Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
The point he's making is that the only comparable suicide rate to transgendered people is that of Jews in Nazi Germany, so the idea that the suicide rate isn't endemic to transgenderism but rather motivated by society's treatment of transgendered people is one he rejects since transgendered people are demonstrably not nearly as oppressed as people undergoing a literal genocide.
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
Yes he's said that a number of times, as he doesn't really have any other argument, and I've addressed it already. What I was referring to was his insinuation that the biggest problem trans people faced was the bathroom they could piss in.
Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
Yeah I honestly feel similarly about the notion of gender identity. I don't think it's necessarily wise to construct an identity corresponding to a biological characteristic based on personality traits associated with certain biological characteristics. We sometimes do something similar with other biological traits, but often only to the point of stereotypes (such as racial stereotypes) but not to the point of a fully blown identity that is linguistically and litigiously recognized. Much the same way that we don't do the same thing for other differences in psychology and personality traits, since we don't use separate sets of words for people with differing personality types or segregate them based on those differences in personality types or have it legislated into law. And I can see why we don't do that for other personality types or psychologies associated with biological characteristics because such a thing is much more difficult to objectively measure and quantify.
I mean hell, even two people in this thread ardently arguing in favor of the difference between the two completely acknowledge that gender identity is more subjective and is a lot more difficult to quantify:
And this really begs the question; if gender identity is so subjective, intangible, ambiguous, hard to prove, and difficult to quantify, then why should we give so much linguistic and litigious weight to this form of identity?
I mean would it not make more practical sense for us as a society to keep linguistic categories of pronouns in relation to biological sex, as well as keep legal documentation in relation to biological sex, and legislation regarding bathrooms in relation to biological sex (again, IMO bathrooms should either be segregated on the basis of biological sex since genitals and not psychology are relevant to taking a piss/shit, or they shouldn't be segregated to begin with), while still recognizing the differences in psychology and personality between varying human beings and accepting people dressing or behaving in ways more or less masculine/feminine than one of their sex traditionally does, and allowing them to get whatever cosmetic surgery or hormonal treatment they choose?
I simply don't see why "gender identity" needs to be instantiated into pronoun usage, bathroom usage, or legislative documentation for the difference in personality and psychology between individuals to be respected, particularly since it is way more practical to have language and legal documents based on something more tangible and objectively observable.
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
Last edited by Emperordmb on Jul 22nd, 2017 at 05:34 PM
That is just it, sex and gender are not coupled. It is only because your sex and gender are in alignment, that you see it that way.
Not all transitions involve medical interventions. Some transgender people do not desire to change their sex. Rather, they seek to live as a gender that is different than the one that was assigned to them on the basis of their birth sex.
Think of it this way: you identify as a man, and the people who see and interact with you on a day-to-day basis do not know whether you are male, but they accept that you are a man, because that is how you identify, and that is how you present yourself. It is the exact same thing for transgender people. The only difference is that the gender they identify with does not correspond to their birth sex.
Gender dysphoria is a difficult condition to live with. Not only do people with this condition face political oppression, religious persecution, and social stigmatization from society-at-large, and often their own friends and families, they have to live with an irresolvable incongruity between their sex and gender. Some think that medical interventions will close the gap enough between that incongruity that they will be happy, and are depressed to learn that it does not solve all of their problems. That is not a failure of the intervention, that is a failure of expectation.
Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
Up until recently we didn't make the distinction between gender identity and biological sex. We're making a grave mistake in trying to instantiate the less objectively measurable of the two into our language and legal documentation.
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
Right exactly. Gender identity is so hardwired into our society and social interactions that it's considered practically synonymous with sex, even though they are in fact distinct constructs.
In that respect, pronouns, bathroom access, legal denotations etc. refer as much to a person's sex as to a person's gender. In should not be hard to work out why a trans person with identifies as female would be uncomfortable being referred to as "he", because it implies they have a masculine identity, when they don't, and a whole body of social behavior and character assumptions becomes shaped around that. The same goes with which bathroom you're allowed to use (which is largely a result of assumed male and female characteristics, not the shape of their privates) and arguably how you're legally identified.
If we lived in a society where these things referred to biological sex and nothing else, that would be great, but we don't.
__________________
Last edited by Beniboybling on Jul 22nd, 2017 at 06:35 PM
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Quick someone name the good looking male who replaced Spicer.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
I don't necessarily reject that society causes transgender people to be depressed or suicidal. But I do think the fact that post-op have a higher suicide rate that pre-op, and that the vast majority of trans women never actually make that final transition, indicates that there is something about that sugery that has negative consequences which are not necessarily just due to "trans-phobia." I say this because I feel that surely pre-op trans people are just as susceptible to trans-phobia as post-op people.
By "coupled" I don't mean synonymous. I simply mean that gender exists because human sexual dimorphism exists. So we have an archetype for "masculinity" that aligns roughly with what it would mean in the context of a hunter gatherer tribe for a man to be a good hunter, warrior, provider. And the archetype for "femininity" is largely based on what it means to be a good mother, nurturer, and wife. I don't see these as arbitrary social constructs, but as deeply rooted in human biology and evolution.
And so I don't necessarily "not understand" because I'm a non-trans male. I understand that some men want to become women. I don't completely understand their mind-state, but I can at least make sense of the fact that their sex doesn't satisfy them and they want to be something different.
What I don't understand, or to me what seems inherently incoherent, are the 70 something genders that are supposed to exist now. I don't understand the people who say they are neither male nor female, or that they are both simultaneously. I don't understand the people who say they identify with other animals or species.
And it seems like the left/social justice side of politics is basically inviting these kinds of incoherent claims by making them somewhat trendy and then shaming or shouting down anyone who openly questions them as simply being (best case) privileged and naive or (worst case) bigoted and malicious.
I already addressed this. Many transgender people do not desire to change their bodies. Those that do, often encounter financial and legal obstacles that prevent them from completing medical transitions.
One needs a referral from two different psychologists in order to qualify for surgery, which means attending therapy for two years with two different therapists. Since sex reassignment is considered cosmetic, it is often not covered by insurance, and can cost up to $50,000. States often have their own requirements, including changing birth documents, and even reproductive sterilization.
In order to surmount all of these obstacles, some people begin to focus on getting the surgery as goal unto itself, instead of a means to an end. They become so focused on how to get to the destination, that they do not think about what will happen once they actually get there.
Many think they will get the surgery, and then they will be happy. But what they do not consider is that all of the troubles they had before surgery will still be there after surgery. They just get to face them in a body they feel more comfortable in. Many cosmetic and reconstructive surgery patients experience exactly the same thing. It is not unique to transgender people, nor is it a failure of the surgery.
If concepts of gender had a basis in biology, they would be uniform across time and culture, and that is simply not the case. Many cultures have more than two genders, and roles assigned to men in one culture may be assigned to women in another.
It is evident that you do not understand, because you described a transwoman as a "man who wants to be a woman." A transwoman is not a man, a transwoman is male. And she does not want to be a woman, she identifies as a woman. You are framing it as a male wanting to be something he is not, when it is someone asserting that both of those identities are true.
I don't really disagree with any of what you just said. But that only adds to my gut feeling that ultimately the trans thing is a sort of delusion that we are encouraging people to engage in.
Because of course if they really believe they are a female trapped in a male's body, they will want to have a female body and they will see this as the solution to their problem. I think that is a sort of natural assumption for one to make if they are in that sort of situation.
Your statement that many don't want to alter their bodies just sounds to me like some of the more inane and trendy modern manifestations of people on tumblr who want to vaguely identify as something other than "cis" but do not want to go so far as making hormonal or surgical modifications to their bodies because they probably intuitively recognize the potential hazards of doing so. I think most of these people are playing word games and are just men or women who feel some level of disillusion with the gender roles they are expected to take on.
But it would seem to me the majority of trans people are usually born male and generally trying to present themselves as women. And beyond that, most of them do make modifications to their body. They just stop short of cutting their dicks off, because that is an intrinsically very radical thing to do.
But the use of hormones and cosmetic surgery to better approximate the body of a human female once again stands out to me as a subconscious recognition that in fact biology does matter. That being a woman only makes sense in the context of human biology, and that these people are doing their best to cosmetically and hormonally approximate that condition.
I see no reason why they would be uniform. Evolution is incredibly complex. What might make the ideal father in tribe A is not necessarily going to be the same in tribe B, especially if tribe A and B exist in radically different environments.
On top of that, in any tribe there is always going to be a dominance heirarchy, and you would expect as a result of that that different men and women will fall into place at different locations across the spectrum. So not all males are going to be genetically fit to be warlords, but they will find their place in the tribe according to whatever characteristics they do offer.
You're quibbling over my use of language to say that I don't understand. Let me say this... I might not be completely on top of how the trans/feminist community wants us to speak. But I feel that they are using these word games to preach their ideology, so I see little reason to grant them the authority to dictate how I speak since I don't particularly care for their ideology.
Let me ask you this... what is it about gender that makes it the sort of thing that you get to choose where as you dismiss the idea that people could do the same with race? Because the only arguments I've ever seen are that well some people are born with brains that more closely resemble a female brain or something along those lines. But doesn't that just back up the idea that gender is manifestation of sexual dimorphism? That it actually is closely linked to biology? And if so, wouldn't that undermine the idea that so and so can just declare themselves "masculine of center gender queer" or whatever tedious category they come up with that has absolutely no basis in their own biology?
Last edited by Afro Cheese on Jul 23rd, 2017 at 01:41 AM
For someone who is so insistent that he understands the issue, every time you post, you demonstrate that you do not.
A transwoman is not "a woman trapped in a man's body." She is a woman with a male body.
Transgender people do not seek medical interventions, because they "believe gender has a basis in biology." They do so to ease gender dysphoria, or to be better accepted as the gender with which they identify.
Imagine if you were short, or slight of frame, or had delicate features, and people constantly perceived you as a woman. Since you identify as a man, it is important to you that people see you as a man. So you might wear lifts in your shoes, or lift weights, or grow a beard, or get plastic surgery.
It is the exact same thing for transgender people, particularly because other people interact with their gender far more than with their genitals.
If gender had a basis in biology, how would it not be uniform? Aside from intersex persons who have a congenital birth defect, there are no human beings who are not sexually dimorphic, so where would variations in gender come from? There is not enough genetic variation among human beings for there to be actual, separate races, yet somehow you believe that there is enough to account for variations in gender? And that it is somehow just a coincidence that concepts of gender change over time and across cultures?
There is an entire branch of Philosophy dedicated to Semantics, and how language shapes thought. Conversely, the language you use, inadvertently reveals your thoughts to others. So when you use imprecise language, not only are you not effectively communicating your thoughts to other people, but you are also revealing to them what you do and do not know.
What makes you think gender is chosen?
This is precisely what I mentioned above. You insist you understand the issue, then you post, and remove any doubt that you do.
That is the logical equivalent of saying a homosexual prefers members of the same sex, when he is in fact exclusively attracted to members of the same sex.
You are operating from the presumption that transgender people are choosing another gender, rather than experiencing the gender they have.