Tallgeese posted:

Tallgeese posted:

The transdisabled actually do run a serious risk of making positive disability advocacy more difficult, and it is already a nearly insurmountable task. I would recommend reading The Social Psychology of Disability for a (very) basic introduction on why you are being an idiot for even entertaining that nonsense.

8-Bit Scholar posted:

I don't really think this flies, because you can argue that sexual preferences are completely inborn traits, whereas transgendered persons are literally rejecting their in-born traits. You can't prove or disprove it, so it's a meaningless gesture.

quote:

Prohibiting people from being gay does nothing to help anyone, it only hurts gays and it violates the freedoms this country was founded upon. It costs nothing to allow them to marry and the only justification against them is religious, which can be easily dismissed.

quote:

Trans people are asking for a lot more than the gays were, and unlike homosexual rights, it isn't religion that stands as the primary hurdle here--it's science and medicine. I'm happy to change my mind on the trans issue if science and medical professionals reach a consensus and hard data is collected to support it, which time will inevitably do--but as it stands, based on the current set of data, the issue is VERY contentious, it has not been settled or agreed upon, and the potential for harm caused is very great.

Do you refute this comparison?

Moridin920 posted:

we wouldn't need it if people in the South stopped making laws that say 'the state determines what bathroom you are allowed to use.'

Snatch Duster posted:

JUST THIS LAST WEEKEND I LEARNED THAT I AM A LESBIAN TRAPPED IN A MALES BODY.

Applewhite posted:

I'm against those laws, too. I'm against any sort of legal codification of this bathroom nonsense.

Moridin920 posted:

were you eating some box when you had an epiphany?



oh well then we agree

Moridin920 posted:

were you eating some box when you had an epiphany?



oh well then we agree

Moridin920 posted:

look again if assholes want to treat disabled people worse because some other weirdos like to roll around in wheelchairs then it's the fault of the assholes for being lovely people.

Tallgeese posted:

Except that they aren't being lovely people, they're acting upon biases that, frankly, are subconscious and almost universal even in generally upstanding fellows.

You seriously have no clue what you're talking about.

Moridin920 posted:

were you eating some box when you had an epiphany?



oh well then we agree

Moridin920 posted:

i need you to change your av bc every time you post i see that fine redhead and it makes me horned up

Aschlafly posted:

You can't prove or disprove that sexual orientation is completely inborn (though the evidence suggests there's at least some environmental component). So what? You can just as easily say that conflict with one's birth gender is "inborn" (IIRC there's some weak evidence suggesting that trans people's brains tend to resemble those of their "preferred" gender, don't quote me on that though because it's pretty fuzzy).

quote:

The anti-trans hysteria (tee hee) in this thread seems borderline religious, too. In fact some of the arguments (e.g. what's "natural" or "biological") are barely find-replaces of non-religious anti-gay arguments.

quote:

Even if I agreed that gender reassignment surgery carries serious mental health implications,
a) that doesn't mean marginalizing and otherizing trans people is the right way to respond: rather the opposite, I suspect.
b) that if anything is an argument for a more inclusive perspective on gender. As previously argued, if people are allowed to identify as their preferred gender, and their preference is given legitimacy without the need for invasive surgery, that might decrease the rate of gender reassignment surgery.

Applewhite posted:

Well except we don't agree on the point that I believe it's right and just for a property owner to enforce whatever weird bathroom rules he has the energy to enforce. Not on a legal level, but at least to the point where violators can be denied access to the premeses.

Applewhite posted:

Well except we don't agree on the point that I believe it's right and just for a property owner to enforce whatever weird bathroom rules he has the energy to enforce. Not on a legal level, but at least to the point where violators can be denied access to the premeses.

dad gay. so what posted:

everyone in the world is gay except for me

8-Bit Scholar posted:

So what?

dad gay. so what posted:

i find it comforting and useful when hunting you

8-Bit Scholar posted:

This isn't just weak evidence, it's wrong evidence. Male and female brains have been found to be almost completely identical, far more similar than different. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-t-really-different-study-finds

quote:

Nice try, but no, actually, using accepted scientific facts to question assertions made here is not religious in the slightest. It is not factually wrong nor fanatical to say that biological sex is immutable--that is to say, human beings do not under any natural circumstances transition into the opposite gender as their birth. It is not done in nature, no primate to our knowledge undergoes such changes.

quote:

But it also means that trans people should not be validated, they should be given therapy and as much as possible should be done to attempt to find out why they suffer from dysphoria and attempt to address the root causes. Validating their dysphoria, but neglecting the surgery aspect, doesn't really address that. Again, you'd end up in a situation where a homosexual relationship would be technically heterosexual if one man claimed identity as a woman.

quote:

To say nothing of laws or programs meant specifically to help women out, or women's prisons. Could an intact male transwoman be sent to a women's prison? Is that really right?

whoflungpoop posted:

by chance would any of you peestanding shitpigs have a lawn to mow/tire to change/grill to tend

Moridin920 posted:

let me ask you this though, how do you feel about replacing perfectly healthy body parts with cybernetic parts that perform the same functions as good as or even better than their biological counterparts? hypothetically ofc (assuming rejection and phantom pain weren't issues)

Snatch Duster posted:

applewhite why do you hate freedom?

doesn't everyone, even shop owners, have the freedom to be bigotted if they so pleased?

whoflungpoop posted:

by chance would any of you peestanding shitpigs have a lawn to mow/tire to change/grill to tend

Tallgeese posted:

Personally, I don't like it, because I suspect that will lead to an augmentation arms race where people will be looked down on for having last year's model. What happens if the insufficiently augmented are subject to the same cognitive biases as the disabled are today?

Tallgeese posted:

Were potential social ostracism not an issue I could not have an objection, but that seems overly optimistic.

Aschlafly posted:

The article explicitly refutes your claim. Brains aren't binary (durr) but there are features statistically correlated with one sex or the other. Didn't you claim, a few pages ago, that women are smarter and more creative on average? Seems to suggest a difference in brain structure to me.

quote:

...which a) has nothing to do with the subject at hand at all and b) is itself a find-replace of an anti-gay argument ("homosexuality doesn't happen in nature")

quote:

What if the root cause is the body itself? Seems reassignment surgery is the right course of action in this case. Besides, isn't "refusing to validate" pretty much what we did for centuries?
This seems like the sort of thing that would have to be decided on a case by case basis. Would it really be more fair to send her to a men's prison?

8-Bit Scholar posted:

It says there is no male or female brain, sex cannot be determined through an MRI alone, thus a man with a "woman's" brain is a meaningless conceit, so no, it doesn't refute my claim.

8-Bit Scholar posted:

When Caitlyn Jenner, a transwoman with (as far as we know) an intact and functional penis, is convicted of vehicular manslaughter, a crime committed as Bruce Jenner, should Bruce serve the sentence or Caitlynn?

Applewhite posted:

Yes. That's like, my whole point. It's called freedom of association.

Snatch Duster posted:

So you hate freedom?

8-Bit Scholar posted:

It says there is no male or female brain, sex cannot be determined through an MRI alone, thus a man with a "woman's" brain is a meaningless conceit, so no, it doesn't refute my claim.

quote:

I will say that yes, in all likeliehood data does not back up that women are smarter and more creative, so I'll gladly say that data doesn't back that one up. The broader point remains, I think anyone could tell you that men and women act and behave different from one another.

quote:

It has everything to do with the subject at hand

quote:

homosexuality DOES happen in nature, quite frequently, so again, science prevails.

quote:

When Caitlyn Jenner, a transwoman with (as far as we know) an intact and functional penis, is convicted of vehicular manslaughter, a crime committed as Bruce Jenner, should Bruce serve the sentence or Caitlynn?

Applewhite posted:

Are you pretending to be Moridin where I say something and it's like he doesn't even hear it?

Applewhite posted:

Are you pretending to be Moridin where I say something and it's like he doesn't even hear it?

Aschlafly posted:

The fact that brain structure isn't, by itself, a perfect predictor of gender doesn't mean there is no statistical tendency one way or the other. Height doesn't perfectly predict basketball ability, but there's a clear correlation. Go back and reread the article. Its central point is much more modest: most people's brains are "mosaics" of male or female features (which, themselves, are not always present in "male" or "female" brains, respectively).

Aschlafly posted:

You can't prove or disprove that sexual orientation is completely inborn (though the evidence suggests there's at least some environmental component). So what? You can just as easily say that conflict with one's birth gender is "inborn" (IIRC there's some weak evidence suggesting that trans people's brains tend to resemble those of their "preferred" gender, don't quote me on that though because it's pretty fuzzy).

quote:

So your position is inconsistent, then.

quote:

we've been talking about "gender": and anyway, choosing to draw the line around primates is pretty arbitrary, considering sex is a loving mess throughout the animal kingdom.

quote:

to which the canned response is, generally, that it doesn't: rather bisexuality, or homosexual sex as a form of social interaction, occurs, but endemic, lifelong "homosexuality" essentially doesn't. It doesn't matter. The point is that you're committing a form of the naturalistic fallacy, arguing that "unnatural" equals "bad".

quote:

Obviously we should go back in time and bring Bruce into the present. I have no idea what the gently caress you're on about. Sure, which prison to send a trans person to is a dicey issue, presumably something jurists will have to hammer out or decide on a case by case basis.