Page 11 of 91
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:29 pm
by Currywurst and Chips
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:26 pm
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:21 pm
I think that stands for Two Spirit, lesbian, gay, bi, trans, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual +anyone else. So no, no more sexes, just the two
Intersex is a medical condition and is therefore identified by the profession as not being either male or female.
And still the number is 2
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:32 pm
by Max B Gold
Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:29 pm
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:26 pm
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:21 pm
I think that stands for Two Spirit, lesbian, gay, bi, trans, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual +anyone else. So no, no more sexes, just the two
Intersex is a medical condition and is therefore identified by the profession as not being either male or female.
And still the number is 2
Mere semantics
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:33 pm
by CEB
Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:24 pm
I can't be the only one who had Keef down as a pronouns in the email signature (Ally) kinda guy
Glad I was wrong
Funnily enough, it was after I went on a bit of a rant here many years ago after Frank Maloney came out as trans & I had a go at people who were dubious about it that I had a bit of a “what am I banging on about here? I’m just saying what I think I should say” moment, & then found that absolutely nobody who thinks men literally become women (regardless of the mechanism by which they get there) can actually articulate what the hell they mean by it…
But the moment I realised quite how messed up it was was when I did a degree as a mature student and saw lesbians on my course called transphobic for saying they don’t do willy, and young, same sex attracted women with short hair questioned about when they were gonna just get their sh*t together and come out as trans. A bald male lecturer (not a biologist, believe it or not) said with a straight face that there was no such thing as biological sex.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:35 pm
by tuffers#1
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 5:52 pm
That’s vague and unconvincing. Male people and female people exist, and are distinct from each other. Whatever legalistic view of the world you’re waffling about, males and females will continue to exist, and have differing needs. You haven’t yet offered a compelling reason as to why society shouldn’t be aware of the differing needs of male and female people, and have ignored several examples I’ve given as to why it’s important to continue to recognise sex differences.
But you have a postie that you like, which I guess works as that unbiased, broad, helicopter view you were talking about before…
Not wanting to be disrespectful so please take the question just as a question ,
Are there people who identify as Animal People
Could i for example identify as a Giraffe or an Elephant ,
Regardless of gender .
Or could I further identify as an atom/s for example a
Computer hard drive but not artificial intelligence but as
A physical embodiment of a computer ?
Its a fascinating topic of existence as in do we actually .
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:37 pm
by StockholmO
A woman with a penis is a woman. It really isn’t difficult to understand.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:38 pm
by CEB
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:32 pm
Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:29 pm
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:26 pm
Intersex is a medical condition and is therefore identified by the profession as not being either male or female.
And still the number is 2
Mere semantics
You said that there are more than two sexes. Intersex conditions are not actually identified by medical professionals as neither male nor female; in fact, intersex conditions are sex specific - every intersex condition (more respectfully known as disorders of sex development or DSD’s) occurs in members of one sex only, and not the other.
Do you know what “sex” refers to in humans? It refers to whether a person has gone down the developmental pathway that, all being well, results in a person producing sperm (males) or eggs (females). There are only two pathways, and only two sex cells that humans can create. Unless you know of a third?
But I have to say, I’m very much enjoying the broader, more informed, objective, knowledge base you’ve brought to this conversation. Truly enlightening.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:39 pm
by CEB
tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:35 pm
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 5:52 pm
That’s vague and unconvincing. Male people and female people exist, and are distinct from each other. Whatever legalistic view of the world you’re waffling about, males and females will continue to exist, and have differing needs. You haven’t yet offered a compelling reason as to why society shouldn’t be aware of the differing needs of male and female people, and have ignored several examples I’ve given as to why it’s important to continue to recognise sex differences.
But you have a postie that you like, which I guess works as that unbiased, broad, helicopter view you were talking about before…
Not wanting to be disrespectful so please take the question just as a question ,
Are there people who identify as Animal People
Could i for example identify as a Giraffe or an Elephant ,
Regardless of gender .
Or could I further identify as an atom/s for example a
Computer hard drive but not artificial intelligence but as
A physical embodiment of a computer ?
Its a fascinating topic of existence as in do we actually .
Google furries or fursonas then have a little lie down
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:40 pm
by Currywurst and Chips
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:33 pm
Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:24 pm
I can't be the only one who had Keef down as a pronouns in the email signature (Ally) kinda guy
Glad I was wrong
Funnily enough, it was after I went on a bit of a rant here many years ago after Frank Maloney came out as trans & I had a go at people who were dubious about it that I had a bit of a “what am I banging on about here? I’m just saying what I think I should say” moment, & then found that absolutely nobody who thinks men literally become women (regardless of the mechanism by which they get there) can actually articulate what the hell they mean by it…
But the moment I realised quite how messed up it was was when I did a degree as a mature student and saw lesbians on my course called transphobic for saying they don’t do willy, and young, same sex attracted women with short hair questioned about when they were gonna just get their sh*t together and come out as trans. A bald male lecturer (not a biologist, believe it or not) said with a straight face that there was no such thing as biological sex.
Heh I remember that thread!
Yeah academia seems pretty lost on the issue although you do have to wonder how many of them believe it and aren't just towing the line based on pain of career destruction and being lambasted in the press. It's sad that universities aren't the beacon of free speech they historically have been.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:44 pm
by Dunners
What I like best about the principle of self ID for gender is that, if it's accepted, then the same must apply for other characteristics. Such as race. And that's because there's more genetic variation on sexes than more subjective terms, such as race.
Just imagine the sh*ts and giggles we have in store when the wokey train arrives in that station.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:44 pm
by CEB
Yeah. Basically the main reason I’m as up on it as I am is because being a good lefty, I tried really, really hard to see what I was missing because I really was instinctively leaning towards supporting a progressive cause and I don’t have anything against trans people as trans people. But if you look at it honestly and actually think the thoughts through, it’s impossible not to conclude that it’s batshit crazy and regressive. But then, I’m privileged to have a cis het black male postie, so I just can’t relate to the issue to the degree that Max can, I guess.
Who were you back then btw?
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:45 pm
by Max B Gold
StockholmO wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:37 pm
A woman with a penis is a woman. It really isn’t difficult to understand.
It's all very confusing.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:49 pm
by Max B Gold
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:38 pm
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:32 pm
Mere semantics
You said that there are more than two sexes. Intersex conditions are not actually identified by medical professionals as neither male nor female; in fact, intersex conditions are sex specific - every intersex condition (more respectfully known as disorders of sex development or DSD’s) occurs in members of one sex only, and not the other.
Do you know what “sex” refers to in humans? It refers to whether a person has gone down the developmental pathway that, all being well, results in a person producing sperm (males) or eggs (females). There are only two pathways, and only two sex cells that humans can create. Unless you know of a third?
But I have to say, I’m very much enjoying the broader, more informed, objective, knowledge base you’ve brought to this conversation. Truly enlightening.
Wicki says its a bit more complicated than that.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:50 pm
by Currywurst and Chips
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:44 pm
Yeah. Basically the main reason I’m as up on it as I am is because being a good lefty, I tried really, really hard to see what I was missing because I really was instinctively leaning towards supporting a progressive cause and I don’t have anything against trans people as trans people. But if you look at it honestly and actually think the thoughts through, it’s impossible not to conclude that it’s batshit crazy and regressive. But then, I’m privileged to have a cis het black male postie, so I just can’t relate to the issue to the degree that Max can, I guess.
Who were you back then btw?
Pie & Mash
Hopefully you don't feel dirty for agreeing with me.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:58 pm
by CEB
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:49 pm
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:38 pm
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:32 pm
Mere semantics
You said that there are more than two sexes. Intersex conditions are not actually identified by medical professionals as neither male nor female; in fact, intersex conditions are sex specific - every intersex condition (more respectfully known as disorders of sex development or DSD’s) occurs in members of one sex only, and not the other.
Do you know what “sex” refers to in humans? It refers to whether a person has gone down the developmental pathway that, all being well, results in a person producing sperm (males) or eggs (females). There are only two pathways, and only two sex cells that humans can create. Unless you know of a third?
But I have to say, I’m very much enjoying the broader, more informed, objective, knowledge base you’ve brought to this conversation. Truly enlightening.
Wicki says its a bit more complicated than that.
Yes, the means by which humans move along developmental pathways to become male and female are indeed complex. But there are only two pathways, and no third sex cell, so you’re still at 2, and I’m still waiting for the third sex, or however many you think there are. But it’s good to know that after confidently telling me that there are more than two sexes, you went to Wikipedia to try to back yourself up and couldn’t find anything more than “it’s complicated”
Here’s a challenge - I bet you £300 that I can correctly guess the sexes of your parents.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:59 pm
by CEB
Currywurst and Chips wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:50 pm
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:44 pm
Yeah. Basically the main reason I’m as up on it as I am is because being a good lefty, I tried really, really hard to see what I was missing because I really was instinctively leaning towards supporting a progressive cause and I don’t have anything against trans people as trans people. But if you look at it honestly and actually think the thoughts through, it’s impossible not to conclude that it’s batshit crazy and regressive. But then, I’m privileged to have a cis het black male postie, so I just can’t relate to the issue to the degree that Max can, I guess.
Who were you back then btw?
Pie & Mash
Hopefully you don't feel dirty for agreeing with me.
I’m sure there’s plenty left for us to disagree about
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 7:02 pm
by tuffers#1
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:39 pm
tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:35 pm
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 5:52 pm
That’s vague and unconvincing. Male people and female people exist, and are distinct from each other. Whatever legalistic view of the world you’re waffling about, males and females will continue to exist, and have differing needs. You haven’t yet offered a compelling reason as to why society shouldn’t be aware of the differing needs of male and female people, and have ignored several examples I’ve given as to why it’s important to continue to recognise sex differences.
But you have a postie that you like, which I guess works as that unbiased, broad, helicopter view you were talking about before…
Not wanting to be disrespectful so please take the question just as a question ,
Are there people who identify as Animal People
Could i for example identify as a Giraffe or an Elephant ,
Regardless of gender .
Or could I further identify as an atom/s for example a
Computer hard drive but not artificial intelligence but as
A physical embodiment of a computer ?
Its a fascinating topic of existence as in do we actually .
Google furries or fursonas then have a little lie down
Im already laying down & they wouldnt want to dress up .
Ok one doesnt want to expand the debate .
No probs
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 7:47 pm
by StockholmO
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:45 pm
StockholmO wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:37 pm
A woman with a penis is a woman. It really isn’t difficult to understand.
It's all very confusing.
Here you go Max, this explains it all better.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 8:36 pm
by Max B Gold
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:58 pm
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:49 pm
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:38 pm
You said that there are more than two sexes. Intersex conditions are not actually identified by medical professionals as neither male nor female; in fact, intersex conditions are sex specific - every intersex condition (more respectfully known as disorders of sex development or DSD’s) occurs in members of one sex only, and not the other.
Do you know what “sex” refers to in humans? It refers to whether a person has gone down the developmental pathway that, all being well, results in a person producing sperm (males) or eggs (females). There are only two pathways, and only two sex cells that humans can create. Unless you know of a third?
But I have to say, I’m very much enjoying the broader, more informed, objective, knowledge base you’ve brought to this conversation. Truly enlightening.
Wicki says its a bit more complicated than that.
Yes, the means by which humans move along developmental pathways to become male and female are indeed complex. But there are only two pathways, and no third sex cell, so you’re still at 2, and I’m still waiting for the third sex, or however many you think there are. But it’s good to know that after confidently telling me that there are more than two sexes, you went to Wikipedia to try to back yourself up and couldn’t find anything more than “it’s complicated”
Here’s a challenge - I bet you £300 that I can correctly guess the sexes of your parents.
Hang on, now that I've actually read it there appears to be an academic on the Wicki who identifies no less than 5.
This is more complicated than you and Sausage Curry are making out. Youse sneaky snakes.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 8:46 pm
by CEB
No, the “academic” is presumably mixing up developmental pathways and differing chromosomal make ups with “sex”. Which is why you won’t be able to name the third sex, or the fourth, or the fifth, and why you won’t be able to name the third, fourth or fifth gamete, and is why whatever amount is cited by your unnamed academic, there will remain two distinct groups of humans who have the ability to reproduce with each other.
You do know what sex *is*, right?
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 8:49 pm
by CEB
But hey, we’ve got you reading at least. Here - have a read of this once you’re bored of trying to find the third gamete. (Heads up - your postie won’t be producing a third gamete. She’ll be producing sperm cells or nowt at all
)
https://janeclarejones.com/2018/09/26/t ... re-of-sex/
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:17 pm
by Beradogs
What I don’t understand is why we have to exclude trans males from female spaces? Women seem to want their cake and eat it. Dismantling brick by brick, men’s traditional refuge’s (if you don’t believe me look at the amount of women presenting, commentating on mens football now as an example) while wanting to keep their own social spaces on the basis of sex. One team one dream now ladies.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:19 pm
by Chocolate_brownie
Beradogs wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:17 pm
What I don’t understand is why we have to exclude trans males from female spaces? Women seem to want their cake and eat it. Dismantling brick by brick, men’s traditional refuge’s (if you don’t believe me look at the amount of women presenting, commentating on mens football now as an example) while wanting to keep their own social spaces on the basis of sex. One team one dream now ladies.
The reference to female commentators exposes this as a blatant WUM. Must try harder. You’re usually better than this.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 10:00 pm
by Max B Gold
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 8:46 pm
No, the “academic” is presumably mixing up developmental pathways and differing chromosomal make ups with “sex”. Which is why you won’t be able to name the third sex, or the fourth, or the fifth, and why you won’t be able to name the third, fourth or fifth gamete, and is why whatever amount is cited by your unnamed academic, there will remain two distinct groups of humans who have the ability to reproduce with each other.
You do know what sex *is*, right?
Thank you doctor.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 10:33 pm
by Ronnie Hotdogs
Chocolate_brownie wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:19 pm
Beradogs wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 9:17 pm
What I don’t understand is why we have to exclude trans males from female spaces? Women seem to want their cake and eat it. Dismantling brick by brick, men’s traditional refuge’s (if you don’t believe me look at the amount of women presenting, commentating on mens football now as an example) while wanting to keep their own social spaces on the basis of sex. One team one dream now ladies.
The reference to female commentators exposes this as a blatant WUM. Must try harder. You’re usually better than this.
He’s not.
Re: The trans debate
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 10:47 pm
by tuffers#1
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 8:36 pm
CEB wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:58 pm
Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 6:49 pm
Wicki says its a bit more complicated than that.
Yes, the means by which humans move along developmental pathways to become male and female are indeed complex. But there are only two pathways, and no third sex cell, so you’re still at 2, and I’m still waiting for the third sex, or however many you think there are. But it’s good to know that after confidently telling me that there are more than two sexes, you went to Wikipedia to try to back yourself up and couldn’t find anything more than “it’s complicated”
Here’s a challenge - I bet you £300 that I can correctly guess the sexes of your parents.
Hang on, now that I've actually read it there appears to be an academic on the Wicki who identifies no less than 5.
This is more complicated than you and Sausage Curry are making out. Youse sneaky snakes.
I bet 3 is Unicorn ?