Zone1 Let's Debate: Is "Transgender" a Valid Concept based in Reality?

[Darkwind]

Reality exists outside of any individual's attempt to define it away.


A valid way to look at it, but not the way I look at it.

I would agree if you would change that to "a person claiming to be 'transgender' is a person suffering a significant mental health break from reality and needs a compassionate treatment program to bring them back to reality.

To me that is like saying "a unicorn is a person suffering a significant mental health break from reality and needs a compassionate treatment program to bring them back to reality."

A unicorn is a mythical and non-existent fiction, regardless of how many people "identify" as unicorns.

It is the ONLY way I will look at it, and when debated, this will be the definition I hold.

I'm sorry, but for nearly six years we've allowed the sickest minds to dictate how we use language and see reality, and I reject it unequivocally.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Whats the difference between transgender transvestite and transsexual?

A transvestite is a person who dresses like the opposite sex. That's not as cut-and-dried as it used to be, but there are still clothes that if worn by a male would be seen as dressing "like a woman," and vice-versa.

A transsexual is a person who believes himself "born in the wrong body," enough to seek hormone and surgery to be changed to be a woman or a man

A person who identifies as "transgender" is a person who believes that he was "assigned the wrong sex at birth" "because doctors make mistakes sometimes" and believes that he or she is already the biological sex they now claim, and should be treated as such based solely on that claim. They still may seek hormones and surgeries, but their claim of "transgender" does not depend on them.

Is every tomboy female a transgender?

Since "transgender" is not a real thing, in my opinion, that question must be asked of a person who believes that it is.

luiza?

JoeB131?

 

[Seymour Flops]

It is the ONLY way I will look at it, and when debated, this will be the definition I hold.

I'm sorry, but for nearly six years we've allowed the sickest minds to dictate how we use language and see reality, and I reject it unequivocally.

Fair enough, we are not that far apart.

If I did not have my own definition, I would be comfortable with yours.

 

[luiza]

Reality does not wait for consensus.

Not the subject .
We are talking about the perception OF it .

Known as the Observer Effect when Reality is seriously debated .

 

[Seymour Flops]

Not the subject .
We are talking about the perception OF it .

Known as the Observer Effect when Reality is seriously debated .

Then let's talk about observation of reality.

I had five kids and one grandkid that I personally observed the day of their births to be clearly male or female.

I have had cousins, nephews and nieces, and children of other friends and family, announced at birth as male or female, boys or girls. I didn't personally observe their bodies to verify, but the parents were always perfectly comfortable and unhesitating in announcing when sex they were, based on their observations. None of those parent suffered or suffer from any mental illness causing a break with reality, nor would they have a reason to lie. So I believe them.

More broadly, every thing I read, everything I saw on media, and every conversation I had until about ten years ago about biological sex took as factual that a child is born one sex or the other and that which one is clear to both medical professionals and to laypersons who see the child.

What is your argument that the current minority belief about "transgenderism" cancels out all of that knowledge?

Especially since not a single person on this thread has offered an argument that "transgender" is real?

 

[JoeB131]

That is a personal attack, not an argument. I'm not offended, but I just want you to know, in case you thought that it was an argument.

No, it's not a personal attack, it's a statement.

Most homophobia and transphobia are the insecurities of other people. Period. Full stop.

That may be true of "transgender" individuals specifically. But I doubt that is a blanket policy you apply to all people.

For example, neither the "transgender" wrestler discussed on another thread, nor the girl he is accused of molesting, are bothering you, but you commented several times on that thread.

You mean the girl who joined a sport where intense physical contact is expected? Who made a claim that she was molested, even though the ref didn't see it, nor any of the spectators, or the person who filmed the match.

 

[Seymour Flops]

No, it's not a personal attack, it's a statement.

The terms are not mutually exclusive.

Most homophobia and transphobia are the insecurities of other people. Period. Full stop.

Off-topic.

Start your own thread about that.

You mean the girl who joined a sport where intense physical contact is expected?

But not molestation.

I mentioned being a backup quarterback and having to put the back of my hands on the crotch of the center. I'm sure if I was male attracted, I could have secretly turned a palm up and copped a feel without being seen, but if the center noticed it, "it's a contact sport for Pete's sake!" would not have been a valid excuse.

Who made a claim that she was molested, even though the ref didn't see it, nor any of the spectators, or the person who filmed the match.

I said that "he is accused of molesting."

If you say it didn't happen, that is not defending it.

If you say it is okay if it did happen because contact sport, then you are an enabler of child molesters and you claim that girls and women sign on for molestation if they play sports.

 

[alang1216]

I am going by the well-established dictionary definition of "valid:"

The word valid is an adjective that describes something founded on truth, logic, or well-grounded facts. In a broader sense, it means an argument, reason, or document is acceptable, defensible, and meets all official or logical requirements. [1, 2, 3]

So it is not about the definition of "valid," but I agree that it often is about who gets to determine what is valid. On this thread, we can each make our arguments about whether transgenderism is valid or not.

Sure, I agree with that.

It is different now than it was years ago. "Transgender" people and their allies now insist on adversely affecting others and that the others must be accepting and even supportive of these adverse effects or be accused of having a mental illness called "transphobia."

We have had transexuals and transvestites since the seventies and they rarely adversely affected others outside of friends and family. They got their hormones and surgeries, or not. They told people their true sex or not. They figured out their own desires for romance and how to fulfill them. They tried to "pass" as women or men so no one noticed them going into their chosen bathrooms.

They were not attention whores, to put it succinctly.

We have had forms of crossdressing probably since very shortly after each tribe of primitive humans starting assigning different manners of dress to the two sexes. No harm no foul.

This is different.

I believe the vast majority of transgenders are born that way and their beliefs about themselves are genuine and, therefore, valid.

I also believe they would love to accepted and supported but would settle for not being demonized or discriminated against. I also don't believe that making people uncomfortable is "adversely affecting others". On the other hand, they don't automatically have the right to play on girls teams if that team doesn't want them there.

 

[JoeB131]

It is the ONLY way I will look at it, and when debated, this will be the definition I hold.

I'm sorry, but for nearly six years we've allowed the sickest minds to dictate how we use language and see reality, and I reject it unequivocally.

I guess.

The question is, why are you so upset that someone who is born male thinks they are female?

Or let me put this another way. Tomorrow morning your boss comes in wearing a dress and demands you call him "Shirley" from now on. Anyone who doesn't will be fired under the company's HR rules.

My guess is you might look for another job, but in the meantime, you'll call him Shirley.

 

[JoeB131]

But not molestation.

I mentioned being a backup quarterback and having to put the back of my hands on the crotch of the center. I'm sure if I was male attracted, I could have secretly turned a palm up and copped a feel without being seen, but if the center noticed it, "it's a contact sport for Pete's sake!" would not have been a valid excuse.

I'm sure of you yelled "No Homo" when you did it, it would have been fine.

I said that "he is accused of molesting."

If you say it didn't happen, that is not defending it.

If you say it is okay if it did happen because contact sport, then you are an enabler of child molesters and you claim that girls and women sign on for molestation if they play sports.

It didn't happen.

End of the discussion for me.

Now, if you could prove to me that the other wrestler did it, did it intentionally, and is only pretending to be transgender so he can feel up girls in a wrestling match, THEN you can come back and talk to me.

Other than that, I'll follow the evidence of witnesses and video that it didn't happen.

 

[Rawley]

Such a debate will have to start with definining the word "transgender."

Seriously? They cannot even define what a woman is

 

[Seymour Flops]

I believe the vast majority of transgenders are born that way and their beliefs about themselves are genuine and, therefore, valid.

Why do you believe that?

I also believe they would love to accepted and supported but would settle for not being demonized or discriminated against.

How are they discriminated against?

For example, of all biological males were banned from entering a public pool changing room with little girls undressed in it, would biological males who claim they are transgender then be discriminated against or would they be treated like all other biological males?

I also don't believe that making people uncomfortable is "adversely affecting others".

Well, by definition making people uncomfortable adversely affects them. I think you mean not adversely affecting them in a way that interferes with their rights?

So a transvestite walking down the sidewalk may make people uncomfortable, but there is no right to contol how other people dress so tough (costume) titty. A transvestite reading sexually charged stories to children in a public school library does adversely affect them and their parents in a way that violates their rights.

On the other hand, they don't automatically have the right to play on girls teams if that team doesn't want them there.

Interesting.

That is not discriminating against them?

I agree that it is not, but I'm surprised that is your position. What about males in girls private spaces if the girls do not want them there?

 

[Seymour Flops]

I guess.

The question is, why are you so upset that someone who is born male thinks they are female?

Or let me put this another way. Tomorrow morning your boss comes in wearing a dress and demands you call him "Shirley" from now on. Anyone who doesn't will be fired under the company's HR rules.

My guess is you might look for another job, but in the meantime, you'll call him Shirley.

I'd say . . .




wait for it . . .







Surely, you're kidding!

 

[JoeB131]

I'd say . . .




wait for it . . .







Surely, you're kidding!

Yes, we all saw Airplane!

 

[Dogmaphobe]

A transgender person or a person with transgenderism is a person who was born biologically one sex and who is in reality a person of the opposite sex.

No. A transgender person is somebody who is one sex biologically, but BELIEVES they are a member of the opposite sex. Belief and reality are two different concepts.

 

[Seymour Flops]

No. A transgender person is somebody who is one sex biologically, but BELIEVES they are a member of the opposite sex. Belief and reality are two different concepts.

Yes, I agree with that.

Odd thing is that this is the 36th post and no one has claimed any different. They've just attacked (mildly) the premise, nit-picked about definitions, and insulted me personally.

 

[alang1216]

Why do you believe that?

Major health organizations, such as the American Psychological Association (APA), recognize that gender identity is a complex interplay of biological, genetic, and environmental factors. They affirm that being transgender is a normal variation of human identity and that an individual's self-expressed identity is genuine and valid. [1, 2]

How are they discriminated against?

Note that what follows does not address any action on the transgender's part:
Under Department of Defense (DoD) directives, personnel diagnosed with or exhibiting symptoms of gender dysphoria are disqualified from service. Active-duty and reserve service members must self-identify for voluntary separation or face involuntary discharge, while the Pentagon also mandates policies enforcing biological sex requirements for shared intimate spaces and grooming standards. [1, 2, 3, 4]

For example, of all biological males were banned from entering a public pool changing room with little girls undressed in it, would biological males who claim they are transgender then be discriminated against or would they be treated like all other biological males?

I'm ok with them being banned from entering a public pool changing room, I'm not ok with with transgenders being banned from entering a public restroom since women don't generally run around naked and there are no urinals.

Well, by definition making people uncomfortable adversely affects them. I think you mean not adversely affecting them in a way that interferes with their rights?

There are people who are uncomfortable with gays or blacks. That that adversely affects them is their problem, not the gay or black. So yes.

So a transvestite walking down the sidewalk may make people uncomfortable, but there is no right to contol how other people dress so tough (costume) titty. A transvestite reading sexually charged stories to children in a public school library does adversely affect them and their parents in a way that violates their rights.

The later is an issue for the school and parents.

Interesting.

That is not discriminating against them?

I agree that it is not, but I'm surprised that is your position. What about males in girls private spaces if the girls do not want them there?

Discrimination is everywhere but it is not an evil if there is a valid justification for it.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Major health organizations, such as the American Psychological Association (APA), recognize that gender identity is a complex interplay of biological, genetic, and environmental factors. They affirm that being transgender is a normal variation of human identity and that an individual's self-expressed identity is genuine and valid. [1, 2]

Unfortunately, that is the argument from authority fallacy.

Note that what follows does not address any action on the transgender's part:
Under Department of Defense (DoD) directives, personnel diagnosed with or exhibiting symptoms of gender dysphoria are disqualified from service. Active-duty and reserve service members must self-identify for voluntary separation or face involuntary discharge, while the Pentagon also mandates policies enforcing biological sex requirements for shared intimate spaces and grooming standards. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Well . . . yes . . . but . . .

Keep in mind that the military also does not allow recruits on SSRI's for depression, ADHD meds, bi-polar medication, etc. along with pain management, sleep aids, and many other prescribed medications. Soldiering is an athletic occupation, often undertaken by young men and women who were not at all athletic in high school. They need to start off at a certain level of health before they get put into situations where they need to push themselves to the limit.

Just being "transgender" in your mind is not a behavior per say. But a male wearing a female uniform, or walking into a female shower, or other space is a behavior, that would severely damage the morale of the female trainees and service members.

I'm ok with them being banned from entering a public pool changing room, I'm not ok with with transgenders being banned from entering a public restroom since women don't generally run around naked and there are no urinals.

My argument for that is why even put the toilets and stalls in a separate room, then. Just line them up against a wall with no windows and everyone can conveniently just go into a stall and do their business. Since it does not matter who is in the room with them, I mean.

There are people who are uncomfortable with gays or blacks. That that adversely affects them is their problem, not the gay or black. So yes.

I agree, but "transgender" does not equal black or gay, and it is insulting to those with those immutable traits to put them in the same category.

The later is an issue for the school and parents.

Yes, and as a parent and a teacher, I know how inappropriate that is.

Discrimination is everywhere but it is not an evil if there is a valid justification for it.

Agreed.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

The ways that transgender people are talked about in popular culture, academia and science are constantly changing

TRANSLATION: "WHAT WE SAY IS TRUE TODAY MAY NOT BE"

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Sex is assigned at birth, refers to one’s biological status as either male or female, and is associated primarily with physical attributes such as chromosomes, hormone prevalence, and external and internal anatomy. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves. While aspects of biological sex are similar across different cultures, aspects of gender may differ.

So how do you know/determine what gender you are JoeBob?