WritersBeat.com
 

Go Back   WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table

The Intellectual Table Discussions on political topics, social issues, current affairs, etc.


Gender Fluidity and Linguistic Grounding

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #61  
Old 10-24-2017, 07:27 PM
Loser&Loner's Avatar
Loser&Loner (Offline)
Intellectually Fertile
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: By the sea
Posts: 153
Thanks: 19
Thanks 17
Default


I blame Myers.

__________________
My words are edible
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 10-24-2017, 07:31 PM
Loser&Loner's Avatar
Loser&Loner (Offline)
Intellectually Fertile
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: By the sea
Posts: 153
Thanks: 19
Thanks 17
Default

Really it is a shame. I know so little about gender and want to learn more.
__________________
My words are edible
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 10-24-2017, 07:33 PM
bluewpc's Avatar
bluewpc (Offline)
Profusive Denizen
Official Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 282
Thanks: 3
Thanks 34
Default

I blame myself.

@eri Id like to have that talk on consciousness with you. Have you ever heard of Julian Jaynes? He wrote the Dawn of Consciousness and The Bicameral Mind and in it he posits that originally there was a slave master relationship between the different hemispheres of the brain and quite fascinatingly he uses as evidence the Iliad of all things as evidence (among many other things)

He hypothesized that the guidance of the Olympian gods to the Greeks was in actuality the interplay between hemispheres. That when presented with novel experiences the master hemisphere would communicate aurally with its counterpart giving it instruction.

Later in the book he posits that mental disorders wherein the patient hears voices is actually a vestige of that system and he points out that many voices in the studies he conducted (this was back in the 70's) were imperative.

Last edited by bluewpc; 10-24-2017 at 07:36 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 10-24-2017, 07:37 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,743
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Originally Posted by Loser&Loner View Post
Dude we are letting it go. I said some things he said some things... it was lame. But hey if you want to start this up again I'm in!
Naw -- I'm good.

Maybe I'm just dense or I can't appreciate the depth of all this examination.

But it seems like it doesn't have very much to do with how people deal with these issues on the ground level.

For example, what if my 14 year old daughter came to me and told me she sincerely believed she was a boy -- and our family had to deal with all the ramifications of that.

Would any of this shit about semantics and nomenclature really matter?

Of course not.

You really can't underestimate empathy as part of the equation when you're looking at issues like this -- even if you think that there is a bandwagon effect or that it's prime fodder for the social justice warriors.

Heck -- there's even a phrase designed to shut down people who consider what it might like to walk in someone else shoes -- "virtue signaling."

I mean, holy shit -- I might be doing it right now!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Myers For This Useful Post:
Loser&Loner (10-24-2017)
  #65  
Old 10-24-2017, 07:40 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,743
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Originally Posted by bluewpc View Post
Oh Myers you are such a yahoo
Maybe so.

Otherwise -- go fuck yourself!

How's that for a lack of empathy...

Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 10-24-2017, 07:42 PM
Loser&Loner's Avatar
Loser&Loner (Offline)
Intellectually Fertile
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: By the sea
Posts: 153
Thanks: 19
Thanks 17
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Perhaps there is and underlying empathy -- maybe on a personal level that we don't see here.

But it's hard to see it under the multiple layers of esoteric bullshit...
Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Naw -- I'm good.

Maybe I'm just dense or I can't appreciate the depth of all this examination.

But it seems like it doesn't have very much to do with how people deal with these issues on the ground level.

For example, what if my 14 year old daughter came to me and told me she sincerely believed she was a boy -- and our family had to deal with all the ramifications of that.

Would any of this shit about semantics and nomenclature really matter?

Of course not.

You really can't underestimate empathy as part of the equation when you're looking at issues like this -- even if you think that there is a bandwagon effect or that it's prime fodder for the social justice warriors.

Heck -- there's even a phrase designed to shut down people who consider what it might like to walk in someone else shoes -- "virtue signaling."

I mean, holy shit -- I might be doing it right now!
Dude thats what I was trying to say! But you kept it on topic thats where I went wrong.
__________________
My words are edible
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Loser&Loner For This Useful Post:
Myers (10-24-2017)
  #67  
Old 10-24-2017, 08:00 PM
eripiomundus (Offline)
The Next Bard
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 416
Thanks: 29
Thanks 110
Default

Originally Posted by Loser&Loner View Post
Do you beta read? I need your brain in my life. What do you think gender really is?
Sorry, I don't beta read. I don't really like to cause social disharmony, and when you're having someone critique your work the best person you can have do it is someone who doesn't mind picking your work to pieces and telling you what's rubbish and what's not. I'd be too concerned about hurt feelings to do the former.

Gender: One of the evolutionary reasons for a division between the sexes is so that survival pressures can be shared between two specialised individuals who act in concert to make a whole. Sex gives structural expression to this phenomenon, with male and female bodies being specialised to their roles, and gender gives functional expression to it, with male and female proclivities being specialised to their roles.

Gender is just a program that encourages an individual to perform their half of a male-female equation.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 10-24-2017, 08:03 PM
eripiomundus (Offline)
The Next Bard
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 416
Thanks: 29
Thanks 110
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Naw -- I'm good.

Maybe I'm just dense or I can't appreciate the depth of all this examination.

But it seems like it doesn't have very much to do with how people deal with these issues on the ground level.

For example, what if my 14 year old daughter came to me and told me she sincerely believed she was a boy -- and our family had to deal with all the ramifications of that.

Would any of this shit about semantics and nomenclature really matter?

Of course not.

You really can't underestimate empathy as part of the equation when you're looking at issues like this -- even if you think that there is a bandwagon effect or that it's prime fodder for the social justice warriors.

Heck -- there's even a phrase designed to shut down people who consider what it might like to walk in someone else shoes -- "virtue signaling."

I mean, holy shit -- I might be doing it right now!
*Sighs*
You said in one post what I couldn't in a dozen.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to eripiomundus For This Useful Post:
Myers (10-25-2017)
  #69  
Old 10-24-2017, 08:07 PM
eripiomundus (Offline)
The Next Bard
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 416
Thanks: 29
Thanks 110
Default

Originally Posted by bluewpc View Post
I blame myself.

@eri Id like to have that talk on consciousness with you. Have you ever heard of Julian Jaynes? He wrote the Dawn of Consciousness and The Bicameral Mind and in it he posits that originally there was a slave master relationship between the different hemispheres of the brain and quite fascinatingly he uses as evidence the Iliad of all things as evidence (among many other things)

He hypothesized that the guidance of the Olympian gods to the Greeks was in actuality the interplay between hemispheres. That when presented with novel experiences the master hemisphere would communicate aurally with its counterpart giving it instruction.

Later in the book he posits that mental disorders wherein the patient hears voices is actually a vestige of that system and he points out that many voices in the studies he conducted (this was back in the 70's) were imperative.
I have the book, but never got around to reading it. It's at my dad's house about 900kms (around 500 miles) away. Next time I see him I'll grab it, but my reading has tapered off to basically nothing these days - a brain injury about four years ago makes it hard to read technical stuff nowadays. Maybe I'll get through it though if it's really interesting.

I'm familiar with his thoughts to about the extent that you've mentioned and no more.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 10-24-2017, 08:08 PM
Loser&Loner's Avatar
Loser&Loner (Offline)
Intellectually Fertile
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: By the sea
Posts: 153
Thanks: 19
Thanks 17
Default

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
*Sighs*
You said in one post what I couldn't in a dozen.
Myers won the debate for sure.
__________________
My words are edible
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 10-24-2017, 08:10 PM
Loser&Loner's Avatar
Loser&Loner (Offline)
Intellectually Fertile
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: By the sea
Posts: 153
Thanks: 19
Thanks 17
Default

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
Sorry, I don't beta read. I don't really like to cause social disharmony, and when you're having someone critique your work the best person you can have do it is someone who doesn't mind picking your work to pieces and telling you what's rubbish and what's not. I'd be too concerned about hurt feelings to do the former.

Gender: One of the evolutionary reasons for a division between the sexes is so that survival pressures can be shared between two specialised individuals who act in concert to make a whole. Sex gives structural expression to this phenomenon, with male and female bodies being specialised to their roles, and gender gives functional expression to it, with male and female proclivities being specialised to their roles.

Gender is just a program that encourages an individual to perform their half of a male-female equation.
Fair enough.

Do you think now that we are thr ultimate apex predators we no longer have a need for these roles?
__________________
My words are edible
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 10-24-2017, 08:17 PM
eripiomundus (Offline)
The Next Bard
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 416
Thanks: 29
Thanks 110
Default

Originally Posted by Loser&Loner View Post
Fair enough.

Do you think now that we are thr ultimate apex predators we no longer have a need for these roles?
There's reason to suppose the current state of civilisation has less need for them. You don't necessarily have to be strong to perform your duties as a man these days, for instance. But unless we adopt a new means of reproducing instead of sex, some gender roles will still be required for that because a different gender mentality drives the impulses that bring a pair of genitals together in a reproductive way.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 10-24-2017, 08:22 PM
Loser&Loner's Avatar
Loser&Loner (Offline)
Intellectually Fertile
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: By the sea
Posts: 153
Thanks: 19
Thanks 17
Default

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
There's reason to suppose the current state of civilisation has less need for them. You don't necessarily have to be strong to perform your duties as a man these days, for instance. But unless we adopt a new means of reproducing instead of sex, some gender roles will still be required for that because a different gender mentality drives the impulses that bring a pair of genitals together in a reproductive way.
That is a matter of sex not gender.
__________________
My words are edible
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 10-24-2017, 08:23 PM
bluewpc's Avatar
bluewpc (Offline)
Profusive Denizen
Official Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 282
Thanks: 3
Thanks 34
Default

@myers I suppose that was outside the scope of the conversation which is why we didnt bring it up. But to address your hypothetical daughter if she were to come out to you that would be a private matter as it is now.

Once the conversation turns towards advocacy in politics, for one path or another, then the ramifications ought to be examined and debated. Democracy rests upon freedom of speech and so there can be no subject taboo and hurt feelings can never be a reason not to discuss ideas or public policy.

You say not to underestimate empathy and I would fully agree and trust me I dont but I would also not underestimate other forces, societal, personal, financial, traditional, religious. And this coming from the guy mind you who rails against the bastard in the office.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 10-24-2017, 08:29 PM
eripiomundus (Offline)
The Next Bard
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 416
Thanks: 29
Thanks 110
Default

Originally Posted by Loser&Loner View Post
That is a matter of sex not gender.
If you reread what I said you'll note that I said "because a different gender mentality drives the impulses that bring a pair of genitals together in a reproductive way". The act of sex is inclusive of gender roles.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to eripiomundus For This Useful Post:
Loser&Loner (10-24-2017)
  #76  
Old 10-24-2017, 11:03 PM
anna (Offline)
Copyist
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 49
Thanks: 19
Thanks 30
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Naw -- I'm good.

Maybe I'm just dense or I can't appreciate the depth of all this examination.

But it seems like it doesn't have very much to do with how people deal with these issues on the ground level.

For example, what if my 14 year old daughter came to me and told me she sincerely believed she was a boy -- and our family had to deal with all the ramifications of that.

Would any of this shit about semantics and nomenclature really matter?

Of course not.

You really can't underestimate empathy as part of the equation when you're looking at issues like this -- even if you think that there is a bandwagon effect or that it's prime fodder for the social justice warriors.

Heck -- there's even a phrase designed to shut down people who consider what it might like to walk in someone else shoes -- "virtue signaling."

I mean, holy shit -- I might be doing it right now!
Yes it does matter, greatly, because you are dealing with a young person and the clarification and classification of things matters to them when they are muddling through to adulthood. The depth of empathy for your child is in the scope for nurturing self discovery without undue irreversible, avoidable harm.

If there was a word for a young person who recognized themselves as being on that gender journey it could be a way of protecting their long term interests whist allowing themselves the scope to just be.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 10-25-2017, 12:52 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,636
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
As Bluewpc has mentioned, and I agree: transsexuals aren't that numerous. It's not easy finding enough of them to participate in a quantitatively substantial study, so you get lots of studies with ten to twenty participants, but there are lots of those studies.


I think we have something of a double standard going on here. I assume you don't consider heterosexual sexuality to be an affectation in expectation of "coolness", and yet can you prove that a heterosexual really is heterosexual? Where's the physical evidence? The biological evidence? Can you prove that a normal biological heterosexual man is what he says he is? "By his actions" you might say, but if we judge according to this standard then acting as the opposite gender aught to be enough. How are you going to "prove" what any of us say we are? I've given you three links, which you didn't bother to read, that suggest there is a neurobiological basis for transsexual identification. If I asked for evidence to support the existence of heterosexual male gender the only place you could genuinely seek the evidence is through neurobiological dimorphism between the sexes, which is the exact type of evidence I've given you with regard to transsexuals.

The double standard here is that you don't require physical/biological "proof" that transsexuals are pretending to be transsexual only to be "cool" - where is your proof for that? It's your own subjective opinion, and you haven't provided any evidence whatsoever to support it, and yet you claim to know with certainty the internal state of people you've never met, and demand of them proof that, when offered, you conveniently choose not to read.
Yeah sorry man but I'm usually at work when I visit this forum, don't have all day but I'll give you my thoughts for good or ill.

So...

On the double standard, no can't prove someone is heterosexual. But I never claimed that sexuality is biologically provable, that seems to be more your bag. Sexuality doesn't require you to subscribe to the non-binary hypothesis, it's just men and women fucking in whichever way they see fit so it's not a valid comparison. Science doesn't really need to get involved with that.

ie: if I say I'm gay, all you really need to know is that I'm attracted to members of the same sex. There's nothing biologically controversial about that.

But saying something like 'I'm non-binary, I'm not a man and don't call me one', when you happen to fit the universal standard for what constitutes a male, then we have a problem which science might want to deal with (though I think it would be rather pointless, see why at the end of the paragraph). Right now science doesn't deal with it, and here's where I think you're missing the point. When I say there is no scientific basis I mean that when I say I'm non-binary you just have to take my word for it and address me using a pronoun of my choosing, which might change at any time, and grant me access to the women's toilets if I want it etc. I don't have to give you science, only my self-diagnosis, and you must conform. This is why I said it comes under the category of choice. Let's be real, how many of these non-binary claims could be actually substantiated by science and what the hell would it matter like anyone who identifies themselves as non-binary is gonna give a shit about some test to determine which lifestyle they lead? How controversial would it be for science to get involved and try to decide who is non-binary and who is not, it would never happen. Science is simply NOT involved. But the LAW is.

EDIT: another way to think about it is I could go so far as to say there isn't a scientific/biological basis for depression. And you could chuck a million studies at me. But it's not like everyone who's is told that they have a 'chemical imbalance' in the brain and prescribed SSRI's can show you what that imbalance looks like. Because no one really know what it looks like and it doesn't matter, they just have to say that they're depressed and describe some behavioural traits, no scan, no biological test required.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.

Last edited by JohnConstantine; 10-25-2017 at 01:00 AM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JohnConstantine For This Useful Post:
Loser&Loner (10-25-2017)
  #78  
Old 10-25-2017, 01:15 AM
eripiomundus (Offline)
The Next Bard
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 416
Thanks: 29
Thanks 110
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Yeah sorry man but I'm usually at work when I visit this forum, don't have all day but I'll give you my thoughts for good or ill.

So...

On the double standard, no can't prove someone is heterosexual. But I never claimed that sexuality is biologically provable, that seems to be more your bag. Sexuality doesn't require you to subscribe to the non-binary hypothesis, it's just men and women fucking in whichever way they see fit so it's not a valid comparison. Science doesn't really need to get involved with that.

ie: if I say I'm gay, all you really need to know is that I'm attracted to members of the same sex. There's nothing biologically controversial about that.

But saying something like 'I'm non-binary, I'm not a man and don't call me one', when you happen to fit the universal standard for what constitutes a male, then we have a problem which science might want to deal with (though I think it would be rather pointless, see why at the end of the paragraph). Right now science doesn't deal with it, and here's where I think you're missing the point. When I say there is no scientific basis I mean that when I say I'm non-binary you just have to take my word for it and address me using a pronoun of my choosing, which might change at any time, and grant me access to the women's toilets if I want it etc. I don't have to give you science, only my self-diagnosis, and you must conform. This is why I said it comes under the category of choice. Let's be real, how many of these non-binary claims could be actually substantiated by science and what the hell would it matter like anyone who identifies themselves as non-binary is gonna give a shit about some test to determine which lifestyle they lead? How controversial would it be for science to get involved and try to decide who is non-binary and who is not, it would never happen. Science is simply NOT involved. But the LAW is.

EDIT: another way to think about it is I could go so far as to say there isn't a scientific/biological basis for depression. And you could chuck a million studies at me. But it's not like everyone who's is told that they have a 'chemical imbalance' in the brain and prescribed SSRI's can show you what that imbalance looks like. Because no one really know what it looks like and it doesn't matter, they just have to say that they're depressed and describe some behavioural traits, no scan, no biological test required.
And yet you require some kind of "proof" that transsexuals exist?

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but if I were to summarise the above post I'd be at a loss to do so other than:

"I believe transgenderism is a choice. I have no grounds upon which to make such an assertion, and if offered scientific evidence to the contrary I will not accept it".

As for depression: it is not, and has never been, caused by a "chemical imbalance". That is a widespread misconception. It is, in every case where it does not result from disease or physical trauma, the result of something that needs changing and isn't changed. When the system requires change and is denied it there is stress. Stress causes the body to utilise so-called "mother" hormones (not in an actual mother, that's just what they call them because other hormones are "born" from them) for the production of cortisol. Cortisol has a neurodegenerative effect on certain parts of the brain owing to glucocorticoid receptor proliferations abounding on those regions. The hippocampus is one such region, and the cortisol receptor activity in that region causes a lapse in hippocampal neurogenesis, which then sends a person into a depressive spiral. Neurochemical imbalance is a symptom stemming from this, not a cause. Even if a lack of certain neurochemicals through dietary insufficiency caused a chemical imbalance, nutrition would be the instigating phenomenon.

Chronic depression causes shrinkage of those regions most readily affected by cortisol proliferation, so a simple MRI could easily detect the effects provided there was a prior MRI to compare it to. So yes, there are neuro-biological correlates that can indicate depression also.

Edit: left out some clarifying words

Last edited by eripiomundus; 10-25-2017 at 01:22 AM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to eripiomundus For This Useful Post:
Loser&Loner (10-25-2017)
  #79  
Old 10-25-2017, 02:09 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,636
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Loser&Loner View Post
I got called a fucking nigger by some white guys driving by me one day and know plenty of other black people with similar stories. It's something I fear happening again so I usually wear headphones when I am out alone. The experience embarrasses me. I don't want pity, I don't feel cool, and I am not a victim. Some people are just assholes and I happen across them from time to time- we all do.

I love black metal music, a ton of that culture caters to neo nazis; going to a black metal show could be a risk for me so I rarely go. Where are all the nazis you ask? For every antifa liberal nutjob there is a right wing lunatic , these people thrive off each other. What's your address?
Let me mail you a shovel so you can dig your head out of the sand.

Your comment made me want to puke and I was able to finish 2 girls one cup without doing so. Blanket statements make you sound ignorant.
Oh gosh I didn't see this one...

*sigh*

So Antifa nutjob let's start there. Do you think that their motives are entirely genuine and there's is nothing of a popularity contest which exists against a backdrop of victimhood in this circle? If you doubt it it's worth listening to one, long talk but worthwhile to get a handle on the mindset: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN2ZTpqr8sQ

In my experience most every prevalent social injustice has this type of dynamic within its oppositional groups. There is a type whose motives are more about self-aggrandizement and cultism, characterised by hypersensitivity, and an inability for self-analyses.

I'm mixed raced, so are my kids, my partner is African, for every discrimination we all may face at one point or another there is some race baiting hypersensitive double-standard ridden SJW who is unveiling their moral indignation like a peacocks feathers on our behalf. And that usually makes me want to puke (I thankfully have not watched two girls one cup... incidentally who does that?)

As for Nazis... the point is the word is bounded about as though we are SURROUNDED. I know a few people, no one comes close to being a Nazi... yet I hear the accusation ten times a day, something's wrong. For some little snowflakes out there everyone who disagrees with them is a Nazi... it is what it is.

I think you've just jumped to a bunch of conclusions and reacted emotionally.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.

Last edited by JohnConstantine; 10-25-2017 at 02:33 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 10-25-2017, 02:29 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,636
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
And yet you require some kind of "proof" that transsexuals exist?

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but if I were to summarise the above post I'd be at a loss to do so other than:

"I believe transgenderism is a choice. I have no grounds upon which to make such an assertion, and if offered scientific evidence to the contrary I will not accept it".
Don't need proof. Saying there ISN'T proof, and basing that on the fact that it isn't required, or practically possible to include.

We don't really need to talk about the studies because they're not involved. But as a side I haven't seen anything which constitutes an overwhelming scientific consensus, only some tentative hypothesis.

So no to summarise. Legally I don't need science to claim not to be a man. I don't really need science to claim to have depression. In neither case will I have my brain scanned, or any biological test done. Therefore 'proof' isn't a factor, therefore there is not a scientific basis for my claim.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 10-25-2017, 03:08 AM
eripiomundus (Offline)
The Next Bard
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 416
Thanks: 29
Thanks 110
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Don't need proof. Saying there ISN'T proof, and basing that on the fact that it isn't required, or practically possible to include.

We don't really need to talk about the studies because they're not involved. But as a side I haven't seen anything which constitutes an overwhelming scientific consensus, only some tentative hypothesis.

So no to summarise. Legally I don't need science to claim not to be a man. I don't really need science to claim to have depression. In neither case will I have my brain scanned, or any biological test done. Therefore 'proof' isn't a factor, therefore there is not a scientific basis for my claim.
You're making an assertion that gender dysphoria is a choice. I'd say that any assertion like that is better supported with some kind of evidence than with none. You haven't qualified the reasons for your assertion with anything of even the least substance. Whereas, whether you think it's relevant or not, I have provided links to serious scientific works that root transsexual identity in concrete phenomena. You can try to dismiss the evidence all you like, but it is real, unlike your reasons for asserting gender dysphoria is a choice.

I don't consider it a reasonable standpoint to make an ungrounded assertion and then defend it by saying "proof isn't a factor". If I choose to voice my opinion in a public forum I can reasonably expect to have the basis of that opinion questioned, and I for one would rather have a rational reason for my opinions rather than a thinly veiled prejudice I'm going to clothe in quasi-rational arguments.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 10-25-2017, 03:16 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,743
Thanks: 337
Thanks 354
Default

Originally Posted by bluewpc View Post
@myers I suppose that was outside the scope of the conversation which is why we didnt bring it up. But to address your hypothetical daughter if she were to come out to you that would be a private matter as it is now.
If she were to come out, it would no longer be a private matter. That's what coming out means.

Originally Posted by bluewpc View Post
Once the conversation turns towards advocacy in politics, for one path or another, then the ramifications ought to be examined and debated. Democracy rests upon freedom of speech and so there can be no subject taboo and hurt feelings can never be a reason not to discuss ideas or public policy.

You say not to underestimate empathy and I would fully agree and trust me I dont but I would also not underestimate other forces, societal, personal, financial, traditional, religious. And this coming from the guy mind you who rails against the bastard in the office.
I don't disagree with any of that -- and nothing I said had to do with what might be taboo or hurt feelings.

I was referring to the semantics of all this.

I can be as pedantic as anyone about word usage, but the reality is, definitions shift, expand or change as these issues move into uncharted areas of discourse.

Nine times out of ten, you can tell exactly what people are talking about by the context -- and there's no real barrier to communication, unless you want there to be one.

Beyond that, I'm simply suggesting that applying empathy in the right measure is a pretty good starting point -- and a pretty useful lens through which you can look at just about any issue or problem that has to do with human beings. Without that ingredient, you just look like another person with an ax to grind.

Last edited by Myers; 10-25-2017 at 03:20 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 10-25-2017, 03:37 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,636
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
You're making an assertion that gender dysphoria is a choice. I'd say that any assertion like that is better supported with some kind of evidence than with none. You haven't qualified the reasons for your assertion with anything of even the least substance. Whereas, whether you think it's relevant or not, I have provided links to serious scientific works that root transsexual identity in concrete phenomena. You can try to dismiss the evidence all you like, but it is real, unlike your reasons for asserting gender dysphoria is a choice.
OK, let me clarify. I'm not making this assertion here, frankly I have NO idea whether gender dysmorphia is a choice or not, I don't think anyone truly does, the science is out on that one if we're honest.

What I am asserting is that nobody needs scientific proof in order to claim to be non-binary and enjoy all of the legal implications therewith. That's indubitable. To make a concession, this reality at least makes it possible to be a choice. I can't physically choose to have cancer, I can choose to identify as non-binary.

Put it this way, say there was a concrete test (there isn't), that proved which category each individual sat within according to the new array of gender specific pronouns. And we then went from campus to campus testing all individuals who identified themselves as non-binary so as to prove their new identity. Do you think there would be a split between those who showed the biological traits assigned to non-binary types, and those who didn't?

Then might we have a split between those who are genetically non-binary and those who just want to get involved in the scene? Or, do you think that magically this self diagnosis and this shaky science will marry up perfectly?

And for the record it's not really me dismissing the science but rather everyone else. If we were really confident and serious about the science then we'd use it to determine the condition before we take any medical/legal action which we don't and won't... ever.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.

Last edited by JohnConstantine; 10-25-2017 at 03:42 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 10-25-2017, 04:10 AM
Loser&Loner's Avatar
Loser&Loner (Offline)
Intellectually Fertile
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: By the sea
Posts: 153
Thanks: 19
Thanks 17
Default

Originally Posted by anna View Post
Yes it does matter, greatly, because you are dealing with a young person and the clarification and classification of things matters to them when they are muddling through to adulthood. The depth of empathy for your child is in the scope for nurturing self discovery without undue irreversible, avoidable harm.

If there was a word for a young person who recognized themselves as being on that gender journey it could be a way of protecting their long term interests whist allowing themselves the scope to just be.
Sexual reassignment shouldn't be allowed to take place until someone is 25 but it is okay to let them know we do recognize your affliction and we do not judge it. That would make all the difference. We live in a world where women in the trades are still being told they are doing a man's job. That is the problem, that's why waiting until you were 25 to have the surgery would feel like torture.
__________________
My words are edible
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 10-25-2017, 04:16 AM
Loser&Loner's Avatar
Loser&Loner (Offline)
Intellectually Fertile
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: By the sea
Posts: 153
Thanks: 19
Thanks 17
Default

Anyone remember Rachel Dolezal? The white woman who pretended to be black claiming she is "transracial"
__________________
My words are edible
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 10-25-2017, 04:29 AM
eripiomundus (Offline)
The Next Bard
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 416
Thanks: 29
Thanks 110
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
OK, let me clarify. I'm not making this assertion here, frankly I have NO idea whether gender dysmorphia is a choice or not, I don't think anyone truly does, the science is out on that one if we're honest.
I'm not intending this to be snarky, but it's gender dysPHORIA. Not dysMORPHIA. Without going back and rereading your posts, I'm pretty sure you've clearly said you think it's a choice, but ok, I'll let it be.

What I am asserting is that nobody needs scientific proof in order to claim to be non-binary and enjoy all of the legal implications therewith. That's indubitable. To make a concession, this reality at least makes it possible to be a choice. I can't physically choose to have cancer, I can choose to identify as non-binary.
Do you require proof in order to assert your gender? You identify as a man, yeah? Do you need to prove it? No? Why should anyone else then? As far as I know you could be a woman trapped in a man's body pretending to be a man for fear of what people think, so maybe I aught to disbelieve your identification? I have no proof after all. The law doesn't require you to prove it either, so I guess I'll just go ahead and believe I'm correct even though I have no grounds for thinking it.

"Enjoy all the legal implications therewith"? What extra legal privilege does getting addressed in the way you identify confer? Is it some kind of privilege when a woman gets addressed as Mrs? Or a man as Mr? If not, then how is it a privilege to be addressed as something else. You talk as if you feel these people are unfairly gaining something they don't deserve. But what are they really gaining that everyone else doesn't already have?

Put it this way, say there was a concrete test (there isn't), that proved which category each individual sat within according to the new array of gender specific pronouns. And we then went from campus to campus testing all individuals who identified themselves as non-binary so as to prove their new identity. Do you think there would be a split between those who showed the biological traits assigned to non-binary types, and those who didn't?
Given the studies I would expect transsexuals to test as transsexual for the most part, just as I'd expect "normal" people to test "normal" for the most part. I feel like a broken record here, but why would a person "choose" to expose themselves to widespread ridicule as a transsexual if they didn't have some inner volition upwelling from a place beneath their conscious understanding? It just seems ludicrous.

Then might we have a split between those who are genetically non-binary and those who just want to get involved in the scene? Or, do you think that magically this self diagnosis and this shaky science will marry up perfectly?
"Shaky science" - by your own admission you never even read the pages I linked to. They are just three snippets in a mountain of studies.

But I concede that in all probability you would "catch" some people out with your hypothetical. You would also "catch" out some closeted gays and whatnot. What would you prove by that? That some people pretend to be what they're not? I don't think it will be any news flash to you if I tell you that people pretend to be what they aren't all the time. Not just transgender people. Basing a generalised opinion of all transsexuals on the possibility that a small percentage might be pretending is pretty weak as far as arguments go.

And for the record it's not really me dismissing the science but rather everyone else. If we were really confident and serious about the science then we'd use it to determine the condition before we take any medical/legal action which we don't and won't... ever.
"Differences in the brain’s white matter that clash with a person’s genetic sex may hold the key to identifying transsexual people before puberty. Doctors could use this information to make a case for delaying puberty to improve the success of a sex change later". This is literally the first paragraph from one of the links I provided earlier. Ok, so they're not saying it is a definitive test as yet, but the implication is that we are honing in on one. "won't... ever" you say?

Last edited by eripiomundus; 10-25-2017 at 04:32 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 10-25-2017, 04:43 AM
anna (Offline)
Copyist
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 49
Thanks: 19
Thanks 30
Default

Originally Posted by Loser&Loner View Post
Sexual reassignment shouldn't be allowed to take place until someone is 25 but it is okay to let them know we do recognize your affliction and we do not judge it. That would make all the difference. We live in a world where women in the trades are still being told they are doing a man's job. That is the problem, that's why waiting until you were 25 to have the surgery would feel like torture.
yes, indeed reports of gender changing hormones being given to children is a thing of nightmares and in certain parts of the globe protocol on hormone treatment for children is not based on evidence or research.

I do accept that waiting to have sexual reassignment surgery until say the age of 25 would feel like torture for some but perhaps it is a necessary evil that would guarantee a time frame to protect those young who could well be considered vulnerable with regards their free will and maturity to decide choice of alignment on a gender spectrum but also on the spectrum of suggestibility.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 10-25-2017, 05:10 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,636
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
Do you require proof in order to assert your gender? You identify as a man, yeah? Do you need to prove it? No? Why should anyone else then? As far as I know you could be a woman trapped in a man's body pretending to be a man for fear of what people think, so maybe I aught to disbelieve your identification? I have no proof after all. The law doesn't require you to prove it either, so I guess I'll just go ahead and believe I'm correct even though I have no grounds for thinking it.
I have a penis. I can easily prove that I'm a man. I can't prove that I'm not a man. But I can make you address me as a woman or have you fired. If you're cool with that then fair enough, I think it's wrong.

Whether it's a privilege or not is subjective.

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
Given the studies I would expect transsexuals to test as transsexual for the most part, just as I'd expect "normal" people to test "normal" for the most part. I feel like a broken record here, but why would a person "choose" to expose themselves to widespread ridicule as a transsexual if they didn't have some inner volition upwelling from a place beneath their conscious understanding? It just seems ludicrous.
People are pretty crazy, that's for sure.

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
"Shaky science" - by your own admission you never even read the pages I linked to. They are just three snippets in a mountain of studies.

But I concede that in all probability you would "catch" some people out with your hypothetical. You would also "catch" out some closeted gays and whatnot. What would you prove by that? That some people pretend to be what they're not? I don't think it will be any news flash to you if I tell you that people pretend to be what they aren't all the time. Not just transgender people. Basing a generalised opinion of all transsexuals on the possibility that a small percentage might be pretending is pretty weak as far as arguments go.
A study based on twelve people is shaky to me sure. A study which shows brain abnormalities in post op trans people is also shaky like these people haven't been on mind altering drugs for however long. We have no idea how many are pretending, no idea whatever. I'll just refer to depression. It has expanded exponentially and continues to grow decade by decade (fuelled by subsidy), everyone's on SSRI's... how many are just sad that nan died? Or just standard drug addicts?

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
"Differences in the brainís white matter that clash with a personís genetic sex may hold the key to identifying transsexual people before puberty. Doctors could use this information to make a case for delaying puberty to improve the success of a sex change later". This is literally the first paragraph from one of the links I provided earlier. Ok, so they're not saying it is a definitive test as yet, but the implication is that we are honing in on one. "won't... ever" you say?
No. It would be a very bad idea for the reasons I said before. Science getting involved to determine who gets to be officially non-binary and those who... are faking? Imagine you claim to be a woman and the test comes back that you're a man... then what? Sorry you're not invited to the party you can't be trans lol I'd love to see it...

Science won't get involved... not seriously. Whoever wants to be non-binary will be non-binary.

And if science were to get involved it would be FUCKED UP for sure. The way we medicate kids now based on a bunch of shaky shit is a pretty good indicator of that. I have very little faith in science being able to accurately diagnose and treat gender dysPHORIA.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 10-25-2017, 05:55 AM
eripiomundus (Offline)
The Next Bard
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 416
Thanks: 29
Thanks 110
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
I have a penis. I can easily prove that I'm a man. I can't prove that I'm not a man. But I can make you address me as a woman or have you fired. If you're cool with that then fair enough, I think it's wrong.
Having a penis testifies to your sex, not your gender.

I'm not really cool with much of the over-the-top political correctness that's being driven into our lives these days, but if someone wanted me to call them Mrs when they were biologically a man who cares? I'd just call them what they want because what does it matter to me? It doesn't have the slightest effect on my life whatsoever.

Whether it's a privilege or not is subjective.
As is everything, so I'm not sure what insight you're trying to convey by saying this.


A study based on twelve people is shaky to me sure. A study which shows brain abnormalities in post op trans people is also shaky like these people haven't been on mind altering drugs for however long. We have no idea how many are pretending, no idea whatever. I'll just refer to depression. It has expanded exponentially and continues to grow decade by decade (fuelled by subsidy), everyone's on SSRI's... how many are just sad that nan died? Or just standard drug addicts?
As I said already, there aren't that many transsexuals around, so there aren't that many available for participation in studies, but the study you're referring to was from 1995. Since then there have been countless many more. Most of them probably have similar numbers of participants, but as a collective, under say a meta-analysis, the number of studies that affirm transsexual identity are substantial.

One of the other studies I linked to showed clear gender differentiation from their biological sex in transsexuals prior to any hormone implementation in both female to male and male to female transsexuals.

You're basically giving no argument except: "I don't think they're telling the truth, and you can't prove otherwise". The onus of supporting your statements with evidence or rationality is on you. It's not up to me to prove you wrong if you can't, or won't, give any factual or rational grounding to your argument. Put some thought into the issue and give me an actual argument for why you think transsexuals are faking it. Not more of the same, because I'm feeling like my head has hit a brick wall here.

No. It would be a very bad idea for the reasons I said before. Science getting involved to determine who gets to be officially non-binary and those who... are faking? Imagine you claim to be a woman and the test comes back that you're a man... then what? Sorry you're not invited to the party you can't be trans lol I'd love to see it...
Why does it even need to be "official"? Who cares what someone wants to be called? And so what if you got tested and the results contradicted your identification. None of this has any impact on you or I in any way other than calling someone 'he' or 'she' when we do that with people anyway. I don't see where your prejudice is coming from here. It's no big deal if someone feels like a man and they're biologically female.

Science won't get involved... not seriously. Whoever wants to be non-binary will be non-binary.

And if science were to get involved it would be FUCKED UP for sure. The way we medicate kids now based on a bunch of shaky shit is a pretty good indicator of that. I have very little faith in science being able to accurately diagnose and treat gender dysPHORIA.
I don't agree with the proliferation of medicated people either, but that's more a question of consumer demand and corporate greed rather than the fault of scientists. The scientists just develop chemicals and test them to determine what, if anything, they might be useful for. The rest is supply and demand.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 10-25-2017, 06:50 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,636
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by eripiomundus View Post
Having a penis testifies to your sex, not your gender.
So I noticed this distinction being made. We're probably working off of completely different distinctions. For me the terms are interchangeable. But from now I'll use gender to refer to a fluid identity if you like.

That sort of changes things. If you were to say biologically I'm a man but I like to think of myself as a woman that would be entirely accurate in my book and we can put this one to bed.

I suspect this isn't really the claim though, the claim is that SEX (gender) is not binary... right?

I'm not really cool with much of the over-the-top political correctness that's being driven into our lives these days, but if someone wanted me to call them Mrs when they were biologically a man who cares? I'd just call them what they want because what does it matter to me? It doesn't have the slightest effect on my life whatsoever.
Most people wouldn't. But some might make the argument that pronouns which have no universal consensus, no limits in terms of their proliferation, which are changeable according to whim alone and hold legal implications should you not choose to subscribe to or keep up with the terminology is wrong. Or rather, you should be able to choose whether to conform or not, and be free to do so without fear of prosecution. I think that's fair.

You're basically giving no argument except: "I don't think they're telling the truth, and you can't prove otherwise". The onus of supporting your statements with evidence or rationality is on you. It's not up to me to prove you wrong if you can't, or won't, give any factual or rational grounding to your argument. Put some thought into the issue and give me an actual argument for why you think transsexuals are faking it. Not more of the same, because I'm feeling like my head has hit a brick wall here.
But dude I literally just said I have NO idea whether gender dysPHORIA is a choice. So we don't need to debate that. The point I've made which is actually inarguable is that when someone makes the claim that they are non-binary they are not making a scientific claim but they are making a legal claim. For them to be making a scientific claim they need lab results. And like I said it's the same thing when it comes to mental illness, although there is a little more scientific involvement in this area we're still just talking conditions voted in by peer consensus, and diagnosis based on a checklist of behavioural traits rather than lab results. You're a scientifically minded person, you must see how each scenario is essentially arbitrary as it is.

It's no big deal if someone feels like a man and they're biologically female.
Again if we're saying sex is binary here (and gender is something different) then the debate is over in my eyes and we're just reduced to semantics.

I don't agree with the proliferation of medicated people either, but that's more a question of consumer demand and corporate greed rather than the fault of scientists. The scientists just develop chemicals and test them to determine what, if anything, they might be useful for. The rest is supply and demand.
This is a sidebar but for me aww man totally scientist's (psychologists) fault. Conditions are just made up man, voted into existence based on peer reviews and diagnosed based on behavioural checklists. And the standard for marketable substances I believe is two positive results, out however many tests you like. It's this unscientific bedrock that allows the whole shit heap to pile. No way you could exonerate science from that one, especially when you look at side effects, it's disgraceful.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:07 AM.

vBulletin, Copyright © 2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.