Danica Roem

[Trausti]

I'd be interest on what these "medical" facts are. "Legal" facts are irrelevant here. The law cannot change biology. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. How someone feels inside doesn't matter.

Not just about sex: throughout our bodies, thousands of genes act differently in men and women

Source study: here

The Clown fish is also transgender achieving this without surgery. The change is from male to female as a standard biological process.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_change

That Wiki acknowledges that a surgery does not change a human's gender. If future people dig up the bones of Danica or Caitlyn, they'll find male bones. Calling a banana an apple doesn't make it so no matter how it makes you feel to believe it.

Identifying and explaining apparent universal sex differences in cognition and behavior

 

[Angra Mainyu]

It is relevant because you claimed he had not undergone surgery. In other words, it is more evidence that you literally do not know what you are talking about.

No, I did not claim that. You keep making false statements about me. I claimed that when Jenner claimed to be a woman (i.e., publicly, and for the first time), he had not undergone surgery, which is true.

Second, had I made that clam, it would still be irrelevant to any of the central points, because I would have been mistaken about that particular example (i.e., about Jenner in particular), while still correct about the points I was using to support it.

No, it is irrelevant to the issue that you deny medical reality.

No, you are the one falsely and unjustly accusing me. I do not deny medical reality. I challenge you to quote any statement of mine that is in conflict with medical reality.
I deny that a woman can choose to become a man and succeed given present-day tech, and in the usual sense of the words "man" and "woman". I also deny that a woman can make that choice and succeed. If that's what you call "choose their gender", whatever. But I still do not deny any medical reality.

While that is conceptually possible, it is not operationally true in this case. Your narrow and religious views make rational discussion impossible.

No, you are mistaken. You are the one spousing religious views, and are decisively committed to them. You will never realize that, but that remains the case.
Ironically, your religious beliefs seem to be in conflict with usual beliefs held by transgender activists and their supporters, which includes beliefs that gender does not change, and that people discover what their gender is.

Again, Jenner claimed that Jenner was a woman all along, not that he was a man and became a woman. Granted, Jenner also claimed otherwise, so he incurred contradiction. But in general, it's common for transgender advocates to say gender does not change.

Given that you have chosen to continue making false, unwarranted and disparaging accusations against me, I will continue to debunk your claims, and show that they remain in conflict even with the regular claims of your own side.

Purely for example:

Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/loren-s-schechter-md-facs/gender-confirmation-surgery_b_1442262.html

For me, most if not all the other names used for the procedure — or, more accurately, the family of procedures — suggest that a person is making a choice to switch genders. From the hundreds of discussions I’ve had with individuals over the years, nothing could be further from the truth. This is not about choice; it’s about using surgery as one of the therapeutic tools to enable people to be comfortable with their gendered self.

Even a doctor who performs the surgery, chooses to call it "gender confirmation surgery", in order to stress that there is no choice of genders.
Now, I do not have any good reasons to believe he is correct in thinking his patients are the gender they claim to have. But that's not a matter of medicine. But given that you're the one making the false, unwarranted, and disparaging claims, it's up to you to deal with this.
And yes, some other doctors call it otherwise. But that's because those are the traditional names. It's not what transgender advocates regularly claim.

And also, for instance:
Source: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/reconstructive-procedures/gender-confirmation-surgeries

The goal is to give transgender individuals the physical appearance and functional abilities of the gender they know themselves to be.

Do you get it?
Their claim is that there is no change of gender.

More evidence:


Source: https://everydayfeminism.com/2014/10/gender-confirmation-surgery/

It’s important to recognize that regardless if someone gets surgery, their gender is still whatever they self-identify as.

 

[RavenSky]

Before the next round begins, I would like to stress a point:

When I first posted in this thread, I was not fighting. I was asking for evidence supporting the claim that Danica Roem is a woman. I got plenty of accusations coming my way, but not a single reasonable argument in support of the claim. It would still be epistemically irrational on my part to believe that Danica Roem is a woman.

I'd like to stress that you have received a mountain of reasonable arguments in support of the fact that Danica Roem is a transgender woman, but you prefer this approach to honestly considering that you may be not only wrong, but rude as fuck. What is irrational is your refusal to address another human being as they wish to be addressed... even IF you think they are wrong.

As for "the next round"... fuck that. You've made it crystal clear that you are going to be intellectually dishonest and your will claim to be the victim.

 

[RavenSky]

No, I did not claim that. You keep making false statements about me. I claimed that when Jenner claimed to be a woman (i.e., publicly, and for the first time), he had not undergone surgery, which is true.

Second, had I made that clam, it would still be irrelevant to any of the central points, because I would have been mistaken about that particular example (i.e., about Jenner in particular), while still correct about the points I was using to support it.

No, it is irrelevant to the issue that you deny medical reality.

No, you are the one falsely and unjustly accusing me. I do not deny medical reality. I challenge you to quote any statement of mine that is in conflict with medical reality.
I deny that a woman can choose to become a man and succeed given present-day tech, and in the usual sense of the words "man" and "woman". I also deny that a woman can make that choice and succeed. If that's what you call "choose their gender", whatever. But I still do not deny any medical reality.

While that is conceptually possible, it is not operationally true in this case. Your narrow and religious views make rational discussion impossible.

No, you are mistaken. You are the one spousing religious views, and are decisively committed to them. You will never realize that, but that remains the case.
Ironically, your religious beliefs seem to be in conflict with usual beliefs held by transgender activists and their supporters, which includes beliefs that gender does not change, and that people discover what their gender is.

Again, Jenner claimed that Jenner was a woman all along, not that he was a man and became a woman. Granted, Jenner also claimed otherwise, so he incurred contradiction. But in general, it's common for transgender advocates to say gender does not change.

Given that you have chosen to continue making false, unwarranted and disparaging accusations against me, I will continue to debunk your claims, and show that they remain in conflict even with the regular claims of your own side.

Purely for example:

Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/loren-s-schechter-md-facs/gender-confirmation-surgery_b_1442262.html

For me, most if not all the other names used for the procedure — or, more accurately, the family of procedures — suggest that a person is making a choice to switch genders. From the hundreds of discussions I’ve had with individuals over the years, nothing could be further from the truth. This is not about choice; it’s about using surgery as one of the therapeutic tools to enable people to be comfortable with their gendered self.

Even a doctor who performs the surgery, chooses to call it "gender confirmation surgery", in order to stress that there is no choice of genders.
Now, I do not have any good reasons to believe he is correct in thinking his patients are the gender they claim to have. But that's not a matter of medicine. But given that you're the one making the false, unwarranted, and disparaging claims, it's up to you to deal with this.
And yes, some other doctors call it otherwise. But that's because those are the traditional names. It's not what transgender advocates regularly claim.

And also, for instance:
Source: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/reconstructive-procedures/gender-confirmation-surgeries

The goal is to give transgender individuals the physical appearance and functional abilities of the gender they know themselves to be.

Do you get it?
Their claim is that there is no change of gender.

More evidence:


Source: https://everydayfeminism.com/2014/10/gender-confirmation-surgery/

It’s important to recognize that regardless if someone gets surgery, their gender is still whatever they self-identify as.

You truly don't even know what the fuck you are arguing about.

YOU are the one insisting that Danica Roem is a man - even to the point of belligerently insisting on using "he" instead of "she" despite the fact that "woman" is the gender she knows herself to be... the gender she self-identifies as.

Everything you just quoted actually rebuts everything YOU have been saying and supports everything Laughing Dog and I and others have been saying.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Before the next round begins, I would like to stress a point:

When I first posted in this thread, I was not fighting. I was asking for evidence supporting the claim that Danica Roem is a woman. I got plenty of accusations coming my way, but not a single reasonable argument in support of the claim. It would still be epistemically irrational on my part to believe that Danica Roem is a woman.

I'd like to stress that you have received a mountain of reasonable arguments in support of the fact that Danica Roem is a transgender woman, but you prefer this approach to honestly considering that you may be not only wrong, but rude as fuck. What is irrational is your refusal to address another human being as they wish to be addressed... even IF you think they are wrong.

As for "the next round"... fuck that. You've made it crystal clear that you are going to be intellectually dishonest and your will claim to be the victim.

While I get that you and others consider my behavior rude, you're mistaken about that too. It's the other way around: you keep making false, unwarranted accusations against me, and my replies are pretty mild in the context of such behavior. They are also fact-based.

 

[laughing dog]

No, you are the one falsely and unjustly accusing me. I do not deny medical reality. I challenge you to quote any statement of mine that is in conflict with medical reality.
I deny that a woman can choose to become a man and succeed given present-day tech, and in the usual sense of the words "man" and "woman". I also deny that a woman can make that choice and succeed. If that's what you call "choose their gender", whatever. But I still do not deny any medical reality.

The medical reality is that there is gender reassignment surgery - that is a medical reality. You deny that it is successful (because success means the gender is reassigned).

Again, .......

For the sake of brevity, I will refrain from addressing the boring derail and your false and disparaging claims.

Their claim is that there is no change of gender.

And if they thought and acted as if they were male and then realize they are female, there is no change of gender?

It’s important to recognize that regardless if someone gets surgery, their gender is still whatever they self-identify as.

If you actually believed that quote, you would not ask for evidence that Danica Roem is a woman.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

No, I did not claim that. You keep making false statements about me. I claimed that when Jenner claimed to be a woman (i.e., publicly, and for the first time), he had not undergone surgery, which is true.

Second, had I made that clam, it would still be irrelevant to any of the central points, because I would have been mistaken about that particular example (i.e., about Jenner in particular), while still correct about the points I was using to support it.



No, you are the one falsely and unjustly accusing me. I do not deny medical reality. I challenge you to quote any statement of mine that is in conflict with medical reality.
I deny that a woman can choose to become a man and succeed given present-day tech, and in the usual sense of the words "man" and "woman". I also deny that a woman can make that choice and succeed. If that's what you call "choose their gender", whatever. But I still do not deny any medical reality.

While that is conceptually possible, it is not operationally true in this case. Your narrow and religious views make rational discussion impossible.

No, you are mistaken. You are the one spousing religious views, and are decisively committed to them. You will never realize that, but that remains the case.
Ironically, your religious beliefs seem to be in conflict with usual beliefs held by transgender activists and their supporters, which includes beliefs that gender does not change, and that people discover what their gender is.

Again, Jenner claimed that Jenner was a woman all along, not that he was a man and became a woman. Granted, Jenner also claimed otherwise, so he incurred contradiction. But in general, it's common for transgender advocates to say gender does not change.

Given that you have chosen to continue making false, unwarranted and disparaging accusations against me, I will continue to debunk your claims, and show that they remain in conflict even with the regular claims of your own side.

Purely for example:

Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/loren-s-schechter-md-facs/gender-confirmation-surgery_b_1442262.html

For me, most if not all the other names used for the procedure — or, more accurately, the family of procedures — suggest that a person is making a choice to switch genders. From the hundreds of discussions I’ve had with individuals over the years, nothing could be further from the truth. This is not about choice; it’s about using surgery as one of the therapeutic tools to enable people to be comfortable with their gendered self.

Even a doctor who performs the surgery, chooses to call it "gender confirmation surgery", in order to stress that there is no choice of genders.
Now, I do not have any good reasons to believe he is correct in thinking his patients are the gender they claim to have. But that's not a matter of medicine. But given that you're the one making the false, unwarranted, and disparaging claims, it's up to you to deal with this.
And yes, some other doctors call it otherwise. But that's because those are the traditional names. It's not what transgender advocates regularly claim.

And also, for instance:
Source: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/reconstructive-procedures/gender-confirmation-surgeries

The goal is to give transgender individuals the physical appearance and functional abilities of the gender they know themselves to be.

Do you get it?
Their claim is that there is no change of gender.

More evidence:


Source: https://everydayfeminism.com/2014/10/gender-confirmation-surgery/

It’s important to recognize that regardless if someone gets surgery, their gender is still whatever they self-identify as.

You truly don't even know what the fuck you are arguing about.

YOU are the one insisting that Danica Roem is a man - even to the point of belligerently insisting on using "he" instead of "she" despite the fact that "woman" is the gender she knows herself to be... the gender she self-identifies as.

Everything you just quoted actually rebuts everything YOU have been saying and supports everything Laughing Dog and I and others have been saying.

Actually, I said Danica Roem is probably a man. I did not say it was beyond a reasonable doubt. And I gave arguments for it, which no one seems to have even understood, because all I get in return is:

a. Unjust, false accusations, misrepresentations of my views and arguments, etc.
b. Arguments or claims that miss the point.

Your reply above that "Everything you just quoted actually rebuts everything YOU have been saying and supports everything Laughing Dog and I and others have been saying" also misses the point entirely. Of course, as I pointed out in the very post (in my reply to laughing dog) that you just quoted,

I do not have any good reasons to believe he is correct in thinking his patients are the gender they claim to have.

The reason I quoted that and other statements is to show that laughing dog's position is in conflict with the usual claims of transgender activists; laughing dog keeps talking about a change in gender, men becoming women, etc., and that is not at all what activists usually claim. Rather, they claim that some people realize they're women, etc. It's very, very different.

As for my use of "he", as I said, I'm going with the more probable assessment. If you or anyone else who claims that Roem is a woman had provided good reasons to believe so, I would believe so. But no good reasons had been given.

 

[LordKiran]

This video seems oddly appropriate.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He7TnoCM7fo[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Angra Mainyu]

The medical reality is that there is gender reassignment surgery - that is a medical reality. You deny that it is successful (because success means the gender is reassigned).

First, I of course do not deny that sexual organs can be surgically altered, and that the altered organs look usually as the doctors who perform the surgeries intend them to have.
Second, I do deny that gender confirmation surgery or any other turns a man into a woman, or a woman into a man. You affirm that, and in doing so, deny the claims of transgender activists and quite a few doctors who say that they're only adjusting the sexual organs to the gender their patients already have, not changing the gender. You are going up against your own side.
Third, while I don't say it's certain that people with female/male sexual organs who claim to be men/women are mistaken, I reckon that (at least in any individual case), it's more probable that they are mistaken. That is not a denial of a "medical reality".

Untrue. He says he had issues. And, he clearly acted and behaved and passed as a man, since he was on the MEN'S olympic team.

Actually, I already quoted him. But moreover, those are standard transgender claims. It's not just Jenner. You're going up against your own in-group, even if you don't realize that.

You are the one denying medical reality. And you are one making false, unwarranted and disparaging claims.

No, I'm showing that those doctors who perform the surgery make claims that contradict yours, as it should be apparent.

So, one doctor is right and the other ones are not. WOW.

Well, given that their claims sometimes are in conflict, it's apparent that they can't both be correct. But regardless, my point is that the claims that are in line with those made by transgender activists and generally (at least in recent times) transgender claims, are in conflict with your position.

And if they thought they were male and then realize they were female, there is no change of gender?

Of course not. Please do not massively change your position without realizing that you're massively changing your position. You kept claiming that people changed their gender through surgery. You kept talking about that, insisted that Jenner was a man and became a woman, etc.
No, again, of course not. If someone thought he was a man and realized she was a woman, it follows that the gender did not change: she was a woman all along, just mistaken about her gender.
In fact, others claim they never thought they were men (or women, depending on the case).

Now, I do not have the belief that those claims are true. But I realize what the claims are.

It’s important to recognize that regardless if someone gets surgery, their gender is still whatever they self-identify as.

If you actually believed that quote, you would not ask for evidence that Danica Roem is a woman.

That's actually not what I said. It gives the impression I agree with that, while I obviously do not. I was quoting a source, and provided the link.

The reason I provided that link and quoted that - which, of course, should be obvious to you - was that it shows the conflict between the claims you've been making and standard transgender claims. You're in conflict with your own in--group, which is a problem for you. It's not a problem for me.

 

[Juma]

The Clown fish is also transgender achieving this without surgery. The change is from male to female as a standard biological process.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_change

That Wiki acknowledges that a surgery does not change a human's gender. If future people dig up the bones of Danica or Caitlyn, they'll find male bones. Calling a banana an apple doesn't make it so no matter how it makes you feel to believe it.

Identifying and explaining apparent universal sex differences in cognition and behavior

That list is worth nothing.
number of studies is no valueif not the real difference/size of difference and the confidence of that measurement Is specified.
Cultural aspects is a big point here. These studies fails to take learnt behavior into account.

 

[Juma]

First, I of course do not deny that sexual organs can be surgically altered, and that the altered organs look usually as the doctors who perform the surgeries intend them to have.
Second, I do deny that gender confirmation surgery or any other turns a man into a woman, or a woman into a man. You affirm that, and in doing so, deny the claims of transgender activists and quite a few doctors who say that they're only adjusting the sexual organs to the gender their patients already have, not changing the gender. You are going up against your own side.
Third, while I don't say it's certain that people with female/male sexual organs who claim to be men/women are mistaken, I reckon that (at least in any individual case), it's more probable that they are mistaken. That is not a denial of a "medical reality".

Untrue. He says he had issues. And, he clearly acted and behaved and passed as a man, since he was on the MEN'S olympic team.

Actually, I already quoted him. But moreover, those are standard transgender claims. It's not just Jenner. You're going up against your own in-group, even if you don't realize that.

You are the one denying medical reality. And you are one making false, unwarranted and disparaging claims.

No, I'm showing that those doctors who perform the surgery make claims that contradict yours, as it should be apparent.

So, one doctor is right and the other ones are not. WOW.

Well, given that their claims sometimes are in conflict, it's apparent that they can't both be correct. But regardless, my point is that the claims that are in line with those made by transgender activists and generally (at least in recent times) transgender claims, are in conflict with your position.

And if they thought they were male and then realize they were female, there is no change of gender?

Of course not. Please do not massively change your position without realizing that you're massively changing your position. You kept claiming that people changed their gender through surgery. You kept talking about that, insisted that Jenner was a man and became a woman, etc.
No, again, of course not. If someone thought he was a man and realized she was a woman, it follows that the gender did not change: she was a woman all along, just mistaken about her gender.
In fact, others claim they never thought they were men (or women, depending on the case).

Now, I do not have the belief that those claims are true. But I realize what the claims are.

It’s important to recognize that regardless if someone gets surgery, their gender is still whatever they self-identify as.

If you actually believed that quote, you would not ask for evidence that Danica Roem is a woman.

That's actually not what I said. It gives the impression I agree with that, while I obviously do not. I was quoting a source, and provided the link.

The reason I provided that link and quoted that - which, of course, should be obvious to you - was that it shows the conflict between the claims you've been making and standard transgender claims. You're in conflict with your own in--group, which is a problem for you. It's not a problem for me.

The cells can be male or female (according X/Y chromosomes)
The body can be male, female or others (according genital organs)
The person can be male, female or others. (According to the persons self image)

Do you acknowledge that these 3 categorizations are separate?

 

[LordKiran]

First, I of course do not deny that sexual organs can be surgically altered, and that the altered organs look usually as the doctors who perform the surgeries intend them to have.
Second, I do deny that gender confirmation surgery or any other turns a man into a woman, or a woman into a man. You affirm that, and in doing so, deny the claims of transgender activists and quite a few doctors who say that they're only adjusting the sexual organs to the gender their patients already have, not changing the gender. You are going up against your own side.
Third, while I don't say it's certain that people with female/male sexual organs who claim to be men/women are mistaken, I reckon that (at least in any individual case), it's more probable that they are mistaken. That is not a denial of a "medical reality".

Untrue. He says he had issues. And, he clearly acted and behaved and passed as a man, since he was on the MEN'S olympic team.

Actually, I already quoted him. But moreover, those are standard transgender claims. It's not just Jenner. You're going up against your own in-group, even if you don't realize that.

You are the one denying medical reality. And you are one making false, unwarranted and disparaging claims.

No, I'm showing that those doctors who perform the surgery make claims that contradict yours, as it should be apparent.

So, one doctor is right and the other ones are not. WOW.

Well, given that their claims sometimes are in conflict, it's apparent that they can't both be correct. But regardless, my point is that the claims that are in line with those made by transgender activists and generally (at least in recent times) transgender claims, are in conflict with your position.

And if they thought they were male and then realize they were female, there is no change of gender?

Of course not. Please do not massively change your position without realizing that you're massively changing your position. You kept claiming that people changed their gender through surgery. You kept talking about that, insisted that Jenner was a man and became a woman, etc.
No, again, of course not. If someone thought he was a man and realized she was a woman, it follows that the gender did not change: she was a woman all along, just mistaken about her gender.
In fact, others claim they never thought they were men (or women, depending on the case).

Now, I do not have the belief that those claims are true. But I realize what the claims are.

It’s important to recognize that regardless if someone gets surgery, their gender is still whatever they self-identify as.

If you actually believed that quote, you would not ask for evidence that Danica Roem is a woman.

That's actually not what I said. It gives the impression I agree with that, while I obviously do not. I was quoting a source, and provided the link.

The reason I provided that link and quoted that - which, of course, should be obvious to you - was that it shows the conflict between the claims you've been making and standard transgender claims. You're in conflict with your own in--group, which is a problem for you. It's not a problem for me.

So what is a woman? Is a woman defined solely by their sexual characteristics? If so then its a moot point anyway since we're pretty close to making viable pregnancies for trans women a reality. So you might as well just humor them because it wont make a difference in ten to twenty years anyway.

Consider more broadly, are you ever going to call a mannish looking woman a man in public? No? Why not? Because its rude as fuck? So then why bother protesting in the first place?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

The cells can be male or female (according X/Y chromosomes)
The body can be male, female or others (according genital organs)
The person can be male, female or others. (According to the persons self image)

Do you acknowledge that these 3 categorizations are separate?

1. There is no such thing as "the body" as opposed to the individual (not necessarily a person). The individual can be male or female (or neither; e.g., intersex individuals in humans, hermaphrodites in other species, etc.).
2. A person can believe that he or she is male or female, but that person may or may not be correct. It's not that the person is male or female depending on their beliefs.
3. As for the chromosome classification, that is indeed a classification separate from the usual classification of individuals as females or males, applicable to most animals species (and beyond). In humans and many other species, chromosomes normally determine sex, in the sense that they normally cause the development of a female or a male individual. But there are species in which there are other causes (and abnormally, perhaps in humans as well).

Now, I wasn't talking about "female" and "male" but about "woman" and "man". There are different theories about the relation between those two classifications. One is that a woman is a female human being, and a man is a male human being (either necessarily but not analytically - as in "water is composed of H2O", or analytically); others might held otherwise.

 

[LordKiran]

The cells can be male or female (according X/Y chromosomes)
The body can be male, female or others (according genital organs)
The person can be male, female or others. (According to the persons self image)

Do you acknowledge that these 3 categorizations are separate?

1. There is no such thing as "the body" as opposed to the individual (not necessarily a person). The individual can be male or female (or neither; e.g., intersex individuals in humans, hermaphrodites in other species, etc.).
2. A person can believe that he or she is male or female, but that person may or may not be correct. It's not that the person is male or female depending on their beliefs.
3. As for the chromosome classification, that is indeed a classification separate from the usual classification of individuals as females or males, applicable to most animals species (and beyond). In humans and many other species, chromosomes normally determine sex, in the sense that they normally cause the development of a female or a male individual. But there are species in which there are other causes (and abnormally, perhaps in humans as well).

Now, I wasn't talking about "female" and "male" but about "woman" and "man". There are different theories about the relation between those two classifications. One is that a woman is a female human being, and a man is a male human being (either necessarily but not analytically - as in "water is composed of H2O", or analytically); others might held otherwise.

You are not necessarily your body.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

So what is a woman? Is a woman defined solely by their sexual characteristics?

The word "woman" is not defined in terms of other words, but - as usual -, the meaning results from usage.
Now, there are different theories about its meaning, and about its referent.
One theory is that a woman is a female human being (there are variants including analytical identification or a weaker for of necessity). It does not seem to account for non-human women, which we see in fiction and are in some cases metaphysically possible, but it could be modified to consider similar cases.
Another theory one would be that a woman is a person with (roughly) a female human mind.
I don't know which theory is correct. I'm inclined to think there is more than one common usage.

But usually, we do not need to know which theory is correct in order to assess whether a person is a woman or a man. Donald Trump is a man. Hillary Clinton is a woman. That's pretty obvious to a competent speaker. By the usual way in which I make assessments of whether a person is a man or a woman, it seems to me Roem is more likely a man. If I consider different theories (as I have done in this thread, going into considerable detail), the assessment remains. Moreover, most of the people who claim Roem is a woman would probably have classified Roem as a man with no difficulty 30 years ago (if they were alive then), as would pretty much everyone else. In my assessment, the reasons they provide for changing their mind and coming to believe that Roem is a woman are not sufficient to warrant their beliefs, at best (often, they end up contradicting themselves).

If so then its a moot point anyway since we're pretty close to making viable pregnancies for trans women a reality. So you might as well just humor them because it wont make a difference in ten to twenty years anyway.

I doubt it's so close (barring a massive breakthrough in AI, but I doubt that's so close too), but that alone would not make them women, in my assessment. If what matters the most is minds, that would not do it (though it would change to some extent their brains, so it would be a partial change). If it's gamete size, it will have no impact. Having a transplanted uterus (which needs medicines to prevent rejection) or an artificial one would not seem to do it, either. But it might make them not men, and even - if it becomes common - make the usual classification less useful.
Regardless, the crucial point is this: this is not about whether to humor anyone. It's about whether the claim that Danica Roem (and others, etc.) is a woman is warranted.

Consider more broadly, are you ever going to call a mannish looking woman a man in public? No? Why not? Because its rude as fuck? So then why bother protesting in the first place?

Not a chance, because:
1. It's false. If she's a mannish woman, she's still a woman.
2. Actually, 1. is enough.

But for that matter, there are plenty of things I would not say in public, in some cases because it would be rude, and in some other cases, just because I'm no hero and I'm not going to put myself on the line, to be attacked (perhaps even physically assaulted) by people committed to their religion/ideology, whether it's one of the versions of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, magic-based religions (common among the masses), Marxism, Fascism, or any of the versions of leftism or rightism people are committed to. It's too risky and again, I'm no hero.

 

[Bomb#20]

Before the next round begins, I would like to stress a point:

When I first posted in this thread, I was not fighting. I was asking for evidence supporting the claim that Danica Roem is a woman. I got plenty of accusations coming my way, but not a single reasonable argument in support of the claim. It would still be epistemically irrational on my part to believe that Danica Roem is a woman.

I'd like to stress that you have received a mountain of reasonable arguments in support of the fact that Danica Roem is a transgender woman,

You are entitled to your opinion on that point.

but you prefer this approach

That's libelous. You should be ashamed of yourself.

What is irrational is your refusal to address another human being as they wish to be addressed... even IF you think they are wrong.

You have the non-moderators here at a disadvantage. In case one of the posters in this thread is Danica Roem, feel free to let us know which poster is really Danica Roem. Then AM will know what he needs to know in order to address her as she wishes. If, on the other hand, Danica is not participating in this thread, then you are not entitled to tell AM that he's refusing to address her as she wishes. It's a fabrication. You just made it up, and you had no basis for thinking it's true. Telling a third party such as yourself that Danica Roem is a man is not a refusal to address her as she wishes, and you know it.

You've made it crystal clear that you are going to be intellectually dishonest

That's libelous. You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[RavenSky]

While I get that you and others consider my behavior rude, you're mistaken about that too. It's the other way around: you keep making false, unwarranted accusations against me, and my replies are pretty mild in the context of such behavior. They are also fact-based.

YOU are not the topic, no matter how much YOU want it to be so, but the above is so full of false it is downright laughable.

- - - Updated - - -

It’s important to recognize that regardless if someone gets surgery, their gender is still whatever they self-identify as.

If you actually believed that quote, you would not ask for evidence that Danica Roem is a woman.

exactly

 

[RavenSky]

As for my use of "he", as I said, I'm going with the more probable assessment. If you or anyone else who claims that Roem is a woman had provided good reasons to believe so, I would believe so. But no good reasons had been given.

And yet YOU posted:

Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/loren...b_1442262.html

For me, most if not all the other names used for the procedure — or, more accurately, the family of procedures — suggest that a person is making a choice to switch genders. From the hundreds of discussions I’ve had with individuals over the years, nothing could be further from the truth. This is not about choice; it’s about using surgery as one of the therapeutic tools to enable people to be comfortable with their gendered self.

Source: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/recon...tion-surgeries

The goal is to give transgender individuals the physical appearance and functional abilities of the gender they know themselves to be.

Source: https://everydayfeminism.com/2014/10...ation-surgery/

It’s important to recognize that regardless if someone gets surgery, their gender is still whatever they self-identify as.

YOU are contradicting yourself at every turn, and don't even have the intellectual honesty or understanding of the topic to acknowledge it, and I do not believe you have any intention of discussing this topic with a goal of honest understanding, so the rest of this post is not for you.

=======================================

Angra Mainyu is attempting to make a big fat hairy deal over the supposed contradiction between some people/sources saying that genders do not change vs other people/sources talking about "transgender" and "gender reassignment surgery" and changing genders...

There is no contradiction. As has been described by every "out" or public transgender person I've ever heard from, they have known what their gender is from a very early age regardless whether they reveal that knowledge to the world through words or actions. It sounds to me (purely my opinion) to be very similar to the way a lot of gay people talk about their childhoods.

So regardless how a transgender person chooses to 'present' - even if they try follow society dictates and live as the 'wrong' gender or if they choose to live as their self-identified gender without ever having hormones/surgery - it is what they genuine feel themselves to be that matters.

But once they choose to live outwardly as the gender they know themselves to be - ESPECIALLY when their outward appearance is matching their gender, what GLAAD calls "visibly transgender" - it is not up to people like Angra Mainyu to tell them they are wrong or to insist on using the wrong pronoun.

 

[RavenSky]

The cells can be male or female (according X/Y chromosomes)
The body can be male, female or others (according genital organs)
The person can be male, female or others. (According to the persons self image)

Do you acknowledge that these 3 categorizations are separate?

I think this is the key question.

 

[LordKiran]

Not a chance, because:
1. It's false. If she's a mannish woman, she's still a woman.
2. Actually, 1. is enough.

1. You don't know that and have no way of ever knowing for 100% certain.

2. See point one.