Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Richard Dawkins stripped of 1996 Humanist of the Year Award...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    Isn't the "jury still out" on all this? Has the issue been finally resolved in such a definite and "cut and dried" manner?
    Resolved to my satisfaction and the satisfaction of every major relevant professional medical organization. I actually was originally against trans rights long ago, I had thought transpeople delusional. What convinced me was learning more about genetics and how sex is determined. After that, the appropriateness of transitioning fell into place. This is partially why I'm more passionate about this subject than others on this forum. I want to present the evidence that convinced me to others who are like my former self.

    If you think about who is against trans-rights (conservatives, the alt-right, certain religions) and who is in favor of trans-rights (doctors, psychologists, the majority of feminists) it correlates to who you would expect to be right about related issues. I can understand hesitancy considering how different transexuality is so different from established thinking, similar to the race myth, but I think anyone looking deeply into the issue in good faith is likely to reach the same conclusion.

    The recent interest in doing so should raise questions. Why are so many young people including pubescent/prepubescent children now deciding they are trans? What are the motives/causes of that decision? How can we be entirely sure that peer pressure and social media have not played a part? How thorough is the psychological analysis prior to treatment in each case? And more importantly, what if that is analysis is mistaken?

    I have the same concerns over reading reports that nine and ten year old girls want breast implants for their sixteenth birthday present. Or that more children and young people are experiencing body shame with the attendant disorders and behaviours that often accompany that condition.
    I would expect some percentage of the increase comes from wider cultural acceptance. Coming out to parents, social transitioning, and access to treatment are all barriers for transpeople to overcome, and as society moves more towards trans-acceptance, these barriers will dissolve and more transpeople will be out. As for mistaken analysis, transpeople have known their truth for at least a decade by the time they start making irreversible decisions, and I wouldn't really expect non-transpeople to reach that point, to go through social transitioning and puberty blockers, to pass through a false diagnosis. Like I said, conservative organizations would absolutely love to host a parade of regretful transpeople. So where is the parade?

    That she was named by such a magazine and that such magazines exist with their predilection for certain “types” of woman does [in some respects] reinforce my point about the media and its influence re "pop-feminism". How many young people are being influenced by this version of feminism, femininity, and womanhood?

    I’d also point out that in most high profile cases it is male to female rather than female to male transitioning, which is a facet of all this I find very interesting.
    I agree that there's plenty to be concerned about when corporate interests present capitalistic opportunism as feminist or liberals latching onto the feminist label without truly knowing about feminist ideals, but I don't see that is a problem related to trans-rights outside of it being a feminist/progressive cause that can therefore be co-opted.

    I also think the greater number of transwomen compared to transmen is interesting. I have some guess as to why that could be, but they're not scientifically substantiated.

    I see this as a case of men [regardless of whether they identify as women] wanting to dominate feminist issues. It is men [albeit men who identify as women] demanding their concerns and rights be recognised regardless of how other women [who have always identified as women] might feel about these issues.
    If a transwoman is mentally a woman, as medical science indicates, then there should be no issue with transwomen demanding their concerns and rights be recognized since they are literally women and certain feminist spaces would be by necessity anti-intersectionality, which should be addressed. Regardless, trans issues are a small subset of feminism and might dominate the discussion due to topicality but there is so much more to movement I have a difficult time understanding how trans issues can dominate generally, especially since transpeople have developed their own progressive spaces.

    Since when is having a different opinion on certain aspects of an extremely complex issue, automatically defined as "prejudice"? I am on the Left politically and have been for over fifty years, however, I do not agree with all opinions or ideologies expressed by some of those who also consider themselves part of the Left.

    Am I displaying "prejudice"? Should I too experience "moral castigation" for daring to disagree?
    Whenever progressives adopt a new issue en masse, whether it's homosexuality, sex-worker rights, or trans-rights, the more moderate will consider it a cause too far. For example, Betty Friedan was famously against tying lesbians to feminism. While feminism is an enormous movement composed of all sorts of thoughts and ideas, when it comes to social justice policy like trans-rights, the cards are all on table. All the scientific evidence is there to see. All the transpeople fighting for their own rights can speak for themselves. The advocates of either side are plain. It's one thing to say that it's too complex to make a determination, it's another to adopt the same rhetoric as the anti-feminists, at least for this sole issue, when we know the morbid impact an unaccepting society can have on transpeople. This isn't the same as questioning if pornography/sex work can be feminist, it's questioning if certain people can have access to the medical treatment they need, if they deserve a place in our society, if their voices are important.

    That depends on how you define "choice". Some of us know from very early ages that we are different. Some realise that later in life. I have several friends who made a conscious decision in their twenties that they were same sex attracted. I also have friends who, in their forties or fifties, made the same decision despite, in those latter examples, having had happy marriages and children. Several maintain very good relationships with their former spouses and both share time with the grand-children.

    My own view of human sexuality is that we are all probably bisexual and at some point we decide, not necessarily consciously, to which sex we are attracted.

    However, in this new world of gender fluidity and trans-sexuality there appears to be no such thing as same sex preferences and so perhaps the world "gay" in its more recent meaning, should be excised from our vocabularies along with male and female pronouns.
    Perhaps that was a poor example. While certainly in an accepting society whether or not people believe homosexuality is a choice doesn't generally matter as people are free to be attracted to whatever sex(es) they want, I was speaking more to the ramifications that would lead to in a patriarchal society, e.g. criminality, conversion camps, child disowning, I should have asked about homosexual validity rather than homosexual choice.

    I think sex preference still has practical benefit even if it becomes more nebular in academic space, at least for now.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by seer View Post

      BS. The normal is not redefined by the abnormal. The normal is biological men and women - malformations or deformities do not change that.
      Nothing you've said here contradicts what I'm saying. That's still, generally speaking, an image of the colors green and purple. Acknowledging the brown pixels between them doesn't change that, it's just more accurate to do so, and science is all about accuracy.

      Society dictates where on the spectrum we separate people into men and women, and because the vast majority of people fall clearly into one of two categories, where you separate people doesn't matter outside of those few edge cases, but it's for the sake of edge cases we specifically define things in the first place.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by seer View Post
        The normal is not redefined by the abnormal. The normal is biological men and women - malformations or deformities do not change that.
        Your usage of the really vague and subjective terms 'normal' and 'abnormal' as if they were some sort of well-defined mathematically precise concepts is really strange.

        Comment


        • #49
          I think the transgender issue is really complicated.

          I don't have much personal experience with transgender people so don't have strong opinions on the subject, other than thinking it's important show the greatest love to those whom society has tended to reject (I might not be a Christian, but I can agree with Jesus on that).

          Something that deeply affected my own thinking on transgenderism was learning that the majority of human cultures in history appear to have made allowances for it.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Starlight View Post
            Your usage of the really vague and subjective terms 'normal' and 'abnormal' as if they were some sort of well-defined mathematically precise concepts is really strange.
            So a person born intersexual is not abnormal? If not the word normal has no meaning. A person born with no arms or legs is normal?
            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by seer View Post
              So a person born intersexual is not abnormal? If not the word normal has no meaning. A person born with no arms or legs is normal?
              You can call it whatever you feel like of course.

              I'm just suggesting you don't try to do any reasoning or construct any logical arguments based on terms like 'normal' and 'abnormal' because they're subjective and emotive terms, not well-defined categories, and whatever arguments you try to build on them will be logically invalid. In English those words are also ambiguous as to whether they are descriptive or normative, and you're setting yourself up for major errors of logic by using words that ambiguously slide between those two categories.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by seer View Post

                So a person born intersexual is not abnormal? If not the word normal has no meaning. A person born with no arms or legs is normal?
                A person born intersexual or minus arms or legs is out of the norm of the average human, but not "abnormal" per se.
                ďHe felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.Ē - Douglas Adams.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                  You can call it whatever you feel like of course.

                  I'm just suggesting you don't try to do any reasoning or construct any logical arguments based on terms like 'normal' and 'abnormal' because they're subjective and emotive terms, not well-defined categories, and whatever arguments you try to build on them will be logically invalid. In English those words are also ambiguous as to whether they are descriptive or normative, and you're setting yourself up for major errors of logic by using words that ambiguously slide between those two categories.
                  If that is the case then all words are subjective and that makes reason, on any level, impossible. And what you just wrote is also suspect. Normal and abnormal are well defined and void of emotional content.

                  Normal:

                  : conforming to a type, standard, or regular pattern : characterized by that which is considered usual, typical, or routine

                  : (of a person) free from physical or mental disorders.

                  : Biology Functioning or occurring in a natural way; lacking observable abnormalities or deficiencies.
                  Last edited by seer; 04-25-2021, 07:01 AM.
                  Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                    A person born intersexual or minus arms or legs is out of the norm of the average human, but not "abnormal" per se.
                    Abnormal:

                    :
                    deviating from the normal or average

                    : Not typical, usual, or regular; not normal; deviant.

                    : different from what is usual or average...

                    : departingfromthenormaline.g. intelligenceanddevelopment...
                    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post



                      The vast majority of pixels in this image are either green or purple, but because of the small percentage of brown pixels, it's clear this is a spectrum and not a binary. Sex is the same way. Normally, it's determined by a number of genes expressing in a certain way, but sometimes those genes express outside the binary, and you get situations like those resulting in gender dysphoria.
                      If substantially less than 1% (0.6% of according to a 2016 study) of those pixels aren't definitely green or purple you would have a valid analogy but this illustration seeks to deliberately misinform and give the impression that a significant portion of the population is transgendered. They are not.

                      So do we scrap everything and restructure it all around the whims and desires of the 0.6%?

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                        A person born intersexual or minus arms or legs is out of the norm of the average human, but not "abnormal" per se.
                        Transparent semantics

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          If substantially less than 1% (0.6% of according to a 2016 study) of those pixels aren't definitely green or purple you would have a valid analogy but this illustration seeks to deliberately misinform and give the impression that a significant portion of the population is transgendered. They are not.

                          So do we scrap everything and restructure it all around the whims and desires of the 0.6%?
                          It doesn't really matter what positive percentage of the image is brown pixels, just that there is a gradient. It wasn't meant to be 1-to-1. Also, in my example the brown pixels aren't meant to solely be transpeople, but to include anyone whose genes or prenatal environment resulted in sex characteristics outside the apparent binary.

                          What do you think we're scrapping and restructuring for the sake of transpeople?
                          Last edited by Psychic Missile; 04-25-2021, 02:08 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post

                            It doesn't really matter what positive percentage of the image is brown pixels, just that there is a gradient. It wasn't meant to be 1-to-1. Also, in my example the brown pixels aren't meant to solely be transpeople, but to include anyone whose genes or prenatal environment resulted in sex characteristics outside the apparent binary.
                            But there is no gradation, there are biological men and biological women and outliers who have defects.

                            What do you think we're scrapping and restructuring for the sake of transpeople?
                            Pretty much. For political correctness.
                            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post



                              What do you think we're scrapping and restructuring for the sake of transpeople?
                              We are doing a whole lot of restructuring to accommodate something that 0.6% of the population has. And this is unlike say someone in a wheelchair who literally has their functionality severely curtailed if we don't assist them in ways that don't, I might add, seek to transform the basic structure of society.

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by seer View Post
                                But there is no gradation, there are biological men and biological women and outliers who have defects.
                                You say the data falls into two categories with some outliers, someone else could equally say the outliers together form a third category and thus there are three categories.

                                To my mind, someone who says there are 3 categories, and thus explains all the data, has done a far better job of explaining the data than you have, with your two categories and the 'outliers' which are effectively data points which don't fit your model thus showing it to have errors.

                                Human cultures in history have had 2-5 genders, and thus chosen to group the data into 2,3,4 or 5 categories. So there are a few different ways of categorizing genders.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by seer, 07-20-2021, 12:05 PM
                                94 responses
                                372 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 07-16-2021, 07:39 AM
                                52 responses
                                253 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Mountain Man, 07-05-2021, 04:27 PM
                                74 responses
                                445 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by tabibito, 06-30-2021, 02:53 AM
                                50 responses
                                325 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by seer, 05-12-2021, 05:35 AM
                                662 responses
                                4,230 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Tassman
                                by Tassman
                                 
                                Working...
                                X