Topic: Don't want a man watching you undress?
started by: Leisher
Posted by Leisher on Mar. 08 2015,14:45
If he claims to be transgender, < then you're the asshole. >We live in the freest country on the planet where you can say whatever you want. You know, unless you complain that there's a man in your female only dressing room. In that case, you need to lose your membership.
Posted by TheCatt on Mar. 08 2015,16:07
How about private dressing rooms and private showers?I am sooo tired of seeing old man dick at the gym. I guess I should stop staring, but still...
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,05:14
"I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain." — John Adams And apparently their children, grandchildren, etc. worry about not hurting the feelings of someone that may or may not identify with the the sex organ they are born with. Apparently we need some real shit to worry about.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,05:35
They already have real problems to deal with.... maybe what they need is less contact with other broken people so they stop thinking their mental aberrations are normal. :-PDidn't we used to put people who thought they were Napoleon in hospitals?
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,07:03
I don't know. Do you think we'd be dealing with this if people needed to concern themselves with not starving the way they did 150-200 years ago? Then again, our ancestors would probably look at notion of paying someone to make their facilities available to us so we can come and do heavy physical labor which produces nothing would probably be seen to merit a kick in our asses.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,07:09
Years ago I made a front page post about vegetarians, and how they were not to be trusted because their lives were so easy, without any real problems or challenges, that they had to invent hardships for themselves, and who knows what other reality-challenging hardships might they invent for themselves. I see what you just said as in that neighborhood.Also, I thought of a term for the concept I brought up before: It used to be that they were seen as mentally ill, now they are labelled as "People Who Identify as Napoleonic," and they are given their own restrooms. There's your twitter post, right there, and unlike shit repeated by that hack Neil Tyson, it is completely original.
I have said for years that our government will not ever be fixed without a whole lot of bloodshed and misery... I have a feeling this mass confusion over identity will only be fixed at exactly the same time.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,07:21
Confusion?
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,07:22
Hysteria?
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,07:26
QUOTE
I have said for years that our government will not ever be fixed without a whole lot of bloodshed and misery... I have a feeling this mass confusion over identity will only be fixed at exactly the same time.
I need a bit of an explanation for that one.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,07:42
Which part?
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,07:51
The second half.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,08:29
Well, I guess it depends on whether more people are actually confused.... I guess you don't like that expression... over their sexuality than they have been in the past. For me, if you have a cock you're a guy and if you have a pussy you are a chick, and then maybe you're straight or gay. Attraction is a chemical and hey, some peeps might have different chemistry, but chromosomes are chromosomes and they are capable of fucking up sometimes, but they don't lie. So is the concept of having... what was it at last count... 8 different genders? a new thing? Has it always been like this but people were oppressed? Are we just now in this new era of enlightenment where people are free to be what they feel on the inside, a male trans gender queer bi pony? I don't even know the correct names. Are feelings a valid argument for anything?
Anyway, my observations have been that it is both the comfort of knowing someone will feed you 3 squares a day guaranteed, and having way too much leisure time, a generation that were taught they are special snowflakes, and complete and perfect communication with other people with the same mental state, that propagates what I see as, generally, a mental illness. They have no real problems or challenges to their survival, they are coddled, they are never told they are wrong, they are never slapped upside the head when they fuck up, there are no consequences for their actions, and they have a built-in support group with other people just like them reinforcing that they are normal and not broken. Not saying they aren't nice people, but accommodating them is like telling the person with OCD or autism that they are fine and shouldn't be judged for it. It doesn't help, and actually hurts.
I wonder.... if there was a pill that fixed brain chemistry and made boys see themselves as boys and girls see themselves as girls, how much protesting there would be.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,08:41
QUOTE
For me, if you have a cock you're a guy and if you have a pussy you are a chick, and then maybe you're straight or gay.
Gender's not just a physical thing. < Those Japanese > dudes whose educational system you like so much have my back on this one.
QUOTE
Are feelings a valid argument for anything?
Of course not. But they're a great excuse and can overrule logic.
QUOTE
Anyway, my observations have been that it is both the comfort of knowing someone will feed you 3 squares a day guaranteed, and having way too much leisure time, a generation that were taught they are special snowflakes, and complete and perfect communication with other people with the same mental state, that propagates what I see as, generally, a mental illness.
Your argument is too much leisure time and not enough challenges translates to invented internal conflicts?
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,08:47
(Malcolm @ Mar. 09 2015,11:41)
QUOTE
QUOTE
Anyway, my observations have been that it is both the comfort of knowing someone will feed you 3 squares a day guaranteed, and having way too much leisure time, a generation that were taught they are special snowflakes, and complete and perfect communication with other people with the same mental state, that propagates what I see as, generally, a mental illness.
Your argument is too much leisure time and not enough challenges translates to invented internal conflicts?
Absolutely, yes. Millions of years of evolution were powered by conflict. Humans are absolutely built to deal with adversity. For the first time in the history of a planet, we (in this country) are a species that has no adversity, no challenge to our existence, and now we are seeing the consequences of that.
Just a hypothesis. Maybe it actually is the fluoride in the water fucking up peoples brains.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,09:03
QUOTE
For the first time in the history of a planet, we (in this country) are a species that has no adversity, no challenge to our existence, and now we are seeing the consequences of that.
No adversity? You aren't alive unless you're being shot at, bombed, or otherwise hunted? Additionally, this country especially seems to spend a fuckload of money trying to overcome adversity and challenges to its continued existence.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,09:11
(Malcolm @ Mar. 09 2015,12:03)
QUOTE
QUOTE
For the first time in the history of a planet, we (in this country) are a species that has no adversity, no challenge to our existence, and now we are seeing the consequences of that.
No adversity? You aren't alive unless you're being shot at, bombed, or otherwise hunted? Additionally, this country especially seems to spend a fuckload of money trying to overcome adversity and challenges to its continued existence.
"You aren't alive unless you're being shot at, bombed, or otherwise hunted?"
In a sense. It doesn't need to be literal. But I wonder.... how long has it been since most people in this country felt true, legitimate hunger, and not just a sense that it was time to eat again, and didn't know where the next meal was coming from? I keep hearing about hungry kids in commercials that want me to give money to their charity, but the reality is that there are two types of poor people in the world: global poor, and America-poor. Global-poor drink where they shit and sometimes starve to death on the side of the road trying to crawl 10 miles to the rumored grain drop-off point. America-poor get offended when you tell them how to spend their... what is the new thing... food stamp debit card?, they have cable, xbox, disposable income for weed, and subsidized housing. How is it even possible to be homeless any more in this country, unless you have mental illness and don't go to the nearest social worker?
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,09:18
Back to my "gender confusion will be fixed at the same time the government is bloodily overthrown" statement:Today people are fat and happy and live with a corrupted government that keeps the bread flowing and the status quo. Today people are free to contemplate who they are and how they don't have the correct genitalia and how everyone else should accomidate their personal perceptions of themselves.
If everything went to shit, if the bloody revolution happened and governments fell like dominoes until, if you are lucky, your local community becomes a walled city-state, and if you are unlucky, you are out in the wilds with the roving gangs, there are going to be 2 genders: people with the penises are either going to be killing for vaginas or building things to secure vaginas, and people with vaginas are going to latch on to the closest, nicest, strongest man to keep themselves from getting raped over and over. That'll be it. Clarity of perception through adversity and threatened existence.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,09:29
(GORDON @ Mar. 09 2015,11:11)
QUOTE
(Malcolm @ Mar. 09 2015,12:03)
QUOTE
QUOTE
For the first time in the history of a planet, we (in this country) are a species that has no adversity, no challenge to our existence, and now we are seeing the consequences of that.
No adversity? You aren't alive unless you're being shot at, bombed, or otherwise hunted? Additionally, this country especially seems to spend a fuckload of money trying to overcome adversity and challenges to its continued existence.
"You aren't alive unless you're being shot at, bombed, or otherwise hunted?"
In a sense. It doesn't need to be literal. But I wonder.... how long has it been since most people in this country felt true, legitimate hunger, and not just a sense that it was time to eat again, and didn't know where the next meal was coming from? I keep hearing about hungry kids in commercials that want me to give money to their charity, but the reality is that there are two types of poor people in the world: global poor, and America-poor. Global-poor drink where they shit and sometimes starve to death on the side of the road trying to crawl 10 miles to the rumored grain drop-off point. America-poor get offended when you tell them how to spend their... what is the new thing... food stamp debit card?, they have cable, xbox, disposable income for weed, and subsidized housing. How is it even possible to be homeless any more in this country, unless you have mental illness and don't go to the nearest social worker?
There's a reason few great thinkers and inventors came out of the tropics. When all you have to do is step outside your hut and grab a banana a coconut and some crabs to survive, that usually doesn't generate the needed diversity to develop farming and iron working and animal husbandry.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,09:34
QUOTE
When all you have to do is step outside your hut and grab a banana a coconut and some crabs to survive, that usually doesn't generate the needed diversity to develop farming and iron working and animal husbandry.
The dudes in the tropics could outsail any European until the advent of steam power. Navigation skills were way more important than metalworking.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,09:35
(Malcolm @ Mar. 09 2015,12:34)
QUOTE
QUOTE
When all you have to do is step outside your hut and grab a banana a coconut and some crabs to survive, that usually doesn't generate the needed diversity to develop farming and iron working and animal husbandry.
The dudes in the tropics could outsail any European until the advent of steam power. Navigation skills were way more important than metalworking.
And yet they didn't dominate the world in spite of that supposed advantage.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,09:44
Cannons. Metalworking.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,09:51
(GORDON @ Mar. 09 2015,11:35)
QUOTE
(Malcolm @ Mar. 09 2015,12:34)
QUOTE
QUOTE
When all you have to do is step outside your hut and grab a banana a coconut and some crabs to survive, that usually doesn't generate the needed diversity to develop farming and iron working and animal husbandry.
The dudes in the tropics could outsail any European until the advent of steam power. Navigation skills were way more important than metalworking.
And yet they didn't dominate the world in spite of that supposed advantage.
Maybe they didn't fucking want to.
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,11:11
QUOTE
So is the concept of having... what was it at last count... 8 different genders? a new thing?
Truth be told, there's about as many different genders as there are people on the planet. The vastly overwhelming majority fall into two groups that are very similar, and can be labeled en masse as male and female. But when you get right down to it how GORDON expresses his masculinity is different from how Malcolm expresses his, and both are a bit different from Vince, etc. But they all get put into the same labeled box together, which is fine for them.
Some people seem to be born with the wrong genitals. They have a dick but as a little kid they played with dolls and loved pink things and wanted to grow up to be a princess and marry a prince. Historically they would either be beaten until they were able to pretend to be normal or they'd be killed for being a freak.
The problem isn't that there are more genders. The problem is that so many busybodies want to insist that everyone fit into a box. Is it really so important that everyone have a damn label that some of them have to die (or be so berated by society that they wish they were dead) because they don't fit?
Bah. Fuck society and it's genders. I'm a me. You go be a you. And if you aren't planning to fuck someone then their "gender" shouldn't be any of your god damned business.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,11:22
I don't really see the traditionalists telling everyone to conform to them, I see the new guys telling everyone else to conform to them.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,11:29
(GORDON @ Mar. 09 2015,13:22)
QUOTE
I don't really see the traditionalists telling everyone to conform to them, I see the new guys telling everyone else to conform to them.
QUOTE
So is the concept of having... what was it at last count... 8 different genders? a new thing? Has it always been like this but people were oppressed? Are we just now in this new era of enlightenment where people are free to be what they feel on the inside, a male trans gender queer bi pony?
QUOTE
...maybe what they need is less contact with other broken people so they stop thinking their mental aberrations are normal.
...
For me, if you have a cock you're a guy and if you have a pussy you are a chick, and then maybe you're straight or gay.
...
For me, if you have a cock you're a guy and if you have a pussy you are a chick, and then maybe you're straight or gay.
Isn't this arguing that modern times need to follow the old rules?
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,11:58
(GORDON @ Mar. 09 2015,13:22)
QUOTE
I don't really see the traditionalists telling everyone to conform to them, I see the new guys telling everyone else to conform to them.
Looking back that's pretty much the entirety of your input on this topic.
When consenting adults can marry each other regardless of what is between their legs and not have to fight a multitude of legal battles then it might be so. But as long as they are still forced to follow the ancient religious customs that they themselves do not subscribe to, then you are just plain wrong.
Now I will admit that there are plenty of assholes on the other side that go too far. So the second half of your statement is not wrong. But the first half is complete fail. Everyone on both sides just needs to stop trying to tell other people how to live their lives.
Posted by TheCatt on Mar. 09 2015,12:10
QUOTE
"Sex" refers to the biological and physiological characteristics that define men and women. "Gender" refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women.
...
QUOTE
Sexologist John Money introduced the terminological distinction between biological sex and gender as a role in 1955. Before his work, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories.[1][2] However, Money's meaning of the word did not become widespread until the 1970s, when feminist theory embraced the concept of a distinction between biological sex and the social construct of gender.
< Gender >
Facebook offers between 51-58 genders (according to a quick google)
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,12:14
QUOTE
Facebook offers between 51-58 genders (according to a quick google)
Instagram tops 1000+.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,12:19
(TPRJones @ Mar. 09 2015,14:58)
QUOTE
(GORDON @ Mar. 09 2015,13:22)
QUOTE
I don't really see the traditionalists telling everyone to conform to them, I see the new guys telling everyone else to conform to them.
Looking back that's pretty much the entirety of your input on this topic.
I'm not telling anyone how to live. I'm telling them to stop demanding I perceive them as something other than what they are.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,12:22
QUOTE
I'm telling them to stop demanding I perceive them as something other than what they are.
If you could define "what they are..."
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,12:24
Already did, I said the chromosomes don't lie.A boy who thinks he is a girl is no different than someone who isn't Napoleon who thinks they are Napoleon.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,12:25
What you are is not strictly physical.QUOTE
A boy who thinks he is a girl is no different than someone who isn't Napoleon who thinks they are Napoleon.
That's a world of difference. Thinking you're some specific other person is different than not being 100% mentally in sync with your physical sex.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,12:27
Thinking you are something that you are not is not 100% in sync with reality.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,12:29
(GORDON @ Mar. 09 2015,14:27)
QUOTE
Thinking you are something that you are not is not 100% in sync with reality.
That begs the question here. The entire debate is "what you are." You're presuming to have an answer to that already, and it seems you're implying you've got the full, completely truthful picture on what reality is. If the body says "boy" and them mind says "girl," why does the mind lose the showdown automatically?
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,12:36
If you're telling me that your feelings override the reality of chromosomes, then I am just going to disagree.I said early on that chromosomes don't lie, but whether you're attracted to your own sex or the opposite sex is chemical and that can certainly be measured, and in time, < be changed. > But having a dick and balls and no ovaries, vagina, or uterus, and still insisting you are a female, is contrary to reality.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,12:40
(Malcolm @ Mar. 09 2015,14:29)
QUOTE
(GORDON @ Mar. 09 2015,14:27)
QUOTE
Thinking you are something that you are not is not 100% in sync with reality.
That begs the question here. The entire debate is "what you are." You're presuming to have an answer to that already, and it seems you're implying you've got the full, completely truthful picture on what reality is. If the body says "boy" and them mind says "girl," why does the mind lose the showdown automatically?
If the body says "human" and the mind says "elephant" is it medical malpractice to sew a trunk on the person?
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,12:40
QUOTE
If you're telling me that your feelings override the reality of chromosomes, then I am just going to disagree.
Brain > body, < and it's not uncommon > under certain circumstances. In fact, it's a bit difficult to < separate those two things > as far as overall health goes. And that last one is from Rene goddamn Descartes if you think it's just some hippie bullshit from the last half century.
QUOTE
I said early on that chromosomes don't lie, but whether you're attracted to your own sex or the opposite sex is chemical and that can certainly be measured...
Gender identity is more than those components.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,12:49
< Rationality > is the quality or state of being reasonable, based on facts or reason.Feelings cannot be measured empirically.
< Sanity > is
++++
\
I tried putting som,ething t0gether but my kid just got home and won't stop jabbering and now there is no more rational thought in me.
Long story short, perception is not reality.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,12:55
QUOTE
Rationality is the quality or state of being reasonable, based on facts or reason.
You can't know all the facts or guarantee perfect reasoning. What validates your logic?
< Rational and irrational >. If you operate as a strictly logical and reasonable individual, then you toss away your intuition and sensations entirely because all that shit is irrational. You get to be Commander Data at worst or Spock at best.
< Here's what David Hume thinks >.
QUOTE
Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,13:04
Here you go. You should love this.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,13:30
I am in a room with 5 other people. I see an elephant in the room with us, but the other 5 people insist that there is no elephant. My first question is to my own sanity. I test and observe that the other people have functioning eyesight. I test and observe that there are no smoke and mirrors in play. I weigh the contents of the room and observe there is 2 tons that can only be explained by elephant. I dip the entire room in water and observe an elephant's worth of displacement.At this point I conclude that I am rational and the other 5 are not, in spite of their consensus. I write up my findings and challenge anyone to disprove them. This is the Scientific Method and it is bulletproof.
Now, take that same logic and process and apply it to a human with a penis and testicles, and no vagina, uterus, or ovaries. If any serious scientists have ever taken on "Why do people think they are a different sex than what their chromosomes state," I bet it always starts with the question, "Why are their brains wired abnormally?" which leads to the question "And can it be fixed?" which leads to the protests of, "There's nothing to fix!" Which is what someone irrational would say.
That last sentence was a dig. The rest was objective.
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,13:56
So you insist that they conform their lives to your ideas of reality instead of their own experiences that they have from their own lives. Why is your experience and viewpoint any more valid than their own? And why should they upend their lives and be miserable just to satisfy you?EDIT: It occurs to me that I should elaborate. You keep claiming that science is on your side, but science cannot yet quantify the mind the way it can the mass of an elephant, so your analogy is invalid. When we have figured out how to read thoughts and emotions as easily as weighing an elephant then it will fit. Until then you are just insisting you are right and they are wrong with no real basis.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,13:59
Statistically speaking, they are just as miserable when they pretend to be of a sex as when they don't as evidenced by the rates of suicide of pre and post op transsexuals. Which goes back to Gordo's supposition that we're dealing with mental illness rather than a gender crisis.
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,14:02
QUOTE
Statistically speaking, they are just as miserable when they pretend to be of a sex as when they don't as evidenced by the rates of suicide of pre and post op transsexuals.
Most of that seems to come from how much the rest of society hates them. Trans people tend to get hatred from both directions, as the gays aren't any better at accepting them than the straight are of accepting the gays.
Statistically speaking, that is.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,14:07
Eh... I don't really care what they do as far as how they dress or what they get chopped off or sewed on. I go back to my original statement that if you have a penis you use the penis dressing room. If you don't you use the non-penis dressing room. Thems the rules.I'm pretty sure John Hopkins probably factored in all the hurt feelings when they decided to stop the chopping off and sewing on because they consider it a mental illness now.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,14:11
QUOTE
This is the Scientific Method and it is bulletproof.
No, it's not. Again, < Hume >.
QUOTE
Hume's argument is that we cannot rationally justify the claim that nature will continue to be uniform, as justification comes in only two varieties—demonstrative reasoning and probable reasoning—and both of these are inadequate. With regard to demonstrative reasoning, Hume argues that the uniformity principle cannot be demonstrated, as it is "consistent and conceivable" that nature might stop being regular. Turning to probable reasoning, Hume argues that we cannot hold that nature will continue to be uniform because it has been in the past. As this is using the very sort of reasoning (induction) that is under question, it would be circular reasoning. Thus, no form of justification will rationally warrant our inductive inferences.
QUOTE
Which goes back to Gordo's supposition that we're dealing with mental illness rather than a gender crisis.
I'd bet damn near 99.9% of people on this planet could qualify as "mentally ill." Not being absolutely confident in your sexuality can do that to you. There are a billion other things you could substitute in place of "sexuality" and they'd all be true.
QUOTE
I go back to my original statement that if you have a penis you use the penis dressing room. If you don't you use the non-penis dressing room. Thems the rules.
What do you plan to do with the hermaphrodites?
QUOTE
"Why are their brains wired abnormally?" which leads to the question "And can it be fixed?" which leads to the protests of, "There's nothing to fix!" Which is what someone irrational would say.
There is nothing irrational about that conclusion. You are supposing their brains aren't wired "correctly," whatever that is.
QUOTE
I'm pretty sure John Hopkins probably factored in all the hurt feelings when they decided to stop the chopping off and sewing on because they consider it a mental illness now.
I think they might be stopping because the improvement to the "woman trapped in a man's body" condition it provides isn't offset sufficiently by the drastic physical modification. That's quite a way from calling someone "mentally ill," it's saying the potential physical liabilities aren't worth the potential psychological gain in enough cases, statistically speaking.
Posted by TheCatt on Mar. 09 2015,14:13
(GORDON @ Mar. 09 2015,16:30)
QUOTE
Now, take that same logic and process and apply it to a human with a penis and testicles, and no vagina, uterus, or ovaries.
Did you read my sex and gender post?
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,14:23
(TheCatt @ Mar. 09 2015,17:13)
QUOTE
(GORDON @ Mar. 09 2015,16:30)
QUOTE
Now, take that same logic and process and apply it to a human with a penis and testicles, and no vagina, uterus, or ovaries.
Did you read my sex and gender post?
That's why I said sex and not gender.
Addressing TPR, and I am on my phone now so quoting is not easy, I am not telling them to do shit, I am telling them that I will not accept abnormality as normal when there is more evidential fact that my perception is more valid than theirs. They can walk around thinking they are the opposite sex or ponies or a lamp, and they can stick their female cock in anything they want, and they can enter into a six-way marriage. I don't give a fuck. I won't do a thing to stop them. In will also think it is a behavioral abberation, and if they want to judge me for living my life the way I want they can go to hell.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,14:27
QUOTE
QUOTE
Which goes back to Gordo's supposition that we're dealing with mental illness rather than a gender crisis.
I'd bet damn near 99.9% of people on this planet could qualify as "mentally ill." Not being absolutely confident in your sexuality can do that to you. There are a billion other things you could substitute in place of "sexuality" and they'd all be true.
The same percentage of people that kill themselves because they think they are in a body with the wrong sex that DON'T have a sexual reassignment surgery kill themselves when they DO have the reassignment surgery. Not to mention a number that decide after the surgery that it was a mistake. These taken together strongly indicate that there is a problem that is unrelated to the sex of the body they're in.
QUOTE
QUOTE
I go back to my original statement that if you have a penis you use the penis dressing room. If you don't you use the non-penis dressing room. Thems the rules.
What do you plan to do with the hermaphrodites?
If they don't have a penis they go to the non-penis room. It's pretty much a binary system that isn't hard to figure out.
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,14:28
QUOTE
I won't do a thing to stop them.
Great, then what the hell are we arguing about? Now can you please tell the other people who think like you do about this to also leave them alone and let them live their lives how they want to?
QUOTE
In will also think it is a behavioral abberation, and if they want to judge me for living my life the way I want they can go to hell.
And I'm sure the feeling would be mutual.
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,14:32
QUOTE
If they don't have a penis they go to the non-penis room. It's pretty much a binary system that isn't hard to figure out.
So all us penis-havers are one unfortunate accident - or one really bad breakup - away from switching restrooms? And doesn't this logic apply to post-op transexuals and some extreme body mod guys as well?
Hell, last time I went swimming in a frozen lake I should probably have switched rooms for the day, based on this logic.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,14:33
And that is absolutely fine. They can think of me whatever they want, but I still think they are broken. I don't think being broken implies any sort of moral deficiency, either, before anyone suggests that.I am not responsible for the other rational people who view things rationally. If they have some bigotry or bias that leads to violence, they also have a mental problem, as far as I am concerned, and also need to be fixed.
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,14:35
I dispute that your position is rational as it is based on several fundamental assumptions about human psychology and neurophysiology for which you have zero proof and have instead substituted your own presumptions in the place of actual scientific evidence. But otherwise I think we can see eye to eye.
Posted by GORDON on Mar. 09 2015,14:36
But the scientic evidence that exists agrees with me.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,14:37
(TPRJones @ Mar. 09 2015,16:28)
QUOTE
QUOTE
I won't do a thing to stop them.
Great, then what the hell are we arguing about? Now can you please tell the other people who think like you do about this to also leave them alone and let them live their lives how they want to?
To be fair, what started this conversation was someone with a penis saying he identified as someone without a penis and had to be allowed to use the non-penis dressing room, which made the actual non-penis club members uncomfortable. I don't think the issue with the non-penis members was how penised individual was living their life, but rather where the penised individual was changing his clothes while at the club.
For the record, I don't mind a penis confused penised club member in the penis dressing room. A penis confused non-penis member still needs to be in the non-penised locker room.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,14:39
(TPRJones @ Mar. 09 2015,16:32)
QUOTE
QUOTE
If they don't have a penis they go to the non-penis room. It's pretty much a binary system that isn't hard to figure out.
So all us penis-havers are one unfortunate accident - or one really bad breakup - away from switching restrooms? And doesn't this logic apply to post-op transexuals and some extreme body mod guys as well?
Hell, last time I went swimming in a frozen lake I should probably have switched rooms for the day, based on this logic.
Based on this logic I should be a porn star because I really think I have a 12 inch cock.
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,14:41
So does that mean you classify people that used to have a penis as still having a penis even when they no longer have a penis?That complicates your simple binary definition.
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,14:47
(GORDON @ Mar. 09 2015,16:36)
QUOTE
But the scientic evidence that exists agrees with me.
The same was true of Aristotle's understanding of physics, but he sure turned out to be wrong about almost everything.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,15:03
QUOTE
These taken together strongly indicate that there is a problem that is unrelated to the sex of the body they're in.
I think it strongly indicates our medical techniques are limited with respect to sex change operations. If you could flip your physical sex from male to female as easy as popping in coloured contacts to change your eyes, I think those numbers would be vastly different. As it stands, sex changes are mainly cosmetic surgeries with a fuckton of hormones under the hood. The "problem" is that the cells in your body kind of get forced into picking male or female. Your psyche doesn't and it doesn't like compromise.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,15:03
(TPRJones @ Mar. 09 2015,16:41)
QUOTE
So does that mean you classify people that used to have a penis as still having a penis even when they no longer have a penis?
That complicates your simple binary definition.
That complicates your simple binary definition.
No, the only time the used to be penis owner gets to use the penis locker room is if the said penis was lost to a jilted sasquatch or a botched alien abduction.
No Loch Ness monster BS though, because everyone knows the Loch Ness monster's fake.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,15:05
QUOTE
No, the only time the used to be penis owner gets to use the penis locker room is if the said penis was lost to a jilted sasquatch or a botched alien abduction.
Good thing < these dudes > aren't around anymore.
QUOTE
Apparently many husbands could not believe that their wives were engaging in such affairs as those husbands didn't understand that castrati's genitalia in general still functioned.
Got to be a blow to your manhood if your wife's cheating on you with an overgrown boy who never made it past puberty and makes a living performing operatic roles in drag.
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,15:05
To expand a bit on the current science, it looks like things like personality and gender identity and homosexuality and many other such more complicated factors aren't about genetics but are instead possibly encoded in epigenetics. This could explain way the odds of a son being homosexual increase depending on the number of older brothers he has. The mother tends to develop antibodies to some of the male-related proteins from the first birth which can alter the gene expressions of future sons.DNA isn't a blueprint, it's a recipe. If you put together flour, water, salt, and sugar depending on how you do it you could have a cake or a loaf of bread or a bagel or gravy. DNA is the similar in that it gives guidelines about what the creature will be like, but the actual growth of the embryo depends just as heavily on the environment in the womb.
The evidence here is still early yet, but it looks like it could explain a lot once it's better understood. But it's certainly not as simple as "Y chromosome = manly man and anything else is broken".
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,15:06
LOL! I thought I was about to pull up an article where someone claimed to be mutilated by aliens or something.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,15:09
(TPRJones @ Mar. 09 2015,17:05)
QUOTE
To expand a bit on the current science, it looks like things like personality and gender identity and homosexuality and many other such more complicated factors aren't about genetics but are instead possibly encoded in epigenetics. This could explain way the odds of a son being homosexual increase depending on the number of older brothers he has. The mother tends to develop antibodies to some of the male-related proteins from the first birth which can alter the gene expressions of future sons.
DNA isn't a blueprint, it's a recipe. If you put together flour, water, salt, and sugar depending on how you do it you could have a cake or a loaf of bread or a bagel or gravy. DNA is the similar in that it gives guidelines about what the creature will be like, but the actual growth of the embryo depends just as heavily on the environment in the womb.
The evidence here is still early yet, but it looks like it could explain a lot once it's better understood. But it's certainly not as simple as "Y chromosome = manly man and anything else is broken".
DNA isn't a blueprint, it's a recipe. If you put together flour, water, salt, and sugar depending on how you do it you could have a cake or a loaf of bread or a bagel or gravy. DNA is the similar in that it gives guidelines about what the creature will be like, but the actual growth of the embryo depends just as heavily on the environment in the womb.
The evidence here is still early yet, but it looks like it could explain a lot once it's better understood. But it's certainly not as simple as "Y chromosome = manly man and anything else is broken".
Are you even willing to acknowledge the possibility that we may be dealing with an emotional or mental issue rather than a physiological one?
Edited to clarify that I'm talking about transgender issues here rather than homosexuality.
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,15:31
Sure, that is indeed a possibility. But the prevalence - not only today but throughout history - of people that are different from the norm in terms of gender identity or sexual orientation makes it either based in something else - my money is currently on the epigenetics explanation - or it's the most common form of mental illness there is by a wide margin. There aren't more people like this around now then before, they're just able to live more openly now than they could in the past.If it's that common it's going to need an explanation as to cause. Defining it as a mental illness doesn't reduce that need for explanation, on the contrary it makes it essential to justify such a classification.
EDIT: Limiting this to just gender identity does reduce the numbers a bit, but I'm not so sure these things are so unrelated as that. Regardless the fact still stands that a cause will need to be defined before I'm comfortable with classifying someone as broken and in need of some sort of adjustment. And if you aren't going to try to "fix" them then there's no point in just labeling them as broken unless your intent is to essentially throw them away.
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,15:45
I would really separate gender identity from sexual orientation. Their underlying cause might be related, but that would surprise me. The reason I would separate them is because issues with gender identity seem to present much more like Apotemnophilia than homosexuality.And I agree that defining it as a mental issue makes it more imperative that we figure out the hows and whys because we'd be faced with the reality that the medical community has been unnecessarily mutilating healthy bodies when we should have been treating unhealthy minds. And if it's truly a physiological issue, we need to learn to address the entire issue because just lobbing off members and pumping hormones as Malcolm said, isn't doing much to help with the suicide rates among those afflicted.
Most importantly, medical professionals need to be able to ask the questions without being labeled a homophobe.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,15:46
Mental illness runs deep in history, I guess.QUOTE
Hijras have a recorded history in the Indian subcontinent, from antiquity, as suggested by the Kama Sutra period, onwards. This history features a number of well-known roles within subcontinental cultures, part gender-liminal, part spiritual and part survival.
...
The ancient Kama Sutra mentions the performance of fellatio by feminine people of a third sex (tritiya prakriti). This passage has been variously interpreted as referring to men who desired other men, so-called eunuchs ("those disguised as males, and those that are disguised as females"), male and female transvestites ("the male takes on the appearance of a female and the female takes on the appearance of the male"), or two kinds of biological males, one dressed as a woman, the other as a man.
...
One of the forms of Lord Shiva is a merging with Parvati where together they are Ardhanari, a god that is half Shiva and Half Parvati. Ardhanari is especially worshipped in North India and has special significance as a patron of hijras, who identify with the gender ambiguity.
...
The ancient Kama Sutra mentions the performance of fellatio by feminine people of a third sex (tritiya prakriti). This passage has been variously interpreted as referring to men who desired other men, so-called eunuchs ("those disguised as males, and those that are disguised as females"), male and female transvestites ("the male takes on the appearance of a female and the female takes on the appearance of the male"), or two kinds of biological males, one dressed as a woman, the other as a man.
...
One of the forms of Lord Shiva is a merging with Parvati where together they are Ardhanari, a god that is half Shiva and Half Parvati. Ardhanari is especially worshipped in North India and has special significance as a patron of hijras, who identify with the gender ambiguity.
There are quite a lot of Hindu folk. Are they all mentally disturbed for believing this?
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,15:49
(Malcolm @ Mar. 09 2015,17:46)
QUOTE
Mental illness runs deep in history, I guess.
Did you think otherwise? There's really nothing new under the sun. Read Genisis and it's pretty clear that Noah was an alcoholic.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 09 2015,15:51
QUOTE
Read Genisis and it's pretty clear that Noah was an alcoholic.
I'm willing to let that slide given some of the larger problems I have with that book.
Posted by TheCatt on Mar. 09 2015,16:22
(Vince @ Mar. 09 2015,17:37)
QUOTE
non-penis member
*giggles*
Posted by Vince on Mar. 09 2015,16:28
My mind flagged that as I was typing, but I pressed on :-)
Posted by TPRJones on Mar. 09 2015,16:49
(Vince @ Mar. 09 2015,17:45)
QUOTE
Most importantly, medical professionals need to be able to ask the questions without being labeled a homophobe.
Sure, but they need to approach it with an open mind instead of the traditional approach that assumes it's a mental issue and goes from there. And if it turns out not to be a mental illness, what do we tell to all the trans people that are going to be labeled as nutcases and treated very shabbily in the meantime? Their lives are already hard enough as it is, as can be shown by the suicide rates you referenced.
Mental illness has a huge stigma in our society. You need to be damn sure you can prove it's true before you paint someone with that brush. And I'm pretty sure future science will show that this is just not the case here.
The problem isn't honest scientific investigation into causes. The problem is that historically that's been the excuse to lock them up and throw away the key based entirely on prejudgement and distaste. There's a very rough history there so it does need to be approached gently.
All that having been said, people do need to be less quick to throw around the homophobe label, too. But I have a hard time getting too mad at them given how badly they've been treated. All this will be less of a problem as the old homophobes and the old homos who lived through the bad times pass away.
Posted by TheCatt on Mar. 10 2015,06:43
