CDZ There are TWO Genders: Change My Mind

[woodwork201]

Well, common sense is that you can't change your sex.

Biologically, yes you will remain what you was born.
Good. That should be the end of this thread.

Common sense is that pretending to be what you aren't leads to psychological problems - and that includes pretending to be a different sex or gender from your birth sex.

It is up to psychiatrists to decide. Some time ago, homosexual behavior was considered as a mental disorder.
Homosexuality IS a mental disorder. That doesn't mean it has to be fixed; we all have some bit of mental disorder, but it is unnatural and deviant from the norm, therefore it's a disorder. It's not up to psychiatrists to decide; they're not gods.

Common sense says that we don't make allow parents to turn their little boys in to little fake-girls, or their little girls into little fake-boys, simply because the child says they wish it were so

What if a child (a girl) refuses to wear girls' outfit, respond to her name and uses males pronouns when talking about herself?
That's between the child and her parents. The Courts and schools have nothing to do with it - or should have nothing to do with it.

Common sense is that we don't make changes to the bodies or hormones of children that can't be reversed

Agree. I think that hormonal therapy and surgeries should be forbidden for kids.

Common sense is that courts don't supersede fathers in determining what pronouns are used to address their own daughters.

Give a certain example of such a case (it actually hapenned, right?). That cant be discussed without details.
HERE is an example:

Father jailed after referring to biological female child as his daughter

The warrant was issued by a judge for the arrest of a father after calling his biological female child his “daughter,” and referring to her with the pronouns “she” and “her.” He was found to be in contempt of court.

thepostmillennial.com

Doesn't matter that it's in Canada; it's still what's being done to children so leftists can destroy familial relationships.

Common sense is that parent's leave their own children, and the children of anyone and everyone else, out of their stupid political, anti-family agenda.

Anti family agenda is a very broad definition. And various people can put different meanings in this term.

The problem, of course, is that common sense isn't so very common, is it?

Yeah, that is true, unfortunately.

Expand the quote and see responses in red.

Homosexuality IS a mental disorder. That doesn't mean it has to be fixed; we all have some bit of mental disorder, but it is unnatural and deviant from the norm, therefore it's a disorder. It's not up to psychiatrists to decide; they're not god
-- So, consider transgenders as a mental disorder too, if you want. That won't change the fact that they should live the lives of 'normal' people, without infringing their rights.

HERE is an example
-- I read something about this story some time ago. Even there was a discussion about it somewhere here. I don't remember much of that, though. What my vague memory says is that the father wasn't 'saint' in this story, but I don't remember the details.

Anyway, that leads to another point:
What if a child (a girl) refuses to wear girls' outfit, respond to her name and uses males pronouns when talking about herself?
That's between the child and her parents. The Courts and schools have nothing to do with it - or should have nothing to do with it

-- I don't agree with that. Sometimes, parents cause more harm to their children that do something good.

And you're suggesting that the State is better equipped to raise our chil'ren and have the power to overturn what the parents want to teach, undoing 100,000 years of precedent?

 

[woodwork201]

I am a man. If through some unexplainable magic I were wake up in a woman's body tomorrow, I believe I could adapt to being a woman, perhaps a lesbian, but still a woman. Why? Because being male does not define me.

Seriously? What does define you?

Being a man isn't all that I am but it's a huge part.

I'm a Father
I'm a Husband
I'm a hunter gatherer
I do the hardest physical work; my wife, a woman who is by nature weaker, does most of the lighter chores... There are occasional exceptions or reversals.

There are other things I do because I am a man. Yes, women can do these things but as the male protector and defender of my family and their peace and comfort, I do them:

I sharpen what needs sharpened.
I lubricate what squeaks.
I mow the lawn (something that would surely have been woman's work 200 year ago but technology has eased the life of men to the point that, for many, that's the toughest thing they do.
I served in the military to defend my nation, ready and willing to fight any enemy, foreign and domestic, to our Constitution

Then there are somethings that my wife has mostly done:
Laundry,
Cooking,
Dishes,
Raising Children
Giving Birth.

Some of those things I can do and, on occasion, I do some of them - not nearly as often as I now wish I had done in order to support my wife but I'm trying to make up for it now. But, not being a quitter, I've tried thousands of times to get pregnant so I could give birth, breastfeed the baby, and do the role of a woman. Try as I might, up to now I have been completely unsuccessful and all three pregnancies were in my wife. But I keep trying.

Being a man, a father, a husband, DEFINITELY defines me.

 

[JoeMoma]

Seriously? What does define you?I

My thoughts, my intellect, my emotions, my values and beliefs. That is what define me. If I were to become a quadriplegic tomorrow I would still be a man but I would not be able to do most of the list of "manly" things that you listed.

The penis between my legs does not make who I am. Thus my point is that I accept my body being the sex it is and there is no need to attempt to artificially alter it to the opposite sex. This would be true regardless if I were born with a male or female body.

 

[woodwork201]

Seriously? What does define you?I

My thoughts, my intellect, my emotions, my values and beliefs. That is what define me. If I were to become a quadriplegic tomorrow I would still be a man but I would not be able to do most of the list of "manly" things that you listed.

The penis between my legs does not make who I am. Thus my point is that I accept my body being the sex it is and there is no need to attempt to artificially alter it to the opposite sex. This would be true regardless if I were born with a male or female body.

What were the first things I said? Husband and Father. You cannot do those in a wheelchair? I didn't say my legs define me but being a man defines me. If I lose my legs doesn't mean I can't get the lawn mowed.

You clearly have no idea what it means to be a man.

 

[JoeMoma]

What were the first things I said? Husband and Father.

Yet your list went much longer than that about the things you do. Most of which could be done by either a man or woman.
Also, I don't disagree with you about the different rolls of men and women. Men don't give childbirth for example.


Perhaps I should have said it this way. If my same mind that was born into a male body were born into a female body instead, I don't think I would be a transgender person. Having always been in a female body, hypothetically, I would simply be female and I would have no memory or frame of reference to know otherwise.

 

[woodwork201]

What were the first things I said? Husband and Father.

Yet your list went much longer than that about the things you do. Most of which could be done by either a man or woman.
Also, I don't disagree with you about the different rolls of men and women. Men don't give childbirth for example.


Perhaps I should have said it this way. If my same mind that was born into a male body were born into a female body instead, I don't think I would be a transgender person. Having always been in a female body, hypothetically, I would simply be female and I would have no memory or frame of reference to know otherwise.

You're already transliberal. You'd still be transliberal if you had been born a woman.

 

[JoeMoma]

What were the first things I said? Husband and Father.

Yet your list went much longer than that about the things you do. Most of which could be done by either a man or woman.
Also, I don't disagree with you about the different rolls of men and women. Men don't give childbirth for example.


Perhaps I should have said it this way. If my same mind that was born into a male body were born into a female body instead, I don't think I would be a transgender person. Having always been in a female body, hypothetically, I would simply be female and I would have no memory or frame of reference to know otherwise.

You're already transliberal. You'd still be transliberal if you had been born a woman.

We are not even on the same wavelength with our discussion, so there is no point in continuing.

 

[GLASNOST]

I think it was more than 2 years ago, when Target wanted to install new bathrooms. Instead of two usual bathrooms, they were going to add a third bathroom. How did that go?

I was in Tokyo in 1966. Most places (if not all places) had only one place to do your business. They had stalls just like everywhere in the west today and it didn't matter if you were a man or a woman.

There are also places in the world where people commonly squat behind a bush to do their business. Just because someone somewhere does it doesn't mean I want to do it or that it's a good thing.

What is the difference between a brick wall, a plyboard separation, and a bush? You ask if "it is a good thing". Holding it in is not a good thing.

 

[GLASNOST]

Two sexes. There can be as many genders as people want. Gender is, by definition, what you choose to call something, not what something is. I don't care if someone calls themselves other than what they are; just don't make me do it.Sex is, by definition, what you choose to call something, not what something is.

Sex is, by definition, what you choose to call something, not what something is.

 

[DrLove]

Three actually - Male, Female & Gender Ignorant (you ;-)

 

[GLASNOST]

Back on the subject of toilettes. Some many years ago I was at my place of work and I really "had to go". The male toilette was occupied but I really "had to go". The woman's toilette was unoccupied and I really "had to go"! So I did. Afterwards, I was scolded "in the interest of hygiene". Hygiene? What did hygiene have to do with it?

 

[DrLove]

I am a man. If through some unexplainable magic I were wake up in a woman's body tomorrow, I believe I could adapt to being a woman, perhaps a lesbian, but still a woman. Why? Because being male does not define me.

Seriously? What does define you?

Being a man isn't all that I am but it's a huge part.

I'm a Father
I'm a Husband
I'm a hunter gatherer
I do the hardest physical work; my wife, a woman who is by nature weaker, does most of the lighter chores... There are occasional exceptions or reversals.

There are other things I do because I am a man. Yes, women can do these things but as the male protector and defender of my family and their peace and comfort, I do them:

I sharpen what needs sharpened.
I lubricate what squeaks.
I mow the lawn (something that would surely have been woman's work 200 year ago but technology has eased the life of men to the point that, for many, that's the toughest thing they do.
I served in the military to defend my nation, ready and willing to fight any enemy, foreign and domestic, to our Constitution

Then there are somethings that my wife has mostly done:
Laundry,
Cooking,
Dishes,
Raising Children
Giving Birth.

Some of those things I can do and, on occasion, I do some of them - not nearly as often as I now wish I had done in order to support my wife but I'm trying to make up for it now. But, not being a quitter, I've tried thousands of times to get pregnant so I could give birth, breastfeed the baby, and do the role of a woman. Try as I might, up to now I have been completely unsuccessful and all three pregnancies were in my wife. But I keep trying.

Being a man, a father, a husband, DEFINITELY defines me.

Whooo boy, Manly Manheimer has joined the chat

 

[GLASNOST]

I am a man. If through some unexplainable magic I were wake up in a woman's body tomorrow, I believe I could adapt to being a woman, perhaps a lesbian, but still a woman. Why? Because being male does not define me.

Whooo boy, Manly Manheimer has joined the chat

And he's been reading Franz Kafka.

 

[ESay]

Well, common sense is that you can't change your sex.

Biologically, yes you will remain what you was born.
Good. That should be the end of this thread.

Common sense is that pretending to be what you aren't leads to psychological problems - and that includes pretending to be a different sex or gender from your birth sex.

It is up to psychiatrists to decide. Some time ago, homosexual behavior was considered as a mental disorder.
Homosexuality IS a mental disorder. That doesn't mean it has to be fixed; we all have some bit of mental disorder, but it is unnatural and deviant from the norm, therefore it's a disorder. It's not up to psychiatrists to decide; they're not gods.

Common sense says that we don't make allow parents to turn their little boys in to little fake-girls, or their little girls into little fake-boys, simply because the child says they wish it were so

What if a child (a girl) refuses to wear girls' outfit, respond to her name and uses males pronouns when talking about herself?
That's between the child and her parents. The Courts and schools have nothing to do with it - or should have nothing to do with it.

Common sense is that we don't make changes to the bodies or hormones of children that can't be reversed

Agree. I think that hormonal therapy and surgeries should be forbidden for kids.

Common sense is that courts don't supersede fathers in determining what pronouns are used to address their own daughters.

Give a certain example of such a case (it actually hapenned, right?). That cant be discussed without details.
HERE is an example:

Father jailed after referring to biological female child as his daughter

The warrant was issued by a judge for the arrest of a father after calling his biological female child his “daughter,” and referring to her with the pronouns “she” and “her.” He was found to be in contempt of court.

thepostmillennial.com

Doesn't matter that it's in Canada; it's still what's being done to children so leftists can destroy familial relationships.

Common sense is that parent's leave their own children, and the children of anyone and everyone else, out of their stupid political, anti-family agenda.

Anti family agenda is a very broad definition. And various people can put different meanings in this term.

The problem, of course, is that common sense isn't so very common, is it?

Yeah, that is true, unfortunately.

Expand the quote and see responses in red.

Homosexuality IS a mental disorder. That doesn't mean it has to be fixed; we all have some bit of mental disorder, but it is unnatural and deviant from the norm, therefore it's a disorder. It's not up to psychiatrists to decide; they're not god
-- So, consider transgenders as a mental disorder too, if you want. That won't change the fact that they should live the lives of 'normal' people, without infringing their rights.

HERE is an example
-- I read something about this story some time ago. Even there was a discussion about it somewhere here. I don't remember much of that, though. What my vague memory says is that the father wasn't 'saint' in this story, but I don't remember the details.

Anyway, that leads to another point:
What if a child (a girl) refuses to wear girls' outfit, respond to her name and uses males pronouns when talking about herself?
That's between the child and her parents. The Courts and schools have nothing to do with it - or should have nothing to do with it

-- I don't agree with that. Sometimes, parents cause more harm to their children that do something good.

And you're suggesting that the State is better equipped to raise our chil'ren and have the power to overturn what the parents want to teach, undoing 100,000 years of precedent?

Well, your question inevitably leads to the question raised above. What education the society needs? And what should educational system look like as a result of that?

Answering your question, I would say no, the state (or more properly state bureaucrats) isn't the best solution, generally speaking. But then again, there are such parents which just shouldn't be allowed to raise kids.

About education as a whole, I would say that maybe the system of charter schools are better solution among others. That is, there should be transparent and strict conditions for such schools to operate and get state's financing. But these schools should be free to choose the way they educate the children. Such system enables competition between these schools. And competition is always good.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I am a man. If through some unexplainable magic I were wake up in a woman's body tomorrow, I believe I could adapt to being a woman, perhaps a lesbian, but still a woman. Why? Because being male does not define me.

I'm guessing if you woke up in an actual female body - rather than just a mutilated male body trying to imitate a female body - you might find that your sex defines your identity more than you currently think. It's easy to discount the importance of something in your life when you've never experienced its absence.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Seriously? What does define you?I

My thoughts, my intellect, my emotions, my values and beliefs. That is what define me. If I were to become a quadriplegic tomorrow I would still be a man but I would not be able to do most of the list of "manly" things that you listed.

The penis between my legs does not make who I am. Thus my point is that I accept my body being the sex it is and there is no need to attempt to artificially alter it to the opposite sex. This would be true regardless if I were born with a male or female body.

I'm not sure I care for the implied parallel between waking up as a woman and waking up as a quadriplegic. The first is a complete change in not only biological capabilities, but in biological imperatives. The second is a disability reducing your physical abilities, but not changing your biological imperatives at all. And, of course, the first is NOT a disability.

The penis between your legs doesn't make you who you are, because the penis between your legs is not your masculinity; it's just one of many physical indicators of it. I think you are a representative of a fundamental problem in this debate: the fact that very few people have the ability to understand just how intrinsic our sex is to who we are, how we think, and how we feel, because absolutely none of us have ever had the ability to truly be the other sex. I'm not saying that you wouldn't have the same values and beliefs if you magically became an actual woman; I'm saying I think you would come to those conclusions from a different viewpoint and different emotions.

 

[JoeMoma]

I am a man. If through some unexplainable magic I were wake up in a woman's body tomorrow, I believe I could adapt to being a woman, perhaps a lesbian, but still a woman. Why? Because being male does not define me.

I'm guessing if you woke up in an actual female body - rather than just a mutilated male body trying to imitate a female body - you might find that your sex defines your identity more than you currently think. It's easy to discount the importance of something in your life when you've never experienced its absence.

I know it's time for me to stop digging.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think it was more than 2 years ago, when Target wanted to install new bathrooms. Instead of two usual bathrooms, they were going to add a third bathroom. How did that go?

I was in Tokyo in 1966. Most places (if not all places) had only one place to do your business. They had stalls just like everywhere in the west today and it didn't matter if you were a man or a woman.

There are also places in the world where people commonly squat behind a bush to do their business. Just because someone somewhere does it doesn't mean I want to do it or that it's a good thing.

What is the difference between a brick wall, a plyboard separation, and a bush? You ask if "it is a good thing". Holding it in is not a good thing.

Irrelevant attempt at deflecting onto a tangent. The point is, what other people do or don't do in their countries has not one fucking thing to do with what THIS country does, or what the people of this country want it to do.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Two sexes. There can be as many genders as people want. Gender is, by definition, what you choose to call something, not what something is. I don't care if someone calls themselves other than what they are; just don't make me do it.Sex is, by definition, what you choose to call something, not what something is.

Sex is, by definition, what you choose to call something, not what something is.

Incorrect. Sex is, by definition, what the thing is. Nomenclature is what you call that thing, based on the reality.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Back on the subject of toilettes. Some many years ago I was at my place of work and I really "had to go". The male toilette was occupied but I really "had to go". The woman's toilette was unoccupied and I really "had to go"! So I did. Afterwards, I was scolded "in the interest of hygiene". Hygiene? What did hygiene have to do with it?

Maybe the person scolding you was aware that men - not all men, but many of them - tend to be . . . less tidy in their toileting habits. My parents and I used to be the custodians for our church. Every Saturday, we had to scrub down the bathrooms in preparation for Sunday services. Every week, the men's room took longer than the women's, because we had to scrub the walls and floors around the toilets and urinals in the men's room, where we only had to mop the floor in the women's.

But perhaps you should have asked that person what they meant by it, since none of us are psychic.