Transgender man gives birth

[Brainster]

A key term? Like "opponent", as in "Opponents want them", or maybe "presents"? when "presents" isn't really defined? Does "presents" mean "attempts to be seen as", or does it mean "appears to be to most observers"?

Well, it certainly can't be the latter, since we've been told endlessly in this thread that you can't tell what gender someone is by looking.

 

[HarryHenderson]

Do you think this is what we're talking about?

Really?

 

[Belz...]

No, when people who complain about hypocrisy and childishness display such brazen and childish hypocrisy with nary a word from their cohorts

You're hilarious. Cohorts? You think I'm in some sort of league with other posters here? You have a twisted view of reality, boy.

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed to comply with Rules 12/0

 

[Belz...]

A key term? Like "opponent", as in "Opponents want them", or maybe "presents"? when "presents" isn't really defined? Does "presents" mean "attempts to be seen as", or does it mean "appears to be to most observers"? Or is there some other meaning?

Or are we talking about a key word like "gender", which not everyone uses the same way? Ten years ago, almost no one used it the way we are told is "correct" today, and I'll bet that 25 years ago, literally no one used it the way we are told is correct today.

And then there are the terms "man" and "woman", "boy" and "girl".

You're wasting your time. There is no discussion with ideologues.

 

[p0lka]

Gosh, do I feel silly! Here I thought quite a few people were saying that a trans woman who has not had the operation should be allowed to use a women's locker room, even though "she" still has the genitals of a male. Glad to see you aren't proposing anything kooky like that.

I feel even sillier, I thought it was about men having babies and whether saying man was correct or not, then it went all locker room talk.
I'l share a locker room with anyone,
if my kids saw genitalia so what?
I would suggest that we would be a healthier society if we didn't have this obsession with acting like sexual organs/the stuff we pee out of, are something to be ashamed about.
grow up society.

 

[Butter!]

I feel even sillier, I thought it was about men having babies and whether saying man was correct or not, then it went all locker room talk.
I'l share a locker room with anyone,
if my kids saw genitalia so what?
I would suggest that we would be a healthier society if we didn't have this obsession with acting like sexual organs are something to be ashamed about.
grow up society.

This is how I feel, too. I've just naturally never given a toss. I accept that everyone doesn't feel the same way about everything or have the same sensitivities as everyone else. And that's a good thing. But in general, the inability to separate genitalia just hangin' there from some sort of overt sexual context seems like a detriment to modern humans. I too wish we would all move past it. Maybe we can't though. Maybe it's inert. I don't have any of the answers.

 

[HarryHenderson]

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed to comply with Rule 12/0

 

[Meadmaker]

I feel even sillier, I thought it was about men having babies and whether saying man was correct or not, then it went all locker room talk.
I'l share a locker room with anyone,
if my kids saw genitalia so what?
I would suggest that we would be a healthier society if we didn't have this obsession with acting like sexual organs/the stuff we pee out of, are something to be ashamed about.
grow up society.

I understand your position, but let me explain why the "locker room talk" is germane to the question of whether or not a man just had a baby.

If we treat men and women equally, if we never draw a distinction, if sex really doesn't matter in any situation*, then it really doesn't matter whether we call someone a man or a woman anyway. Ok. So Mr. Mom is really a man. So what?

As long as there is no practical difference in the way we deal with men and women, then in it really doesn't matter whether someone is a man or a woman.

However, there's the thing. We really do care whether someone is a man or a woman. We care socially, and in a few cases, we bring that care into law and policy. So the "locker room" stuff is just illustrating that, whether or not it is rational or wise to do so, most people care who sees them naked and, specifically, whether those people are men or women. It's just an illustration of one circumstance where most, but not all, people care about the difference between men and women.

*And I'm excluding individual romantic/sexual preferences. That's something where darned near everyone cares one way or another, but that's between the two, or more, people who are trying to work that out between themselves.

ETA: In other words, there is the philosophical question of what truly makes one a man or a woman, but that's not a question most people really care about. The reason it becomes a political issue, or an issue worthy of societal debate, is that certain people not traditionally viewed as women wish to be recognized as and treated like women.

 

[Meadmaker]

This is how I feel, too. I've just naturally never given a toss. I accept that everyone doesn't feel the same way about everything or have the same sensitivities as everyone else. And that's a good thing. But in general, the inability to separate genitalia just hangin' there from some sort of overt sexual context seems like a detriment to modern humans. I too wish we would all move past it. Maybe we can't though. Maybe it's inert. I don't have any of the answers.

At my age, it seems like it's growing inert, but I think the word you meant was innate.

ETA: And for what it's worth, in my youth I had the opportunity to participate in "clothing optional" situations, and I will assure you that I, and all the other young men, were quite happy to have the opportunity to view naked women. I don't know if that qualifies as "overtly sexual", but it's definitely more sexual than being around the same group of women fully clothed.

 

[Belz...]

So the "locker room" stuff is just illustrating that, whether or not it is rational or wise to do so, most people care who sees them naked and, specifically, whether those people are men or women.

Maybe they should just tell these people to mind their own business and shut up, then.

 

[johnny karate]

Except it didn't seem to me like you were saying that you didn't believe he wanted the actual answer, but rather that the real answer didn't matter.

It doesn't.

Er... yes. Is that supposed to be some sort of hypocrisy?

There's a difference between one (speaking out in frustration, which tends to bring hyperbole) and the other (changing the topic repeatedly).

Frustration over what?

 

[Belz...]

It doesn't.

So the actual answer doesn't matter, then. All that matters is, what? The feelings of the person in question? That should determine reality?

How is that sort of thinking not applicable to everything? Who cares if the earth revolves around the sun or vice-versa? Isn't it enough that people believe the latter? Why shatter their deeply-held beliefs?

This sort of thinking is anathema to me.

Frustration over what?

How is that relevant? You're just trying to avoid giving me the point.

 

[johnny karate]

So the actual answer doesn't matter, then. All that matters is, what? The feelings of the person in question? That should determine reality?

How is that sort of thinking not applicable to everything? Who cares if the earth revolves around the sun or vice-versa? Isn't it enough that people believe the latter? Why shatter their deeply-held beliefs?

This sort of thinking is anathema to me.

As you so recently asked me, is there no middle ground?

How about instead of it being all or nothing, we each decide for ourselves when and under what circumstances we challenge beliefs we don't agree with?

I don't have a problem with transgender people, so I see no point in confronting them on these issues.

How is that relevant? You're just trying to avoid giving me the point.

Believe me, the point is exactly what I've been looking for in this thread. And I don't see much of one in what you and others have been arguing.

 

[Butter!]

At my age, it seems like it's growing inert, but I think the word you meant was innate.

ETA: And for what it's worth, in my youth I had the opportunity to participate in "clothing optional" situations, and I will assure you that I, and all the other young men, were quite happy to have the opportunity to view naked women. I don't know if that qualifies as "overtly sexual", but it's definitely more sexual than being around the same group of women fully clothed.

Yeah, I meant innate. I don't use wrong words too often in posts, so I guess I was distracted. Sorry.

As for the rest of it, I'm really not too worried about how my views may or may not be shared by other people. I was just chiming in. In a perfect world, I actually DO think there'd be a way to admire a naked body without it becoming sexual, but I'm not convinced the world (or even I) could ever fully get there.

 

[tyr_13]

You're hilarious. Cohorts? You think I'm in some sort of league with other posters here? You have a twisted view of reality, boy.

Holy ****, do I have to link to the dictionary definition of 'cohort' too? Again you distort what someone is saying.

Edited by kmortis: 

Removed to comply with Rule 12/0

 

[sylvan8798]

Well, it certainly can't be the latter, since we've been told endlessly in this thread that you can't tell what gender someone is by looking.

I don't claim to be "most observers" but I haven't been observing the public nekked since, like, ever. So I just make random guesses as to their gender. I've found that it mostly doesn't matter if I'm right or not, given that I'm no longer in search of a mate.

 

[Brainster]

I don't claim to be "most observers" but I haven't been observing the public nekked since, like, ever. So I just make random guesses as to their gender. I've found that it mostly doesn't matter if I'm right or not, given that I'm no longer in search of a mate.

You make random guesses about the respective genders of naked people?

 

[theprestige]

You make random guesses about the respective genders of naked people?

What are his options, if they haven't told him what gender they are? It would be a hate crime for him to deduce their gender based on observable physical properties. It's probably safest just to flight a coin.

This signature is intended to irradiate people.

 

[johnny karate]

I like how people who have taken a stand against offering other people respect and courtesy whine about being called bigots and being accused of hate crimes.

 

[Belz...]

As you so recently asked me, is there no middle ground?

Nothing I've said suggested this. It was a question: what constitutes the criteria? I've been asking this for a week now.

How about instead of it being all or nothing, we each decide for ourselves when and under what circumstances we challenge beliefs we don't agree with?

That sounds like a recipe for being called bigots and harassers. This is a serious question: when is it ok to do so and when is it not? Why would challenging religion, for example, be more acceptable than challenging this belief?

I like how people who have taken a stand against offering other people respect and courtesy whine about being called bigots and being accused of hate crimes.

And I like how many people here make the conversation about being rude and bigoted rather than about discussing a factual question. It's almost as if you're trying to shame your opponents into submission.