Cont: Trans Women are not Women II: The Bath Of Khan

[Ziggurat]

What about all the other claims that are biological that you don't state there should be an objective test?

"All the other claims"... what other claims? You mentioned sexuality. I don't know anything else that you could be referring to here, even though you're using the plural.

By what principle is this one excepted?

You're trying to straw man me.

You made a claim that trans identity is biologically based, and furthermore you used that alleged biological basis as justification for trans inclusion. I'm not making any claim about the connection between sexuality and biology, but more importantly, I'm not using any such claim as justification for anything about sexuality. Sexuality isn't excepted, the question is simply moot because my position isn't equivalent to your position.

 

[BobTheCoward]

No they are not. They have the bodies of men. Different musculature, different stamina and endurance. Different build. Those do not change just because their brains are miswired to think they are women. They Are NOT.

#factsmatter

Not miswired.

 

[BobTheCoward]

"All the other claims"... what other claims? You mentioned sexuality. I don't know anything else that you could be referring to here, even though you're using the plural.



You're trying to straw man me.

You made a claim that trans identity is biologically based, and furthermore you used that alleged biological basis as justification for trans inclusion. I'm not making any claim about the connection between sexuality and biology, but more importantly, I'm not using any such claim as justification for anything about sexuality. Sexuality isn't excepted, the question is simply moot because my position isn't equivalent to your position.

You asked about an objective test. But if you don't generally require an objective test for matters of biology related to preferences, then ziggurat would need to establish why an objective test is necessary here.

There is a possibility you are requesting a level of evidence above what you would request normally, and I want to double check.

 

[d4m10n]

...ziggurat would need to establish why an objective test is necessary here.

Necessary to what end?

(Guessing the goal is to create a relatively level playing field, given certain advantages inherent to those with testes.)

 

[Delphic Oracle]

It's called biology for a freakin' reason. And yes it IS "hard wired".

Facts don't care about your or anyone else's feelings.

The statement you quoted is my statement that I think the breadth of development that people attribute to some kind of "hard wiring" is far too broad.

If you want to discuss a specific aspect of biology you think is hard-wired, please describe what aspect you're talking about.

But, just as a general overview of where I'm coming from:

In a society where people don't have as easy access to automobiles or for whatever reason, steps per day are higher, will people's legs develop differently?

If, during my development, there's a lot of periods of hunger bordering on malnutrition, will that have effects on my physiology like relative ratios of organ sizes and BMI that persist long into adult life?

Am I really able to encourage development of my nephew's hippocampus with all these memory games?

Can a child surrounded by stress and fear develop a much larger and more cognitively involved amygdala, then? Or at least develop a "disorder" attributed to that structure?

A lot of what we "know" about social behaviors is because a developing human is surrounded by social behaviors to observe.

Much further back, recall we used to at least sometimes still use all 4 limbs for locomotion. A human body won't develop that way now because there's chairs to sit in and counters to do stuff on. Baby wants to just roam around on the floor. But no, we walk around them all day. We stand them up, bounce them on their chubby little legs, put them in the spring suspenders thing, encourage them to keep trying. We buy them miniature versions of chairs and tables to do stuff on. No matter how many times they fall out of the little chair, plop back they go with a kiss on the head.

The body develops like it is demanded and/or encouraged to.

A lot of this stuff unfolds over a couple of decades and not in any kind of strict order, either.

 

[cullennz]

Part of our difference is you think the person is making a choice. Most transgender advocates are trying to express that just like sexuality, it isn't a choice.

Thinking you should have been a chick isn't a choice.

Having cosmetic surgery as a result is.

Which is what I said

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Thinking you should have been a chick isn't a choice.

Having cosmetic surgery as a result is.

Which is what I said

Okay, thinking you should boink other dudes isn't a choice.

Boinking other dudes is.

Still used by bible thumpers to this day.

None of them are "thinking they should have been a chick." That's a mildly laudable attempt to at least grasp for an idea from their point of view, but you failed to really leave your own experience.

Imagine it a lot more like, for a person who has many "gender ambiguities", some physiological, some cognitive/behavioral, coming to the realization that you are and have been the other gender identity than the one assigned to you and that you have unsuccessfully wrestled to internalize.

Again, I'll clarify that gender dysphoria does not mean every kid showing signs needs to pumped with hormones and rushed into surgery, there's literally dozens of combinations of ways all these factors of identity can resolve. One "boy" with hypogonadism that likes "girl's" clothes gets one kind of hormones, gets a job working on cars, loves his wife and kids, and packs the house for 2 drag shows a night on the weekends. Another "boy" with the same start gets a different kind of hormones and, upon reaching an appropriate age, decides to fully transition (recall they were in ambiguous territory to start with).

But just like none of us sat down and wrote out a pros and cons list of whether we liked Sally or Jimmy (I kinda wonder if some bi people may have done this, but anyways...), I doubt a lot of 8 year olds have the capacity to do all the self-inventory activities to work their way through a lot of this without some guidance. Nor will we learn any more about it by not providing any and just let them continue killing themselves at alarming rates, instead.

 

[cullennz]

Okay, thinking you should boink other dudes isn't a choice.



Boinking other dudes is.



Still used by bible thumpers to this day.



None of them are "thinking they should have been a chick." That's a mildly laudable attempt to at least grasp for an idea from their point of view, but you failed to really leave your own experience.



Imagine it a lot more like, for a person who has many "gender ambiguities", some physiological, some cognitive/behavioral, coming to the realization that you are and have been the other gender identity than the one assigned to you and that you have unsuccessfully wrestled to internalize.



Again, I'll clarify that gender dysphoria does not mean every kid showing signs needs to pumped with hormones and rushed into surgery, there's literally dozens of combinations of ways all these factors of identity can resolve.



But just like none of us sat down and wrote out a pros and cons list of whether we liked Sally or Jimmy (I kinda wonder if some bi people may have done this, but anyways...), I doubt a lot of 8 year olds have the capacity to do all the self-inventory activities to work their way through a lot of this without some guidance. Nor will we learn any more about it by not providing any and just let them continue killing themselves at alarming rates, instead.

I agree with this to a point but it doesn't change the fact that while you have little choice in what your brain says you should be,what you chose to do because of it is. Be it dressing up as a chick or being surgically altered in an extreme example

 

[Ziggurat]

You asked about an objective test. But if you don't generally require an objective test for matters of biology related to preferences, then ziggurat would need to establish why an objective test is necessary here.

You don't get it. A biological test for sexuality is irrelevant because as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter if someone is faking their sexuality. Seriously, what do I care? If you want to have sex with someone you're not sexually attracted to, it's no skin off my nose. Why would you test for sexuality, when there's no reason to gatekeep based on sexuality? The only case I can think of where that might be relevant is the Gay Games (is that still even a thing), but I think that idea was ridiculous to begin with, so they can sort their own **** out.

But if the justification for letting transwomen compete against ciswomen in sports is that they're somehow biologically women (and I doubt you can come up with a coherent description of that either), then gatekeeping is required, because men who merely claim to be transwomen but aren't transwomen shouldn't be allowed to compete against ciswomen. But in order to do that required gatekeeping, you need to be able to distinguish between transwomen who are truly transwomen and men who only pretend to be transwomen. How do you propose to do that?

 

[Ziggurat]

Much further back, recall we used to at least sometimes still use all 4 limbs for locomotion. A human body won't develop that way now because there's chairs to sit in and counters to do stuff on.

 

[BobTheCoward]

You don't get it. A biological test for sexuality is irrelevant because as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter if someone is faking their sexuality. Seriously, what do I care? If you want to have sex with someone you're not sexually attracted to, it's no skin off my nose. Why would you test for sexuality, when there's no reason to gatekeep based on sexuality? The only case I can think of where that might be relevant is the Gay Games (is that still even a thing), but I think that idea was ridiculous to begin with, so they can sort their own **** out.

But if the justification for letting transwomen compete against ciswomen in sports is that they're somehow biologically women (and I doubt you can come up with a coherent description of that either), then gatekeeping is required, because men who merely claim to be transwomen but aren't transwomen shouldn't be allowed to compete against ciswomen. But in order to do that required gatekeeping, you need to be able to distinguish between transwomen who are truly transwomen and men who only pretend to be transwomen. How do you propose to do that?

I would bet the sustained indignities experienced living as a trans person would be the number one tool.

 

[Ziggurat]

I would bet the sustained indignities experienced living as a trans person would be the number one tool.

These "sustained indignities" in certain places constitute winning the "victimhood" lottery, and let you sit atop the grievance hierarchy. If you think no one would fake being trans, you're dangerously naive.

 

[BobTheCoward]

These "sustained indignities" in certain places constitute winning the "victimhood" lottery, and let you sit atop the grievance hierarchy. If you think no one would fake being trans, you're dangerously naive.

Who is faking their identity now to achieve that?

I'm saying that isn't a problem worth doing anything about, not that it never happens. The standard on few things in life is "never." This is similar to voter ID laws and the perception of how big or small an issue it is.

Simply put, I think your conclusion is facile.

 

[Ziggurat]

Who is faking their identity now to achieve that?

We’ve got no way of knowing, do we? Because you claim it’s biological, but there’s no test. In fact even your claim that it’s biological is an unfalsifiable belief.

 

[cullennz]

We’ve got no way of knowing, do we? Because you claim it’s biological, but there’s no test. In fact even your claim that it’s biological is an unfalsifiable belief.

Tbf gender dysphoria obviously is biological, or at least some kind of mental and chemical imbalance. The rest is choice.

 

[Ziggurat]

Tbf gender dysphoria obviously is biological, or at least some kind of mental and chemical imbalance. The rest is choice.

But Bob isn’t talking dysphoria. He is saying they ARE women, in some unspecified biological way. And that lack of specificity is part of the unfalsifiability of his position.

 

[cullennz]

But Bob isn’t talking dysphoria. He is saying they ARE women, in some unspecified biological way. And that lack of specificity is part of the unfalsifiability of his position.

Fair point.

They aren't.

Persinally don't mind calling them she though if it helps

Just not the "ze" or the other stupid 10's of other ones idiots have decided is fashionable

 

[The Atheist]

But just like none of us sat down and wrote out a pros and cons list of whether we liked Sally or Jimmy (I kinda wonder if some bi people may have done this, but anyways...), I doubt a lot of 8 year olds have the capacity to do all the self-inventory activities to work their way through a lot of this without some guidance. Nor will we learn any more about it by not providing any and just let them continue killing themselves at alarming rates, instead.

Very nicely put.

What amuses me is people who clearly have no personal experience offering opinions as though they had a single clue what they were typing.

 

[JihadJane]

First: Breitbart.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Second, holy *********, "science says" there's exactly two categories in which 99.98% of people fit?

Uh, it kinda seems like, no matter how small that 0.2% might seem, uh, if those in the 0.2% are apparently neither male nor female, then more than 2 ******* possibilities exist!

The authors of this garbage you're sharing can't even be internally consistent.

Plus "reproductive anatomy", "unambiguous", and "at birth" are doing massive amounts of heavy lifting, there.

ETA: "No third type of sex cell" is some real garbage that has already been sufficiently addressed by others in describing a whole range of conditions that have results on biological sexual development, to say nothing of even more complicated issues like gene expression.

Why do biological twins have different cognition, mannerisms, and self-identity?

If I could watch the development of a child in two dimensions, one where they are raised by their biological parents and one where their parents are tragically killed and they are raised by foster parents, would the child be the same "person" in both cases?

I wish people realized what blank slates we are when we come out. Way too much insistence on "hard wired" ********.

Take 5 people from different random parts of the planet, ask them what "natural behaviors driven by centuries of evolution" there are. You'll be lucky if you only get 5 opinions. They will all insist that "all you have to do is look around and see how people act!"

Intersex isn't a third sex.

 

[BobTheCoward]

But Bob isn’t talking dysphoria. He is saying they ARE women, in some unspecified biological way. And that lack of specificity is part of the unfalsifiability of his position.

The conclusion that it is biological is the same as concluding that every thought a person has is chemistry or physics. There have been multiple experiments on how the brain works and there is no evidence of an external mechanism. I don't have to separately prove that thoughts about one's identity is also the brain.

My claim that they are women is absolutely falsifiable. If it fails to meet the criteria I ssrablished, then it is falsified.