're attempting to be? There are cisgender people who have the genitalia, chromosomes or reproductive organs of both biological sexes. What gender would you have them identify as?

Quote:Right.

But that doesn't mean people can't be swayed into believing they're something they're not. 

Sure, a person could be persuaded to believe many things. However, if that's the basis of evaluating identity, then you and I could deconstruct every aspect of each other's identity using that premise; to the point where everything about who we are is completely arbitrary and without internal origin. It seems to me that would be a rather nonsensical approach to identity, because while we all have external pressures and influences, their is an internal essence about each of us that the external world can never touch. Look into a mirror while alone with your thoughts. What you experience in that moment is you. No matter the opinions or determinations of others, only you know who you truly are.

People have told me I'm not really gay my entire life; that it's just a choice, a phase or a mental illness. However, my internal self knows what those people only pretend to know; who I truly am. Only the individual can know who they truly are. To assert they are mistaken or misled is a rather arrogant presumption that implies you know the person better than they know themselves.

[*Nately120*]

What if someone convinces me that I need to let my kid get gender affirming surgery and he or she regrets it?

What if someone convinces me that I need a gun and my kid gets it and shoots himself/someone ?

What if someone convinces me that vaccines are bad and I don't let my kid get it and he/she gets a terminal case of disco fever?

What if someone convinces me of something and the government doesn't stop me from doing it? Also, kids are involved.

[Matt_Crimson]

(05-10-2023, 03:12 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Well, you don't have any reason to move your house so why would you?

Right. That's my point.

(05-11-2023, 07:26 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Trans people. Doctors. I don't know, everyone who is knowledgeable about this topic.

I wasnt asking that in a facetious manner. I just didn't want to assume what you meant by "they". Regardless, my response to Lucidus is also a response to you.

(05-11-2023, 09:32 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Those procedures are for the purposes of gender-affirmation. They occur when the individual desires to have certain normative physical traits  associated with a biological classification [male / female]. If a biological male identifies as a woman in terms of their gender, they may also desire to possess certain physical traits / features of the biological classification they feel aligns more accurately with their gender. This is not a desire to be "the opposite sex" -- but rather, a more accurate external representation of their true internal self. Of course, this doesn't apply to all transgender people, as some neither desire the physical attributes of one classification or another, nor feel that any aspect of their gender is comprised of, or derived from, the physical.

If you're biologically born a man or a woman and you are doing hormone therapy and reassignment surgery to present yourself as the opposite sex, then you are trying to change your biological self to the opposite of what you were born as. In other words, you're trying to be the opposite sex.

I've seen numerous debates on this where a trans person will say, "I'm not trying to be a man/woman, I am a man/woman, because thats what I identity as and my genitals don't define that". 

I get that. 

I completely understand that trans people believe that they "always have been" and that they're not "becoming" and the changes they make to their bodies are just affirming their "inner self" which is their "true self". But at the end of the day, if you are making biological changes to yourself to affirm your identity you are attempting to become something you aren't biologically.

And I'm not saying all trans people are doing this. But even so, those that are simply demanding that I call them by the pronoun of the opposite sex without any of the therapy or reassignment surgeries are still asking me to say that a biological man/woman is actually the opposite and they're just in the wrong body.

Quote:If a gay man wears makeup and feminine clothing, does it follow that he wants to be the opposite sex?


If a cis women wants to become incredibly muscular, does it follow that she wants to be a the opposite sex?

Well no, because the gay man and the cis woman aren't trying to affirm that they're the opposite sex. They're just expressing their masculinity and/or femininity.
 
A gay man may feel extremely feminine but not say "I feel like a woman so you must address me like a woman". That's what trans people are saying.

Quote:If a biological female feels that a penis more accurately represents their internal identity, it doesn't automatically follow they want to be the opposite sex

If the point of trying to get a penis is to show that they are actually a man, then yes they are trying to be the opposite sex. 

Quote: There are transgender people who have both a penis and breasts. What "sex" do you think they're attempting to be? There are cisgender people who have the genitalia, chromosomes or reproductive organs of both biological sexes. What gender would you have them identify as?

It's not about what sex I think they're attempting to be or what I think they should identify as. It comes down to their own identity and the way in which they want society to view and treat them. If the trans person with a penis and breats says they're a man and wants society to treat them as such, then they are attempting to be a man. The same goes for the cis gender example.

Quote:Sure, a person could be persuaded to believe many things. However, if that's the basis of evaluating identity, then you and I could deconstruct every aspect of each other's identity using that premise; to the point where everything about who we are is completely arbitrary and without internal origin. It seems to me that would be a rather nonsensical approach to identity, because while we all have external pressures and influences, their is an internal essence about each of us that the external world can never touch. Look into a mirror while alone with your thoughts. What you experience in that moment is you. No matter the opinions or determinations of others, only you know who you truly are.

But you can't deny the biological differences between men and women. Start there and work your way down. Whatever category you fit in the most biologically, then that's what you are. How you "feel" doesn't change that.

Quote:People have told me I'm not really gay my entire life; that it's just a choice, a phase or a mental illness. However, my internal self knows what those people only pretend to know; who I truly am. 

Well I'd say those people are illogical. If you're attracted to the same sex then you're gay. It's that simple. That's not something that requires a Sherlock Holmes level of investigation. Determining if someone's a man or woman however may require a bit more effort depending on the individuals biological makeup. It's not as simple as attraction.

Quote:Only the individual can know who they truly are. To assert they are mistaken or misled is a rather arrogant presumption that implies you know the person better than they know themselves.

Arrogant?

I'm not denying that people can be more masculine or more feminine in nature and express that. In fact, I've encouraged that that should actually be the "identity" here and not "male or female". I'm sorry, but nobody can primarily have the characteristics of one sex and tell me they identify as the other on an expressive level but then also tell me that I have to accept them as that on an objective truth level.

[CJD]

(05-12-2023, 09:40 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: I'm not denying that people can be more masculine or more feminine in nature and express that. In fact, I've encouraged that that should actually be the "identity" here and not "male or female". I'm sorry, but nobody can primarily have the characteristics of one sex and tell me they identify as the other on an expressive level but then also tell me that I have to accept them as that on an objective truth level.

I haven't read the entire, branching conversation and debate that you've had in this thread (you've had a lot of them and they're very long), but one thing I've noticed consistently in the posts I have read is that you seem to be very preoccupied with what you "have to accept" or do in regards to trans people. Like, socially.

I'm struggling with this because, I don't mean this in a rude way but, I don't understand what relevance that has for you. If you met a person and they looked kind of like a man (broad shoulders, lack of curves, maybe some minor 5 o clock shadow on their face, who knows. Whatever comes to your mind in this hypothetical) but were wearing a dress and maybe had long hair and they introduced themselves as Jane, what is your reaction to this person?

Would you say "clearly you are biologically a man based on some external physical features I have noticed about you, so what is your real name, sir?"

Based on your posts so far, I don't think you would. You seem to be fairly grounded in at least an attempt at understanding and tolerating trans people. So, correct me if I'm wrong, but I assume you would call this person Jane and use feminine pronouns when addressing her, right?
If so, how else does it affect you if a person who you suspect maaaaaaay be a biological man prefers to be identified as a woman?

For me, I am not all that interested in the social aspects of trans people's existence (which will continue whether people "agree" with it or not. Trans people have been around forever and they aren't going to just disappear). It's mostly regarding how people address other people and, like all othe rthings, if you address a person in a manner by which they would prefer you did not, that's rude. Whether it's their name, their pronouns, their job, whatever. Being dismissive of someone's preferences makes a person an asshole whether or not the person's preferences are "based in objective fact" or not. So there isn't a whole lot to discuss in that realm.

I am much more interested in the political and legal aspects of trans people's existence.

It's like how that Right Wing kook Michael Knowles said at CPAC, he wants to "eradicate transgenderism" in public life. He was very clear that he didn't mean eradicate transgender people, just the ideology (whatever that means). When pressed further he said in order to eradicate transgenderism you need to tell trans people "...that they need to get psychological help, that they probably need to get a little bit of spiritual help" and that they "need to be normal." (Again, whatever that means).

The problem is that's basically not possible without using the legal system to punish trans people for existing as trans people. In order to enact that right wing view of "transgenderism eradication," you would need to do essentially make it illegal for men to purchase and wear women's clothes and vice versa. You'd have to make it illegal to buy and use hormone therapies, get elective surgeries, purchase make up or wigs or whatever else society associates with one sex or another.

This creates a lot of problems.

Like...what is women's clothes? is it just dresses? Or are low rise jeans also women's clothes? What about high heels? Are those women's clothes?

Also, How do you identify a person as a "man" before they go out into public in women's clothes? Do police need to start stopping women that they think look "manly" and ID them? What if it's just a more "manly" biological women? And, if they do start "stop and frisking" manly women, do they need to get a DNA test in order to get this ID? What about the trans women that pass really well, by society's standards? Do they just fly under the radar? Or is the government going to track trans people to ensure they can't "fly under the radar?" 

To what lengths are right wingers willing to go to ensure transgenderism is "eradicated?"

It's really easy to say "Trans women are men and trans men are women." It's really easy to condemn it and complain about it, which people on the right do all the time already. But once they start trying to legislate it, things get really fascist-y, really fast.

If you, in your own brain, see a trans woman and think "nah, that's not really a woman..." that's your right to think that and I don't think you're being a bad person for having that thought. But once you take that thought and turn it into a vote for a person who wants to pass laws that take away trans people's rights based on their existence as trans people, that's where I begin to become concerned.

Does that make sense?

[Belsnickel]

(05-12-2023, 09:40 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: I wasnt asking that in a facetious manner. I just didn't want to assume what you meant by "they". Regardless, my response to Lucidus is also a response to you.

And your response to Lucidus still just ignored what I said. It ignores the differences between sex and gender. Genitals don't define a person's biological sex as that is an outward expression. Genetics is how a person's sex is really defined, and even then it isn't strictly male/female. When a person goes through surgical procedures to affirm their gender it is about their gender, not their sex. You keep ignoring that.

[SunsetBengal]

(05-11-2023, 07:26 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Trans people. Doctors. I don't know, everyone who is knowledgeable about this topic.

Trans people and doctors that cater to them might have a similar agenda.  The "I don't know" is concerning, as it makes you appear to be grasping at straws.

What's my point?  Not everyone is ready to accept the "trans movement", and a significant portion of those non-accepters feel like it's a "fad" that will pass, and that those feelings of being trans may have been influenced by outside sources like social media and it's effects on the child and parent.  Now, that does not go to discount anything that you have said about "science", as they are continually gathering and questioning facts/evidence that they attain.  All I can think of when reading through these arguments is the fall of Rome.  I never thought that the fall of the US would stem from gender dysphoria.

[*Nately120*]

(05-12-2023, 08:03 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Trans people and doctors that cater to them might have a similar agenda.  The "I don't know" is concerning, as it makes you appear to be grasping at straws.

What's my point?  Not everyone is ready to accept the "trans movement", and a significant portion of those non-accepters feel like it's a "fad" that will pass, and that those feelings of being trans may have been influenced by outside sources like social media and it's effects on the child and parent.  Now, that does not go to discount anything that you have said about "science", as they are continually gathering and questioning facts/evidence that they attain.  All I can think of when reading through these arguments is the fall of Rome.  I never thought that the fall of the US would stem from gender dysphoria.

If it's a fad then let it pass.  And if people regret transitioning, use them to warn people of the dangers of falling for the ruse much like the pro-life movement has used women who got abortions and then regretted it to bolster their side of the argument.  Here is Sue, she regrets getting an abortion so make it illegal.  Here is Bobby, he regrets becoming Betty so make it illegal.  Here is Clint, he regrets buying the gun his son Bobby used to shoot himself so make it illegal.  It's all about winning elections at this point, innit?

For all we know in 2028 a democrat could be running on a platform of pardoning all the parents who let their kids transition when it was against the law.  They're political prisoners, after all right?

I also don't get why we are suddenly acting like social media and outside sources aren't filling us with a bunch of information about everything and anything and the idea that anything trans is a bridge too far.  One could argue that you comparing this to the fall of Rome could be attributed to you letting social media play an undue role on the way you perceive things.

Then again, maybe my inability to grasp how this is going to usher in the fall of our nation is a sign of my own biased view of the world thanks to the specific brand of "reality" I'm being fed.

[Belsnickel]

(05-12-2023, 08:03 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Trans people and doctors that cater to them might have a similar agenda.  The "I don't know" is concerning, as it makes you appear to be grasping at straws.

The "I don't know" was simply because I could list a number of different categories. Thus the statement immediately following the "I don't know" indicating stating everyone knowledgeable on the topic.

(05-12-2023, 08:03 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: What's my point?  Not everyone is ready to accept the "trans movement", and a significant portion of those non-accepters feel like it's a "fad" that will pass, and that those feelings of being trans may have been influenced by outside sources like social media and it's effects on the child and parent.  Now, that does not go to discount anything that you have said about "science", as they are continually gathering and questioning facts/evidence that they attain.  All I can think of when reading through these arguments is the fall of Rome.  I never thought that the fall of the US would stem from gender dysphoria.

Right. It's a fad that has existed for ~4,500 years and in cultures all over the world. While the language we use in modern times for this has only been around for 60-70 years, there is anthropological evidence of trans individuals in Sumerian culture.

As for the fall of the US, it certainly isn't going to come from gender dysphoria. It's going to come from politicians ignoring the quotes in my signature.

[SunsetBengal]

(05-12-2023, 08:24 PM)Nately120 Wrote: If it's a fad then let it pass.  And if people regret transitioning, use them to warn people of the dangers of falling for the ruse much like the pro-life movement has used women who got abortions and then regretted it to bolster their side of the argument.  Here is Sue, she regrets getting an abortion so make it illegal.  Here is Bobby, he regrets becoming Betty so make it illegal.  Here is Clint, he regrets buying the gun his son Bobby used to shoot himself so make it illegal.  It's all about winning elections at this point, innit?

For all we know in 2028 a democrat could be running on a platform of pardoning all the parents who let their kids transition when it was against the law.  They're political prisoners, after all right?

I also don't get why we are suddenly acting like social media and outside sources aren't filling us with a bunch of information about everything and anything and the idea that anything trans is a bridge too far.  One could argue that you comparing this to the fall of Rome could be attributed to you letting social media play an undue role on the way you perceive things.

Then again, maybe my inability to grasp how this is going to usher in the fall of our nation is a sign of my own biased view of the world thanks to the specific brand of "reality" I'm being fed.

There's a reason that our military budget is astronomical, and that reason is because the US is "expected" to be the protectors of the free world.  We are now in a period where the armed forces are struggling and in some instances failing to meet recruiting numbers.  We live in a country so comfortable that our young are not willing to sign up to defend, that is a warning signal.  That in itself isn't the barometer of failure that I'm leaning toward as much as our youth are more caught up in social issues that they no longer care about being a part of keeping those rights to do so sovereign.  

Your failure to recognize that the US is currently in a parallel situation as Rome under the rule of Caligula, is just baffling to me.

[SunsetBengal]

(05-12-2023, 08:52 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The "I don't know" was simply because I could list a number of different categories. Thus the statement immediately following the "I don't know" indicating stating everyone knowledgeable on the topic.


Right. It's a fad that has existed for ~4,500 years and in cultures all over the world. While the language we use in modern times for this has only been around for 60-70 years, there is anthropological evidence of trans individuals in Sumerian culture.

As for the fall of the US, it certainly isn't going to come from gender dysphoria. It's going to come from politicians ignoring the quotes in my signature.

So cultures have been accepting and providing gender reversing surgeries for thousands of years?  Good to know. 

[Belsnickel]

(05-12-2023, 09:00 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So cultures have been accepting and providing gender reversing surgeries for thousands of years?  Good to know. 

Careful not to move those goalposts too much, don't want to misplace them.