The costs of trans visibility

The parents are deluded then? Its a boy because it has boy parts for example. Not a 'they'.

I think you are implying some general mistake of emphasizing a boys accomplishments versus a girls appearance.? I don't understand your point here. What is the thing about pink dresses and bows and long hair? (Your sentence seems to imply those are typically girl things no?)

This statement is not allowed.

Which statement? These are meant as question, I tried to add a question mark, can't edit.

I haven’t - and won’t - provide some rigid definition so this entire bit where you pretend I’m imposing a “uke definition” is just inept. Different people can decide for themselves whether they want to identify as trans. It ain’t up to me, or you, or your imaginary pride parade enforcers.

I just don't know what its refereeing to. Its just hanging there.

Your footwork is sloppy here. People can see ur breaking rules to attack me here. Ur supposed to be hiding this.

whats a typical girl thing in this regard?

If a boy does or uses a typical girl thing, whats the implication? Are they perhaps more of a girl? Are they just a boy doing girl things?

I ask this, because if guys start wearing dresses...then are dresses girl things?

How do these words work?

Thats a uke definition. Thats not a definition. Thats YOUR definition. Words don't have 'fluid' definitions based on peoples whims right?

Thats why I cited wikipedia, and it doesn't work with your definition when you say "non-binary doesn't imply trans thats wrong".

Ur framing the definition of trans for this thread, and its wrong, because words don't work like that.

That is not allowed as a question either. You cannot say anyone is deluded regarding transness in this thread. It is very clear if you read the long argument about it from months ago. You're dredging up things that were settled long ago.

With all your communication ability, you cannot even correctly parse the Wikipedia entry that you personally posted and in particular the sentence that you put in bold.

Transgender is also an umbrella term; in addition to including people whose gender identity is the opposite of their assigned sex (trans men and trans women), it may also include people who are non-binary or genderqueer

The important word here is "may". Transgender may include people who are non-binary. That means that sometimes it might not include them. Again, it is up to the individual, just as I and others have stated and is backed up by the article you posted.

If you're sure you know better than everyone else, why do you ask questions?
(I bet he won't answer this question either. )

I wouldn't think it blanket applies to any use of the word deluded.

I certainly didn't use it in any context that would be reasonable to ban.

If I know of some parents that believe their child is trans, but it turns out they just don't understand the word....their are deluding themselves.

Thats not disallowed.

Yes it is.

I have read the entire thread. Have you?

I also don't believe these parents exist.

No its not up to the individual. thats not what that means. Definitions of words in this context are not up to the individual right? You don't bend it based on your individual whim.

Someone isn't trans just because they say they are...there is a definition of trans, and you fit into or you don't right?

And is your definition/understanding the same as Uke's, I'm assuming it is.

Your gender is fluid, not definitions of words. Is this right?

You are completely wrong, sorry.

Ok, then let's have your interpretation of the sentence I quoted, in particular the word "may".

And why don't you go ahead and give us your definition of "trans" as well, since you don't like ouom

I'm looking for the definition that's not subjective you see?

What on earth are you droning on about. Is the big struggle that you don't realize that dresses are more commonly worn by girls?

This shouldn't be so hard for you.

I'm not sure why this is so confusing. People aren't always going to adopt the same words to describe themselves. Some people might say they are non-binary instead of trans. Others might say they are non-binary which is a type of being trans. That's ok. That isn't a definition - it's not "my" definition imposed on anyone else - it's just a basic observation about how people choose to identify. The only one asking for some sort of imposed definition seems to be you.

I just don't understand how a boy wearing a dress makes them moreso a girl. ie if boys start wearing dresses then isn't wearing a dress then also a boy thing?

So just to be clear Uke, you...have declared the definition of transgender for this thread, is not the wiki definition, is that correct?

I'm asking for the definition of transgender right because thats how words work, we need something to parse with...

So if we make it 'subjective' to the "person of concern's feelings"...we have left out any medical based observations right? Whats the medical definition, we can't seriously think its fluid based on the person of concerns beliefs right?

This is getting incredibly tedious walking through absolute basics. Nobody has said anything at all about a boy wearing a dress is magically makes them "moreso a girl". Maybe run your responses through an LLM first?

If the culture were different and boys tended to wear dresses and girls tended not to, then dresses would be associated more with boys. Duh.

I saw both my first pride parade and my first Trump rally within 15 minutes of each other today along the same road.

I do see. But it doesn't exist. That is part of why the trans issue is so controversial.

If you want a definition that is not subjective, why don't you find it and then inform us of it, instead of saying we are lying?

No, I didn't declare any definition. The wiki one is perfectly fine, and perfectly consistent with my observation that non-binary people "may" identify as transgender, but also may not. Again, that isn't a definition, it is an observation.

That said, there is nothing at all wrong with a concept being subjective in the sense that some people will find it describes their identity and others won't. Subjectivity isn't a problem, it is part of society.

Again, the wiki entry does not contradict us, it contradicts you.

I asked you to explain if you have a different explanation for the sentence with "may", but as always you refuse to answer questions but demand answers, and then complain if you don't like the answers. Do you think that is a good way to have a discussion?

The wiki definition doesn't support your assertion. Thats why I'm distinguishing it with what you present which I'm calling the "uke definition" so we can refer to it and show its different.

The wiki definition does NOT say, that trangender is defined by peoples whim's of their own gender. Thats your definition.

Its not a part of definitions though. Not in the way you are asserting. People aren't trans or not trans because you say so right? And they aren't trans just because someone says so, nor because they themselves declare so.

citation wiki.