Scrolls of Lore Forums  

Go Back   Scrolls of Lore Forums > Scrolls of Lore > Halls of Lordaeron

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #45401  
Old 08-01-2016, 10:07 AM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,166

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
So do you address people by their legally given names or by their preferred names and form of address?
The latter generally, including Caitlyn and others who change to a more masculine/feminine name. Names are completely self-identity.

Names are just weird in general. Some parents think "Kelly" is a unisex name, for example, and their poor sons have that saddled on them.

EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aneurysm View Post
I've never understood the male/female bathroom thing. Like at all. Not even the trans-issue people are arguing nowadays, but in general. It's not as if you take a dump with the bathroom stall doors open, so who gives a shit if someone of the opposite sex would happen to walk in? Is it embarrassing to wash your hands next to a person of the opposite sex? Or is it the sharing of bodily fumes that's the issue?

Now I don't know about female bathrooms, but in the rooms assigned for men we don't exactly run around with our dongs out. What is it you do inside that is so personal?
Running around naked? That environment is middle school locker rooms.

I'm all for reforming that in general. By high school we took band to get away from that class.

Last edited by BaronGrackle; 08-01-2016 at 10:10 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #45402  
Old 08-01-2016, 10:39 AM
Ruinshin Ruinshin is offline

Elune
Ruinshin's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 21,145

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
Gender identity is complicated, but so too is biological sex, and science continues demonstrating that it is far from being a cut-and-dried binary. There are a myriad of sex determiners that science observes which negate our social notions of biological binary, including external genitalia, internal genitalia, chromosomal sex, genetic sex, nuclear sex, psychological/brain chemistry sex, etc. Calling people who exist outside of the biological binary as merely "exceptions," "aberrations," or "anomalies," just lazily ignores the science for how the existence of the biological binary of sex is repeatedly negated on just about every battleground in which the lines in the sand are drawn while also dehumanizing such people. The zoologist in me did not believe it either, as I thought that biological sex was male-female when it came to humans, and I turned out to be wrong the more that I investigated the issue. Science repeatedly demonstrates that our notion of the "biological binary" for humans is false. Preserving the myriad of humans sexes into a two sex binary is indeed a falsity justified primarily through us continuing to come to grasp with our growing sense of social gender(s) over any real notions of biological science. There may indeed be a sexual spectrum that genetically limits sexual expression of humans, but it's still diverse and far from being a binary.

I do agree, that sex has been helpful as a shorthand identifier when it comes to diagnosing and treating at-risk factors in patients, but it's still not a scientifically hardwired binary. But I also don't think that notions of biological binary are particularly useful when it comes to medical science, where it seems that you are less concerned with the existence or non-existence of the binary, but in treating particular problems of patients or specific medical issues.

I see what you are trying to argue, and I agree that it's absurd to think that werespacecatfairies exist on the basis of self-identification because that is a human identifying as a non-human. Yet, as mentioned above by both you and me, we are increasingly recognizing that gender identity and biological sex are far more fluid and complicated than we have commonly held as hardwired empirical truth.

So with respect to your argumentation, we must then ask if self-thinking/identification is not enough, does that not also call the existence of only two genders on the basis of self/social-identification into question? Why does thinking that there are only two genders mean that there are only two genders? If a cismale self-identifies as male does that necessitate the existence of males? Here, we would likely appeal to social norms, history, notions of biological sex, and other factors in human experience to justify our identification as males. And similarly, Ruinshin, I think we can point to other anthropological factors that justify the self-identification of people outside of that gender and biological binary.

We have cultures on earth now and throughout history in which more the two genders were acknowledged and accepted. Human history and social anthropology trumps you there too. We can even find more than two genders in the Bible such as eunuchs, who were often treated as a third gender. Or we find ancient law texts in which women were legally adopted as male heirs. Or we find that men who were genetically sterile were not considered men, though before clinical testing, women were often accused of infertility for lack of children. But time and time again, the richness of human history debunks our prevailing notions of gender and sexual binaries.

Sure, we can also find people in history who identified as magic-wielding witches and werewolves or believed in deities, and that does not make them true either, but when it comes to something like gender, which is "complicated," fluid, and socially-constructed, then I would like to think that could rationally both recognize the clear false equivalence between gender identity and the aforementioned issues, including the werespacecatfairy.

If there was a far burly person who considers themselves a woman then there would not be a fat burly man but a fat burly woman in the bathroom. So I don't see the problem. What about this person is illegal? How they identify? Nope. Their size? Nope. Their birth-assigned-gender? Nope. Yeah. No issue apart from the fictive one you have created in your own head but has little bearing on a real scenario that seems to follow the more troubling assumption that fat burly men are sexual predators. Regardless of how this person identifies, sexual predation on minors is illegal. My little girl could be at risk from sexual predators in either the male or female bathroom. My little boy would also be at risk from sexual predators in either the male or female bathroom. I would not let my little girl go into the bathroom with a known sexual predator, but transgender people are not more likely to be sexual predators than anyone else, whether they are gay, straight, or cis, so my little girl is not any safer when I unjustly discriminate against transgender people. Hell, my little girl in your scenario may be transgender herself. So my little girl, in such case, could be safer going to the women's restroom with this fat burly transwoman rather than the men's restroom.

You would likely be surprised by the number of transgender people who have used the bathroom corresponding to the gender-identification unnoticed or unharassed. It's not as if transwomen just look like burly bearded men but with dresses.

The Whitherspoon Institute? Don't you think that a conservative think tank that also opposes same-sex marriage may have biased cause to discredit transgenderism on the basis of reinforcing "traditional family values" and gender roles?

So do you address people by their legally given names or by their preferred names and form of address?

Fair. But I also know feminists who were ecstatic that a transwoman won the Woman of the Year award in that Glamour magazine.
True, but from my understanding, intersex isnt more genders, its both genders, and while theres a whole slew of hermaphroditic conditions, it IS an abberation..

Its funny, because I believe Transgender exists as a condition. The scientific evidence supports it, from you boys pre drugs identifying as girls being effected by pheromones that only effect women, to brain size... Ive seen several studies say than trans brains are different from both male or female..

But that doesnt make a trans women an actual women, and wont until technology catches up enough to make that a reality.

Nor does it mean she should be persecuted
__________________
Fucking Epic :X
Reply With Quote
  #45403  
Old 08-01-2016, 11:09 AM
Aneurysm Aneurysm is offline

Problemsolver
Aneurysm's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here, there, and everywhere.
Posts: 9,321

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
Running around naked? That environment is middle school locker rooms.

I'm all for reforming that in general. By high school we took band to get away from that class.
Locker rooms are different from public bathrooms, though. I don't spank men in public bathrooms with my wet towel. In locker rooms I do.
__________________
My love for you is like a truck, berserker.
Would you like some making fuck, berserker?
Reply With Quote
  #45404  
Old 08-01-2016, 11:19 AM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,166

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aneurysm View Post
Locker rooms are different from public bathrooms, though. I don't spank men in public bathrooms with my wet towel. In locker rooms I do.
I'm pretty sure Obama's directive (and transgender goals in general, as presented by the media) includes school locker rooms.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/...ool-bathrooms/
Reply With Quote
  #45405  
Old 08-01-2016, 11:27 AM
SmokeBlader SmokeBlader is offline

Elune
SmokeBlader's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 30,980

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutterscrawl View Post
This tbh, it seems outdated.
Surprised you didn't say sexist. Or compare it with racist drinking fountains.
Reply With Quote
  #45406  
Old 08-01-2016, 04:27 PM
Mutterscrawl Mutterscrawl is offline

World Builder
Mutterscrawl's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 32,519

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeBlader View Post
Surprised you didn't say sexist. Or compare it with racist drinking fountains.
You have always had a very skewed view of what I believe.
__________________
Brought to you by Sanguine Enterprises.

My Worldbuilding:
http://bloodinkworlds.tumblr.com/
Reply With Quote
  #45407  
Old 08-02-2016, 09:54 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,279

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
The latter generally, including Caitlyn and others who change to a more masculine/feminine name. Names are completely self-identity.
And why not gender? It seems strange that you would call someone by Caitlyn but refuse to respect their gender identity that corresponds with that name. You claim to lean to the empirical, but what happened to leaning towards the not-being-an-ass-to-people option: i.e. respecting the human person as a person? Some of my closest friends happen to be transgender. If you ask them about how it feels when someone mislabels their gender identity, it hurts and emotionally draining. It's about like the douche who keeps mentioning how great grandmothers are around someone they know recently lost their grandmother. It's that sort of socially incentive remark, but also on a more integral level of their personal identity.

Quote:
Names are just weird in general. Some parents think "Kelly" is a unisex name, for example, and their poor sons have that saddled on them.
Probably because a lot of male names were adopted as female names later, so yes there are a lot of unisex names. Ashley, for example, was a prevalent male name until it became an increasingly common female name. So yes, I would say that "Kelly" is a unisex name.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruinshin View Post
True, but from my understanding, intersex isnt more genders, its both genders, and while theres a whole slew of hermaphroditic conditions, it IS an aberration..
We were talking about both gender and biological sex. I was under the impression from our discussions that we agree that there is a distinction. You suggested that there was a biological binary, but as I said, science demonstrates that this is a false notion, with intersex being but one piece of evidence in that growing list. Science instead seems to be more of the mind that there is a diverse sex spectrum, though with some sex expressions being more common than others. I'm of a similar mind in that I find frequency more useful and scientifically accurate than sustaining false notions of sexual binaries.

Quote:
Its funny, because I believe Transgender exists as a condition. The scientific evidence supports it, from you boys pre drugs identifying as girls being effected by pheromones that only effect women, to brain size... Ive seen several studies say than trans brains are different from both male or female..

But that doesnt make a trans women an actual women, and wont until technology catches up enough to make that a reality.

Nor does it mean she should be persecuted
What makes for an "actual woman"? If it's having certain organs, doesn't that get thrown out when there are women born with improperly working ones or have those reproductive organs removed? While I understand what you are trying to say in regards to differences between cis and trans women, I would argue against notions of "actual woman," as that is no more helpful than essentialist notions of what constitutes an "actual man" - a rabbit hole that I suspect we would both agree leads to a lot of harmful sexism for both men and women - and instead simply recognize that there is a diverse spectrum of what constitute as either "man" or "woman," or even either/neither, in our society. From what I can tell, though perhaps you have further insight that escapes me, there is no gained social value from distinguishing between "actual gender" and "false gender," but there is a lot more social capital that can be gained. Probably the biggest areas in which this does have an effect is in competitive sports. But as Omacron suggests, I suspect that our transhuman future will likely fuck a lot of things up in terms of complicating the little things we take for granted.
Reply With Quote
  #45408  
Old 08-02-2016, 12:11 PM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,166

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
And why not gender?
Because my entire life and throughout history as I know it, "he" and "she" defaults to sex instead of gender. Sex is the physical reality; gender is the perception.

Quote:
You claim to lean to the empirical, but what happened to leaning towards the not-being-an-ass-to-people option: i.e. respecting the human person as a person? Some of my closest friends happen to be transgender. If you ask them about how it feels when someone mislabels their gender identity it hurts and emotionally draining. It's about like the douche who keeps mentioning how great grandmothers are around someone they know recently lost their grandmother. It's that sort of socially incentive remark, but also on a more integral level of their personal identity.
The balance between honesty and not-being-an-ass is tricky, sure. I generally try to avoid the male/female or he/she references in real life, much as someone who might avoid the topic of natural hair colors around someone who clearly is dyed, or the topic of grandmothers around someone whose grandmother has passed on.

If someone who lost their grandmother starts harping about seeing her again in heaven someday, a polite atheist might smile and half-nod. But I wouldn't expect the polite atheist to specifically confirm the grandmother's existence in heaven, for the sake of politeness, and feed into (what the atheist considers to be) the mourning grandchild's delusion.
Reply With Quote
  #45409  
Old 08-02-2016, 06:04 PM
Ragnahar Ragnahar is offline

Poor Soldier
Ragnahar's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 12,430
BattleTag: Mathias#1221

Default

Avoiding he/she stuff in real life seems silly. If you say the wrong one to someone who's questionable in appearance, then you now know the correct one. If someone wants to say they are neutral or a unicorn, well, fuck'em.
Reply With Quote
  #45410  
Old 08-02-2016, 06:17 PM
Taintedmage Taintedmage is offline

Eternal
Taintedmage's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,809

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnahar View Post
Avoiding he/she stuff in real life seems silly. If you say the wrong one to someone who's questionable in appearance, then you now know the correct one. If someone wants to say they are neutral or a unicorn, well, fuck'em.
Just use "it" in that case.
It's more salty
Reply With Quote
  #45411  
Old 08-02-2016, 06:20 PM
Noitora Noitora is offline

Elune
Noitora's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,693
BattleTag: Chillman#1339

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taintedmage View Post
Just use "it" in that case.
It's more salty
Or, you can choose to not be a devil worshipping dick.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fojar View Post
Yeah but where would this forum be if not for people speculating endlessly about things Blizzard doesn't give a shit about
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathon View Post
SoL: 20 something know it alls telling other 20 something know it alls they know everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kobebyarlant View Post
All this faction bitching and people arguing with each other and it's Fojar of all people that comes in with reasonable positivity.
Reply With Quote
  #45412  
Old 08-02-2016, 06:30 PM
BaronGrackle BaronGrackle is offline

Echo of the Past
BaronGrackle's Avatar
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 15,166

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnahar View Post
Avoiding he/she stuff in real life seems silly. If you say the wrong one to someone who's questionable in appearance, then you now know the correct one. If someone wants to say they are neutral or a unicorn, well, fuck'em.
Well I mean... treating someone as a unicorn seems silly.
Reply With Quote
  #45413  
Old 08-03-2016, 01:55 AM
Aneurysm Aneurysm is offline

Problemsolver
Aneurysm's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here, there, and everywhere.
Posts: 9,321

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronGrackle View Post
Well I mean... treating someone as a unicorn seems silly.
Like drinking their blood in order to sustain immortality, albeit a cursed life?

I agree. That'd be silly.
__________________
My love for you is like a truck, berserker.
Would you like some making fuck, berserker?
Reply With Quote
  #45414  
Old 08-03-2016, 03:56 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,279

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnahar View Post
Avoiding he/she stuff in real life seems silly. If you say the wrong one to someone who's questionable in appearance, then you now know the correct one. If someone wants to say they are neutral or a unicorn, well, fuck'em.
Pretty much. 'Neutral' though is often not that hard since the genderqueer often go by 'they.' And yes, 'they' is grammatically acceptable as a singular. I am, however, skeptical of the thousand-and-one simultaneous attempts to rewrite the core basics of English language by attempting to add more genderqueer/neutral pronouns, each often with aesthetic quality of nails on chalkboard.
Reply With Quote
  #45415  
Old 08-03-2016, 06:55 AM
Mertico Mertico is offline

Elune
Mertico's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 7,261

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
Pretty much. 'Neutral' though is often not that hard since the genderqueer often go by 'they.' And yes, 'they' is grammatically acceptable as a singular. I am, however, skeptical of the thousand-and-one simultaneous attempts to rewrite the core basics of English language by attempting to add more genderqueer/neutral pronouns, each often with aesthetic quality of nails on chalkboard.
You don't like xhey are trying to change the English language so the loys and sirls can feel like whey are being accepted? What if I told you that ley will never be happy with what phay pick?
Reply With Quote
  #45416  
Old 08-03-2016, 07:28 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,279

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mertico View Post
You don't like xhey are trying to change the English language so the loys and sirls can feel like whey are being accepted? What if I told you that ley will never be happy with what phay pick?
So what if you did tell me that? I appreciate the idea of English having a neutral singular personal pronoun apart from 'they' or the object-oriented 'it.' But many advocates for such new pronouns are going about it in a linguistically inorganic way with so many alternatives floating around that it turns most people off from attempting to incorporate any of them into practical usage. It's why there would be little surprise no one would be happy with anything that this amorphous 'they/phay' chooses. In groups and committees, people are often offended when their proposal is not picked or something they dislike is picked. But when such changes occur naturally in the language, then it's less about what they like or dislike, but more about what has become conventional usage. I do think that the English language will develop this neutral set of personal pronouns, but it's something that has to come from the ground up - likely via mass usage from young women, as historically has been the case for many neocolloquialisms and neologisms in the English language - and not projected down.
Reply With Quote
  #45417  
Old 08-03-2016, 08:00 AM
Mertico Mertico is offline

Elune
Mertico's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 7,261

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
So what if you did tell me that? I appreciate the idea of English having a neutral singular personal pronoun apart from 'they' or the object-oriented 'it.' But many advocates for such new pronouns are going about it in a linguistically inorganic way with so many alternatives floating around that it turns most people off from attempting to incorporate any of them into practical usage. It's why there would be little surprise no one would be happy with anything that this amorphous 'they/phay' chooses. In groups and committees, people are often offended when their proposal is not picked or something they dislike is picked. But when such changes occur naturally in the language, then it's less about what they like or dislike, but more about what has become conventional usage. I do think that the English language will develop this neutral set of personal pronouns, but it's something that has to come from the ground up - likely via mass usage from young women, as historically has been the case for many neocolloquialisms and neologisms in the English language - and not projected down.
I don't find changing genders to be logically consistent with human biology. We have XX and XY genders, and while there are some animals capable of changing their genders (some frogs) or that have features we would call masculine (some hyena), these features are not found in humans. This is not say that gender identity disorder does not exist, it's that it should be treated differently than we are currently treating.
Reply With Quote
  #45418  
Old 08-03-2016, 08:53 AM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,279

Default

Mertico, your post seems to have diverged from your initial concern about pronouns, but I will try to briefly address your points as best as I can.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mertico View Post
I don't find changing genders to be logically consistent with human biology.
It may be helpful for you to distinguish between gender and biological sex. I would say that it's less about human biology and more about social norms around that human biology.

Gender (i.e. social discussion/norms around human biology and sex) and human biology are separate, albeit intricately, connected issues. We project our social conceptions gender onto our biological bodies. I find it helpful to think of gender, as per Judith Butler, partially as a social performance: i.e. people with this body type act like X and people with this other body type act like Y. Gender involves a lot of social expressions like "girls wear pink," "girls wear high heels," or "boys don't play with dolls," which is far from being something intrinsic to human biology. Such gender norms change throughout human history, as was the case with the examples I listed.

Quote:
We have XX and XY genders, and while there are some animals capable of changing their genders (some frogs) or that have features we would call masculine (some hyena), these features are not found in humans.
That's a common misconception about humans. We do not have XX and XY genders. We have XX and XY chromosomes, but humans are also not limited to those chromosomal combinations. Science empirically demonstrates that although the XX and XY are the most frequent chromosomal expressions for humans, they are not our only ones. We humans also have X, XXY, XYY, XXX, XXXX chromosomes, and a maybe few others that I am forgetting. Even then, simply having XX and XY does not necessarily make one male or female as per sex. XX males and XY females, for example, do exist. (And yes, humans have, albeit rarely, naturally changed sex.)

In short, science increasingly shows that we humans are far weirder than our society would otherwise like to pretend ourselves to be and more diverse than the tiny social boxes we have constructed around ourselves.

Quote:
This is not say that gender identity disorder does not exist, it's that it should be treated differently than we are currently treating.
I suspect that we will disagree on the matter of "treatment" too, especially if you come from a wildly divergent set of core assumptions.
Reply With Quote
  #45419  
Old 08-03-2016, 09:13 AM
Commander Rotal Commander Rotal is offline

Sha of Disappointment
Commander Rotal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 13,095

Default

Reply With Quote
  #45420  
Old 08-03-2016, 09:21 AM
HlaaluStyle HlaaluStyle is offline

Elune
HlaaluStyle's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Tradegate, the Outlands
Posts: 12,465
BattleTag: DAllicant#1203

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
Pretty much. 'Neutral' though is often not that hard since the genderqueer often go by 'they.' And yes, 'they' is grammatically acceptable as a singular. I am, however, skeptical of the thousand-and-one simultaneous attempts to rewrite the core basics of English language by attempting to add more genderqueer/neutral pronouns, each often with aesthetic quality of nails on chalkboard.
That's actually a subject of sore contention within the grammar world. Not "they" vs "xir/xi/whatever", but "they" vs. "he and/or she". Using "they" creates a pronoun-antecedent disagreement, since it uses a plural pronoun for a singular subject.

I stick with "they". It's a lot easier, and the reader can generally infer what is meant.
__________________
See WoW in a way you've never imagined it.

"He came to Ahn'qiraj for the strife... instead, he found a wife! She's my qiraji love-bride, next on Sick Sad World of Warcraft!"
Reply With Quote
  #45421  
Old 08-03-2016, 10:37 AM
Mertico Mertico is offline

Elune
Mertico's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 7,261

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
Mertico, your post seems to have diverged from your initial concern about pronouns, but I will try to briefly address your points as best as I can.

It may be helpful for you to distinguish between gender and biological sex. I would say that it's less about human biology and more about social norms around that human biology.

Gender (i.e. social discussion/norms around human biology and sex) and human biology are separate, albeit intricately, connected issues. We project our social conceptions gender onto our biological bodies. I find it helpful to think of gender, as per Judith Butler, partially as a social performance: i.e. people with this body type act like X and people with this other body type act like Y. Gender involves a lot of social expressions like "girls wear pink," "girls wear high heels," or "boys don't play with dolls," which is far from being something intrinsic to human biology. Such gender norms change throughout human history, as was the case with the examples I listed.

That's a common misconception about humans. We do not have XX and XY genders. We have XX and XY chromosomes, but humans are also not limited to those chromosomal combinations. Science empirically demonstrates that although the XX and XY are the most frequent chromosomal expressions for humans, they are not our only ones. We humans also have X, XXY, XYY, XXX, XXXX chromosomes, and a maybe few others that I am forgetting. Even then, simply having XX and XY does not necessarily make one male or female as per sex. XX males and XY females, for example, do exist. (And yes, humans have, albeit rarely, naturally changed sex.)

In short, science increasingly shows that we humans are far weirder than our society would otherwise like to pretend ourselves to be and more diverse than the tiny social boxes we have constructed around ourselves.

I suspect that we will disagree on the matter of "treatment" too, especially if you come from a wildly divergent set of core assumptions.
To me gender is not a social construct nor is the science of the matter hard. And while I do find the idea of boys' clothes and girls' clothes to be silly, that does not mean that biologically we have roles to fill.

As such a woman will always have XX chromosomes. There is nothing Bruce Jenner can do to truly become Caitlin Jenner. He will always have parts to him that make him male.

And besides, we should build our society on such tiny groups of people. We do not need to break down the ideas of marriage because some men and women are incapable of having children in much the same way we should not break down our ideas of gender because some people think they are not gender or gendered improperly.
Reply With Quote
  #45422  
Old 08-03-2016, 02:24 PM
Galdus Galdus is offline

Banished
Galdus's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,346

Default





Reply With Quote
  #45423  
Old 08-03-2016, 05:37 PM
Genesis Genesis is offline

Guru of Gilneas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 13,279

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mertico View Post
To me gender is not a social construct nor is the science of the matter hard. And while I do find the idea of boys' clothes and girls' clothes to be silly, that does not mean that biologically we have roles to fill.

As such a woman will always have XX chromosomes. There is nothing Bruce Jenner can do to truly become Caitlin Jenner. He will always have parts to him that make him male.
There is no "as such," Mertico. The science must indeed be hard for you if you have so blatantly ignored the science that flies in the face of your false assertions here. You have done nothing to refute the evidence that I listed regarding chromosomal expression or even your own falsities to which I responded. Your comments indicate that you are more concerned about preserving your own narrow worldview over any notions of science, gender studies, or anthropology. So pardon me if I question whether you have any intention to engage in this conversation with any good faith.

Quote:
And besides, we should build our society on such tiny groups of people. We do not need to break down the ideas of marriage because some men and women are incapable of having children in much the same way we should not break down our ideas of gender because some people think they are not gender or gendered improperly.
Break down the ideas of marriage? Those ideas have long been broken down throughout history. It's why we have ideas of marriage, as you unintentionally admit, and not just a single idea of marriage. We have on historical record all sorts of gay and queer marriages in a number of cultures. Why do you feel so threatened and defensive about this? Breaking down gender does not mean that you have to stop being yourself or acting according to your preferred gender expression. It's just stopping everyone from having to conform to the two tiny boxes we have created around gender so that people are at greater liberty to be themselves. Are you that frightened that breaking down the gender binary into a gender spectrum will cause you to magically lose your ?
Reply With Quote
  #45424  
Old 08-03-2016, 07:42 PM
Mertico Mertico is offline

Elune
Mertico's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 7,261

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis View Post
There is no "as such," Mertico. The science must indeed be hard for you if you have so blatantly ignored the science that flies in the face of your false assertions here. You have done nothing to refute the evidence that I listed regarding chromosomal expression or even your own falsities to which I responded. Your comments indicate that you are more concerned about preserving your own narrow worldview over any notions of science, gender studies, or anthropology. So pardon me if I question whether you have any intention to engage in this conversation with any good faith.

Break down the ideas of marriage? Those ideas have long been broken down throughout history. It's why we have ideas of marriage, as you unintentionally admit, and not just a single idea of marriage. We have on historical record all sorts of gay and queer marriages in a number of cultures. Why do you feel so threatened and defensive about this? Breaking down gender does not mean that you have to stop being yourself or acting according to your preferred gender expression. It's just stopping everyone from having to conform to the two tiny boxes we have created around gender so that people are at greater liberty to be themselves. Are you that frightened that breaking down the gender binary into a gender spectrum will cause you to magically lose your ?
I am entering into this conversation in good faith. I'm telling my position, which is, I do not believe men can become women with our current medical technology. There are outliers of women, generally young girls, who can become men via natural means.

And if my cock were to fall off and I were to magically grow a pair of tits, then maybe my destiny was to be a woman. Transgender people, however, do not have this happen to them.
Reply With Quote
  #45425  
Old 08-03-2016, 07:59 PM
C9H20 C9H20 is offline

Elune
C9H20's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 12,238

Default

About the whole gay, trans, xir/xie, furries, otherkin and all the way up to legit mental things like headmates... I feel it is somewhat inevitable. People just live too good lives, many in the west are almost living in a post-scarcity age. By which I mean base survival is covered with minimal or no effort. People don't feel the need to interact with other people, they just don't have as much need for it, they don't depend on others in the way people used to not that long ago. This along with the feeling of being small caused by being one of billions makes people do a lot of crazy things to stand out, to be an individual. It also breeds a lot of selfishness.

But again I am not sure there is a way around this, if liberty is to preserved anyway. Given a choice and the means most people will max out their pleasure and fulfill their fantasies. As we have more energy at our disposal, which is the currency of the future, things will only get crazier. I think this process is even strong enough to bash down any would be fascist who would oppose it. If technological progress holds there will be nothing to stop this train, even as society becomes more hedonistic and corrupt (ergo weak). Eventually chances are people will live in space habitats, orbiting our Sun or another star and within these habitats they will have their own little fantasy playground. And things going on inside those will by and large probably be obscene or even monstrous by our modern PoV. I see these very self-centered people of our times as just a precursor of things to come, and this phenomena will only increase with increasing wealth and abundance.

This is not necessarily a horrible thing, if some basic rules like no killing and so on hold. You can go full pervert but you can also make a virtuous life with like minded people if that happens to be your fantasy.
My main fear now is that between now and then social, economical and worst of all potential technological disasters could see a lot of us dead. I also worry many of us may be seen as "redundant" by the elites, and we all can imagine how that might turn out.

Last edited by C9H20; 08-03-2016 at 09:20 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
politics, serious business, sylvanas for president

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.