This week in trans: The Lancet, the ACLU, the Guardian

[Metaphor]

Gametes are binary.

It's just that by the time you are looking at the level of sex there are so many ways for things to get a bit mixed up that it is no longer binary. It's like you can combine 32 binary bits to make a single precision floating point value. Nobody will claim the floating point value is binary.

Sexual characteristics are not necessarily binary, but sex is functionally binary in mammals and disorders of sexual development do not change that.

However, as I've said before, the intersex gambit is a furphy. The trans activist movement is not an intersex awareness movement. The trans activist movement's religious chant is "trans women are women", not "some people have disorders of sexual development and therefore some people who were identified male at birth might be closer to biologically female than you think".

No. The trans movement does not make the claim that males who produce sperm, have male-typical gonads, are XY, and have normal amounts of testosterone in their system do not get to be trans women. Nor does the trans movement even want males to have to take any measures whatsoever in order for trans-identified males to be treated socially and legally as women.

Sex in mammals is binary. Gender can be anything at all, because gender identity is a thought in a person's head. I have never inquired about somebody's 'gender' because I don't give a shit and I have no obligation to honour somebody's "gender", whatever that would mean.

I can see whether you are male or female. Volunteering your "gender identity" is like telling me you are a Pisces.

The trans movement is about the idea that perceived gender is separate from physical gender. There seems to be a mental gender that normally but not always matches the physical gender--we saw that before the trans movement showed up. (Learned the hard way by trying to surgically correct intersex babies and sometimes getting the resulting gender different than the mental gender. The trans movement is about recognizing that nature sometimes gets it wrong, not just the surgeons.)

The trans movement is not about any such thing. There's no "physical gender". There is biological sex. Some people have a thought in their head--their "gender identity"--which makes them uncomfortable with the reality of their biological sex. Other people are not uncomfortable with their biological sex but demand validation as 'non-binary', as if they had no biological sex at all. This thought does not remove the reality of their biological sex, nor does putting on the costume of the other sex make those people the other sex, or sexless.

Lil Nas X was called transphobic because he said being gay wasn't an act, he just liked dick. The trans movement is hellbent on erasing same-sex attraction as a reality and labelling those people who are attracted to a sex--and the genitals that that implies--as 'genital fetishists'.

There has to be a 'peak trans' moment for some of the people on this board. That moment when somebody who has been oblivious to the authoritarian religion that is gender ideology realises 'oh, actually yeah, they're destroying languages and lives'. So far, there has been no outrage, apparently, outrageous enough.

When men can masquerade as women and compete in women's sports, when men can proclaim themselves to be women and be housed in women's prisons, when faggots get called transphobic and 'genital fetishists' because they acknowledge the reality that they are sexually attracted to adult human males and only adult human males, when people can and are punished by the State for failing to validate the delusions of trans-identified people, when children as young as three are identified as 'trans' (by their parents, naturally) and nine year olds can be put on puberty blockers and made sterile for life, if none of this is enough to get some people over the 'peak trans' line, then I don't fucking know what to say.

 

[Toni]

The trans movement is about the idea that perceived gender is separate from physical gender. There seems to be a mental gender that normally but not always matches the physical gender--we saw that before the trans movement showed up. (Learned the hard way by trying to surgically correct intersex babies and sometimes getting the resulting gender different than the mental gender. The trans movement is about recognizing that nature sometimes gets it wrong, not just the surgeons.)

The trans movement is not about any such thing. There's no "physical gender". There is biological sex. Some people have a thought in their head--their "gender identity"--which makes them uncomfortable with the reality of their biological sex. Other people are not uncomfortable with their biological sex but demand validation as 'non-binary', as if they had no biological sex at all. This thought does not remove the reality of their biological sex, nor does putting on the costume of the other sex make those people the other sex, or sexless.

Lil Nas X was called transphobic because he said being gay wasn't an act, he just liked dick. The trans movement is hellbent on erasing same-sex attraction as a reality and labelling those people who are attracted to a sex--and the genitals that that implies--as 'genital fetishists'.

There has to be a 'peak trans' moment for some of the people on this board. That moment when somebody who has been oblivious to the authoritarian religion that is gender ideology realises 'oh, actually yeah, they're destroying languages and lives'. So far, there has been no outrage, apparently, outrageous enough.

When men can masquerade as women and compete in women's sports, when men can proclaim themselves to be women and be housed in women's prisons, when faggots get called transphobic and 'genital fetishists' because they acknowledge the reality that they are sexually attracted to adult human males and only adult human males, when people can and are punished by the State for failing to validate the delusions of trans-identified people, when children as young as three are identified as 'trans' (by their parents, naturally) and nine year olds can be put on puberty blockers and made sterile for life, if none of this is enough to get some people over the 'peak trans' line, then I don't fucking know what to say.

Do you actually know any trans individuals?

I was more on the side of 'trans identity is bogus/mental illness' or at best agnostic--until a child who went to school with my children insisted they were a boy, although they were outwardly female appearing and were treated as female by their family and school and everyone. As a child, I often said I wished I were a boy, but that wasn't really accurate: I wished to have the privileges I saw boys get that girls were denied. I did not actually wish to be a boy and did not want to have a penis, although I clearly saw the utility when one was playing outdoors and did not want to bother going into the house to urinate. This child was clearly different than I was--they really, truly saw themselves as male. Many of the things I enjoyed as a child were stereotypically assigned to boy children's interests, although there is and wasn't any particular reason that a girl couldn't like to climb trees, collect rocks and bugs, study math and science, play sports, prefer jeans to dresses, enjoyed fixing things and going fishing with my dad etc. I was what was known as a 'tomboy.' I also liked dolls, art, reading, languages, sewing, anything creative or beautiful.
This child was different than I was. They did not want to be a boy, they were not a girl who had preferences for some passtimes that were stereotypically regarded as male passtimes. In fact, they generally preferred anything that could be considered creative--art, music, theater, problem solving of many kinds, etc. They saw themselves as a boy. Period. It was not pretense, it was not wishful thinking. It was their reality.

After elementary school, they attended a different school than my children did but I know from someone who was in class with them that eventually, as a legal adult, they transitioned, I assume including surgery, etc. They began to use a masculine form of their name. They now live a few states away (last I heard) and I hope they are happy. For various reasons, they had a difficult childhood in ways that were completely unrelated to their gender identity, although clearly that did not help. I write this with confidence as I am aware of the issues within their household and some of the issues their siblings experienced. It was...rough. They were very bright and creative and they deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. They deserve happiness.

This person, as a child, spent many hours in my home. I knew them well. They were not faking anything, not trying to get anything special--they simply wanted to be treated and seen as they saw themselves. I was forced to re-evaluate my stance that transgender was probably not real but a form of mental illness. Knowing this child changed how I regarded the whole notion of trans sexuality. It wasn't fake, it wasn't a theory. It was the reality that some individuals face. Just because it makes you uncomfortable, they do not have to pretend to be something they are not.

 

[Metaphor]

Do you actually know any trans individuals?

What difference could that possibly make to the soundness of my arguments?

I was more on the side of 'trans identity is bogus/mental illness'

I did not say it was 'bogus', I said having a thought in your head cannot and does not change the reality of your biological sex.

or at best agnostic--until a child who went to school with my children insisted they were a boy, although they were outwardly female appearing and were treated as female by their family and school and everyone.

She was treated that way because she was female.

As a child,...
This child was different than I was. They did not want to be a boy, they were not a girl who had preferences for some passtimes that were stereotypically regarded as male passtimes. They saw themselves as a boy. Period. It was not pretense, it was not wishful thinking. It was their reality.

That they wanted to be a boy - a human male - does not mean they were a boy. They were a girl. "Seeing yourself as x" does not make you x.

After elementary school...

This person, as a child, spent many hours in my home. I knew them well. They were not faking anything, not trying to get anything special--they simply wanted to be treated and seen as they saw themselves. Knowing this child changed how I regarded the whole notion of trans sexuality. It wasn't fake, it wasn't a theory. It was the reality that some individuals face. Just because it makes you uncomfortable, they do not have to pretend to be something they are not.

Why are you asking me to pretend? I cannot believe that girls can become boys, because humans cannot change sex. Even if you think I am delusional in this belief (and I am not - ask a biologist if mammals can change sex), why should the State punish me for what you believe to be my delusion?

 

[laughing dog]

Why are you asking me to pretend? I cannot believe that girls can become boys, because humans cannot change sex. Even if you think I am delusional in this belief (and I am not - ask a biologist if mammals can change sex), why should the State punish me for what you believe to be my delusion?

No one is asking you to pretend. Some people are implicitly asking you to show some basic common courtesy and kindness (i.e. what used to be called manners).

 

[Metaphor]

Why are you asking me to pretend? I cannot believe that girls can become boys, because humans cannot change sex. Even if you think I am delusional in this belief (and I am not - ask a biologist if mammals can change sex), why should the State punish me for what you believe to be my delusion?

No one is asking you to pretend. Some people are implicitly asking you to show some basic common courtesy and kindness (i.e. what used to be called manners).

They are asking me to pretend, and they are threatening me with State punishment if I do not.

It is a reality, in Australia, that I can be fined thousands of dollars by the State for calling a biological male 'he' on social media (or indeed, in any media). It is a reality, in the UK, that a woman can be denied victim compensation if, after being assaulted by a biological male, she calls her assaulter 'he' in court proceedings.

I am willing to engage in polite fictions for the sake of civility. But when the State threatens me if I don't, it isn't a polite fiction. It is State-mandated religious observation.

 

[Toni]

Why are you asking me to pretend? I cannot believe that girls can become boys, because humans cannot change sex. Even if you think I am delusional in this belief (and I am not - ask a biologist if mammals can change sex), why should the State punish me for what you believe to be my delusion?

No one is asking you to pretend. Some people are implicitly asking you to show some basic common courtesy and kindness (i.e. what used to be called manners).

They are asking me to pretend, and they are threatening me with State punishment if I do not.

It is a reality, in Australia, that I can be fined thousands of dollars by the State for calling a biological male 'he' on social media (or indeed, in any media). It is a reality, in the UK, that a woman can be denied victim compensation if, after being assaulted by a biological male, she calls her assaulter 'he' in court proceedings.

I am willing to engage in polite fictions for the sake of civility. But when the State threatens me if I don't, it isn't a polite fiction. It is State-mandated religious observation.

Nobody is threatening you with anything. Perhaps you should talk to a professional about your fears which to the rest of us seem to be completely unfounded.

 

[Metaphor]

They are asking me to pretend, and they are threatening me with State punishment if I do not.

It is a reality, in Australia, that I can be fined thousands of dollars by the State for calling a biological male 'he' on social media (or indeed, in any media). It is a reality, in the UK, that a woman can be denied victim compensation if, after being assaulted by a biological male, she calls her assaulter 'he' in court proceedings.

I am willing to engage in polite fictions for the sake of civility. But when the State threatens me if I don't, it isn't a polite fiction. It is State-mandated religious observation.

Nobody is threatening you with anything. Perhaps you should talk to a professional about your fears which to the rest of us seem to be completely unfounded.

Of course the State is threatening me. Do X, or we will punish you. That's a threat.

I acknowledge your unsolicited advice about 'seeing a professional', but I shall not be following it.

 

[Toni]

What difference could that possibly make to the soundness of my arguments?



I did not say it was 'bogus', I said having a thought in your head cannot and does not change the reality of your biological sex.

or at best agnostic--until a child who went to school with my children insisted they were a boy, although they were outwardly female appearing and were treated as female by their family and school and everyone.

She was treated that way because she was female.

As a child,...
This child was different than I was. They did not want to be a boy, they were not a girl who had preferences for some passtimes that were stereotypically regarded as male passtimes. They saw themselves as a boy. Period. It was not pretense, it was not wishful thinking. It was their reality.

That they wanted to be a boy - a human male - does not mean they were a boy. They were a girl. "Seeing yourself as x" does not make you x.

After elementary school...

This person, as a child, spent many hours in my home. I knew them well. They were not faking anything, not trying to get anything special--they simply wanted to be treated and seen as they saw themselves. Knowing this child changed how I regarded the whole notion of trans sexuality. It wasn't fake, it wasn't a theory. It was the reality that some individuals face. Just because it makes you uncomfortable, they do not have to pretend to be something they are not.

Why are you asking me to pretend? I cannot believe that girls can become boys, because humans cannot change sex. Even if you think I am delusional in this belief (and I am not - ask a biologist if mammals can change sex), why should the State punish me for what you believe to be my delusion?

Cannot is not the same as will not or do not or refuse to.

I have not asked you to pretend anything. I asked you a question which you refused to answer. Instead, you keep offering your opinion about an individual you have never met, and advancing your own bigotry.

As far as I can tell, you refuse to acknowledge that individuals might have a better understanding of their gender identity than you do. For someone who keeps calling me out if I write casually using the word gender for the word sex, you certainly seem to believe they are the same thing--unless you see me being inconsistent (which I admit to doing), Kind of like not reading carefully enough to see that I actually answered your question--and then refusing to answer mine. I think there's a word for that....

In any case, I did not ask you anything except whether or not you know any transgender individuals. I then related how I came to change how I understood the issue. It didn't involve you or ask anything of you at all. Honestly, the world does not revolve around you! Although reading your responses to some posts, it seems you believe that it does.

 

[laughing dog]

Why are you asking me to pretend? I cannot believe that girls can become boys, because humans cannot change sex. Even if you think I am delusional in this belief (and I am not - ask a biologist if mammals can change sex), why should the State punish me for what you believe to be my delusion?

No one is asking you to pretend. Some people are implicitly asking you to show some basic common courtesy and kindness (i.e. what used to be called manners).

They are asking me to pretend, and they are threatening me with State punishment if I do not.

It is a reality, in Australia, that I can be fined thousands of dollars by the State for calling a biological male 'he' on social media (or indeed, in any media). It is a reality, in the UK, that a woman can be denied victim compensation if, after being assaulted by a biological male, she calls her assaulter 'he' in court proceedings.

Are you referring to actions based on intentional misuse?

I am willing to engage in polite fictions for the sake of civility. But when the State threatens me if I don't, it isn't a polite fiction. It is State-mandated religious observation.

I am under the impression that if you engage in polite fictions for the sake of civility, you will have no problem.

 

[Metaphor]

As far as I can tell, you refuse to acknowledge that individuals might have a better understanding of their gender identity than you do.

In what universe is this true? I have acknowledged time and again that gender identity can be anything, because it is a thought in a person's head.

For someone who keeps calling me out if I write casually using the word gender for the word sex, you certainly seem to believe they are the same thing--unless you see me being inconsistent (which I admit to doing), Kind of like not reading carefully enough to see that I actually answered your question--and then refusing to answer mine. I think there's a word for that....

I do not believe they are the same thing. I believe sex is a biological reality and cannot be changed. Gender identity is a thought in a person's head and there is no reason we should treat somebody's gender identity as if it were their sex.

In any case, I did not ask you anything except whether or not you know any transgender individuals. I then related how I came to change how I understood the issue. It didn't involve you or ask anything of you at all. Honestly, the world does not revolve around you! Although reading your responses to some posts, it seems you believe that it does.

I would have to be some kind of ultra selfhating solipsist to believe the world revolves around me whilst simultaneously holding a number of minority opinions.

 

[Metaphor]

Are you referring to actions based on intentional misuse?

Calling a biological male 'he' cannot be abuse, unless uttering the truth is abusive. But even if it were abuse, the State has no business punishing her citizens for uttering the truth.

I am under the impression that if you engage in polite fictions for the sake of civility, you will have no problem.

I engage in polite fictions all the time. But sometimes I do not. Sometimes I refuse. Sometimes, enough is enough.

 

[laughing dog]

Are you referring to actions based on intentional misuse?

Calling a biological male 'he' cannot be abuse, unless uttering the truth is abusive.

Of course it cn be abuse. Calling an overweight person a "fatty" can be abuse.

But even if it were abuse, the State has no business punishing her citizens for uttering the truth.

If by "no business", you mean "they should not", I tend to agree.

I engage in polite fictions all the time. But sometimes I do not. Sometimes I refuse. Sometimes, enough is enough.

I urge you to start an active campaign of civil disobedience, and keep us informed.

 

[Toni]

In what universe is this true? I have acknowledged time and again that gender identity can be anything, because it is a thought in a person's head.



I do not believe they are the same thing. I believe sex is a biological reality and cannot be changed. Gender identity is a thought in a person's head and there is no reason we should treat somebody's gender identity as if it were their sex.

In any case, I did not ask you anything except whether or not you know any transgender individuals. I then related how I came to change how I understood the issue. It didn't involve you or ask anything of you at all. Honestly, the world does not revolve around you! Although reading your responses to some posts, it seems you believe that it does.

I would have to be some kind of ultra selfhating solipsist to believe the world revolves around me whilst simultaneously holding a number of minority opinions.

You know yourself better than I do but I think you're kind of hard on yourself.

 

[Metaphor]

Of course it cn be abuse. Calling an overweight person a "fatty" can be abuse.

But even if it were abuse, the State has no business punishing her citizens for uttering the truth.

If by "no business", you mean "they should not", I tend to agree.

I engage in polite fictions all the time. But sometimes I do not. Sometimes I refuse. Sometimes, enough is enough.

I urge you to start an active campaign of civil disobedience, and keep us informed.

My mettle may soon be tested at work. I'll keep you up to date.

 

[Bomb#20]

It is a reality, in Australia, that I can be fined thousands of dollars by the State for calling a biological male 'he' on social media (or indeed, in any media). ... But when the State threatens me if I don't, it isn't a polite fiction. It is State-mandated religious observation.

Nobody is threatening you with anything.
(Disclaimer: This post is not legal advice. I am not licensed to practice law in Australia. My opinion about whether the State is threatening you is derived from pure intuition and is unsupported by observational evidence or logic.)

Fixed it for you.

Perhaps you should talk to a professional about your fears which to the rest of us seem to be completely unfounded.

Perhaps you should speak to a professional about your feeling that you speak for the rest of us.

 

[Bomb#20]

I urge you to start an active campaign of civil disobedience, and keep us informed.

My mettle may soon be tested at work. I'll keep you up to date.

"A dictatorship is like a snake. If you put your foot on its tail as you do it, it will just bite you and nobody will be helped. You have to strike the head."

- Emmi Bonhoeffer​

 

[Metaphor]

I urge you to start an active campaign of civil disobedience, and keep us informed.

My mettle may soon be tested at work. I'll keep you up to date.

"A dictatorship is like a snake. If you put your foot on its tail as you do it, it will just bite you and nobody will be helped. You have to strike the head."

- Emmi Bonhoeffer​

I think what will happen at work is official encouragement (and official and unofficial pressure) to add pronouns to my email signature. I will not do that. If the order is made compulsory, I do not know what I will do. I have my convictions, but I also have a mortgage.

 

[Bomb#20]

"A dictatorship is like a snake. If you put your foot on its tail as you do it, it will just bite you and nobody will be helped. You have to strike the head."

- Emmi Bonhoeffer​

I think what will happen at work is official encouragement (and official and unofficial pressure) to add pronouns to my email signature. I will not do that. If the order is made compulsory, I do not know what I will do. I have my convictions, but I also have a mortgage.

If it's made compulsory, it presumably won't be because the owners are PC, but because they too are being pressured; refusing will amount to stepping on the snake's tail.

Maybe you could make the null-string your pronoun? Or perhaps you could say your pronouns are on, njega and njemu, claim anyone who won't put in the effort of telling accusative from dative is misgendering you, and claim anyone who makes an issue of your choice is erasing your identity as a Croatian-Australian.

I'm not very good at pep talks, am I?

 

[ZiprHead]

They are asking me to pretend, and they are threatening me with State punishment if I do not.

It is a reality, in Australia, that I can be fined thousands of dollars by the State for calling a biological male 'he' on social media (or indeed, in any media). It is a reality, in the UK, that a woman can be denied victim compensation if, after being assaulted by a biological male, she calls her assaulter 'he' in court proceedings.

I am willing to engage in polite fictions for the sake of civility. But when the State threatens me if I don't, it isn't a polite fiction. It is State-mandated religious observation.

Nobody is threatening you with anything. Perhaps you should talk to a professional about your fears which to the rest of us seem to be completely unfounded.

Of course the State is threatening me. Do X, or we will punish you. That's a threat.

Maybe your time would be better spent lobbying your government to change the laws than wasting it arguing on a little backwater message board.

 

[Metaphor]

Of course the State is threatening me. Do X, or we will punish you. That's a threat.

Maybe your time would be better spent lobbying your government to change the laws than wasting it arguing on a little backwater message board.

If I am "wasting" my time arguing about issues on this board, isn't everybody on this board doing the same thing?

If you mean to say "I don't like hearing what you have to say and I want you to stop talking", I think you should simply ban me. Policies are what they are because culture is what it is.