Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, essentially, you disagree with people having personal choice about their lives.
But what if we don't like personal choices you make about your life?
What if you belong to a political party the majority doesn't like?
A religion the majority doesn't like?
A church the majority doesn't like?
An organization (such as the Moose Club or the VFW) that the majority doesn't like?
The problem is that you don't see the principle of personal freedom.
In regards to the assertion that this particular issue consists of those objecting to people having the freedom to identify as gender fluid/trans/whatever related term one may use on one side and those who support freedom of self identification on the other , I can only expand on what I touched on previously :
That is that while certainly part of this ongoing debate stems from those who object to the existence of people identifying as being part of this category in question , such objections clearly do not have the ability to set the tone for a debate of such magnitude that we are experiencing , since I think it's safe to say that only a small minority of adults in contemporary Western society seriously want to (f.ex ) prohibit people from being able to identify as gender fluid , trans , and so forth .
On the contrary the crux of this matter hinges on the themes of legal recognition of persons who have this specific identity , along with the more abstract debate about the meaning of truth as it relates to this subject , plus the ( IIRC so far unmentioned ) issue of educational policy in relation to gender identity .
To put it more plainly , the reason for there being so much noise about this subject these days is not because the number of decidedly anti trans people is so numerous , but because the subject of giving legal recognition to a previously unheard of identity has come up along with the question of whether or not it's appropriate to have ( for instance ) drag queens read stories to students at public schools .
The factor of many people wanting to question the stance of it being possible for someone to be biologically male/female while simultaneously belonging to the opposite gender cannot also be discounted , because ( to reiterate one of my previous points ) this matter is as much about what constitutes truth in general as it is about politics .
This neat separation between biological and sociological gender , or sex and gender as the adherents of this particular position usually refer to it as , is a very recent phenomenon and thus it's no surprise that so many people used to the previously accepted truth are somewhat shocked by its emergence .
Swerving over to the subject of personal freedom being limited , I may as well point out the view that granting legal recognition to gender fluid persons and ( especially ) allowing discussion/display of the matter in public educational institutions can very much be seen as an infringement of the right of individuals ( including parents ) to distance themselves from explicitly affirming a truth they find to be incorrect , next to maintaining some semblance of control over what their children can be taught .
Really this whole debate can be compared to that of whether or not social marginalization of those said to engage in " hate speech " is legitimate or not , particularly if no legal penalty for engaging in such speech exists , what with being gender fluid carrying no legal consequences at the present time .
All in all I think this issue should be conceived of as a dialogue between parties with wholly different views , as opposed to an attempt by one or either party at literally disenfranchising the other IMO .
That's fluidity of gender roles, and not gender. Huge difference.
You misread my post. I want people to make choices in their personal lives. I don't want to subsidize those choices. I don't want my contribution, through insurance and/or taxes to be used for gender-change surgery (in most cases), puberty blockers and/or additional sets of bathrooms. I feel this way especially when the purpose of foisting these "choices" on society is to scramble and destabilize society.
I feel the same way on immigration. I have no problem if people of the same or different ethnicities want to come to the U.S. I have a problem if we're throwing a party with tax dollars.
I don't think I misread you at all. But go ahead, in which post number did you say the bolded? If you said it and I missed it, I'll apologize for my error.
That next sentence -- you really think that when someone decided to have a sex change operation that they're doing it with the intent of destabilizing society?
I am okay with not spending tax payer dollars on gender-change surgery, providing that no tax money is also spent on things like plastic surgery (with some exceptions), and all other forms of what I will call 'whim surgery'.
The terms for this is "birth defect." Among other mammals this would be coupled with other health issues.
That's a judgment. A birth defect according to who? Cite your health issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa
I have a problem with affirmatively adopting pathologies as a life choice.
That's another judgment. In whose world are these pathologies?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa
That's fluidity of gender roles, and not gender. Huge difference.
You misread my post. I want people to make choices in their personal lives. I don't want to subsidize those choices. I don't want my contribution, through insurance and/or taxes to be used for gender-change surgery (in most cases), puberty blockers and/or additional sets of bathrooms. I feel this way especially when the purpose of foisting these "choices" on society is to scramble and destabilize society.
I feel the same way on immigration. I have no problem if people of the same or different ethnicities want to come to the U.S. I have a problem if we're throwing a party with tax dollars.
First of all, those are not "choices", anymore than someone who is born with an XYY chromosome makes a choice to be born that way.
Secondly, part of living in the US is that your taxes will always go for something you don't believe in. That's a fact of life. Get over it. I personally wish I didn't have to pay taxes for schools. Why should I? I never had kids. If you choose to have kids, then educating them should be on you, not me. But taxes don't work that way. I'm old enough to know that and you should be too.
And third, this "foisting" on society is only people tired of being discriminated against, wanting to be heard. Only the previously privileged would see equality as oppression to themselves.
It's sort of like saying someone has to share the toys in the sandbox and to be able to do that, he has to acknowledge that there are other people around that want to play with the toys, too. And when someone has to see those other people, he says they're being foisted on everyone.
Nobody's foisting anything or anyone on you. You just don't want to share.
The terms for this is "birth defect." Among other mammals this would be coupled with other health issues. Medicine, among humans, can rescue a lot of people.
That's a judgment. A birth defect according to who? Cite your health issues.
Would anyone in their right would choose to be born with two different sets of gender equipment. Which way does that leave the brain wired?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodentraiser
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa
I am all for accepting people with Downs Syndrome, gender dysphoria, Tay-Sachs Disease, Canavan's Disease or color-blindness as people. I never said anything about or against that. What I am against is normalizing gender fluidity. No one, for example, would choose to get Downs Syndrome, Tay-Sachs Disease, Canavan's Disease or color-blindness as a life choice. Many people are opting, at least on social media, to be "trans-gender." I don't know if they present in that manner in the real world. I have a problem with affirmatively adopting pathologies as a life choice.That's another judgment. In whose world are these pathologies?
That's another judgment. In whose world are these pathologies?
I restored context and added to my portion of the quoted posts. My point is that people are born with many things which no one in their right mind would adopt as an identity. For example, would anyone choose to be born with Tay-Sachs disease?
Would anyone in their right would choose to be born with two different sets of gender equipment. Which way does that leave the brain wired?
I restored context and added to my portion of the quoted posts. My point is that people are born with many things which no one in their right mind would adopt as an identity. For example, would anyone choose to be born with Tay-Sachs disease?
You can include being born gay in among those things. Why would you think gay people choose to be gay? The put downs, the discrimination, the name calling, people like you thinking they want to be like that...the fact is they don't choose it and no matter what you think about it, they're just here on earth trying to get through this life the same as everybody else. Why do people like you see it as a life mission to make things more difficult for them?
And why would you care how it leaves the brain wired? As long as they aren't hurting you and yours, how about a little respect for them and some understanding of what they go through? Is that too much to ask?
I think I can contribute a little to resolving the confusion. Or not.
It is very rare for babies to be born neither male nor female. Most of the ambiguity can be attributed to a disorder of sex development. (DSD) The sex is discernable but has been distorted by a variety of causes. Those births occur about once in every 1,500.
I think many people don't understand the difference between a disease and a disorder for what it's worth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
