Womens hostility to Trans women.

[Bob Blaylock]

"women assigned men". Once more the left invents medical terms to mask their ignorance (in a literal sense) of genetic science.

Willful defiance of truth is not really the same thing as common ignorance. A truly ignorant person just doesn't know any better. We're talking about people who openly rebel against what they know to be the truth—people who know better, but choose to intentionally promote falsehood.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

That's their definition. So, gender as a social construct is perceived to be fluid and you can be born a male or female but identify as the other gender. That's cool. If you feel that you were born in the wrong body that's fine. You do you.

Let's not let them hijack and corrupt the language. “Trans women” are not women. They are not, in any meaningful sense, female. Let us not allow them to get away with corrupting the language to promote the absurdity that they are anything other than mentally- and morally-defective men who are so severely f•••ed-up in the head that they cannot tell the difference between male and female. Orwell warned us against this when he defined and described “Newspeak”. We must not let the crazies control our language or our thoughts.

Trans women and women have different issues. We are not the same. Trans women have a different set of experiences that are not less than women but unique and important in their own right. There are those in the trans community that insist that there is no difference between themselves and women and that's it. If you say otherwise, their rational is the number of harassment incidents and murders of trans people yada yada yada. You either have to agree with them or you are labeled as transphobic. They don't even address the issues which come down to legal documentation, funding, services geared for specific populations.That's why there is so much friction going on right now.

Their issue is that they are batshit crazy, and so are any who play along with their madness. Let us not let them get away, unchallenged, with claiming that they are not.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Nope. Race is a social construct as well.

No, it is not. Like sex, race is an observable, provable parameter of humanity, by which some humans differ observably from others. A Caucasian is observably different from a Negro, who is observably different from an Asian, and so on. This isn't a “social construct”; it is a set of objective, observable differences. How we treat people, according to race, may be a social construct,but race itself is not.

I had previously been under the impression that the different races were subspecies of humanity, but it turns out that's not really correct. “Race” is actually recognized as a valid taxon below subspecies; all extant humans are of the same subspecies, but we are of different races. Below species, the different taxa become somewhat fuzzy. Species is defined by the ability to freely interbreed. You only ever really get different subspecies, or races, or strains, or any other taxa that might exist below that, by having populations isolated from one another, prevented from interbreeding, long enough for these isolated populations to evolve in different directions. As modern travel technology is causing the world, in effect, to become smaller, and allowing the previously isolated populations to interbreed, the races are becoming less distinct, and eventually, may all merge into one homogeneous race descended from all the races that now exist.

 

[whitehall]

If "social construct' is fluid it means that genetic science is "fluid".

Nope. Race is a social construct as well.

Gender as a social construct. There were several movie stars in the early part of the last century that were "gender bending" on stage and in clothing.

I get it and you might not like it but we are in agreement. In the greatest Country in the world citizens are free to act out whatever fantasies their fevered minds can come up with as long as they don't physically hurt anyone else. There are venues to alter appearance with plastic surgery and amputate healthy body parts if that's how far the fantasy goes and there are even special laws that protect these hapless people. The problem for society emerges when muscular genetic men steal potential lucrative educational benefits from genetic women with athletic scholarships or when genetic men compete on an international level with genetic women. Nobody claims that the occasional sexually confused man who wants to be accepted as a woman should be arrested but genetic women who are victims of the most incredible discrimination in the history of humanity have a case.

 

[Billiejeens]

Labour’s Lisa Nandy vows to ‘redouble her efforts’ standing up for trans rights after barrage of ‘hate and anger’

This is a link to a UK article but I suspect it holds true the world over.

Why are women so hostile to trans women ?

Because they are really confused men with their dicks cut off?

Or not cut off?

 

[Disir]

Nope. Race is a social construct as well.

No, it is not. Like sex, race is an observable, provable parameter of humanity, by which some humans differ observably from others. A Caucasian is observably different from a Negro, who is observably different from an Asian, and so on. This isn't a “social construct”; it is a set of objective, observable differences. How we treat people, according to race, may be a social construct,but race itself is not.

I had previously been under the impression that the different races were subspecies of humanity, but it turns out that's not really correct. “Race” is actually recognized as a valid taxon below subspecies; all extant humans are of the same subspecies, but we are of different races. Below species, the different taxa become somewhat fuzzy. Species is defined by the ability to freely interbreed. You only ever really get different subspecies, or races, or strains, or any other taxa that might exist below that, by having populations isolated from one another, prevented from interbreeding, long enough for these isolated populations to evolve in different directions. As modern travel technology is causing the world, in effect, to become smaller, and allowing the previously isolated populations to interbreed, the races are becoming less distinct, and eventually, may all merge into one homogeneous race descended from all the races that now exist.

We have one race. There is only a 3% difference between any of us: hair color, eye color and skin color. That's it.

 

[Billiejeens]

Labour’s Lisa Nandy vows to ‘redouble her efforts’ standing up for trans rights after barrage of ‘hate and anger’

This is a link to a UK article but I suspect it holds true the world over.

Why are women so hostile to trans women ?

Tommy, are these "hostile women" considered misogynists because of this? what if they are "hostile" because they see/feel men have found another way to oppress them by becoming them? do you think transgender women are just as much women as those women that are mad at them? or do you believe this is nothing more than women just being mad at each other so it's nothing new? do you really believe that if something in the UK is true of women it then has to be true of all women?...do you think "liberal thinking" is an oxymoron or a double negative? ...man what an upside down lot

No its a genuine question. My philosophy in life is to accept people as they would like. Good manners cost nothing. This just seems to be an anomaly.I struggle to see it as a conspiracy against women. I might add that the hostility seems to be coming from left wing groups of women who are generally sound on the big issues.

I laugh

 

[Billiejeens]

Nope. Race is a social construct as well.

No, it is not. Like sex, race is an observable, provable parameter of humanity, by which some humans differ observably from others. A Caucasian is observably different from a Negro, who is observably different from an Asian, and so on. This isn't a “social construct”; it is a set of objective, observable differences. How we treat people, according to race, may be a social construct,but race itself is not.

I had previously been under the impression that the different races were subspecies of humanity, but it turns out that's not really correct. “Race” is actually recognized as a valid taxon below subspecies; all extant humans are of the same subspecies, but we are of different races. Below species, the different taxa become somewhat fuzzy. Species is defined by the ability to freely interbreed. You only ever really get different subspecies, or races, or strains, or any other taxa that might exist below that, by having populations isolated from one another, prevented from interbreeding, long enough for these isolated populations to evolve in different directions. As modern travel technology is causing the world, in effect, to become smaller, and allowing the previously isolated populations to interbreed, the races are becoming less distinct, and eventually, may all merge into one homogeneous race descended from all the races that now exist.

We have one race. There is only a 3% difference between any of us: hair color, eye color and skin color. That's it.

No.

 

[Billiejeens]

Labour’s Lisa Nandy vows to ‘redouble her efforts’ standing up for trans rights after barrage of ‘hate and anger’

This is a link to a UK article but I suspect it holds true the world over.

Why are women so hostile to trans women ?

Tommy, are these "hostile women" considered misogynists because of this? what if they are "hostile" because they see/feel men have found another way to oppress them by becoming them? do you think transgender women are just as much women as those women that are mad at them? or do you believe this is nothing more than women just being mad at each other so it's nothing new? do you really believe that if something in the UK is true of women it then has to be true of all women?...do you think "liberal thinking" is an oxymoron or a double negative? ...man what an upside down lot

No its a genuine question. My philosophy in life is to accept people as they would like. Good manners cost nothing. This just seems to be an anomaly.I struggle to see it as a conspiracy against women. I might add that the hostility seems to be coming from left wing groups of women who are generally sound on the big issues.

Some might contest that good manners would preclude declaring oneself the same as a woman (or other) and imposing that on the vast majority that has not joined one's reality.

But where is the victim in all this.Surely we can identify ourselves as we see fit ?

Should I be able to identify myself as black and claim Affirmative action benefits?

People are.

 

[Billiejeens]

The feminist movement has abandoned women when it refuses to fight off the attack of the trans movement.

Which is a bit weird because current feminism abandoned normal women some time ago.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

We have one race. There is only a 3% difference between any of us: hair color, eye color and skin color. That's it.

Put aside semantic distinctions, and you cannot deny that there are several groups within humanity, that are consistent within those groups, and distinct from other groups, with regard to minor, observable, objective physical traits. Each of these groups breeds true within itself; offspring produced by a mating between two members of one of these groups have the same observable characteristics as their parents, that distinguish them as part of that group. As far as any scientific classification has been made to distinguish these groups, “race” is the name of the taxonomic level into which they are divided.

And yes, the genetic differences between these groups are small. Small enough that we can all freely interbreed, regardless of race, producing offspring that are not quite the same as either parent race. This ability to freely interbreed is what makes us all the same species.

 

[Billiejeens]

This is part of a growing worldwide trend for disturbed people to become obsessed with any issue involving sex, sexuality, sexual orientation, and gender. It accomplishes absolutely nothing of any good use to anyone. All it amounts to is a gigantic show of psychological insecurity.

There is nothing wrong with simply accepting people for who they are and treating people with respect and kindness, and everything right.

While scrolling down the linked article, I came upon one Kaitlin Bennett and googled her. What a dipshit. Why is she running around confronting people? She's got biiiiggg problems.

The issue starts when SJW twats like you force people to accept things like this OR ELSE.

Do you honestly think biological boys should be able to compete in girls sports?

No. The issue starts with bigotry from angry misogynist white supremacist pretend Christians

Idiotic response

 

[Disir]

That's their definition. So, gender as a social construct is perceived to be fluid and you can be born a male or female but identify as the other gender. That's cool. If you feel that you were born in the wrong body that's fine. You do you.

Let's not let them hijack and corrupt the language. “Trans women” are not women. They are not, in any meaningful sense, female. Let us not allow them to get away with corrupting the language to promote the absurdity that they are anything other than mentally- and morally-defective men who are so severely f•••ed-up in the head that they cannot tell the difference between male and female. Orwell warned us against this when he defined and described “Newspeak”. We must not let the crazies control our language or our thoughts.

Trans women and women have different issues. We are not the same. Trans women have a different set of experiences that are not less than women but unique and important in their own right. There are those in the trans community that insist that there is no difference between themselves and women and that's it. If you say otherwise, their rational is the number of harassment incidents and murders of trans people yada yada yada. You either have to agree with them or you are labeled as transphobic. They don't even address the issues which come down to legal documentation, funding, services geared for specific populations.That's why there is so much friction going on right now.

Their issue is that they are batshit crazy, and so are any who play along with their madness. Let us not let them get away, unchallenged, with claiming that they are not.

That's fine in a bar discussion, sitting on the stoop smoking a blunt or conversing at a cocktail party but that doesn't address the issues. The battles are legal in nature and at the federal level address funding. When you are looking at mental health services, the treatment of one population is going to be very different from another population because their experiences are very different.

So, if you have a Domestic Violence shelter that accepts a trans woman it's traumatizing for the women that are in there. That doesn't mean, nor should it be taken, that violence against trans women isn't real and isn't a problem. It means that it is necessary to create something for the other population so that those needs are met.

 

[skye]

The title of this thread is kind of wrong...

Because in NOT ONLY women who are hostile to trannies

Men are too!



and with reason.

 

[Billiejeens]

We have one race. There is only a 3% difference between any of us: hair color, eye color and skin color. That's it.

Put aside semantic distinctions, and you cannot deny that there are several groups within humanity, that are consistent within those groups, and distinct from other groups, with regard to minor, observable, objective physical traits. Each of these groups breeds true within itself; offspring produced by a mating between two members of one of these groups have the same observable characteristics as their parents, that distinguish them as part of that group. As far as any scientific classification has been made to distinguish these groups, “race” is the name of the taxonomic level into which they are divided.

And yes, the genetic differences between these groups are small. Small enough that we can all freely interbreed, regardless of race, producing offspring that are not quite the same as either parent race. This ability to freely interbreed is what makes us all the same species.

We used to have enough sense to know that just because you can do something doesnt mean that you should.

 

[Disir]

We have one race. There is only a 3% difference between any of us: hair color, eye color and skin color. That's it.

Put aside semantic distinctions, and you cannot deny that there are several groups within humanity, that are consistent within those groups, and distinct from other groups, with regard to minor, observable, objective physical traits. Each of these groups breeds true within itself; offspring produced by a mating between two members of one of these groups have the same observable characteristics as their parents, that distinguish them as part of that group. As far as any scientific classification has been made to distinguish these groups, “race” is the name of the taxonomic level into which they are divided.

And yes, the genetic differences between these groups are small. Small enough that we can all freely interbreed, regardless of race, producing offspring that are not quite the same as either parent race. This ability to freely interbreed is what makes us all the same species.

3% difference, Bob. One race because we are all the same species.

 

[Disir]

Nope. Race is a social construct as well.

No, it is not. Like sex, race is an observable, provable parameter of humanity, by which some humans differ observably from others. A Caucasian is observably different from a Negro, who is observably different from an Asian, and so on. This isn't a “social construct”; it is a set of objective, observable differences. How we treat people, according to race, may be a social construct,but race itself is not.

I had previously been under the impression that the different races were subspecies of humanity, but it turns out that's not really correct. “Race” is actually recognized as a valid taxon below subspecies; all extant humans are of the same subspecies, but we are of different races. Below species, the different taxa become somewhat fuzzy. Species is defined by the ability to freely interbreed. You only ever really get different subspecies, or races, or strains, or any other taxa that might exist below that, by having populations isolated from one another, prevented from interbreeding, long enough for these isolated populations to evolve in different directions. As modern travel technology is causing the world, in effect, to become smaller, and allowing the previously isolated populations to interbreed, the races are becoming less distinct, and eventually, may all merge into one homogeneous race descended from all the races that now exist.

We have one race. There is only a 3% difference between any of us: hair color, eye color and skin color. That's it.

No.

You need to figure out how to speak intelligently. I don't do hit and runs.

If "social construct' is fluid it means that genetic science is "fluid".

Nope. Race is a social construct as well.

Gender as a social construct. There were several movie stars in the early part of the last century that were "gender bending" on stage and in clothing.

I get it and you might not like it but we are in agreement. In the greatest Country in the world citizens are free to act out whatever fantasies their fevered minds can come up with as long as they don't physically hurt anyone else. There are venues to alter appearance with plastic surgery and amputate healthy body parts if that's how far the fantasy goes and there are even special laws that protect these hapless people. The problem for society emerges when muscular genetic men steal potential lucrative educational benefits from genetic women with athletic scholarships or when genetic men compete on an international level with genetic women. Nobody claims that the occasional sexually confused man who wants to be accepted as a woman should be arrested but genetic women who are victims of the most incredible discrimination in the history of humanity have a case.

I may have to mark this day down to remember that we agreed on something. Perhaps it's Leap Year magic.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

We used to have enough sense to know that just because you can do something doesnt [sic] mean that you should.

Are you saying that the races shouldn't interbreed? If so, then I have to disagree.

Once upon a time, most of us Caucasians had the hubris to believe that we were the superior race, that other races—Negros especially—were inferior to us. We actually, in many jurisdictions, made it a criminal offense to commit “miscegenation”—the crime of “polluting” our “superior” white race by interbreeding with “inferior” races.

Now, most of us know better. From more modern science, we recognize the value of genetic diversity in strengthening a species; while breeding too closely weakens a species. Mankind, as a whole, can only become stronger and healthier, the more we racially interbreed.

 

[Billiejeens]

We used to have enough sense to know that just because you can do something doesnt [sic] mean that you should.

Are you saying that the races shouldn't interbreed? If so, then I have to disagree.

Once upon a time, most of us Caucasians had the hubris to believe that we were the superior race, that other races—Negros especially—were inferior to us. We actually, in many jurisdictions, made it a criminal offense to commit “miscegenation”—the crime of “polluting” our “superior” white race by interbreeding with “inferior” races.

Now, most of us know better. From more modern science, we recognize the value of genetic diversity in strengthening a species; while breeding too closely weakens a species. Mankind, as a whole, can only become stronger and healthier, the more we racially interbreed.

I laugh

 

[Bob Blaylock]

3% difference, Bob. One race because we are all the same species.

We are all the same species, yes. Hence our ability to freely interbreed.

We are even the same subspecies—Homo sapiens sapiens. There is one other recognized subspecies, Homo sapiens idaltu, but it's been extinct for about 160,000 years; and several other long-extinct varieties that it is thought might possibly have been subspecies of Homo sapiens, but it's not known with any certainty that they were not entirely different species from us.

But we are different races. This isn't a “social construct”. This is observable science.

Again, this part of the taxonomy hierarchy is defined as…

• Species
• Subspecies
• Race
• Strain

I don't know if there's anything below Strain. I could easily enough find out, I suppose, but I'm not going to bother, right now. Really, things get kind of fuzzy, once you get below Species, since everything below that can interbreed.