Scott75

Perhaps, but you'll have to get into specific examples if you want to actually provide evidence for your claim.

And who sets these limits. In terms of words that have moved beyond merely being slang and only known to a relatively small subset of people (certain young people in a certain region, for instance), various institutions that we tend to turn to when we want to know how a word is defined, mainly dictionaries and other online sources of information such as Wikipedia. There's a lot to unpack in what you said. For starters, we have to think of what happens when 2 parties don't agree on something as important as what terms like gender, male and female mean. Now, the -easiest- solution is for the parties in question to simply not use the ambiguous words, but for various reasons, one or both parties may want to use said words even when talking to people who don't agree with their definitions. Best case scenario, they manage to handle things anyway. Medium case scenario, lawsuits, which I've covered before. Worst case scenario, there can be violence and even murders: How the rise of anti-LGBTQ+ hate and violence is impacting the community | PBS Quoting from the introduction to the video above: ** The murders of several LGBTQ+ people and allies in recent weeks are raising alarm across the U.S. O’Shae Sibley was stabbed to death in Brooklyn after police said he confronted a group who made homophobic slurs and Laura Ann Carleton was killed in California for apparently refusing to remove a Pride flag from her store. Geoff Bennett discussed more with GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis. ** Can we at least agree that what these anti-LGBTQ+ people did was terrible? Incidentally, I made a thread in another forum here that touches on LGBTQ+ issues that you might find interesting. It can be seen here:

I just finished watching Nimona on Netflix. It's an animated feature that I at first thought would just merely be pretty funny. By the end of it, I found it to be a profound look at how we treat things that are different from what we're used to, and how trying to eradicate differences tends to just lead to more problems. Here's a film review on it that I think is quite good: https://mashable.com/article/nimona-review Quoting a bit from it: ** Remarkable resurrection aside, Nimona is an extraordinary film in its own right. It catapults us into an eye-popping futuristic medieval world, where shapeshifter Nimona (voiced by Chloë Grace Moretz) will wreak havoc — and win your heart in the process. Along with its unique animation and rollicking action sequences, Nimona digs into themes of individuality, identity, and acceptance that aim to speak directly and warmly to the queer community. At a time when LGBTQ rights and spaces continue to come under attack from bigoted legislation, Nimona cements itself not just as a great fantasy film, but as an important one as well. ** One thing I'd like to add, I don't think the lessons in this film stop at LGBTQ issues, but with ways of resolving things in general- one is dialogue, the other with violence and how violence tends to frequently escalate into more violence.

You've been given links. Why didn't you go through the sources and respond based on the sources? I believe I have, but if you believe there's a post where you believe I didn't respond properly to a source you or someone else gave me, by all means point it out.

In a word...YES. The denial of the basic and fundamental laws of nature is in opposition to nature. What "basic and fundamental laws of nature" do you think I'm opposing?

Where? Go find it, mr. super responder. It's in that pile of comments you've been piling up. Generally speaking, I don't go looking for the source material of people I debate with. By the same token, I don't ask people I debate with to look for my own source material. It's basically a rule of "do your own homework". That's right, you should do your own homework. I have, which is why when I say source, it's almost always followed by a link, not a "go check there".

Dude...sh1t happens. It's unfortunate but it does happen...very seldom. It is not an excuse to oppose nature. Do you think I'm opposing nature?

Source provided. Go check there. Where? Go find it, mr. super responder. It's in that pile of comments you've been piling up. Generally speaking, I don't go looking for the source material of people I debate with. By the same token, I don't ask people I debate with to look for my own source material. It's basically a rule of "do your own homework".

In the rare case that a baby is born deformed, choosing one or the other gender would be a good idea. Not necessarily. Ironically, Matt Walsh, a conservative who created the documentary "What is a woman?" presents a powerful argument to let the child decide rather than making the decision for them, by presenting the case of the Reimer twins at around the 53 minutes and 30 second mark: https://rumble.com/v2rpv4w-what-is-a-woman-matt-walsh-full-documentary.html There's a good summary of the case here: ** Summary David Reimer was born in 1965; he had a MZ twin brother. When he was 8 months old his penis was accidentally cut off during surgery. His parents contacted John Money, a psychologist who was developing a theory of gender neutrality. His theory claimed that a child would take the gender identity he/she was raised with rather than the gender identity corresponding to the biological sex. David’s parents brought him up as a girl and Money wrote extensively about this case claiming it supported his theory. However, Brenda as he was named was suffering from severe psychological and emotional difficulties and in her teens, when she found out what had happened, she reverted back to being a boy. This case study supports the influence of testosterone on gender development as it shows that David’s brain development was influenced by the presence of this hormone and its effects on gender identity was stronger that the influence of social factors. ** Source: https://www.simplypsychology.org/david-reimer.html Now, you could say, he would have been an undeformed boy if it hadn't been for the accident, and you're right. But there are a lot of things going on in terms of biology when it comes to intersex people, meaning that just making a choice without the intersex person's consent can (and I believe should) have negative consequences for those making this decision. Quoting from the Wikipedia article on intersex people: ** In 2011, Christiane Völling became the first intersex person known to have successfully sued for damages in a case brought for non-consensual surgical intervention.[36] In April 2015, Malta became the first country to outlaw non-consensual medical interventions to modify sex anatomy, including that of intersex people.[37][38] ** Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex

Gender is not fluid. I believe you're right for most people, but there are apparently exceptions. From Wikipedia's article on the subject: ** Gender fluidity (commonly referred to as genderfluid) is a non-fixed gender identity that shifts over time or depending on the situation. These fluctuations can occur at the level of gender identity or gender expression. A genderfluid person may fluctuate among different gender expressions over their lifetime, or express multiple aspects of various gender markers simultaneously.[1][2] Genderfluid individuals may identify as non-binary or transgender, or cisgender (meaning they identify with the gender associated with their sex assigned at birth).[3][4] ** Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_fluidity

Agreed, LARPing has nothing to do with gender. I was talking about gender fluidity. It does for the NPC's If you want to expand on that statement, be my guest. I've never LARPed, but I did look up Wikipedia's page on LARPing. They didn't even mention gender, let alone gender fluidity.

your sentiment makes me smile as I consider a common phrase : Scratch a liberal and you'll find a fascist scratch a liberal and you'll find a fascist - Wiktionary, the free dictionary For the record, I've never really considered myself a liberal, at least not in the way I understand the term. I consider myself more of a realist. I've liked terms like progressive in the past, but some politicians labelled as progressives have let me down sometimes.

It's unfortunate that you're not aware of the reality that it really does. Some examples that make this crystal clear: Wisconsin school district can’t restrict bathrooms for trans student, judge says | NBC Here's another example where a school's intransigence cost them millions: Transgender Student’s Lawsuit Over Locker Room Access Costs District Millions | Athletic Business Then the law needs to change to avoid that. We can disagree on that point, but at least you recognize what I was conveying to Deluge, namely that where trans people go to washrooms or locker rooms depends on the place they live. Sure. The question is, would you agree to it the other way around, namely: "If honest transgender people are being discriminated against by cisgender people, that shouldn't be tolerated".

But it's all dishonesty. You're Mis defining words To promote an agenda Good soundbite, but that's all it is. I provided you with an article from a medical web site making my case. Did you even read it?

As far as I know, you haven't even defined what you think the trans agenda -is-. How about you start there? I'll do it for you. Is the promotion of rights that are seen to be beneficial to the transgender people to the exclusion of and erosion of the rights of other people. Other people must be repressed and made to obey whatever transgender activists state should be or else face dire consequences. That's quite the draconian vision you have of this alleged trans agenda -.- Thanks for sharing though. Now I at least know what you think this alleged trans agenda is. That's certainly a very distorted view of me, but again, thanks for sharing. Some questions for you: 1- Why do you think I have "zero respect for anybody else"? 2- Am I part of your alleged "trans agenda"? 3- Do you have any evidence for your assertions? 4- Where did you get this notion that I think that "everything the trans people do is right and correct"? 5- Are you even aware that not all trans people see things the same way? Take a look at Matt Walsh's "What is a woman?" documentary if you don't believe me. Matt Walsh is quite conservative, trust me. His documentary can be seen here: https://rumble.com/v2rpv4w-what-is-a-woman-matt-walsh-full-documentary.html Take a look at the testimony of a trans man, starting at around 55 minutes and 30 seconds.

Well according to you I get to define the word however I want so I'm perfectly legitimate to say the Wikipedia is entirely wrong. I said -we- can define words however we want. Naturally, this works best where everyone agrees on the definition of a word. Unfortunately, groups of people don't always agree on what the definition of a word should be. Words that start being defined in news ways typically start off as slang. Gender words have moved past that, to the point that laws and courts are now siding with the new definitions. I've pointed this out to you before, but I think it might be helpful to do so once more in case you've forgotten: Transgender Student’s Lawsuit Over Locker Room Access Costs District Millions | Athletic Business

No, male or female is shorter. True. However, as I've mentioned many times, a significant amount of people now define male as includng both cisgender and transgender males and define females as including both cisgender and transgender females. Given this reality, if you're addressing an audience that includes people who define these terms in this way, people can misinterpret what you mean. The only way to make things clear is to use additional words, such as "biological", "identifies with", both of these, or just cis and trans followed by male or female.

Yes, I have. You use the term to define the term. The same thing is done to define a democrat or a republican. Now, that doesn't mean that you can't attempt to define democrats and republicans with other words, but then, you can do the same thing with males and females. Males generally have more masculine traits, females more female traits. If we're talking about biological males, this is obvious, but there are social traits too, like males tend to like sports more, for instance. An interesting case of a young transgender male who sued his school for not allowing him to be in the boy's locker room after engaging in sports with them: Transgender Student’s Lawsuit Over Locker Room Access Costs District Millions | Athletic Business

LOL, no. Just say male. If I was just talking to you and I knew that your definition of male was "a biological male who identifies as a male", then sure, I could do that. The problem arises when addressing an audience where some people in the group define male as you do and others define male as anyone who identifies as male. To make sure that everyone understands me, I'd have to either go for the very long term quoted above, or I could just say cisgender. Again, which term I use would also probably depend on the audience. If I knew or strongly suspected that some people would object to the term cisgender, I might well opt for the cumbersome "biological male who identifes as a male".

It's not, though. I suspect the reason it's used has to do with people who are intersex. From an article on the subject: ** Intersex is an umbrella term that describes bodies that fall outside the strict male/female binary. There are lots of ways someone can be intersex. What does intersex mean? Intersex is a general term used for a variety of situations in which a person is born with reproductive or sexual anatomy that doesn’t fit the boxes of “female” or “male.” Sometimes doctors do surgeries on intersex babies and children to make their bodies fit binary ideas of “male” or “female”. Doctors always assign intersex babies a legal sex (male or female, in most states), but, just like with non-intersex people, that doesn’t mean that’s the gender identity they’ll grow up to have. This brings up questions about whether or not it’s OK to do medical procedures on children’s bodies when it’s not needed for their health. Being intersex is a naturally occurring variation in humans, and it isn’t a medical problem — therefore, medical interventions (like surgeries or hormone therapy) on children usually aren’t medically necessary. Being intersex is also more common than most people realize. It’s hard to know exactly how many people are intersex, but estimates suggest that about 1-2 in 100 people born in the U.S. are intersex. There are many different ways someone can be intersex. Some intersex people have genitals or internal sex organs that fall outside the male/female categories — such as a person with both ovarian and testicular tissues. Other intersex people have combinations of chromosomes that are different than XY ( usually associated with male) and XX (usually associated with female), like XXY. And some people are born with external genitals that fall into the typical male/female categories, but their internal organs or hormones don’t. If a person’s genitals look different from what doctors and nurses expect when they’re born, someone might be identified as intersex from birth. Other times, someone might not know they’re intersex until later in life, like when they go through puberty. Sometimes a person can live their whole life without ever discovering that they’re intersex. ** Full article: https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/gender-identity/sex-gender-identity/whats-intersex You're talking about hermaphrodites and they are much too small of a community to force the entire nation into the tranny agenda. They will continue living the way they've always lived. The article I linked to doesn't mention hermaphrodites at all, which got me wondering. I looked up the term hermaphrodite on Wikipedia, and I got this at the top: "Not to be confused with Intersex people or Intersex (biology)." Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermaphrodite And yet, when I went to the Wikipedia's Hermaphrodite (disambiguation) page, I got this: ** Biology [edit] Hermaphrodite (botany), a flowering plant that has both male and female structures, that is, it combines both sexes in one structure Bovine hermaphrodite, an infertile cow with masculinized behavior and non-functioning ovaries Sequential hermaphrodite, an individual that changes its sex at some point in its life Simultaneous hermaphrodite, an individual that has sex organs of both sexes and can produce both gamete types even in the same breeding season Intersex (biology), a general term for an organism that has sex characteristics that are between male and female Intersex person, an individual born with any of several sex characteristics, including chromosomes, gonads, sex hormones, or genitals that do not fit typical binary notions of male or female bodies Pseudohermaphrodite, an individual whose gonads are mismatched with their internal reproductive system and/or external genitalia True hermaphrodite, an individual who is born with ovarian and testicular tissue ** The following article from biologydictionary.com directly equates the 2 terms: https://biologydictionary.net/hermaphrodite/ Quoting: ** Causes of Normally Dimorphic Hermaphrodites In sexually dimorphic organisms, a hermaphrodite may arise because of variations in the genetic code. In humans, hermaphrodites are caused by a variety of genetic conditions. In one form, a hermaphrodite or intersex person is created when two fertilized eggs fuse together, giving the zygote two X chromosomes and one Y chromosome. Other cases of hermaphrodites are caused by the SRY gene, the gene responsible for testosterone and male genitals, being transferred to the X chromosome during meiosis, resulting in both male and female genitals. ** Anyway, it looks like term for people with these uncommon conditions would generally prefer to be called intersex people, so I'll go with that. As to continuing to "live as they've always lived", I can understand that as a conservative you'd like things to stay as they have always been, but it seems to me that the intersex community would like some changes, one of which is apparently to now be referred to as intersex people rather than hermaphrodites. As to people who are intersex and their crossover with transgenderism, that's not a subject that I've explored all that much. But in the case of intersex people, it's clear that there is definitely a -biological- component involved.

This is not the kind of different meaning you were arguing the term has. All this is saying is that the term female can relate to talking about sex or gender, but they are still the same thing, as it says female is belonging to being a woman or a girl. Which... you must be female to be a woman or girl or to have the sex of female you are a woman or a girl. Did you not notice the example given of the trans female athlete?

They don't. They have one definition Back to denial again -.- Ah well, hopefully you'll come around one day.

Yes, I refuse to accept your new definitions. I have been obvious on that. That you have. Now, if they were -only- my definitions for these terms, that'd probably be the end of it. They're not though. In fact, I didn't even come up with them. More importantly, prominent sources of information now include these definitions. So, you can continue to pretend that these definitions don't exist, or you can acknowledge the fact. Sometimes you seem to do that a bit and then we can get into why you dislike them. Other times, we seem to be stuck in this area where you can't even acknowledge they exist. It reminds me of things like Alcoholics Anonymous, where the first step is to acknowledge the problem and only after that can you get on with the other work that needs to be done.

What I say is backed up by logic, observation, and reason. Anyone can say that. The hard part is showing that prominent sources agree with your logic, observation and reason. That's where you fail on this subject. All I can do is point out what recognized sources of information have said about sex assignment. You're free to disagree all you like: ** Sex assignment (also known as gender assignment[1][2]) is the discernment of an infant's sex, typically made at birth based on an examination of the baby's external genitalia by a healthcare provider such as a midwife, nurse, or physician.[3] In the vast majority of cases (99.95%), sex is assigned unambiguously at birth. However, in about 1 in 2000 births, the baby's genitalia may not clearly indicate male or female, necessitating additional diagnostic steps, and deferring sex assignment.[4][5] In most countries the healthcare provider's determination, along with other details of the birth, is by law recorded on an official document and submitted to the government for later issuance of a birth certificate and for other legal purposes.[6] The prevalence of intersex conditions, where a baby's sex characteristics do not conform strictly to typical definitions of male or female, ranges between 0.018% and 1.7%.[7][8][9] While some intersex conditions result in genital ambiguity (approximately 0.02% to 0.05% of births[4]), others present genitalia that are distinctly male or female, which may delay the recognition of an intersex condition until later in life.[10][11] ** Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_assignment

We have that, they are called transgender. That certainly works when you want to identify people who are transgender. The problem occurs when you want to identify people who aren't. Cisgender works great to do this. LOL, no. Male, Female, Transgender. No problems at all. Again, the problem is that there's a fair amount of people who now define male as anyone who identifies as male and female as anyone who identifies as female. Given this reality, as well as the reality that it is at times a good thing to be able to differentiate between cisgenders and transgenders, adding cis and trans to male and female solves the problem quite well.