The costs of trans visibility

"So, if we just called tall women women, we wouldn't say tall women are women?"

It's ridiculous that they haven't had to since whenever women were allowed to join the army.

yes?
😵

I think Bruce unlike uke and gangsta is deeper in the hole and so actually believe there is no biological sex basis upon which to apply gender

Man, it's not my fault your argument falls apart immediately.

Didace, from my perspective I spent hundreds of posts carefully laying out why trans women are women in a very measured and careful way that builds the case from the ground up including scientific studies, data, empirical reasoning, the history of the debate and the scientific landscape of it. A lot of my posts are very very good and very insightful. I dont really see a debate going on, and of course its -ev for me to engage, especially when im here to play cards.

I dont see a lot of “debate” going on, what I see is an emerging consensus amongst 4 individuals to ignore logic and reason, marginalize all disagreeing parties and politely handshake on “ the obvious truth” in their minds that transgender people suffer some mental disability , arent really the gender they claim , and are more or less a fad that could be seductive to the youth.

gender has never been based on biology at any point in history.

It is your fault that you are intentional obtuse so you can make your witty one-liners and giggle to yourself.

If there is no debate, why is this an issue at all? It's in the news all the time.

I meant in regards to this forum obviously.

I'm pretty sure there is a debate here, as well.

Lol, having tits or not has never been the basis for nursing a baby sure

I'm not obtuse, your point was just so incredibly stupid that it didn't take more than one line to teat it apart. I'm glad you find my posts witty though, I sure don't.

Instead claiming that biological sex never was the basis of gender is not redicolous beyond belief I guess mctroll

Under distress, you can either build on your identity — make it more powerful / meaningful — or you can transcend your identity for a new one.

The trans person is rightfully exploring the latter but it’s a half measure. They are detaching from their gender social identity when truth calls you to transcend the social self in its entirety, which means you have to reach deeper into yourself.

When the half measure inevitably leaves more to be desired, many trans people revert back to trying to build a more powerful identity. This leads to mobilization and activism in the political space. Again, acting through the social self instead of transcending it.

You thinking that this transgender issue can be resolved using logic and reason just shows how confused / ill equipped you are about this topic.

Oh, I don't find them witty. I thought it was self-evident that you did. Otherwise, why?

And what point do you think I was trying to make? Hint: It wasn't about who is a woman.

Especially when he thinks non-radical leftists give any value to radical leftists publishing papers reviewed by other radical leftists in fields invented by radical leftists to hire radical leftists that went to radical leftist colleges that otherwise would have no other job prospect.

To refresh, the claim made by some in this thread is that the trans person has an innate connection to their “true” gender. True gender is used to signify a unique quality of gender identity: it’s a fundamental, fixed identity that cannot be transcended.

Is our deepest identity one gender and not the other? Or is the gender identity transitioned to able to be transcended as shown by detransitioners?

In order to defend this claim about true gender, it must hold that all detransitioners were illegitimate, which means they don’t have this special, inerrant, innate connection to their true gender like the real trans do.

Or do detransitioners not have a true gender? Do non binary people not have a true gender? So many unanswered questions for our so called gender experts..

all these linguistic "debates" about trans people are tiresome. Like, who cares? Noting that trans people exist is just observational about human behaviours. Our choice is whether to be *******s or not in how we treat these people. All this wordplay of "do detransitioners not have a true gender" like ffs who cares.

It matters because non solutions delay actual solutions. Gender affirmation and reforming societal norms in favor of trans acceptance doesn’t solve suicidal ideation.

Advocates who have made the meaning they derive from their advocacy the highest moral truth - they don’t care. They just assume suicidal ideation is healed by their advocacy so that they can continue to leech off the meaning.

As i already stated it matters when you guys want the label to have legal meaning , a meaning that binds third parties to a behaviour under threat of state violence if they don't comply.

You can call me a sinner and I wouldn't gaf because it has no legal effects

So are you just going to roll with it from now on and not correct anyone who uses terms you don't agree with?

WTF is "transcending your gender" supposed to mean?

Not the same. I think people should generally be respectful and use established terms correctly like not misgendering trans people. This is different from finding the silly philosophy 100 style what is a woman faux debates tiresome.