Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lithrael said:
Yeah, seems to me the parentage listed on the birth certificate has long been one of the things that’s more about a social role and often not about a biological reality. Factors like “genetic testing isn’t done” and “fertility donors aren’t listed” means the birth certificate has always been more of ‘a lead to follow up when trying to discover,’ than ‘a document of,’ genetic parentage for the kid on it.

But we do need a strong public understanding that you need to be bringing genetic facts with you when you rock up at the genetic disease test doctors.
Click to expand...

I’ve started a discussion about birth certificates in general in this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=348019
 
The Atheist said:
It's not easy to write a one-page article about a self-explanatory ten-word sentence.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how self-explanatory that sentence really is. Especially when uttered by a politician. Empty platitudes are easy to say, but do they actually explain anything? What do these ten words mean for Finnish public policy?

Those ten words don't explain anything about:
- gender identity and medical services
- gender identity and sports qualifications
- gender identity and sex work*
- gender identity and social perception

Really, those ten words are just a special case of "everybody has the right to think about themselves however they want". Which is entirely true, but also doesn't explain sod all about whether one's rightful self-perception has any bearing on how the state or anyone else perceives you.

I could probably write at least one-page article about all the things those ten words probably need explanations about, but which are not provided in those ten words.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Then there's nothing self-explanatory about that ten word sentence in this context.
Click to expand...

Stop looking for things that don't exist.

She made a comment which is entirely self-explanatory. Let me repeat it:

"Everyone has the right to determine their own gender identity."

It's not policy, it's not in Parliament, it's a personal opinion. The only reason it was reported was because she's the PM. Whether she decides to act upon her opinion is a matter for conjecture, but right now, that's all there is.
 
I guess that at least the more enlightened of us should be grateful that the world's actual experts in the matter, together with many progressive national legislatures, understand that there's a distinction between sex and gender, and that gender dysphoria is a real, lived condition which requires recognition and protection.

And I'd have thought that critical thinkers would - if for nothing else but the DSM4 classification - be of the same mindset. How wrong I turned out to be :)
 
LondonJohn said:
I guess that at least the more enlightened of us should be grateful that the world's actual experts in the matter, together with many progressive national legislatures, understand that there's a distinction between sex and gender, and that gender dysphoria is a real, lived condition which requires recognition and protection.

And I'd have thought that critical thinkers would - if for nothing else but the DSM4 classification - be of the same mindset. How wrong I turned out to be :)
Click to expand...

Let's break this down, shall we?

Distinction between sex and gender? Yes. Sex is a verifiable thing which everyone understands. Gender is a bit harder to pin down in some of the edge cases, but for most people, including most transgenders, we get what it is, and there's no real dispute about it. So, critical thinkers agree.

Gender dysphoria is a real, lived, condition? There is absolutely zero claims otherwise in these threads. Critical thinkers agree.

Gender dysphoria requires recognition? So far so good. Critical thinkers agree.

Gender dysphoria requires protection? I'm not sure what "protect gender dysphoria" means, but everyone here opposes any rule or law that would make it illegal or punish gender dysphoria. Critical thinkers agree.

So, all the critical thinkers here agree with you on every count. You weren't wrong.

Unless, of course, you also expected critical thinkers to go along with different, unstated, assumptions. Unless you mean that "recognized" and "protected" mean something other than their literal meanings.
 
It may be a disagreement on what protections and rights they are demanding.

More a large population density issue than a general issue.
 
Seriously, an 80-year old man says

"I'm afraid I'm not that interested in trans folks
I just hope they're happy and that people treat them kindly"

and this has people's knickers in a twist?
 
8enotto said:
It may be a disagreement on what protections and rights they are demanding.

More a large population density issue than a general issue.
Click to expand...

Well of course it is, but that's where all the fuss is, and it's disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

LondonJohn knows, or at least should know, that all of us here recognize all the things that he said that we don't recognize. We just don't go as far.

Certainly within broader society there are people who reject everything he said, but no one here does. Here, it's all about how far rights and protections extend.
 
Meadmaker said:
Well of course it is, but that's where all the fuss is, and it's disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

LondonJohn knows, or at least should know, that all of us here recognize all the things that he said that we don't recognize. We just don't go as far.

Certainly within broader society there are people who reject everything he said, but no one here does. Here, it's all about how far rights and protections extend.
Click to expand...

I'd just like to emphasize my agreement with this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom