Why is gender-nonconformity bad? Alternatively, why must one's gender align with their sex?

[Ringel05]

We are not amused.

Actually, we are, but we have our image to uphold, you know.

We understand.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Can't we ever have a discussion of sex without somebody mentioning slippery slopes?


Such lurid imagery tsk tsk tsk.

 

[DukeU]

Let's let the paper and smoke decide.

 

[gtopa1]

Only two.....1 and 2.....

Male and female.

Male female (and mutilated.)

Greg

 

[yumegari]

Yeah, sex is binary and established at conception.

100% agree with you on this one. Glad we've found common ground.

---

Why would it suddenly increase? Don't know, people are people which is why I used the caveat "possibility".

There's a possibility a rock will fly down from the heavens and kill us all tomorrow. There's a lot of things that could happen, but when you do something and a negative outcome does not follow, I can't imagine why action should or should not be taken purely on the basis of possibility.

You are not everyone and while you claim women are the biggest supporters what is the demographic? What percentage of women support this? ten percent? Twenty percent? Sixty percent?
When responding keep in mind the true adage "lies, damn lies and statistics....."

Well, anecdotal: I met far more men than women that are opposed to this. What statistics would you like to look at? Statistics for female support of democrats (a party which often supports this policy), or statistics on the support of this policy itself? There's some on both, but if you don't trust statistics at all, I don't know what to tell you. I generally will look at a plethora of statistics if they're available, compare the results and if there's a discrepancy I'll check out the methodology more thoroughly, assuming I can find it.

---

Substantiated with what? More opinions. LOL

I don't remember if you were the one that said you didn't read my initial argument, but if so, that may be why. My conclusion is an opinion, but I used actual facts to back up my opinion. If you would like, I can create a list of every fact I used in my argument, and you can pick apart those facts as you please.

---

Gender is biological. Period.

Guess it depends on how you define gender. If you use the term gender as a word synonymous with sex, then sure. That's not how I'm using the word, however. I'm using gender to refer to the collection of social assumptions we relate to sex, which are very real. Even if you don't want to define gender like that, it doesn't really change my argument.

A man born with gender dysphoria is still a man. And always will be.

In terms of sex? Sure. I won't deny that.

Having said that - a crossdresser is not a trans. Never will be. Wearing female clothes doesn't change your gender.
Getting sexually aroused by wearing panties does not merit society having to go along with their fetish.
Gay men who are effeminate, are not trans. They do not merit society being forced to go along with their sexual preference. They are, and always will be, gay.... men.

Right, if you don't say you're gender-nonconforming, you aren't. Some men like to wear female clothes, that's not gender-nonconformity/transgenderism.

Transgenderism/Sexual Dysphoria is real. But it is exceedingly rare. Extremely rare.
They deserve to be treated fairly and like the sex they identify as.

Estimates range between 0.1% to 2% based on the criteria. So, lowest estimate, there are 330,000 transgenders in the United States. That's a lot. Highest estimate, 6.5 million. I can't say which point between 0.1% and 2% is correct, but I know that the amount of people I've met that are transgender more closely reflects the latter.

Everyone else is playing out a sexual fetish. Society should not be forced to play along with it.

I really don't know where you got it that this is a "sexual fetish." Perhaps it is for someone, but for most of the gender-nonconforming people I've met, it has very little to do with sex at all.

 

[Ringel05]

100% agree with you on this one. Glad we've found common ground.

---

There's a possibility a rock will fly down from the heavens and kill us all tomorrow. There's a lot of things that could happen, but when you do something and a negative outcome does not follow, I can't imagine why action should or should not be taken purely on the basis of possibility.

Well, anecdotal: I met far more men than women that are opposed to this. What statistics would you like to look at? Statistics for female support of democrats (a party which often supports this policy), or statistics on the support of this policy itself? There's some on both, but if you don't trust statistics at all, I don't know what to tell you. I generally will look at a plethora of statistics if they're available, compare the results and if there's a discrepancy I'll check out the methodology more thoroughly, assuming I can find it.

---

I don't remember if you were the one that said you didn't read my initial argument, but if so, that may be why. My conclusion is an opinion, but I used actual facts to back up my opinion. If you would like, I can create a list of every fact I used in my argument, and you can pick apart those facts as you please.

---

Guess it depends on how you define gender. If you use the term gender as a word synonymous with sex, then sure. That's not how I'm using the word, however. I'm using gender to refer to the collection of social assumptions we relate to sex, which are very real. Even if you don't want to define gender like that, it doesn't really change my argument.

In terms of sex? Sure. I won't deny that.

Right, if you don't say you're gender-nonconforming, you aren't. Some men like to wear female clothes, that's not gender-nonconformity/transgenderism.

Estimates range between 0.1% to 2% based on the criteria. So, lowest estimate, there are 330,000 transgenders in the United States. That's a lot. Highest estimate, 6.5 million. I can't say which point between 0.1% and 2% is correct, but I know that the amount of people I've met that are transgender more closely reflects the latter.

I really don't know where you got it that this is a "sexual fetish." Perhaps it is for someone, but for most of the gender-nonconforming people I've met, it has very little to do with sex at all.

It's not statistics I don't trust it's their manipulation that calls them into question.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

100% agree with you on this one. Glad we've found common ground.

---

There's a possibility a rock will fly down from the heavens and kill us all tomorrow. There's a lot of things that could happen, but when you do something and a negative outcome does not follow, I can't imagine why action should or should not be taken purely on the basis of possibility.

Well, anecdotal: I met far more men than women that are opposed to this. What statistics would you like to look at? Statistics for female support of democrats (a party which often supports this policy), or statistics on the support of this policy itself? There's some on both, but if you don't trust statistics at all, I don't know what to tell you. I generally will look at a plethora of statistics if they're available, compare the results and if there's a discrepancy I'll check out the methodology more thoroughly, assuming I can find it.

---

I don't remember if you were the one that said you didn't read my initial argument, but if so, that may be why. My conclusion is an opinion, but I used actual facts to back up my opinion. If you would like, I can create a list of every fact I used in my argument, and you can pick apart those facts as you please.

---

Guess it depends on how you define gender. If you use the term gender as a word synonymous with sex, then sure. That's not how I'm using the word, however. I'm using gender to refer to the collection of social assumptions we relate to sex, which are very real. Even if you don't want to define gender like that, it doesn't really change my argument.

In terms of sex? Sure. I won't deny that.

Right, if you don't say you're gender-nonconforming, you aren't. Some men like to wear female clothes, that's not gender-nonconformity/transgenderism.

Estimates range between 0.1% to 2% based on the criteria. So, lowest estimate, there are 330,000 transgenders in the United States. That's a lot. Highest estimate, 6.5 million. I can't say which point between 0.1% and 2% is correct, but I know that the amount of people I've met that are transgender more closely reflects the latter.

I really don't know where you got it that this is a "sexual fetish." Perhaps it is for someone, but for most of the gender-nonconforming people I've met, it has very little to do with sex at all.

Then you are wrong.
Pretty simple.
You want to change a word from it's scientific/static use to mean something else to fit a current fad that you like.
You can change a word's meanings.. sure. But you will never change the fact it represents.

 

[DukeU]

I don't remember if you were the one that said you didn't read my initial argument, but if so, that may be why. My conclusion is an opinion, but I used actual facts to back up my opinion. If you would like, I can create a list of every fact I used in my argument, and you can pick apart those facts as you please.

You sprinkled in some irrelevant facts to go along with what is mostly opinion.

You're argument is not rational. IMO

 

[iamwhatiseem]

It's not statistics I don't trust it's their manipulation that calls them into question.

Always.
Example....
Women make less than men by X% for same job. Because, you know, sexism.
Statistically, the stat is true. And that is the only part one side wants you to hear.
But it ignores many factors that make the stat true, but openly proves the assumption wrong.

Same here.
The reason there are so many more trans, is because some, like the OP, simply change the meaning of the word so that it encompasses a much larger set of people.
Now suddenly, a heterosexual man who likes to dress in women's clothes as a sexual fetish... is whalaaah!!.... transgender. Yay!!

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Then you are wrong.
Pretty simple.
You want to change a word from it's scientific/static use to mean something else to fit a current fad that you like.
You can change a word's meanings.. sure. But you will never change the fact it represents.

And the fad is driven by the woke media conditioning people to adopt tribalism instead of principles or ideals. In the pecking order of authoritarian identity politics, being a straight white male is at the very bottom and is something reviled. Teenagers like yumigari are trying desperately to avoid this reviled identity, and so are eager to adopt anything BUT.

Elizabeth Warren pretends she is native American because it's more cool. Rachel Dolezal pretended she is black because it's more cool. Beto O'Rourke adopts an ethic first name because it's more cool.

This is all driven by identity politics and so is all this nonsense about dozens of different genders.

 

[Anomalism]

Once again, not a leftist, but very few people commit suicide for reasons that aren't somehow related to their social experiences. That's a pretty basic feature of suicide.

It is not my responsibility to mitigate myself in the hope that mentally ill snowflakes don't kill themselves. I owe you nothing.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I was considering participating in this discussion. Coud be a stimulating discussion if one selectively responds.

But then I remembered that my Myers-Briggs Type Indicator results consistently reflect a natural contradiction to the importance of the politicization of designated victim status groups with regard to emotional matters and personal feelings and as they relate to forming ones/his/her identity and/or selective mediation of the perception thereof.

I tell ya. Story of my life...

 

[JohnDB]

I was considering participating in this discussion. Coud be a stimulating discussion if one selectively responds.

But then I remembered that my Myers-Briggs Type Indicator results consistently reflect a natural contradiction to the importance of the politicization of designated victim status groups with regard to emotional matters and personal feelings and as they relate to forming ones/his/her identity and/or selective mediation of the perception thereof.



View attachment 551726

I tell ya. Story of my life...

That and the insistence by the OP that they aren't living in a personally created fantasy bubble about who they really are.

If I could self identify I'd self identify as a trillionaire. Unfortunately no one wants to give me my money.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I was considering participating in this discussion. Coud be a stimulating discussion if one selectively responds.

But then I remembered that my Myers-Briggs Type Indicator results consistently reflect a natural contradiction to the importance of the politicization of designated victim status groups with regard to emotional matters and

I was considering participating in this discussion. Coud be a stimulating discussion if one selectively responds.

But then I remembered that my Myers-Briggs Type Indicator results consistently reflect a natural contradiction to the importance of the politicization of designated victim status groups with regard to emotional matters and personal feelings and as they relate to forming ones/his/her identity and/or selective mediation of the perception thereof.



View attachment 551726

I tell ya. Story of my life...

personal feelings and as they relate to forming ones/his/her identity and/or selective mediation of the perception thereof.



View attachment 551726

I tell ya. Story of my life...

I'm an INTJ, myself.

It's the not suffering fools gladly type.

 

[OKTexas]

Pedophilia and bestiality lead to the harm of others. Transgenderism doesn't. Massive difference. There's nothing wrong with deviance as long as it doesn't result in the harm of others.

Sure, you can practice self-discipline. Why should you in this case? Not all things we discipline out of ourselves, and I see no reason why this should be one of them.

100%. Standards are good. They exist in every society to have ever existed, and they should always exist. I'm arguing about whether or not this specific thing should be a standard.

I'm not a leftist, and I support standards and expectations.

---

20% of US adults have received some form of mental health treatment in the past 12 months. The transgender population makes up far less than 20%. How is this not realistic?

---

I never said psychological traits are part of how we identify male and females, they're part of how we conceive of males and females once we've identified them. That is part of the basis for my argument.

100%. I'm with you in this one. Always was.

How is this "gender" talk unrelated with reality? How is it made up? I'm curious.

I didn't make any effort to make everyone else go along with their identity. I said it's irrational not to. That was my argument.

---

Suicide rates vary based on a lot of metrics. Mental illness definitely is an influencing factor. However, most often mental illness causes higher suicide rates for no reason intrinsic to the mental illness. Those that are caringly accommodated by those around them and offered the help they need don't commit suicide at anywhere near the same rate.

Anecdotal, but I've met plenty of gender-nonconforming people that are quite happy with themselves, actually. Purely because they've made a transition, and those around them have respected that. This doesn't change the fact that there are those that are unhappy with themselves, but the most reliable treatment for that is a mix of therapy, both psychological and hormonal, and for some, gender reassignment surgery, though not everyone desires such a thing.

So how does any of this go against reality or nature?

---

I didn't try to shove it down your throat. And I don't support shoving it down your throat. I am simply seeking a respectful debate on the matter, since I still have yet to find a solid, rationally-consistent argument for why gender-nonconformity is any of what people claim it is. Others might try to shove it down your throat, someone might try to shove their opinion down my throat. That's not what I'm doing, and that's not what I intend to do.

When you can show me a man that can spontaneously become a woman, or vice versa, with no medical intervention, then I'll believe in the concept. But name one other group the represents a fraction of a percent in the country the has a comparable suicide rate. They should get the psychological intervention from the start, but the worse thing is pushing the crap on kids. That's just child abuse.

.

 

[jc456]

Gender is not defined by sex

Yes it is!

cant make a man bleed like a lady, can’t give a woman balls or prostate.
You’re brainwashed

 

[metalwolf]

One thing i feel is a double standard is that women can wear jeans, but as soon as a man wears a skirt or a dress it is frowned upon.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why is gender-nonconformity bad?

It isn't.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

why must one's gender align with their sex?

It doesn't.

Americans have a fundamental right to self-determination, to express themselves in accordance with who they are – gender identity is an example of the right to self-determination and expression.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

gender-nonconformity is neither irrational nor a mental illness.

Correct.

Whereas hostility toward gender-nonconformity is both unwarranted and irrational – the product of ignorance and fear.