|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 26, 2017 19:50:21 GMT
I'm a major proponent of the scientific method, thanks.
It's cute that you try to name call me as transphobic. That's what PC junkies do, just run around calling people racist, but where have I been transphobic?
Actually, you are neither major nor a proponent Know your place. I'm a proponent and a student, but I'm not a major proponent, and saying someone is a major student sounds kind of funny. The fact is, you don't even understand the basics of the scientific method, and all attempts at teaching them to you have been blissfully ignored. Which does not mean you are a bad person, but you are in no way a proponent of the scientific method, much less, in the eyes of science itself, science-friendly. Your perceptions of the issue are another matter. The statement you refer to was in a conditional clause. If the hood fits, however, there is good reason for that. Even if I were not to state you are transphobic yourself, (almost) all your posts on the subject have factually been. Your posts have been transphobic in stating or implying wrong and critical assumptions about the TG community and, against advertence, repeating them, as well as defective questions that are, also, classified as such. You already know these assumptions and these questions, since they were already mentioned. And, for the record, the only people who say pc or pretend left and right don’t exist are (in, the latter case, usually politically inactive) right-wing people.
|
|
|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 26, 2017 19:58:31 GMT
And accepting that you have the physical body you have. Not accepting that is having it surgically altered. Actually, no, it isn't. People are born with many defects, conditions or other morphological characteristics that can be altered surgically. Neither science nor they nor any movement that fights for their rights see that as who they are. OK, some other people, like you, and J's Ws, do, but your misguided definitions of who they are don't matter when their rights are concerned. J's Ws don't accept transfusions due to their personal, irrational beliefs. You don't accept SRs. Neither of you matter when healthcare for other people is concerned, but you both are free not to undergo the operations you don't accept yourselves. There is nothing wrong whatsoever with altering our bodies surgically. However, not accepting something in your body is not the same as having this part altered surgically. If it was, we would be undergoing immediate magical surgeries all the time. For any surgery at all to be performed, it must before be evaluated by a surgical professional, and, following the right criteria, it's always done with the endorsement of the medical community. SRs is actually so well employed that it not only demands a previous surgical evaluation, but also a psychological one. So, in fact, it's actually above average in this regard!
|
|
|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 26, 2017 20:07:45 GMT
I didn't ask that question to be actually answered. it was rhetorical but the idea behind the question still stays the same. why should the world accept anyone else and their views and their bodies and their religion or whatever if they don't have to accept what their God gave them? I am just stating that all this pc crap just isn't worth it now. trans gender bathrooms IN SCHOOLS? THAT IS COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT!Perhaps I would not use those words, but that's fundamentally the view of all people not of your religion and mindset about the influence of your religion on matters of state. Since we officially won that fight in the West long ago, we thankfully have the upper hand in political debate when it comes to Laicism.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 26, 2017 20:10:49 GMT
I'm a major proponent of the scientific method, thanks.
It's cute that you try to name call me as transphobic. That's what PC junkies do, just run around calling people racist, but where have I been transphobic?
Actually, you are neither major nor a proponent Know your place. I'm a proponent and a student, but I'm not a major proponent, and saying someone is a major student sounds kind of funny. The fact is, you don't even understand the basics of the scientific method, and all attempts at teaching them to you have been blissfully ignored. Which does not mean you are a bad person, but you are in no way a proponent of the scientific method, much less, in the eyes of science itself, science-friendly. Your perceptions of the issue are another matter. The statement you refer to was in a conditional clause. If the hood fits, however, there is good reason for that. Even if I were not to state you are transphobic yourself, (almost) all your posts on the subject have factually been. Your posts have been transphobic in stating or implying wrong and critical assumptions about the TG community and, against advertence, repeating them, as well as defective questions that are, also, classified as such. You already know these assumptions and these questions, since they were already mentioned. And, for the record, the only people who say pc or pretend left and right don’t exist are (in, the latter case, usually politically inactive) right-wing people. I have to be honest, I stopped listening to you awhile back. You just sort of ramble, and it would help if you learned how to be concise and direct in how you write.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 26, 2017 20:16:07 GMT
And accepting that you have the physical body you have. Not accepting that is having it surgically altered. Actually, no, it isn't. People are born with many defects, conditions or other morphological characteristics that can be altered surgically. Neither science nor they nor any movement that fights for their rights see that as who they are. OK, some other people, like you, and J's Ws, do, but your misguided definitions of who they are don't matter when their rights are concerned. J's Ws don't accept transfusions due to their personal, irrational beliefs. You don't accept SRs. Neither of you matter when healthcare for other people is concerned, but you both are free not to undergo the operations you don't accept yourselves. There is nothing wrong whatsoever with altering our bodies surgically. However, not accepting something in your body is not the same as having this part altered surgically. If it was, we would be undergoing immediate magical surgeries all the time. For any surgery at all to be performed, it must before be evaluated by a surgical professional, and, following the right criteria, it's always done with the endorsement of the medical community. SRs is actually so well employed that it not only demands a previous surgical evaluation, but also a psychological one. So, in fact, it's actually above average in this regard! Yes, you're talking about alterations that present an actual challenge, which you haven't demonstrated transgender to be. The only challenge appears to be accepting it, which you are advocating against.
|
|
|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 26, 2017 20:50:59 GMT
I have to be honest, I stopped listening to you awhile back. You just sort of ramble, and it would help if you learned how to be concise and direct in how you write. I sent you 100-1400 word summarizations of 500-2000 page books. Being more concise would be difficult. Not saying it cannot be done, but I’m not Betrand Russell nor Steven Pinker nor V. S. Ramachandran, and even they had to actually write their attempts at popularizing science in book format. Sometimes, they were very long books. If you want to ask good questions, you have to have or develop the attention span to read much, much longer texts. Unfortunately, there’s no escaping that. If you were to read such books, then you would start fighting personal assumptions and judgments and misguided or overvalued guesses. Before that, even thinking about properly talking about science, let alone be a proponent of it, is not an option.
|
|
|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 26, 2017 20:51:19 GMT
Yes, you're talking about alterations that present an actual challenge, which you haven't demonstrated transgender to be. The only challenge appears to be accepting it, which you are advocating against. Large breasts or uneven teeth or not wanting to have children but wanting to have a lot of unprotected sex present actual challenges, I agree with you. Not one iota of the challenge of living with body dysphoria, however. And body dysphoria is not an inability to “accept” your body, it is the uneasiness of having a body that does not match your mind type. Even if the person “accepts” it, the uneasiness and distress do not go away. Body dysphoria is a byproduct, in some cases, of being TG (which means they are not the same thing). To give you the basic thought exercise we are given in our very introduction to the scientific method, sometimes it rains when there are clouds in the sky, but clouds in the sky don't mean there is going to be rain. Being TG is inalterable, for the reasons I already explained. Body dysphoria is not easily manageable, and the best way to manage it are the options we present to TG people in healthcare. Either way, if we did nothing, they would not stop being TG, they would not stop presenting dysphoria and they would keep on suffering with it, sometimes until suicide. That's why HRT, SRS and counseling are the best option in such cases. For more details, I’m going to copy paste the most relevant excerpt of my last post on the issue: "We should accept others when they are not harming others. The rest doesn't matter. Contrary to OP's assumption, we do accept anorexic patients and addicts in society. Now, whether we should provide them with care is another matter entirely. Healthcare professionals should provide health service when the patient (or legal sponsor) wants it and when there is something we can change that could help the patients more than the evidence suggests it harms them. Gender (1) is a definition that exists in a dimension completely alien to secondary sexual characteristics (2), reproductive organs (3) and sexual chromossomes (4). It is a psychosocial definition of identity, much like being Chinese, being a cinephile, etc, and it's mostly dependent on brain type, its cognitive byproducts and identity development during human growth. It's more fundamental than being a cinephile, probably more fundamental in most senses than being of your given nationality, but just as impossible to change as it is. As for the other numbers, they are all definitions operationalized on biological morphology, except for number 2, that contains cognitive and behavioral dimensions as well. Number 3 is defined by number 4 and certain conditions of embryonic development. Number 2 is defined by certain conditions of development and complex physiological changes started by "cues" sent by different parts of the body under certain conditions, among them 3. However, a lot of variation does occur already at this level of analysis for a variety of different reasons, and these characteristics may not be expressed at all, due to both artificial and natural factors. Either way, gender is completely different, and that's why TG people's minds do match reality. They don't wrongly believe they are chromossomal Xy or XX, nor do they believe they have male or female reproductive organs, nor do they believe they have or don't have male or female secondary characteristics. They don't necessarily believe anything at all. They just have a male or female type mind they cannot change and an identity that reflects that mind. As for choosing your own gender identity, evidence suggests it's not much of a choice, and that it's not changeable eiher, even if the patient wants it to change, by any service we can provide him/her that would not incur in irreversible, unjustifiable harm and, all evidence suggests, not even work at all. People already tried doing this in the past, sometimes with consent and previous patient demand, just as people already tried doing other things we now know we can't do. It's not just guesswork. Now, let's suppose that you could change your gender identity by choice. That would be a great power in your hands, and, according to the criteria above, there's no reason whatsoever we should not accept you and your choice. Now, should we provide you with some kind of healthcare? It totally depends on what changing your gender would mean to you. Would it provoke body dysphoria (this, yes, a negative symptom, unlike being TG, and which does not have any fundamental relationship at all to the patients' beliefs)? That happens for some, but not all trans people. If yes, then we should present you with the option of undergoing HRT, SRS and counseling. All of this process is only began after a careful psychological evaluation that tries to determine that you really do present the neccessary requirements and that doing so has, according to the data we have, a higher probability of helping you more than harming you. That is, briefly explained, how healthcare works."
|
|
|
Post by deembastille on Mar 26, 2017 20:52:38 GMT
I didn't ask that question to be actually answered. it was rhetorical but the idea behind the question still stays the same. why should the world accept anyone else and their views and their bodies and their religion or whatever if they don't have to accept what their God gave them? I am just stating that all this pc crap just isn't worth it now. trans gender bathrooms IN SCHOOLS? THAT IS COMPLETE AND UTTER BULLSHIT!Perhaps I would not use those words, but that's fundamentally the view of all people not of your religion and mindset about the influence of your religion on matters of state. Since we officially won that fight in the West long ago, we thankfully have the upper hand in political debate when it comes to Laicism. And that's the reason why I wrote WHAT THEIR GOD made them. PS I dislike God, particularly the Christian one, if he infact exists.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 26, 2017 20:53:39 GMT
I have to be honest, I stopped listening to you awhile back. You just sort of ramble, and it would help if you learned how to be concise and direct in how you write. I sent you 100-1400 word summarizations of 500-2000 page books. Being more concise would be difficult. Not saying it cannot be done, but I’m not Betrand Russell nor Steven Pinker nor V. S. Ramachandran, and even they had to actually write their attempts at popularizing science in book format. Sometimes, they were very long books. If you want to ask good questions, you have to have or develop the attention span to read much, much longer texts. Unfortunately, there’s no escaping that. If you were to read such books, then you would start fighting personal assumptions and judgments and misguided or overvalued guesses. Before that, even thinking about properly talking about science, let alone be a proponent of it, is not an option. ok. Enjoy that.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 26, 2017 20:54:42 GMT
Yes, you're talking about alterations that present an actual challenge, which you haven't demonstrated transgender to be. The only challenge appears to be accepting it, which you are advocating against. Large breasts or uneven teeth or not wanting to have children but wanting to have a lot of unprotected sex present actual challenges, I agree with you. Not one iota of the challenge of living with body dysphoria, however. And body dysphoria is not an inability to “accept” your body, it is the uneasiness of having a body that does not match your mind type. Even if the person “accepts” it, the uneasiness and distress do not go away. Body dysphoria is a byproduct, in some cases, of being TG (which means they are not the same thing). To give you the basic thought exercise we are given in our very introduction to the scientific method, sometimes it rains when there are clouds in the sky, but clouds in the sky don't mean there is going to be rain. Being TG is inalterable, for the reasons I already explained. Body dysphoria is not easily manageable, and the best way to manage it are the options we present to TG people in healthcare. Either way, if we did nothing, they would not stop being TG, they would not stop presenting dysphoria and they would keep on suffering with it, sometimes until suicide. That's why HRT, SRS and counseling are the best option in such cases. For more details, I’m going to copy paste the most relevant excerpt of my last post on the issue: "We should accept others when they are not harming others. The rest doesn't matter. Contrary to OP's assumption, we do accept anorexic patients and addicts in society. Now, whether we should provide them with care is another matter entirely. Healthcare professionals should provide health service when the patient (or legal sponsor) wants it and when there is something we can change that could help the patients more than the evidence suggests it harms them. Gender (1) is a definition that exists in a dimension completely alien to secondary sexual characteristics (2), reproductive organs (3) and sexual chromossomes (4). It is a psychosocial definition of identity, much like being Chinese, being a cinephile, etc, and it's mostly dependent on brain type, its cognitive byproducts and identity development during human growth. It's more fundamental than being a cinephile, probably more fundamental in most senses than being of your given nationality, but just as impossible to change as it is. As for the other numbers, they are all definitions operationalized on biological morphology, except for number 2, that contains cognitive and behavioral dimensions as well. Number 3 is defined by number 4 and certain conditions of embryonic development. Number 2 is defined by certain conditions of development and complex physiological changes started by "cues" sent by different parts of the body under certain conditions, among them 3. However, a lot of variation does occur already at this level of analysis for a variety of different reasons, and these characteristics may not be expressed at all, due to both artificial and natural factors. Either way, gender is completely different, and that's why TG people's minds do match reality. They don't wrongly believe they are chromossomal Xy or XX, nor do they believe they have male or female reproductive organs, nor do they believe they have or don't have male or female secondary characteristics. They don't necessarily believe anything at all. They just have a male or female type mind they cannot change and an identity that reflects that mind. As for choosing your own gender identity, evidence suggests it's not much of a choice, and that it's not changeable eiher, even if the patient wants it to change, by any service we can provide him/her that would not incur in irreversible, unjustifiable harm and, all evidence suggests, not even work at all. People already tried doing this in the past, sometimes with consent and previous patient demand, just as people already tried doing other things we now know we can't do. It's not just guesswork. Now, let's suppose that you could change your gender identity by choice. That would be a great power in your hands, and, according to the criteria above, there's no reason whatsoever we should not accept you and your choice. Now, should we provide you with some kind of healthcare? It totally depends on what changing your gender would mean to you. Would it provoke body dysphoria (this, yes, a negative symptom, unlike being TG, and which does not have any fundamental relationship at all to the patients' beliefs)? That happens for some, but not all trans people. If yes, then we should present you with the option of undergoing HRT, SRS and counseling. All of this process is only began after a careful psychological evaluation that tries to determine that you really do present the neccessary requirements and that doing so has, according to the data we have, a higher probability of helping you more than harming you. That is, briefly explained, how healthcare works." Woooooooords
|
|
|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 26, 2017 20:58:44 GMT
Perhaps I would not use those words, but that's fundamentally the view of all people not of your religion and mindset about the influence of your religion on matters of state. Since we officially won that fight in the West long ago, we thankfully have the upper hand in political debate when it comes to Laicism. And that's the reason why I wrote WHAT THEIR GOD made them. PS I dislike God, particularly the Christian one, if he infact exists. They don't necessarily have gods, nor do they necessarily hold such unscientific beliefs about body purity. That’s part of the reason why there is nothing wrong about being TG or presenting TG people with the best possible health and social care.
|
|
|
Post by NishmatHaChalil on Mar 26, 2017 21:05:11 GMT
ok. Enjoy that. Woooooooords Ok But when you pretend you care about science or know your respective place in the scientific community, even though you don't do the neccessary homework, nor do you assume a position free of personal beliefs, or when you decide to post unscientific assumptions, suggestions, misguided questions, criticism and "questioning", I'm going to call it what it is, and I'm going to state the scientific, political and ethical implications of interest.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 26, 2017 21:44:41 GMT
ok. Enjoy that. Woooooooords Ok But when you pretend you care about science or know your respective place in the scientific community, even though you don't do the neccessary homework, nor do you assume a position free of personal beliefs, or when you decide to post unscientific assumptions, suggestions, misguided questions, criticism and "questioning", I'm going to call it what it is, and I'm going to state the scientific, political and ethical implications of interest. I do care about science. You just haven't presented your case in any coherent way that differentiates it from encouraging people to not accept who they are. You just ramble on and conflate ideas while saying I'm the one making assumptions. Sure.
|
|
|
Post by deembastille on Mar 27, 2017 2:03:56 GMT
words. of. the. CENTURY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 27, 2017 15:14:31 GMT
I realize this might offend some, but I mean to express that I honestly don't understand the support of being transgender.
I am a humanist, I support the ideas of freedom and life in general, and I fully support and completely understand the nature and lifestyle of gays and lesbians without question. I wish them all the happiness in the world and embrace them.
But being transgender is different. You're talking about not accepting what you are and trying to be something else. It's the opposite of why I support gay people. You're talking about surgery. You're talking about cutting off body parts to be something else. I really don't know how this isn't disturbing. Where is the line between that and a legitimate psychological problem?
And I honestly find it outrageous that people felt the need to give somebody like Jenner a woman of the year award. That's a joke right? There are great women out there accomplishing amazing things, and some guy who cut off his dick and put on a dress is the woman of the year? That's an outrage to women and their legitimate contributions to society. I am gay and I also understand where you are coming from. Yes, it is disturbing, but for some reason, TG'd expect others to get them. They do have some very serious psychological issues. I can accept a transgendered person for their life and humanity, just not understand or respect the serious mutilation they have done to their sex. How can they possibly expect a vast majority of humans in the world, who do appreciate the body they are born with, to embrace and honor their transition into a fake gender, and not question the psychology or even ethics behind it? Jenner is a narcissist and he hasn't even had a cut and tuck yet as far as I'm concerned, so that gives him even less privilege to be woman of the year. It is a f<>king farce. Regardless, he will still always be genetically male, even if he psychologically identifies as a woman. But yes, that is all in his mind. It's a mental illness. It is no different than any other condition where someone wishes to – or actually goes through with it – alter their appearance in some extreme manner. Extreme plastic surgery, body modification, tattooing, purging – it's no different. There is a condition called Body integrity identity disorder. essentially, people who suffer from it wish to be disabled. The want one or more of their limbs removed. Do we let them do it? of course not, because that would be insane. The only reason GID is tolerated is because it has become political. Trans people somehow latched on to the LGB community, thus making it untouchable in SJW's eyes.
|
|
bd74
Junior Member
#WalkAway
@bd74
Posts: 1,522
Likes: 659
|
Post by bd74 on Mar 27, 2017 17:45:39 GMT
Yes, I am cute, and you are still a condescending and pretentious pseudo-intellectual twerp, who has no "real" argument in defense of others having to "respect" a trannies decision to mutilate their genitals, so as to be accepted as the opposite gender, which is contrary to what their birth biology dictates. Listen up good, hell will freeze over before a male having a cut and tuck to become a fake female is deemed as "natural" and "normal". Your repeated depiction of transgenders as having "very serious psychological issues" and "mutilating themselves" is disturbing, to say the least. Especially when considering it's coming from a gay man. One would think that gay people would have a better tolerance of things. I have never, ever seen or heard anything like it -- and I happen to know MANY gay people.
|
|
|
Post by deembastille on Mar 27, 2017 22:26:24 GMT
Yes, I am cute, and you are still a condescending and pretentious pseudo-intellectual twerp, who has no "real" argument in defense of others having to "respect" a trannies decision to mutilate their genitals, so as to be accepted as the opposite gender, which is contrary to what their birth biology dictates. Listen up good, hell will freeze over before a male having a cut and tuck to become a fake female is deemed as "natural" and "normal". Your repeated depiction of transgenders as having "very serious psychological issues" and "mutilating themselves" is disturbing, to say the least. Especially when considering it's coming from a gay man. One would think that gay people would have a better tolerance of things. I have never, ever seen or heard anything like it -- and I happen to know MANY gay people. er... I'll have you know that many people of a particular, uh, situation, are kind of closed minded when it comes to an addendum of THEIR SITUATION. not many people from a particular race are accepting of a person HALF THAT RACE, for example. and just because someone is gay doesn't mean that they automatically agree and support all things that other gay people SHOULD agree with and support. A colleague at my school is openly gay and LEPT FOR JOY WHEN TRUMP WON! Liberalism doesn't automatically come with this territory. NOTHING should automatically come with ANY territory!
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 28, 2017 13:31:14 GMT
Yes, I am cute, and you are still a condescending and pretentious pseudo-intellectual twerp, who has no "real" argument in defense of others having to "respect" a trannies decision to mutilate their genitals, so as to be accepted as the opposite gender, which is contrary to what their birth biology dictates. Listen up good, hell will freeze over before a male having a cut and tuck to become a fake female is deemed as "natural" and "normal". Your repeated depiction of transgenders as having "very serious psychological issues" and "mutilating themselves" is disturbing, to say the least. Especially when considering it's coming from a gay man. One would think that gay people would have a better tolerance of things. I have never, ever seen or heard anything like it -- and I happen to know MANY gay people. Irony: Lecturing someone about being open-minded while lumping them into a group based on their sexuality.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Mar 28, 2017 13:32:21 GMT
er... I'll have you know that many people of a particular, uh, situation, are kind of closed minded when it comes to an addendum of THEIR SITUATION. not many people from a particular race are accepting of a person HALF THAT RACE, for example. and just because someone is gay doesn't mean that they automatically agree and support all things that other gay people SHOULD agree with and support. A colleague at my school is openly gay and LEPT FOR JOY WHEN TRUMP WON! Liberalism doesn't automatically come with this territory. NOTHING should automatically come with ANY territory!Well I would say in my defense, that TG is not an addendum of my situation of being a gay man. It has nothing to do with my sexuality, or any other being that identifies as homosexual\gay. If a gay person or straight person chooses to embrace transgender, that is on their own perogative. And yes, I agree. A persons outlook\perception does not always have anything to do with one's political slant and is not confined to just any specific territory. The TG issue is not really about politics at all; but is a mental health care issue. It should be a mental health care issue, but unfortunately is very much about politics.
|
|
skribb
Sophomore
IMDb since June 2005
@skribb
Posts: 767
Likes: 204
|
Post by skribb on Mar 28, 2017 13:48:02 GMT
Well I would say in my defense, that TG is not an addendum of my situation of being a gay man. It has nothing to do with my sexuality, or any other being that identifies as homosexual\gay. If a gay person or straight person chooses to embrace transgender, that is on their own perogative. And yes, I agree. A persons outlook\perception does not always have anything to do with one's political slant and is not confined to just any specific territory. The TG issue is not really about politics at all; but is a mental health care issue. It should be a mental health care issue, but unfortunately is very much about politics. everything is politics.
|
|