Are you a man or a woman?

[Scott75]

On 11/4/2024 at 11:19 AM, Deluge said:

  

On 11/3/2024 at 7:39 AM, phoenyx75 said:

That doesn't really explain much. As I've said elsewhere, I think that for many trans people who are considering things like hormone therapy and surgery, the -reason- they think this may be their best option is because they don't feel accepted by society the way they currently appear. Which to me strongly suggests that society needs to be more accepting of people who stretch gender norms.

People need to be accepting without bending to the trans agenda, which is possible. The problem is that trans activists have gotten overly aggressive. They want more than just acceptance; they want full compliance with their agenda. 

As far as I know, you haven't even defined what you think the trans agenda -is-. How about you start there?

[Scott75]

On 11/4/2024 at 11:33 AM, Deluge said:

On 11/3/2024 at 7:29 AM, phoenyx75 said:

What exactly do you believe constitutes the "lgbt agenda"? Secondly, the only relatively well known person who I've seen bring up the effects of chemicals in relation to people's gender identity is Alex Jones, who is Wikipedia describes as being on the far right.

Source provided.

Where?

[Scott75]

On 11/4/2024 at 11:33 AM, Deluge said:

  

On 11/3/2024 at 7:29 AM, phoenyx75 said:

No, my idea of acceptance entails accepting people for who they are, not for who some conservatives would like them to be. Ironically, I think this could lead to -less- hormone therapies and surgeries, because if people are more comfortable with who they already are, they would feel less of a need to try to change their appearance.

No, your idea of acceptance is whatever the left-wing tells you. A person is either a biological male, or biological female - there is no deviation from this. 

Absolute balderdash. I actually thought that Trump might be slightly less bad than Kamala prior to his getting elected, because at least he seems to have the good sense to want to get out of Ukraine as quickly as possible.

[CdnFox]

39 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

That's one of the definitions. The other relates to gender. Wikipedia explains:

**

Usage

In humans, the word male can be used in the context of gender, such as for gender role or gender identity of a man or boy.^[7] For example, according to Merriam-Webster, "male" can refer to "having a gender identity that is the opposite of female".^[21] According to the Cambridge Dictionary, "male" can mean "belonging or relating to men".^[22]

**

Source:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male

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.

And you're still dishonest

22 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

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.

You're kind of proving that here as you talk. I see zero respect for anybody else, in fact you're happy to disrespect others provided you foster the idea that everything the trans people do is right and correct

[Scott75]

On 11/4/2024 at 11:33 AM, Deluge said:

On 11/3/2024 at 7:29 AM, phoenyx75 said:

On 11/2/2024 at 7:19 AM, Deluge said:

But to be quite honest, we are not interested in ANYTHING that the left has to say. We're not interested because the left takes a mile when given an inch. That's why we stand firm with pretty much everything they want. 

Anyone can speak against vague abstractions such as "the left", but it won't [get] us anywhere productive. To get productive results, we need to talk about specifics.

And it doesn't get more specific than two choices: a biological male and biological female. You should practice what you preach.  

As I've said elsewhere, there's actually a third possibility even when it comes to biological, which is intersex:

Sex and gender: What is the difference? | Medical News Today

And once we get into gender as a social construct, we have yet more possibilties.

Edited November 7, 2024 by phoenyx75

[CdnFox]

16 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

As I've said elsewhere, there's actually a third possibility even when it comes to biological, which is intersex:

Sex and gender: What is the difference? | Medical News Today

And once we get into gender as a social construct, we have yet more possibilties.

But it's all dishonesty. You're Mis defining words To promote an agenda

[Scott75]

On 11/4/2024 at 11:33 AM, Deluge said:

On 11/3/2024 at 7:29 AM, phoenyx75 said:

Again, this depends on the place. Several laws have already been instituted allowing trans women to use the washroom of the gender they identify with.

It doesn't depend on the place

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

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

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. If honest people are being discriminated against by transgender people that shouldn't be tolerated

[Scott75]

On 11/4/2024 at 11:33 AM, Deluge said:

  

On 11/3/2024 at 7:29 AM, phoenyx75 said:

On 11/2/2024 at 7:19 AM, Deluge said:

As far as children go, it's best to just stay away froom them. 

Again, I strongly disagree, not least of which is because some trans people have children of their own. What's needed is more dialogue to try to find a way that everyone's concerns are heard and ultimately, find an approach that integrates trans people, whether or not they have taking hormones or surgery. I suspect that most people would be better off without hormone therapies and surgeries, but for that, they have to be comfortable in the bodies they already have. And that, I strongly suspect, will only come once societies are more comfortable with the fact that a lot of people don't want to comform to certain gender stereotypes.

Trans people have been given way too much latitude, and that fantasy needs to be dialed way, WAY back. Probably to 1950's levels. 

Your sentiment makes me smile as I consider a line from one of Frank Herbert's books:

"Scratch a conservative and you find someone who prefers the past over any future."

Source:

https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/3634588-god-emperor-of-dune

[CdnFox]

14 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

Your sentiment makes me smile as I consider a line from one of Frank Herbert's books:

"Scratch a conservative and you find someone who prefers the past over any future."

Source:

https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/3634588-god-emperor-of-dune

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

You offer no reason or logic as to why things should be the way that you say. You simply demand that that's the way they are and everybody else has to fall in line without addressing the concerns or issues presented to you.

And your fellow cohorts who are supporters of such a cause would prefer to pass into law a requirement so that people who disagree with you are appropriately jailed or at least severely punished.

 

[Scott75]

On 11/4/2024 at 11:34 AM, CdnFox said:

On 11/4/2024 at 9:12 AM, phoenyx75 said:

This goes back to my belief that there should be a way to differentiate between cisgender and transgender people.

We already had one.  Hetero and transgender. That's all you need.

Hetero is an informal word for heterosexual, according to the American Heritage Dictionary, 5th Edition. Heterosexual, in turn, means a heterosexual person, someone who is "sexually oriented to persons of the opposite sex", as well as "of or relating to different sexes", according to the same dictionary. Note that it says nothing about what gender a person is, or even what sex a person is. Transgender defines a person who identifies with a sex that is not their own. What's missing is a word for people who identify with a sex that -is- their own. Cisgender is the shortest term for this. But for those who insist on some other term, there's always the super long "biological male/female/intersex who identifies as male/female/intersex".

Edited November 7, 2024 by phoenyx75

[Scott75]

On 11/4/2024 at 11:57 AM, Deluge said:

On 11/4/2024 at 8:50 AM, phoenyx75 said:

Again, for people who define male and female as people who identify as such, trans males are males and trans females are females. For someone who doesn't like the idea of having definitions "crammed down your throat" as you put it, you certainly seem to be wanting to do a fair amount of cramming yourself. You need to learn to accept that some people want to define these words differently then you do and stop trying to force them to define these words the way you define them.

The only "cramming" that's taking place here is your tranny activism.

No, I'm just pointing out the fact that there is a significant group of people who define male and female as people who identify as such, and that there are people like you who have a hard time accepting this.

[Scott75]

On 11/5/2024 at 1:01 AM, CdnFox said:

On 11/5/2024 at 12:42 AM, phoenyx75 said:

On 11/3/2024 at 12:04 PM, CdnFox said:

It's not a question of whether or not it offends them. The point is it's the truth. It's not a term that is intended to be offensive or that is offensive and common use such as the n word. It is a statement of fact and that differentiates it.

A person may or may not be offended by the truth. There are certainly no end of examples of people being offended by what is true, or at least becoming very angry about it. But that doesn't stop it from being true.

If somebody makes a true statement and they're not doing it in a malicious or vindictive fashion then whether it's offensive or not to the other person they should not be penalized for it.  

If someone asks me if they're fat and I look at them and I say "Yes, you are objectively overweight by a significant amount. I would guess that you would need to lose approximately 50 lb to be at your ideal body weight" , Then even if they are offended by that or hurt by that or it makes them sad all I've done is state a simple truth without malice. It doesn't matter how much they've tried to lose weight, it doesn't matter how hard it is for them to lose weight or how much it upsets them to be overweight.

What you said above made me smile. I recall a certain person saying that cisgender offended them. I can imagine reciting everything you just said to justify the term :-p.

Except the part where it's true   And that's where you fall flat on your face. It's an inaccurate made up term much like n@gger or chug or chink etc. 

I suppose there's some truth to those terms, N@gger is based on 'negro' which is an accurate term.  But they're invented pejoratives.

I don't think the N word is a very accurate term- as far as I know, no one is actually black. Same thing for white, although perhaps albinos are an exception.  Instead, humans tend to come in colours varying from slightly pink to very dark brown. Transgender and cisgender, on the other hand, are at least close to 100% accurate terms. And you have yet to show any evidence that they are pejorative terms.

Edited November 7, 2024 by phoenyx75

[Scott75]

On 11/5/2024 at 1:01 AM, CdnFox said:

On 11/5/2024 at 12:42 AM, phoenyx75 said:

Anyway, the fundamental point remains the same- the definitions of terms like gender, male, female, etc. are being fought over in a way. Some people, such as myself, can juggle between the 2- that is, if I know that my audience is comprised of people who define gender as cisgender by default, I can simply say add trans when defining people who are not cisgender. If I know my audience has at least some people who define gender as a social construct, on the other hand, things become more complicated, and I will have to decide how to define my terms based on the various factors involved.

No, the fundimental point is that you prefer to insult people in pursuit of your agenda and create hostile wedges to separate people instead of looking for ways to bring people together.

Absolute balderdash. I'm guessing this is coming from your insistence that cis is an insult, despite having presented no solid evidence that this is the case.

[CdnFox]

48 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

I don't think the N word is a very accurate term

Well your opinion doesn't matter. Remember by your own rules I'm the one that gets to decide if it's accurate or not because I'm the one speaking. Words are defined by the people saying them not by the listener or by comic convention according to you

And the fact that you've dodged around that subject and are willing to actually address it tells me you're dishonest. You haven't thought through what you're saying. It doesn't make sense there's no logic to it. But you say it anyway so you're not speaking from a point of view of intelligence or education, you are speaking from the point of view of an echo chamber that you've bought into.

As I said. You're a hypocrite. You refuse to address the issues that are being raised and hide behind cheesy arguments about people making up their own meanings for words which you then completely dismiss when applied to someone else.

You're just proof of the dishonesty of the trans argument

1 minute ago, phoenyx75 said:

Absolute balderdash. I'm guessing this is coming from your insistence that cis is an insult, despite having presented no solid evidence that this is the case.

Absolute truth. And you have yet to address any of the points mentioned here other than to simply try and dodge it by claiming that words have no fixed meaning and are completely malleable and definitions are whatever the person speaking wants them to be and can change on the fly.

I'm sure your arguments would be lethally effective in any grade six class but you're going to have to do better to impress anyone here

[Scott75]

On 11/5/2024 at 5:38 AM, Nationalist said:

On 11/5/2024 at 4:21 AM, phoenyx75 said:

The definitions of gender fluidity and trans are quite different. Here's what gender fluidity means according to Wikipedia:

**

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

LARPing. It's nothing to do with gender.

Agreed, LARPing has nothing to do with gender. I was talking about gender fluidity.

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

Agreed, LARPing has nothing to do with gender. I was talking about gender fluidity.

LOL @Nationalist didn't even have to call the tower for that flyover  

[Legato]

13 minutes ago, phoenyx75 said:

Agreed, LARPing has nothing to do with gender. I was talking about gender fluidity.

It does for the NPC's

[Scott75]

On 11/5/2024 at 8:21 AM, User said:

On 11/5/2024 at 3:39 AM, phoenyx75 said:

You haven't presented any evidence that cis is a pejorative. As I tried to explain previously, a -lot- of terms can be used pejoratively, even if they aren't regularly seen this way. 

Do you think it is pejorative to call a transwoman, who is a man identifying as a woman, a man, or a male, even after they have asked you to refer to them as how they identify?

I think we can agree that referring to anyone in a way that they don't like can be seen as insulting, but there are also levels of offense. Someone who is biologically male and identifies as male is a cismale. Now, some cismales may not like the term, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a very specific and accurate term.

Now, let's do a little thought experiment. Let's say that a lab is doing some tests that need to be done on biological males. They are drawing from a pool of people wherein some of them may define being male as being a cisgender male and others may define being male as both a cisgender and a transgender male. In order to make it clear that they can only take cisgender males, they have to have a way to differentiate between the 2. Naturally, cisgender male would work, but biological male would too.

Now, let's try a different though experiment. This time, they are looking for biological males who -identify- as males, again drawing from the same pool of people, some of whom define males as biological males and others who define males as both biological and transgender males. This time, it's harder- either they would have to ask for cisgender males or they have to ask something rather long, basically "biological males who identify as males". Ultimately, I think people are going to go with the much shorter "cismales", but at present, perhaps there'll be a bit of both.

Edited November 7, 2024 by phoenyx75

[Scott75]

On 11/5/2024 at 12:20 PM, CdnFox said:

On 11/5/2024 at 1:04 AM, phoenyx75 said:

On 11/3/2024 at 12:04 PM, CdnFox said:

On 11/3/2024 at 9:13 AM, phoenyx75 said:

On 11/2/2024 at 8:12 PM, CdnFox said:

We all know what sex and gender is. If your argument is that gender is so malleable a term that it means something different to anyone then it's a pointless and meaningless term and isn't relevant to the discussion and we should just stick with sex exclusively. 

I agree with you there. But it's not so malleable.

But you need to make up your mind, because you're claiming it is. Your flip-flopping back and forth on this.

No, I'm not, but I can see how you could get that impression.

You absolutely are. Perhaps you don't realize it but you absolutely are doing that, that is the thing you are doing

I think sometimes the problem is that you take a snippet of what I write and miss the larger context. I went back to my post #213, where I pointed out that the term gender is not -so- malleable. What I meant is that there are some pretty hard limits to how much a word can be shaped, especially ones which are in common usage such as gender and gender words such as male and female. Right after I pionted out that gender was not that malleable a word, I said the following:

**

Recently, there's been a type of battle between what we can call the old definition, that gender is tied to biology, and the new one that it is a social construct, as Wikipedia puts it. For now, both of these definitions exist and thus, it can be hard to know what a person means when they say they are male or female, because it depends on how they're defining their gender. That's why using terms like cis or biological are important if one wants to establish one's biological gender.

**

Edited November 7, 2024 by phoenyx75

[Scott75]

On 11/5/2024 at 12:25 PM, CdnFox said:

On 11/5/2024 at 4:21 AM, phoenyx75 said:

The definitions of gender fluidity and trans are quite different. Here's what gender fluidity means according to Wikipedia:

**

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

But what if he defines it as "An exercise in self delusion practiced by whiny little brats who can't cope with reality as they've discovered it and are seeking to demand the government wipe their butts so that they feel better"?

Word definitions have some similarities to the law. Frank Herbert wrote a great line on the law in one of his Dune books:

"Law always chooses sides on the basis of enforcement power. Morality and legal niceties have little to do with it when the real question is: Who has the clout?"

Thus it is with words. There's the clout to get a word into the slang of an area and even more clout if you can get it into Wikipedia and dictionaries. Now, that doesn't mean that morality and other niceties can't be part of it, but the most important thing is the clout. As I've said previously, there is currently a war of sorts going on between those who want to maintain the old definitions of words like gender and those who want to replace them with the new ones that I've mentioned. I think we've agreed that more people are using the new definitions. You've pointed out that new trends are not always good ones, and I agree with that. I think in this particular case, though, it's a good trend. What remains to be seen is this trend will have the clout to win the battle. I think it will, but ofcourse time is the ultimate arbiter on things of this nature.

[Scott75]

On 11/5/2024 at 12:27 PM, CdnFox said:

On 11/5/2024 at 3:39 AM, phoenyx75 said:

You haven't presented any evidence that cis is a pejorative. As I tried to explain previously, a -lot- of terms can be used pejoratively, even if they aren't regularly seen this way. 

Now you're just getting into lying.

What exactly do you think I'm lying about? And once again, I've seen no evidence that cis is a pejorative. If you have any evidence suggesting that it is, by all means present it.

[Scott75]

18 hours ago, Nationalist said:

  

18 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

From what I've seen, the word sex itself, when used in a biological context, is generally sufficient. So, you can -usually- say that a person's sex is male and female. The key here, though, is usually. This is because of people who are intersex. Below is an article that gets into intersex people:

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/gender-identity/sex-gender-identity/whats-intersex

Intersex?

Dude...this is silly. Nobody but the most Tweenkie would even consider this.

It's a fairly well known term:

https://www.webmd.com/sex/what-is-intersex

From the above link:

**

What Does Intersex Mean?

Intersex is an umbrella term for people who are born with one or more traits in their chromosomes, genitals, hormones, or internal reproductive organs that don’t fit the typical male or female patterns. Some of their traits might not match the sex they were assigned at birth or may combine traditionally understood male and female traits. 

While intersex traits are often noticed at birth, the differences aren't always obvious then. People might discover they have intersex traits at puberty or in adulthood, sometimes as a result of medical testing for infertility. In rare instances, such differences are found in autopsies, after people have died. 

It's important to note that intersex people may use varying terms to describe their differences. While many reject the language used by some medical organizations – "disorders of sex development" – some use the term "differences of sex development." The most widely used description is intersex.

**

[Scott75]

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

20 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

What you call 'perverting' is simply changing the original meaning of the word. The definitions of words change all the time and a good amount of people have decided that their meaning of gender now includes anyone who identifies with said gender. The fat that words such as biological or cis now need to be added to gender in order to differentiate between cis and transgender people just means that there are still situations where it's important to know the difference between these 2 types of people. Incidentally, I think cis is better for 2 reasons:

1- It's shorter.

2- It doesn't just say what a person's biological gender is, but also what gender they identify with.

Meanings of words do not change overnight.

I agree with you there.

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

And not just because a "good amount" of people decide it.

You may have noticed that "a good amount of people" is a rather vague. How many people would it be? The most important thing, I think, is not really the number of people backing a word, but the amount of clout they have. It goes back to what I said in an earlier post about law, specifically about it being decided by who has the clout. Right now, there are enough people in what we could call the old guard of the gender definition debate that the new definitions of gender and other gender words still haven't succeeded in being in various dictionaries. But it's in a few and I believe that number will grow over time. Hand in hand with this are court cases where some transgender people are winning as I've already pointed out in a previous post to you.

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

It's an organic process that happens over time in a specific manner, and one definition supplants the other, you don't get people using two definitions. 

Oh, you can, and indeed we do have this when it comes to gender and other gender words, but I think that generally speaking, people would prefer to have just one definition of common words like gender. Eventually, I think one definition will become the winner and the other will become what dictionaries like to call "archaic". 

[Scott75]

15 hours ago, Deluge said:

19 hours ago, phoenyx75 said:

From what I've seen, the word sex itself, when used in a biological context, is generally sufficient. So, you can -usually- say that a person's sex is male and female. The key here, though, is usually. This is because of people who are intersex. Below is an article that gets into intersex people:

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/gender-identity/sex-gender-identity/whats-intersex

Biological sex is ALWAYS sufficient; it's why society needs to stick with it. 

Some people are intersex, biologically. I'm guessing you didn't read the article I linked to in my previous post. You can still do so if you wish:

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/gender-identity/sex-gender-identity/whats-intersex