Is transgender a disease?

Also, we're talking about gender pronouns, not race.

Rocinante wrote:

Also, we're talking about gender pronouns, not race.

It's the SAME THING as I stated before. read my other posts. I think they are clear. I won't just argue past each other. If you want to address the points I've made previously, please do so and we can discuss. Otherwise, I know your opinion by now because you continue to state it the same way without assimilating new information. As you usually do. I love you X, really. But damn.

You came in today with a strawman assessment of what you believe my position is. Somehow, I guess I'm a racist because I don't believe transgendered individuals are anything but a statistical anomaly as opposed to the true pioneers of sociological without any falsifiable evidence or facts. I don't get that.

I don't hate, or bear any malice to people over differences of race, or gender or religion. But I don't hate myself either. So if you need me to hate myself so you can feel comfortable with my perspective, you are out of luck.

xsanguine wrote:100 words or less? Do you know who you're dealing with?

I'll try.

Gender is a social construct meaning the characteristics of masculine and feminine are enforced through social norms and are not naturally occurring. They are harmful when manifested through social ostracization by parents, teachers, peers and media. This results in negative outcomes such as depression, self harm/medication and suicide.

Am I on the right track?

xsanguine wrote:I get it. I do.

I just don't know if something that's more of an annoyance should be considered a social harm.

I mean don't we all deal or dealt with those sorts of things from our parents? My mom would give me shit about things I'm socially supposed to be doing or not doing as a man. My mother in law is very traditional Roman Catholic Mexican woman from Mexico. She'll tell me what my role is and tells her daughter, my wife, what she's supposed to be doing as a wife. We simply just ignore it or give it a dismissive answer. And it's kind of a running joke when we're in the car heading home. I think most people deal with things like that and most people don't take offense.

Holy shit I'm chatty today, I apologize, Cam. Should lay off the sativa.

Rocinante wrote:I just read the Canadian proposed law. It doesn't seem to say what you think it says.

Eugene Volokh, Washington Post wrote:Examples of Violations

a. Intentional or repeated refusal to use an individual’s preferred name, pronoun or title. For example, repeatedly calling a transgender woman “him” or “Mr.” after she has made clear which pronouns and title she uses …

Covered entities may avoid violations of the NYCHRL by creating a policy of asking everyone what their preferred gender pronoun is so that no individual is singled out for such questions and by updating their systems to allow all individuals to self-identify their names and genders. They should not limit the options for identification to male and female only.

Eugene Volokh, Washington Post wrote:So people can basically force us — on pain of massive legal liability — to say what they want us to say, whether or not we want to endorse the political message associated with that term, and whether or not we think it’s a lie.

We have to use “ze,” a made-up word that carries an obvious political connotation (endorsement of the “non-binary” view of gender). We have to call people “him” and “her” even if we believe that people’s genders are determined by their biological sex and not by their self-perceptions — perceptions that, by the way, can rapidly change, for those who are “gender-fluid” — and that using terms tied to self-perception is basically a lie. (I myself am not sure whether people who are anatomically male, for example, but perceive themselves as female should be viewed as men or women; perhaps one day I’ll be persuaded that they should be viewed as women; my objection is to being forced to express that view.) We can’t be required to even display a license plate that says “Live Free or Die” on our car, if we object to the message; that’s what the court held in Wooley v. Maynard (1978). But New York is requiring people to actually say words that convey a message of approval of the view that gender is a matter of self-perception rather than anatomy, and that, as to “ze,” were deliberately created to convey that a message.

What’s more, according to the City, “refusal to use a transgender employee’s preferred name, pronoun, or title may constitute unlawful gender-based harassment.” The label “harassment” is important here because harassment law requires employers and businesses to prevent harassment by co-workers and patrons and not just by themselves or their own employees; this is particularly well established for harassment by co-workers, but it has also been accepted for harassment by fellow patrons. So an employer or business that learns that its employees or patrons are “refus[ing] to use a transgender employee’s preferred” pronoun or title would have to threaten to fire or eject such people unless they comply with the City’s demands. (The logic would also apply to landlords having to threaten to eject tenants who refuse to use co-tenants’ preferred pronouns or titles, but that’s less certain.)

Cameron wrote:

xsanguine wrote:You watch Bill Nye now vs Bill Nye in the 90s when he talks about gender. The episode in the 90s, while dumbed down for it audience of children, explains the chromosomes and DNA and how that manifests itself into genitalia and reproduction. Now his story has changed. Okay, no biggie, whatcha got Billy... and he brings out someone trying to be funny whose message only boils down to "I can be whatever I want to be based on how I'm feeling at the moment", the music stops and he proclaims "the science is settled" without having introduced anything that could be considered scientific into the conversation.

I had his new Netflix show added to my queue but hadn't watched it. I saw a clip somewhere else of his gender rap or whatever, and I took the show out of my queue. For whatever good points he had, that shit was some of the most cringeworthy "entertainment" I have ever seen, and I don't want my fond childhood memories sullied. Some of my favorite memories from elementary school involve getting to watch Bill Nye in science class whenever we had a substitute teacher.

Cameron wrote:

Cameron wrote:


I had his new Netflix show added to my queue but hadn't watched it. I saw a clip somewhere else of his gender rap or whatever, and I took the show out of my queue. For whatever good points he had, that shit was some of the most cringeworthy "entertainment" I have ever seen, and I don't want my fond childhood memories sullied. Some of my favorite memories from elementary school involve getting to watch Bill Nye in science class whenever we had a substitute teacher.

Rocinante wrote:So Bill Nye was cool until he started talking about stuff that made you uncomfortable. And I am so hot for Rachael Bloom.

Rocinante wrote:I agree, people should not be "forced" to use a gender pronoun. But we should look for one that doesn't have the inherent oppressive qualities of the binary gender labels that the currently used ones do. Because it's the right thing to do. I know it seems out there, but it really isn't.

Rocinante wrote:So Bill Nye was cool until he started talking about stuff that made you uncomfortable. And I am so hot for Rachael Bloom.

Rocinante wrote:I agree, people should not be "forced" to use a gender pronoun. But we should look for one that doesn't have the inherent oppressive qualities of the binary gender labels that the currently used ones do. Because it's the right thing to do. I know it seems out there, but it really isn't.

Cameron wrote:

Rocinante wrote:So Bill Nye was cool until he started talking about stuff that made you uncomfortable. And I am so hot for Rachael Bloom.

I still think he's kind of cool, but that gender rap was painful to sit through. I mostly just posted the video because I came across it randomly on youtube and it made me think of this thread.

Rocinante wrote:I agree, people should not be "forced" to use a gender pronoun. But we should look for one that doesn't have the inherent oppressive qualities of the binary gender labels that the currently used ones do. Because it's the right thing to do. I know it seems out there, but it really isn't.

So are you saying we should stop using "he" and "she," even for people who feel that those are perfectly suitable?

Can we use "it?" If no, why not?

xsanguine wrote:

Rocinante wrote:I agree, people should not be "forced" to use a gender pronoun. But we should look for one that doesn't have the inherent oppressive qualities of the binary gender labels that the currently used ones do. Because it's the right thing to do. I know it seems out there, but it really isn't.

Sex is binary. It is what it is. Until we discover a new genital... that's how we're divided, naturally. And I think nature knows what it's doing.

In one thread we're worried about being oppressive because someone's feelings are hurt when you don't verbally use a recently made up pronoun that they prefer with no basis in biology.

In another thread an ideology that has been actually oppressing people through institutional slavery, misogyny, genital mutilation, pedophilia and bigotry for a millenia and a half is defended.

That's some wild shit.

AnomanderRake wrote:

Cameron wrote:

I still think he's kind of cool, but that gender rap was painful to sit through. I mostly just posted the video because I came across it randomly on youtube and it made me think of this thread.



So are you saying we should stop using "he" and "she," even for people who feel that those are perfectly suitable?

Can we use "it?" If no, why not?

A lot of languages don't even have gender specific pronouns. English already has a few gender neutral pronouns such as it, one, and they.

AnomanderRake wrote:

Cameron wrote:

I still think he's kind of cool, but that gender rap was painful to sit through. I mostly just posted the video because I came across it randomly on youtube and it made me think of this thread.



So are you saying we should stop using "he" and "she," even for people who feel that those are perfectly suitable?

Can we use "it?" If no, why not?

A lot of languages don't even have gender specific pronouns. English already has a few gender neutral pronouns such as it, one, and they.

Rocinante wrote:

xsanguine wrote:

Sex is binary. It is what it is. Until we discover a new genital... that's how we're divided, naturally. And I think nature knows what it's doing.

In one thread we're worried about being oppressive because someone's feelings are hurt when you don't verbally use a recently made up pronoun that they prefer with no basis in biology.

In another thread an ideology that has been actually oppressing people through institutional slavery, misogyny, genital mutilation, pedophilia and bigotry for a millenia and a half is defended.

That's some wild shit.

We've already had this conversation about gender vs sex. I'm not going to do it again. Christians and Jews mutilate genitals. It's called circumcision.

Rocinante wrote:Cool, so the way you mutilate a child's genitals is an important factor. Good to know.

Rocinante wrote:Cool, so the way you mutilate a child's genitals is an important factor. Good to know.

Rocinante wrote:Cool, so the way you mutilate a child's genitals is an important factor. Good to know.

In an interview with the Toronto Star, Kiaras Gharabaghi, director of Ryerson University's School of Child and Youth Care, said the bill is full of "weasel words."

"It is a bill that completely lacks courage," Gharabaghi said. "In every section it builds in limitations that suggest this is what we are hoping for, but it's OK if it doesn't happen. Everything is 'should be,' 'may be,' 'could be,' 'ought to be,' 'where appropriate,' 'if necessary.' "