Discussion: Transwomen are not women (Part 7)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Paul2 said:
Sure, it's possible, but all we have is 1.2 billion years of sexual reproduction on earth. Do we really think that any of that has anything to do with why actual people - not the species homo sapiens, but people like you and me - are attracted to someone?

/s

It's the blank slate phenomenon ( Steven Pinker, The Blank Slate), which ignores that we are animals and are part of the animal kingdom, all species in which have evolved, as if our brains are somehow exempt from the influence of that 1.2 billion years.
Click to expand...

The underlying basis of gender identity ideology is rooted in denial of objective material reality. All phenomena are socially constructed and can be deconstructed by changing language.

Somewhere on twitter, somebody used the analogy that if the earth were going to be hit by an asteroid, you could solve the problem by redefining 'earth' as 'something that cannot be hit by asteroids' (or redefining an asteroid as something that cannot collide with a planet). Of course, this also means having to silence anyone who speaks the wrong narrative.
 
Maybe the thread title needs a change?

surely it has been established by now that transwomen are women if they want that gender role, but they aren't female?

Buck angel isn't male, they are very manly though so yeah take the role.

Gender is like deciding who you want to play in a rpg.

Go for it, I love people being able to be themselves without societal pressure.

Gender change is fine by me, you can't deny reality though.
 
Emily's Cat said:
New Research Shows a Vast Majority of Cis People Won't Date Trans People

I feel like this is kind of a No ****, Sherlock sort of a study. The author seems surprised by these findings, which boggles my mind. The vast majority of people on the planet are attracted to people whose primary and secondary sexual characteristics are in alignment with each other. We're wired that way, we're a sexually dimorphic species that reproduces via two distinct and different sexes. Why on earth would anyone be surprised that this holds true? It's up there with doing research and being surprised to find out that water is wet.

This part also reinforces to me the willful ignorance and fantasy involved:



This is what happens when someone somewhere tries to redefine sexual orientation to be "gender identity orientation" instead. Then you end up with researchers being surprised that gay males are attracted to other males, regardless of their presentation, and that gay females are attracted to other females.

Their conclusion really hammers home the lack of rational thought involved.



They're concluding that exclusion of transgender people is transphobia, as opposed to basic sexual function. But hey, at least they consider it a *possibility* that some people are attracted to a sex as opposed to a gender identity.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink

They just need more practice. They will master it eventually,
 
p0lka said:
Maybe the thread title needs a change?

surely it has been established by now that transwomen are women if they want that gender role, but they aren't female?

Buck angel isn't male, they are very manly though so yeah take the role.

Gender is like deciding who you want to play in a rpg.

Go for it, I love people being able to be themselves without societal pressure.

Gender change is fine by me, you can't deny reality though.
Click to expand...
That has not been established at all.
A Woman is an Adult, Human, Female. All three criteria need be met.
 
Insane propagandists said:
Surpisingly Unsurprisingly, among the 127 participants open to dating a trans person, almost half selected a trans person of a gender incongruent with their stated sexual orientation. For example, 50% of the trans-inclusive straight women and 28% of the trans-inclusive gay men were willing to date a trans woman, even though especially because one wouldn’t expect either straight women or gay men to be attracted to women. Similarly, 50% of trans-inclusive straight men and 69% of trans-inclusive lesbians said they’d date a trans man, even though especially because both groups are presumably only attracted to women.
Click to expand...

There, fixed for us rational folks.
 
Distracted1 said:
That has not been established at all.
A Woman is an Adult, Human, Female. All three criteria need be met.
Click to expand...

I disagree,
from what I can work out, woman is a gender label so rpg it, whatever.
Human? Won't anyone think about the A.I's?

Female is a physical description, I don't think that can rpg'ed at all.

A female is a female, a male is a male, everything else seems to be a variable.
 
Emily's Cat said:
They're concluding that exclusion of transgender people is transphobia, as opposed to basic sexual function. But hey, at least they consider it a *possibility* that some people are attracted to a sex as opposed to a gender identity.
Click to expand...

If being a little bit squicked out by the prospect of cock-sex with someone in the uncanny valley between male and female makes me a transphobe, then a transphobe is what I am.

Heterosexuals don't have to apologize to anyone for their sexual turn-ons and turn-offs. Homosexuals don't have to justify their sexual attractions to any damn person. Transsexuals don't have to apologize. Why should cissexuals have to?
 
p0lka said:
Maybe the thread title needs a change?

surely it has been established by now that transwomen are women if they want that gender role, but they aren't female?

Buck angel isn't male, they are very manly though so yeah take the role.

Gender is like deciding who you want to play in a rpg.

Go for it, I love people being able to be themselves without societal pressure.

Gender change is fine by me, you can't deny reality though.
Click to expand...

I want to roleplay as a very, very manly woman.
 
p0lka said:
Maybe the thread title needs a change?

surely it has been established by now that transwomen are women if they want that gender role, but they aren't female?
Click to expand...
This has been established and disestablished, stipulated and rejected, multiple times throughout the several installments of this thread.

Me, I've mostly come around to the conclusion that gender roles are a stalking horse for transcending sex-based segregation. So, in the only way that anyone is willing to define, the only way that has concrete practical applications, transwomen (i.e., males) are not women (i.e., females). Everything else is jiggery-pokery dancing around this basic truth and its opponents.
 
p0lka said:
I disagree,
from what I can work out, woman is a gender label so rpg it, whatever.
Human? Won't anyone think about the A.I's?

Female is a physical description, I don't think that can rpg'ed at all.

A female is a female, a male is a male, everything else seems to be a variable.
Click to expand...
Indeed, and being female is just as much a component of being a "Woman" as being an Adult, or being a Human is.
If all three conditions are not met- the person is "presenting as", or "believing themselves to be" or even "pretending to be" a Woman. Which is fine by me. But they are not, objectively, a "Woman" unless they are Female, Adult, and Human.
 
p0lka said:
I disagree,
from what I can work out, woman is a gender label so rpg it, whatever.
Human? Won't anyone think about the A.I's?

Female is a physical description, I don't think that can rpg'ed at all.

A female is a female, a male is a male, everything else seems to be a variable.
Click to expand...

If you define woman as a gender role, does that mean a female person who doesn't perform that gender role isn't a woman?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom