Transgender man gives birth

[Belz...]

You have been clear that for this you will focus on some biological fact instead of what will actually help them.

The two aren't mutually-exclusive. But of course, someone who sees everything in black-and-white terms wouldn't understand that.

But you repeatedly ignore all the complexity of biological sex too.

Oh, amaze me about this complexity you speak of.

How about this, what is an acceptable fine for refusing to rent apartments to transgender people?

I've already told you that I have no idea. I only know that the price of a house is too high, ok?

 

[ponderingturtle]

The two aren't mutually-exclusive. But of course, someone who sees everything in black-and-white terms wouldn't understand that.

In this case you are acting in ways well documented to increase the suicide rate of people with these conditions.

Oh, amaze me about this complexity you speak of.

Androgen insensitive men. They are men but they look like ladies. Clearly they need to use the men's locker room.

I've already told you that I have no idea. I only know that the price of a house is too high, ok?

So what should the cap be? It needs to be high because it needs to be something that will effect large companies. Or you just get the fox news sexual harassment situation where you just accept the fines as the cost of doing business.

So lets make it cap out at $5. That way we can't even pretend that it will effect the rich and powerful.

 

[Ziggurat]

No, Zigg, it actually isn't, no matter how many times you've also fallen into that 'childish' trap too.

Again, context matters.

Which is another way of saying "because reasons".

And it's not a trap when you can't raise a legitimate argument and resort to straw man bad faith arguments instead.

 

[Belz...]

In this case you are acting in ways well documented to increase the suicide rate of people with these conditions.

That would only be true if you think medication and transition increase their suicide rate.

Androgen insensitive men. They are men but they look like ladies. Clearly they need to use the men's locker room.

That's not a complexity of sex. That's a rare disorder that has an occurance of 0.005. Complexity of sex would include listing the various genes that are responsible for the expression of sex and how they make it difficult to determine sex in a sizeable proportion of the population. If significantly less than 1% of the population has such identification problems, it isn't a matter of the complexity of sex.

So what should the cap be?

No idea. As I said, higher for those with higher means.

 

[johnny karate]

Then why word it that way, "intentional OR repeated"?

Because that's how harassment is being defined in the statute. Also, you left out a key bit of context. It's an intentional or repeated refusal.

Need? What? Do you seriously think that there are only two options there? Harass this person or pretend that what they think is true regardless of whether it is?

No, I'm asking you why you need that middle ground. Why can't you just call Bob "Roberta" and get on with your life? Why do you need to move closer to the harassment end of the spectrum?

Also, no one is telling you that you have to pretend something is true that you don't think is. All you have to do is exhibit a modicum of respect and courtesy by referring to someone as the gender to which they wish to be referred.

You're using a non-standard definition. If you send me to the dictionary, I'll just tell you that your use of these words is just nonsense.

Awesome. You have fun with your tedious and pointless semantic game. I won't be taking part.

 

[Ziggurat]

I only know that the price of a house is too high, ok?

 

[Belz...]

Because that's how harassment is being defined in the statute. Also, you left out a key bit of context. It's an intentional or repeated refusal.

We're running in circles. The way it's written, a single intentional refusal is defined as harassment? That's crazy. It has to be repeated to make any sense.

No, I'm asking you why you need that middle ground.

Why do you keep using that word, "need"? I'm pointing out that you left out possibilities, creating a false dichotomy.

Why can't you just call Bob "Roberta" and get on with your life?

Also, no one is telling you that you have to pretend something is true that you don't think is.

Of course they are. They're telling me to call Bob "Roberta" and get on with my life.

Awesome. You have fun with your tedious and pointless semantic game. I won't be taking part.

I tell you that you're using non-standard definitions, and I'm the one playing semantic games?

Or did you feel that you couldn't defend your use of those words?

 

[johnny karate]

We're running in circles. The way it's written, a single intentional refusal is defined as harassment? That's crazy. It has to be repeated to make any sense.

File a complaint with your legislator then, I guess. I didn't draft the law, so I can't help you with that. I personally don't have a problem with how it's worded, nor do I find myself at risk of running afoul of it.

Why do you keep using that word, "need"? I'm pointing out that you left out possibilities, creating a false dichotomy.

I presented two options. I didn't suggest no other ones exist.

Of course they are. They're telling me to call Bob "Roberta" and get on with my life.

And you feel that would somehow force you to pretend to believe something to be true that you don't? Weird.

 

[Belz...]

File a complaint with your legislator then, I guess.

Come on now, Johnny. I don't live in NYC but I can still disagree with aspects of the law.

I presented two options. I didn't suggest no other ones exist.

Fair enough, then. I still don't know how that's bigoted or dehumanising.

And you feel that would somehow force you to pretend to believe something to be true that you don't?

Pretend, yes, since I should shut up about it and not challenge it. At least you're not asking me to believe it.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

I think a pretty good trans-inclusive definition of "woman" would go something like "an adult, human female, or someone who exhibits the gender attributes (especially gender identity) traditionally associated with adult, human females". That's non-circular and does not evacuate the word of all meaning.

What about a person who is an adult, human female, or someone who exhibits the gender attributes traditionally associated with adult, human females that chooses to identify as male?

 

[ponderingturtle]

That would only be true if you think medication and transition increase their suicide rate.

And you are rejecting transition. And opposing laws to make discrimination illegal.

Make some proposals of how you want it to work.

 

[Belz...]

And you are rejecting transition. And opposing laws to make discrimination illegal.

And you are advocating killing babies for food. And opposing laws to make slavery illegal.

When you have something to say about what I actually write, let me know.

 

[Lithrael]

Just for clarity, Arg, are you saying that you prefer to refer to people as the gender you think is appropriate based on how well they are passing as that gender in your judgement, and if they request something else you want to be free to ignore that?

And if so you are aware that that is the sort of thing that does actually in fact aggravate suicide rates but too bad? After all if they want your cooperation they just need to get further along in transition? The distress is worth the stand?

Do you think that people in this situation need you to remind them that they don't deserve to be called sir or madam as the case may be? Do you think it will do a single ounce of good to try to reinforce what they already know practically everyone besides themselves, their doctors, and hopefully their close friends thinks about them? Do you really think they haven't already heard and considered this? Do you think they need you to correct their misconceptions?

It sounds a little like you were walking it back to just saying it sounded like the bar for calling it harassment instead of honest mistakes was too low or the fines too high.

Being continually intentionally referred to by the opposite of your preferred pronouns at work is definitely being harassed, it's stressful and dehumanizing and also annoying. Disagree? Too bad?

 

[ponderingturtle]

We're running in circles. The way it's written, a single intentional refusal is defined as harassment? That's crazy. It has to be repeated to make any sense.

Sure it depends on context. Like sexual harassment, some things are clearly harassment, and somethings become harassment through repeated unwanted use.

Of course they are. They're telling me to call Bob "Roberta" and get on with my life

And god help Bob if he wants to go by Robert. He will still be Bob.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Just for clarity, Arg, are you saying that you prefer to refer to people as the gender you think is appropriate based on how well they are passing as that gender in your judgement, and if they request something else you want to be free to ignore that?

And if so you are aware that that is the sort of thing that does actually in fact aggravate suicide rates but too bad? After all if they want your cooperation they just need to get further along in transition? The distress is worth the stand?

Gertrude clearly does not care about their lives or deaths.

 

[Belz...]

Just for clarity, Arg, are you saying that you prefer to refer to people as the gender you think is appropriate based on how well they are passing as that gender in your judgement, and if they request something else you want to be free to ignore that?

The issue in these sorts of thread is that we're frequently presented with a conflation of two things: objective reality and etiquette. Just because I think someone isn't a man just because they think of themselves as a man doesn't mean I go around telling random people on the street their gender according to my observations.

My crucial point is that one's beliefs does not change reality, and that sex/gender are not determined by one's beliefs. It's that simple. The idea of challenging people on those beliefs was brought up by others as a distraction.

Do you think that people in this situation need you to remind them that they don't deserve to be called sir or madam as the case may be?

There's that word again, "need". Everything circles right back to how people feel, when I'm arguing about objective reality. So it does seem like people are arguing that the former should trump the latter.

 

[Belz...]

Gertrude clearly does not care about their lives or deaths.

Are you aware that misrepresenting my actual beliefs is dehumanising? You are invalidating my experiences! How bigoted of you! You've just increased my rate of suicide.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Are you aware that misrepresenting my actual beliefs is dehumanising? You are invalidating my experiences! How bigoted of you! You've just increased my rate of suicide.

You need to accept some responsibility for your actions.

 

[Belz...]

You need to accept some responsibility for your actions.

HA! How amusing. I say that I support trans people in their quest to become the gender of their choice, that I oppose discrimination against them based on their condition, and then you come in and pretend like I said the exact opposite, repeatedly and even after I show to the world that you're the dishonest party in the discussion, and now _I_ have to be responsible for the "actions" you made up for me?

You are an exceptional comedian. A dishonest and despicable comedian, but an exceptional one nonetheless.

I do hope that in the future you run afoul of your own ideological allies and get a taste of your own medecine, however. Ideologues have a tendency to splinter in mutually-heretical groups, despised by the others for not being "pure" enough in their beliefs, and those who are the most vicious and fanatical tend to learn that lesson before the others.

 

[ponderingturtle]

HA! How amusing. I say that I support trans people in their quest to become the gender of their choice, that I oppose discrimination against them based on their condition, and then you come in and pretend like I said the exact opposite, repeatedly and even after I show to the world that you're the dishonest party in the discussion, and now _I_ have to be responsible for the "actions" you made up for me?

You just refuse to properly gender them.