• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Transgender man gives birth

Argumemnon said:
Hey, this is the third time I have to repeat myself to you. Pay attention:

I'd like them to be treated to the truth. The truth doesn't have to be told in a way that hurts, but is it wrong of me to want my utterances to correspond to objective reality?
Click to expand...
We've seen your argument.

Here's what you've failed to do: Show us how you'd "treat" (<gag>) someone to your truth in a way doesn't hurt? In the absence of a working example, what both TM and I are telling you is that you can't do it because it's fundamentally rude to respond to someone correcting you as to their gender by telling them they're wrong.
 
TragicMonkey said:
You think you don't have that problem but apparently you do.
Click to expand...

No, disagreeing with your ideology is no problem at all. You only think it's a problem because it's an ideology. That's the nature of the beast.

You seem to have some compulsion to dwell on the sex of whoever you're talking to
Click to expand...

More inventions by you. Apparently you've chosen to forget -- because there's no way you don't know this -- that many languages, English included, differentiate men from women and thus when addressing people there are different words to use depending on who you're talking to. Once you've been taught this you do it automatically. So far I haven't met a person (in real life) that my brain can't determine the sex of.

to the extreme of arguing with them if you think they've gotten it wrong.
Click to expand...

Wow, you have a vivid imagination. Where have I argued with them, since I've just told you I've never encountered this situation? ...snip...

Edited by jsfisher: 
Edited for compliance with Rules 0 and 12 of the Membership Agreement.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Argumemnon said:
I said I was Emperor of the World, Tyr. I think I know my rank better than you do.
Click to expand...

You don't. Rank isn't self-bestowed. You don't have to figure out your rank, or question your rank growing up. It's unlikely you'll be tortured for your rank.

A transwoman wants to be called 'her' because she is a woman. A transman wants to be called 'he' because he is a man. You want to be called Emperor even though you don't think you are one because you don't know who is a man and who is a woman. It's a way of thinking I just can't mentally parse.

See how that works? No. I'm not emperor of the world, and there are objective measures of who's a he and who's a she.
Click to expand...

You don't seem to understand what measures are used to determine who is a 'he' and who is a 'she', and insist on using your 'truth' on others who know better. More than that, you insist you can do this in a polite fashion. This is multiple layers of wrong. It's like the Christians who think they can let atheists know the 'truth' that the atheist will be burning in hell politely.
 
Babbylonian said:
We've seen your argument.

Here's what you've failed to do: Show us how you'd "treat" (<gag>) someone to your truth in a way doesn't hurt? In the absence of a working example, what both TM and I are telling you is that you can't do it because it's fundamentally rude to respond to someone correcting you as to their gender by telling them they're wrong.
Click to expand...

You know, this is very amusing. Had I omitted the highlighted part, I know for a fact, by experience, that you or someone else would've concocted a nice hypothetical where I call people fat in the streets for no reason. Apparently in that situation, which has happened not long ago right here on the forum, I'm speaking of the general case. And now that I added the highlighted to cover the general case, suddenly it can only apply to the specific and I must argue with trans people.

You will interpret my words in the way that best suits your need to be outraged about my disagreement.

So how about you spare us all that and instead make an actual case? I've made mine, distinguishing being polite and respectful with telling people what they want to hear because they want to be told a lie. So yes, I'm sure it hurts their feelings that I'm not going along with the lie. But what of it? My feelings are hurt all the time and I don't demand others change to protect them. Are we now in a world where the safe space in our mind is paramount and objective reality is unimportant?

That's a crucial distinction I'm making. How about we deal with that?
 
tyr_13 said:
You don't. Rank isn't self-bestowed.
Click to expand...

Neither is gender.

A transwoman wants to be called 'her' because she is a woman.
Click to expand...

No, a trans woman wants to be called "her" because he feels like a woman. Fine. Go through the hormone therapy and surgeries and I'll be glad to oblige, because at that point, objective reality matches her feelings.

You don't seem to understand what measures are used to determine who is a 'he' and who is a 'she', and insist on using your 'truth' on others who know better.
Click to expand...

Oh, no, I understand exactly what measures are used. It's precisely because they are measures that they are not dependant on what the person feels like.

More than that, you insist you can do this in a polite fashion.
Click to expand...

Of course you can. You can tell someone the worst thing in the world in a polite fashion. Some people make careers out of it.
 
Argumemnon said:
Neither is gender.
Click to expand...

Sex. The word you're thinking of is sex.



No, a trans woman wants to be called "her" because he feels like a woman. Fine. Go through the hormone therapy and surgeries and I'll be glad to oblige, because at that point, objective reality matches her feelings.
Click to expand...

A transwoman is a woman. The hint is in the name. Again, the word you're thinking of is sex.



Oh, no, I understand exactly what measures are used. It's precisely because they are measures that they are not dependant on what the person feels like.
Click to expand...

Again, you don't understand the measures. Yes, what a person feels like is in fact, part of it. It isn't the whole of it, but it is part of it. That you don't believe this means you don't actually have a 'truth' to tell.


Of course you can. You can tell someone the worst thing in the world in a polite fashion. Some people make careers out of it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's perfectly polite to tell someone they're the wrong gender or they're going to hell. The trick is in the tone. Just say it soft, which doesn't sound rudely condescending at all.
 
tyr_13 said:
A transwoman is a woman. The hint is in the name. Again, the word you're thinking of is sex.
Click to expand...

No, he is not. It's perfectly fine for folks to humor him in his delusion, just as it's fine for them to pretend that they appreciate the eggs from the man down the street who thinks he's a chicken.

A transwoman is a woman you say, don't confuse gender with sex. Okay, well what words applying to women then do not apply to transwomen? When we talk about animals and sex we tend to use the words "male" and "female." Is a transwoman a female?
 
Last edited:
Argumemnon said:
No, disagreeing with your ideology is no problem at all. You only think it's a problem because it's an ideology. That's the nature of the beast.
Click to expand...

Not confronting people needlessly about their gender issues is an ideology? Minding your own business about things that don't concern you--that's an ideology? I would have thought an ideology would require positive action, not lack of action. Live and let live, that's an ideology, I guess. What a terrible one to follow! I should be ashamed.

More inventions by you. Apparently you've chosen to forget -- because there's no way you don't know this -- that many languages, English included, differentiate men from women and thus when addressing people there are different words to use depending on who you're talking to. Once you've been taught this you do it automatically. So far I haven't met a person (in real life) that my brain can't determine the sex of.
Click to expand...

You really think you have to use the words "sir" or "ma'am" in every conversation with another human being? There's no way out of it? You MUST call them one or the other, and find out which is the appropriate one. And you've never had a single doubt or made a single mistake on the subject, ever. Even with small children, or the very elderly, or people with ambiguous haircuts. Not once.

Wow, you have a vivid imagination. Where have I argued with them, since I've just told you I've never encountered this situation? You live in fantasy land. Leave reality for the rest of us.
Click to expand...

If you've never encountered a single transgendered person in your entire life, why are you so adamant on insisting that if and when you do you'll call them the gender they don't identify as? It's an important principle of yours, apparently, because TRUTH...but it hasn't come up yet? Then why are you bugging about it so hard? So you'll be ready when it comes? You'll show them, yes SIR or MA'AM! Ha! Those wacky kids don't know what'll hit them when you address them by a term they don't identify as. That'll...teach 'em...something. Or other.
 
Brainster said:
No, he is not. It's perfectly fine for folks to humor him in his delusion, just as it's fine for them to pretend that they appreciate the eggs from the man down the street who thinks he's a chicken.
Click to expand...

Yes she is, and I will not humor your delusions to the contrary. I'll also decline to be polite about it. You're simply wrong and don't know what a woman is.
 
tyr_13 said:
Yes she is, and I will not humor your delusions to the contrary. I'll also decline to be polite about it. You're simply wrong and don't know what a woman is.
Click to expand...

The only way that you can insist that a transfemale is really and objectively a woman is if we define "woman" as "someone who identifies as a woman." It's a circular definition. The word ceases to have any meaning at all, and saying "what a woman is" becomes a meaningless phrase.
 
Argumemnon said:
It's absolutely nothing like it at all. "Him" is not a derogatory word. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I didn't claim it was. Nor does it need to be for my analogy to be valid.

The similarity lies in the motivation of people who cry foul over something so insignificant.
 
Far be it for me to be defending it, but psychology and psychiatry are sciences and study real phenomena. Science and objective reality includes more than genitalia and chromosomes (which I haven't observed in 99.99% of the people I have gendered).

The question of gender identity, dysphoria, its nature, how society and culture interact and vice versa, language, permanence, whether quixotic ones exist, etc. are much more relevant. I certainly have counter-trending views that rile those darned SJWs on these matters, but at least I am addressing the actual issues.

Some look to MRI scans and "x brain in y body" if they need crude physicalist explanations.
 
Meadmaker said:
The only way that you can insist that a transfemale is really and objectively a woman is if we define "woman" as "someone who identifies as a woman." It's a circular definition. The word ceases to have any meaning at all, and saying "what a woman is" becomes a meaningless phrase.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the concept of sexes is hazier than previously conceived. Maybe it's the definitions that should be reconsidered, rather than attempting to force reality to fit the definitions we should make the definitions more flexible to describe reality?

Just because Ug and Grug perceived exactly two distinct sexes a hundred thousand years ago doesn't mean we're stuck with that forever, does it?
 
Even if there is some "objective reality" to gender, it's not like I ask for DNA samples when I meet people. If I think someone is a man and she tells me she's a woman, I'm not going to predicate my embarrassed apology on whether or not she's trans. I probably wouldn't even give her an ocular pat-down. I'd do the right thing and immediately begin objectifying her.
 
Last edited:
tyr_13 said:
Lady, if you think you know the 'truth' of someone else's gender better than they do themselves and can tell them in a 'polite' way, you don't know what 'polite' means.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the giving of birth was a clue that he is a she?

It seems rather odd to me that a woman who identifies as a man would even want to give birth. They are a man, no? Men don't do that. Or are we now living in a world where we can't even say, "Men don't give birth," without offending someone.

"Your world frightens and confuses me." -Caveman Lawyer.
 
Girls will be boys, and boys will be girls.
It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world,
Except for Lola. Lo lo lo lo Lola.
 
TragicMonkey said:
My grandfather was born in 1914. He's a racist. During the civil rights struggle he repeatedly said that he'd never call a black person "sir", never shake one's hand, etc etc. My mother was born in 1944. She's not racist. She found her father's racism to be insane. Why would he be like that? Why can't he see that there's no sense in racism? she'd say. But you know what? She herself is homophobic. And she can't see the parallel. As unreasonable as she finds her father's notions, she still finds her own to be perfectly rational and thinks people are crazy to question her homophobia.

I think transgenderism is the current generation's thing like that. People my age tend to be non-racist, okay with the gays...but iffy on those weird transgender people. But that's the thing about blind spots--you can't see that they are blind spots. Future generations will look back on today's anti-transgenderism with the same bemusement (and contempt) that we look back on homophobic Baby Boomers and racist whatever you call people born during WWI. Flappers?
Click to expand...

And just think, forty years from now your grandkids will be talking about how pedophobic you were.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom