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

[Starlight]

We are doing a whole lot of restructuring

Is it really a 'whole lot'? I haven't had much personal direct experience with either disabled people or transgender people, so can't really point to a single thing I have had to do to accommodate either one.

You talk as if we are making immense sacrifices... is doing nothing an immense sacrifice for the sake of giving freedom to others?

to accommodate something that 0.6% of the population has.

It's difficult to give numbers to things like this because obviously in a society where some people are antagonistic towards transgender people, only people that are strongly transgender will come forward and identify themselves. Others who are less strongly transgender will stay in the closet and try to make do as best they can because they feel more scared of people not accepting them than they do a desire to express their transgenderism.

And this is unlike say someone in a wheelchair who literally has their functionality severely curtailed if we don't assist them

It seems to me that severe mental distress can be as debilitating to someone's life as severe physical disability. Historically many people in severe mental distress were just locked away in asylums for the rest of their lives.

If instead such people can be helped to live lives that are close to normal in level of functionality, that seems worthwhile.

in ways that don't, I might add, seek to transform the basic structure of society.

I'm sure the people who were against abolishing slavery made much the same complaint. Or who were against abolishing the class system, or the caste system, or against giving women equal rights, etc.

One thing I think often makes conservatives into liberals is to study cultural anthropology, and realize that cultures with very very different basic structures can and do thrive regardless of structure. There is no reason to worry about changing basic structures of society. Social change continually happens and it doesn't result in the apocalypse. Human cultures through history have had 2-5 genders and thrived perfectly well.

[Tassman]

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...

But NOT “abnormal” in the sense of unacceptable as fellow human beings unless you are arguing that albinos, persons minus arms or legs, intersexual people - and other minorities - are excluded from normal humanity.

[seer]

But NOT “abnormal” in the sense of unacceptable as fellow human beings unless you are arguing that albinos, persons minus arms or legs, intersexual people - and other minorities - are excluded from normal humanity.

I said nothing about being unacceptable as fellow human beings - of course they are, as they are all created in the image of God...

[seer]

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.

Actually there are only two categories by definition - normal (biological men and women) and abnormal (and those with defects). And I'm not sure what your point about genders is - since they are subjective categories.

[seer]

One thing I think often makes conservatives into liberals is to study cultural anthropology, and realize that cultures with very very different basic structures can and do thrive regardless of structure. There is no reason to worry about changing basic structures of society. Social change continually happens and it doesn't result in the apocalypse. Human cultures through history have had 2-5 genders and thrived perfectly well.

Really, have you read the what the leftist destruction of the nuclear family has wrought? What fatherless homes has done to children? There are plenty of studies. And this gender nonsense is just the logical conclusion of the sexual revolution. Which has destroyed the family.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Resolved to my satisfaction and the satisfaction of every major relevant professional medical organization.

I would have to disagree. A brief search of various available scientific articles on the net makes it clear that this issue is far from resolved. Nor have you considered my questions. Why are we now seeing an increase particularly among young people and children [pubescent and/or prepubescent] who are suddenly identifying as trans?

If the condition is as widespread as these recent incidents suggest, where is the corroborating evidence from among older people? How many fifty, sixty, and seventy year olds are coming forward to have their genders reassigned? Do you have any information on that?

The incidence of DSD and inter-sex individuals is tiny in proportion to the population and of course such individuals need all the help and support they can be given. However, this sudden upsurge raises serious questions.

The simple fact is that biological sex is not a spectrum in humans. It is binary and is connected to the distinct types of sex cells [gametes] produced. Hence in humans males are the sex that produce sperm [the small gametes] and females are the sex that produce ova [the large gametes]. I have yet to read that intermediate human gametes have been discovered. Sexual preferences however are an entirely different issue.

Some fish can change sex as a result of population levels and/or external pressures. Some reptiles and insects can reproduce by parthenogenesis. Humans can do neither. Of course our evolutionary background may play a part in why there are found some rare examples of individuals who have some sex cells that are different from their phenotype. However, I am not convinced that those rare examples support the claim that human biological sex is a “spectrum”. Furthermore, we also know that sex can be determined in utero thereby permitting foetal sex selection often accompanied by the attendant aborting of embryos purely because they are female.

In my opinion, a lot of this desire for gender reassignment is premised on the very term “gender” which is a cultural and not a biological phenomenon.

In our western society the two separate sexes are culturally conditioned to adhere to what constitutes specific male and female gender typical behaviours, rather than on actual biology. We also have to recognise that even today our society still has deeply laid patriarchal mores.

It does not follow that a little girl who likes playing with trucks, climbing trees, and making dens is a boy trapped in a girl’s body anymore than a little boy who likes dressing up in his mother’s evening gown, playing with dolls, or baking cakes, is a girl trapped in a boy’s body. They are simply children doing what children do.

Some of those children will be attracted to same sex partners, a tiny percentage will be DSD. Most will be neither.

It is within wider society that the fault lies because of those cultural mores and prejudices particularly towards boys who receive social opprobrium if they do not behave or act in a manner that constitutes or befits “Being a man”.

Nor am I entirely convinced by your comment that “a transwoman is mentally a woman”. Again, from the available literature there is no conclusive evidence that the theories concerning the [so-called] male and female brain are correct. The Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus concept has been widely discredited.

In a short video interview with New Scientist magazine in 2019 cognitive neuroscientist Prof. Gina Rippon made the point that while there are tiny differences within male & female brains she questioned their significance; and while she also made the point that there are hormonal differences particularly concerning reproduction she again noted that even there overlaps are found.

In her corresponding article in the print edition she notes that stereotypes about any group’s innate abilities can become self-fulfilling prophecies. “If someone is aware of a negative stereotype about the group to which they belong this can impair their performance in a related task” and that studies have shown that “if a task is presented in a positive context, then both the associated brain processes and how well someone performs the task will be different from when it is presented in a negative context.”

That leads to the question, why should we assume that expectations concerning behaviours should be any different? If from birth boys and girls are surrounded by huge social pressures [toys, clothes, home, school, advertising, fashion, etc] to act and behave in a certain way it is not surprising that they grow up viewing these as “natural” aspects of their respective sex. In the same article Prof. Rippon also references a study undertaken in 2015 at Tel Aviv university that examined the characteristics of more than 100 brain structures in over 1400 scans and found it impossible to divide these neatly into “female-typical and male–typical brains”. Likewise two psychologists at Temple University and Cabrini College in Pennsylvania USA found that playing computer/video games was a better predictor of spatial awareness than biological sex. While more males played these games, females who were at the same level of competence and experience showed equally good spatial skills. [see New Scientist, March 2-8, 2019]

However, we both agree on the dangers of corporate interests capitalising on these issues and that pertains to my own concerns that it is possible that much of what we are seeing, particularly among the young, is a combination of gender stereotyping in our society, peer pressure, the impact of the media [especially social media] and [to some extent] a fashion fad. Hence as to your question “Where is the parade” of regretful individuals who have transitioned, this is still early days. I doubt I will be around to see it but I wonder what may transpire over the next thirty or forty years if young people today increasingly decide to go through this process.

I was also interested in your reference to “feminist ideals”? What precisely do you consider those to be?

I find it somewhat amusing that several high profile “celebrity” trans women so often present themselves as the [male created] stereotype of what constitutes “sexy” femininity. To wit cripplingly high heels, make-up, big hair, and breasts thrust forward in décolletage dresses. There are even trans women who take part in beauty pageants [Lucia Heredia]. Such [male created] contests [cattle markets] serve purely to objectify women as sex objects and have been vilified by feminists for decades.

Another trans woman, India Willoughby [who transitioned when she was fifty] while discussing a top UK hotel’s demand that its female staff shaved their legs was asked what her reaction would have been if she had been required to shave her legs while living as a man and replied “What a bizarre question. Why would I shave my legs when I was living as a man?" Ms Willoughby continued by noting “Personally, I wouldn’t like to be served by somebody with hairy legs, grubby nails, dishevelled hair, and looking a bit worse for wear.” A sexist attitude which she reinforced by continuing that “for women, the expectation is that you do look clean.” [subtext - unshaven female legs are dirty].

As previously noted I have trans friends and those who are trans should be offered every support and help. However, I am not convinced that there are as many trans individuals around as is presently being suggested. In that I agree with what Prof. Dawkins wrote,

“In 2015, Rachel Dolezal, a white chapter president of NAACP, was vilified for identifying as Black. Some men choose to identify as women, and some women choose to identify as men. You will be vilified if you deny that they literally are what they identify as.
Discuss” [my emphasis]

And that is precisely what has happened. These people are not “literally” women [or men] and to abuse or vilify someone for pointing out that biological fact is completely reprehensible.

[rogue06]

Is it really a 'whole lot'? I haven't had much personal direct experience with either disabled people or transgender people, so can't really point to a single thing I have had to do to accommodate either one.

The biggest thing for handicap people stuck in wheelchairs was the building of access ramps since stairs are impossible for them.

With transgendered we have second rate male athletes declaring they feel girlie and slowly but surely demolishing girls and women's sports. Biological males are getting athletic scholarships meant for girls.

And of course there is the bathroom/showers/changing room issue and situations like this that the MSM will usually not cover but you can find in local media reports.

Transgender woman arrested accused of sexually assaulting teen in Walmart bathroom

New details on transgender woman arrested for voyeurism at Ammon Target

Cross-dressing man arrested for filming Alabama woman in public bathroom

Man Dressed as Woman Arrested for Spying Into Mall Bathroom Stall, Police Say

Fortunately, since they only constitute 0.6% of the population (and I've seen studies questioning if it is even that high) so such situations are rare but women and girls shouldn't be concerned that a public restroom or the like is some pervert's hunting grounds.

Ironically, supporters of biological men using women's bathroom and changing facilities cite the rareness of these incidents to claim there is no problem. Then I guess the rarity of transsexualism itself (0.6%) means it is not anything that requires vast social restructuring in order to accommodate them.

[rogue06]

But NOT “abnormal” in the sense of unacceptable as fellow human beings unless you are arguing that albinos, persons minus arms or legs, intersexual people - and other minorities - are excluded from normal humanity.

Histrionics aside, your mention of those with albinism does raise an interesting point. Given that they are sensitive to bright light, often requiring sunglasses and lots of sun screen just to go outdoors, shouldn't we be mandating that all windows be replaced with tinted glass in order to accommodate them?

[rogue06]

I said nothing about being unacceptable as fellow human beings - of course they are, as they are all created in the image of God...

You have to give Tass credit there though. That straw man he constructed was worthy of a Burning Man festival

[Starlight]

Really, have you read the what the leftist destruction of the nuclear family has wrought? What fatherless homes has done to children? There are plenty of studies.

I've read recent studies about family structure and child raising, apparently unlike you, since you're 100% wrong about what they say.

And this gender nonsense is just the logical conclusion of the sexual revolution. Which has destroyed the family.

You say the craziest things.

Actually there are only two categories by definition - normal (biological men and women) and abnormal (and those with defects). And I'm not sure what your point about genders is - since they are subjective categories.

It's not merely that you're totally wrong here, but that you even think you have a valid point is insane.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

The biggest thing for handicap people stuck in wheelchairs was the building of access ramps since stairs are impossible for them.

That is why the Daleks will never conquer the universe.

On the issue of unisex changing rooms and bathrooms perhaps if large sections of society was generally less prurient about the human body we would not have these issues.

What is intrinsically wrong with having unisex public bathrooms?

[rogue06]

That is why the Daleks will never conquer the universe.

dalek_motivational_by_animaniac43_d4b50r3-fullview.jpg

In the newest version they fly

p01nw6xj.jpgdaleks_flying_over_london-11103821.jpg

On the issue of unisex changing rooms and bathrooms perhaps if large sections of society was generally less prurient about the human body we would not have these issues.

Ah yes. Just wave a wand and magically change human behavior.


As for unisex bathrooms? Nothing wrong if they contain a single toilet, urinal and sink and the door can be locked. The problems arise when there are several stalls and men and women can both enter at the same time.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

In the newest version they fly

Oh that's just cheating:

Ah yes. Just wave a wand and magically change human behavior.

Pardon? In what respect? We all have to defecate and urinate.

As for unisex bathrooms? Nothing wrong if they contain a single toilet, urinal and sink and the door can be locked. The problems arise when there are several stalls and men and women can both enter at the same time.

No unisex bathroom I have ever used had cubicles which offered facilities for two.

[rogue06]

Oh that's just cheating:


Pardon? In what respect? We all have to defecate and urinate.


No unisex bathroom I have ever used had cubicles which offered facilities for two.

I've seen one that had the sinks in the middle sort of like one of those kitchen island designs and the stalls for men on one side and the stalls for women on the other, but all in one room.

The woman I knew who works there said she either holds it or goes to the building next door.

[seer]

I've read recent studies about family structure and child raising, apparently unlike you, since you're 100% wrong about what they say.

Are you seriously saying that the poverty rate, for instance, for single parenthood, is not way higher?

It's not merely that you're totally wrong here, but that you even think you have a valid point is insane.

Show me where I am off. Exactly.