All Things LGBTQ+ (3 Viewers)

[Farb]

Didn't really see a place for this so I thought I would start a thread about all things LGBTQ since this is a pretty hot topic in our culture right now

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/17/sup...y-that-refuses-to-work-with-lgbt-couples.html

• The Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a unanimous defeat to LGBT couples in a high-profile case over whether Philadelphia could refuse to contract with a Roman Catholic adoption agency that says its religious beliefs prevent it from working with same-sex foster parents.
• Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in an opinion for a majority of the court that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment by refusing to contract with Catholic Social Services once it learned that the organization would not certify same-sex couples for adoption.

I will admit, I was hopeful for this decision by the SCOTUS but I was surprised by the unanimous decision.

While I don't think there is anything wrong, per se, with same sex couples adopting and raising children (I actually think it is a good thing as it not an abortion) but I also did not want to see the state force a religious institution to bend to a societal norm.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Who said anything abnormal is bad?

In terms of this thread

It's "normal" that men want to have sex with women
It's "normal" that women want to have sex with men

It's "normal" that a man looks, acts and thinks "like a man" (whatever that means)
It's "normal" that a woman looks, acts and thinks "like a woman"

This whole thread is about those who are outside what is generally considered "normal" and how they are treated by "normal" people

 

[Paul]

Inclusive of everything except your entire post, Paul

OK, I will bite. What did I say that was not inclusive? Please make sure to quote my words.
Thanks!

 

[JRad]

OK, I will bite. What did I say that was not inclusive? Please make sure to quote my words.
Thanks!

I was making a (bad) joke about the typo V Chip quoted

 

[SystemShock]

"This guy"? I don't even get a name?

"This guy" meant me, not you. I thought it was clear given the comment. Sorry for any confusion. I wouldn't do that to you.

To answer your question is that the term disorder often carries a value judgement

Sorry to cut the rest of your post, but something has to be said about this. True, unfortunately some terms often carry value judgments, just as reactions t said terms often carry value judgments of their own. I should know, I am a Mexican atheist.

And it is really hard to carry a conversation when such value judgments are applied to terms which in on themselves don't signify the value judgment (or shouldn't anyway), as it is the case with "disorder". I don't give "disorder" any other value than what it describes, nor do i think a person who suffers the condition is any less a human being than they are. And if anyone thinks I mean anything else when I use the term "disorder", shame on them.

Likewise, anything I say about self-identification, gender or otherwise.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

"This guy" meant me, not you. I thought it was clear given the comment. Sorry for any confusion. I wouldn't do that to you.

Sorry to cut the rest of your post, but something has to be said about this. True, unfortunately some terms often carry value judgments, just as reactions t said terms often carry value judgments of their own. I should know, I am a Mexican atheist.

And it is really hard to carry a conversation when such value judgments are applied to terms which in on themselves don't signify the value judgment (or shouldn't anyway), as it is the case with "disorder". I don't give "disorder" any other value than what it describes, nor do i think a person who suffers the condition is any less a human being than they are. And if anyone thinks I mean anything else when I use the term "disorder", shame on them.

Likewise, anything I say about self-identification, gender or otherwise.

Yep, I get that, so I try not to take offense or hold it against anyone using it that way, but it's also a normal reaction to have an aversion to it. Unfortunately we live in a world where people are discriminated, mocked, or whatever for falling outside the norms. It's part of human nature, and social evolution. So, it's very easy to get defensive about it.

Basically, the way I look at it a disorder should be defined as something that prevents someone from having a full and fulfilling life. For example, I have Gilbert's syndrome. Basically, it means I don't break down bilirubin as efficiently as most people. However, it has actually no effect on my quality of life, or my life expectancy. So I wouldn't call that a disorder.

Now, when it comes to transgender or those with gender dysphoria, the biggest hurdle to their ability to live a fulfilling life is how other people react to them. There's still a whole lot to learn about what is happening, and the best way forward for them, but most doctors, therapists and psychiatrists have settled on letting them transition, either socially, physically or both, to the point they are most comfortable. At that point they are able to live a normal and fulfilling life. So is it a disorder, the way I think about it, if they can live a happy and fulfilling life?

If we just go by things that fall on the tails of a normal distribution, then most of us have some sort of disorder I guess.

 

[Farb]

https://www.insider.com/oli-london-white-influencer-criticized-for-identifying-as-korean-2021-6

There was talk in this thread recently about a race being a social contrust as well as gender. I saw this this morning and got to thinking, isn't this basically the same thing as transgender?

 

[SystemShock]

Yep, I get that, so I try not to take offense or hold it against anyone using it that way, but it's also a normal reaction to have an aversion to it. Unfortunately we live in a world where people are discriminated, mocked, or whatever for falling outside the norms. It's part of human nature, and social evolution. So, it's very easy to get defensive about it.

Basically, the way I look at it a disorder should be defined as something that prevents someone from having a full and fulfilling life. For example, I have Gilbert's syndrome. Basically, it means I don't break down bilirubin as efficiently as most people. However, it has actually no effect on my quality of life, or my life expectancy. So I wouldn't call that a disorder.

Now, when it comes to transgender or those with gender dysphoria, the biggest hurdle to their ability to live a fulfilling life is how other people react to them. There's still a whole lot to learn about what is happening, and the best way forward for them, but most doctors, therapists and psychiatrists have settled on letting them transition, either socially, physically or both, to the point they are most comfortable. At that point they are able to live a normal and fulfilling life. So is it a disorder, the way I think about it, if they can live a happy and fulfilling life?

If we just go by things that fall on the tails of a normal distribution, then most of us have some sort of disorder I guess.

A disorder is simply a condition. I don't know about "normal and fulfilling life"; generally speaking, I think in terms of quality of life based on modern standards of living, and even those standards change depending where in the world you are. But quality of life isn't a measure of life fulfillment either.

As for transgenders - and here we are, yet again, talking about transgenders - they certainly have a condition (gender dysphoria); I don't see them as any less human because of their condition, I don't fault them for mitigating their condition, and don't fault them in their pursuit of happiness.

But, at the same time, while I can tolerate/accept/condone behavior, I don't have to accept behavior and/or belief over biology.

 

[coldseat]

But, at the same time, while I can tolerate/accept/condone behavior, I don't have to accept behavior and/or belief over biology.

Except nobody here (or anywhere) has asked you to do that. By accepting that trans woman are woman, nobody is claiming that they're born as biological females. Nobody here or anywhere is claiming that they have an XY chromosome. Accepting trans woman as women isn't even "accepting their behavior", it's just recognizing their reality. That they have gender dysphoria and where born into a biological body that doesn't match their gender. Why is that so hard?

 

[Paul]

https://www.insider.com/oli-london-white-influencer-criticized-for-identifying-as-korean-2021-6

There was talk in this thread recently about a race being a social contrust as well as gender. I saw this this morning and got to thinking, isn't this basically the same thing as transgender?

If a laboratory is provided with samples of saliva or blood from a biological male or female the lab will be able to determine the sex of the sample donor. That means that sex is biological.

If someone sends saliva to ancestry.com they will be able to figure out the group to where that human belongs to. Hence the genotype and phenotype of humans has a biological basis. Having said that there is only one human race.

"LGBTQIAA-plus" cannot be assess with the analysis of biological tissue. The only exception is intersex which is a group of medical disorders and hence there are biological markers for these disorders.

Regarding a European person that thinks he or she is Korean. Ancestry.com will still label that person as European.

 

[Paul]

Except nobody here (or anywhere) has asked you to do that. By accepting that trans woman are woman, nobody is claiming that they're born as biological females. Nobody here or anywhere is claiming that they have an XY chromosome. Accepting trans woman as women isn't even "accepting their behavior", it's just recognizing their reality. That they have gender dysphoria and where born into a biological body that doesn't match their gender. Why is that so hard?

Good post. Transgender women should be treated as women at all times. However, athletic competition with biological women remains controversial and perhaps discriminatory to biological women.

As a side note: It is very interesting that they have men and women chess competitions. One would think this is an area where men and women and trans compete in an even fair manner.

 

[SystemShock]

Except nobody here (or anywhere) has asked you to do that.

Except that I keep being told trans women are women, and should be allowed to play sports against biological women, even by people who can't even properly define what a woman is.

Accepting trans woman as women isn't even "accepting their behavior", it's just recognizing their reality. That they have gender dysphoria and where born into a biological body that doesn't match their gender. Why is that so hard?

It is accepting their behavior. If gender is self-identification and not tied to biology, what other way is there to transition gender wise from "man" to "woman" (or vice versa) but through behavior?

 

[Paul]

Except that I keep being told trans women are women, and should be allowed to play sports against biological women, even by people who can't even properly define what a woman is.

It is accepting their behavior. If gender is self-identification and not tied to biology, what other way is there to transition gender wise from "man" to "woman" (or vice versa) but through behavior?

Are you Jordan Peterson? He thinks just as you do.

 

[coldseat]

Except that I keep being told trans women are women, and should be allowed to play sports against biological women, even by people who can't even properly define what a woman is.

I think that I'm the only one here among those who accept trans women as woman who has also supported them playing in women sports, and that was conditional. I even admitted that my position wasn't very firm given that I haven't really invested any time into understanding the issue seriously.

It is accepting their behavior. If gender is self-identification and not tied to biology, what other way is there to transition gender wise from "man" to "woman" (or vice versa) but through behavior?

Lol. Nobody has said that gender is not tied to biology. In fact, the exact opposite has been said, that for the overwhelming majority of people their gender is congruent with the biological sex. Just that for these subset of people, it is not congruent. And that sense our collective understanding of gender has evolved (maybe not for everybody) to and understanding that it encompasses more than "just" our biological sex, there is no reason not to accept trans woman as woman and trans men as men.

BTW, I highly doubt your personal acceptance (or anybody else) matters to trans people. They just want to be accepted legally as who they say they are and not be discriminated against or assaulted for it.

 

[Farb]

Except nobody here (or anywhere) has asked you to do that. By accepting that trans woman are woman, nobody is claiming that they're born as biological females. Nobody here or anywhere is claiming that they have an XY chromosome. Accepting trans woman as women isn't even "accepting their behavior", it's just recognizing their reality. That they have gender dysphoria and where born into a biological body that doesn't match their gender. Why is that so hard?

Do I have a the same courtesy to not recognize them as real women or the same courtesy to not have female genitalia in a make locker room or vice versa based on the established reality from the beginning of mankind?

Your answer will be "no" their lived or experience or whatever mushy mouth lefty slogans you have been coached on, out weights my perceived reality.

ETA: https://heavy.com/news/wi-spa-los-angeles-transgender-video/

Why does their feeling of acceptance trump a females right to feel safe and comfortable in a woman's locker room?

Why does a dude that wants to be woman's feelings and mental state take precedence over possible mental trauma to a young woman or girl?

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Do I have a the same courtesy to not recognize them as real women or the same courtesy to not have female genitalia in a make locker room or vice versa based on the established reality from the beginning of mankind?

Your answer will be "no" their lived or experience or whatever mushy mouth lefty slogans you have been coached on, out weights my perceived reality.

ETA: https://heavy.com/news/wi-spa-los-angeles-transgender-video/

Why does their feeling of acceptance trump a females right to feel safe and comfortable in a woman's locker room?

Why does a dude that wants to be woman's feelings and mental state take precedence over possible mental trauma to a young woman or girl?

Who would you rather have in the same young girl's locker room (although I don't know where any adult is hanging out with young kids in a locker room):

or

They've both had full re-assignment surgery. Because right now, your stance would be sending that first guy with his surgically created penis into the same locker room as the young girl in your scenario (again, I'm not sure where adults are hanging out with kids in a locker room anyway, but it's your scenario).

For schools where gender re-assignment surgery is not possible for the trans population, they use a teacher's office to change, so it's not like they are traumatizing young Sally either.

Also, your "established reality from the beginning of mankind" is not true. There are several cultures throughout history which recognize transgender individuals as the gender they identify with and not the genitalia they are born with. This is not something completely new.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Do I have a the same courtesy to not recognize them as real women or the same courtesy to not have female genitalia in a make locker room or vice versa based on the established reality from the beginning of mankind?

Your answer will be "no" their lived or experience or whatever mushy mouth lefty slogans you have been coached on, out weights my perceived reality.

I think most people don't question your right to believe whatever you want to believe. How you deal with people though will effect how they perceive and how they deal with you in return. That's just the way things work. You won't go to jail for believing a transwoman is man, and no one should argue that you should. But if I introduce you to my kid as Emery, and you insist on calling him Emilia, then I'll just think you're a dick and I'll keep my kid away from you.

 

[SystemShock]

Are you Jordan Peterson?

Personal insults are against TOS

Really, I only bring biology either when talking about things which are meant to protect/advance women (such as sports and their biological division) or when the woke patrol tries to beat me into submission. To me, who you are is what matters, not what you are or think you are, if you know what I mean.

 

[SystemShock]

Lol. Nobody has said that gender is not tied to biology.

Are you sure about that?