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.

 

[SystemShock]

Sounds like you can't, since I've asked you repeatedly to clarify yourself and you haven't.

Seriously, man, you need to stop. Anyone with a middle school education knows what a male and female of our species are. There is no debate as to their definitions. Male and female of our species do not need clarification. This insistence of you that I define them for you is frankly childish; unless of course you don't actually know what males and females of the species are, or, like I said before, you want to bring up birth defects and outliers into the male-female of the species conversation, which you already did on this very thread, starting around page 115, and you told me I was wrong in saying that you were going to do that again LOL.

And look, even if you bring birth defects and outliers (again LOL ), such physical birth defects and outliers still are not going to somehow validate someone born with a penis, testicles, a prostate, and who produces semen as a female of the species.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Seriously, man, you need to stop. Anyone with a middle school education knows what a male and female of our species are. There is no debate as to their definitions. Male and female of our species do not need clarification. This insistence of you that I define them for you is frankly childish; unless of course you don't actually know what males and females of the species are, or, like I said before, you want to bring up birth defects and outliers into the male-female of the species conversation, which you already did on this very thread, starting around page 115, and you told me I was wrong in saying that you were going to do that again LOL

I know I've discussed genetic anomalies before on this thread. I've discussed a lot of things. That doesn't mean I plan on rehashing them. You're the one that keeps making assumptions without actually working to clarify.

.And look, even if you bring birth defects and outliers (again LOL ), such physical birth defects and outliers still are not going to somehow validate someone born with a penis, testicles, a prostate, and who produces semen as a female of the species.

See, I can work with this. I have another question meant to clarify: do you mean genitals at birth, regardless of any transitional surgery undertaken at a later date?

 

[MT15]

So, this happened:

 

[BullSheetBuddha]

So, this happened:

How Christian of them.

 

[SystemShock]

How Christian of them.

Actually, yes, very Christian of them: anyone other than straight is an abomination, as per Bible.

 

[SystemShock]

I know I've discussed genetic anomalies before on this thread. I've discussed a lot of things. That doesn't mean I plan on rehashing them. You're the one that keeps making assumptions without actually working to clarify.



See, I can work with this. I have another question meant to clarify: do you mean genitals at birth, regardless of any transitional surgery undertaken at a later date?

"Transitional surgery"? Is there a surgery that transitions a male of the species into a female of the species and/or vise versa? Or are you going to bring up gender? Which you shouldn't, as I have been told repeatedly that gender is not sex/biology?

And why does it have to be "transitional"? Can't it be because of cancer? Court mandated? Or a freak accident?

 

[cuddlemonkey]

"Transitional surgery"? Is there a surgery that transitions a male of the species into a female of the species and/or vise versa? Or are you going to bring up gender? Which you shouldn't, as I have been told repeatedly that gender is not sex/biology?

You're the one who put the focus on genitals. I'm just trying to clarify, and instead of answering, you deflect. Again. Yawn.

And why does it have to be "transitional"? Can't it be because of cancer? Court mandated? Or a freak accident?

We're speaking of transitioning from male to female or vice versa, so none of those cases would apply.

 

[BullSheetBuddha]

Actually, yes, very Christian of them: anyone other than straight is an abomination, as per Bible.

Maybe you should abandon your literalism.

 

[SystemShock]

Maybe you should abandon your literalism.

What does that mean?
Should I pretend the Bible doesn't say they are aberrations that shall be put to death? Or is that some sort of euphemism for "we love teh gheys"?

 

[SystemShock]

You're the one who put the focus on genitals. I'm just trying to clarify, and instead of answering, you deflect. Again. Yawn.

I am not deflecting anything. And it's not just genitals, but the entire physiology; after all, genitals don't play sports, bodies do.

And you are not trying to clarify anything, on the contrary, but I know where this is going.

We're speaking of transitioning from male to female or vice versa, so none of those cases would apply.

Here is another fact for you: you can't transition from male of the species to female of the species, or vise versa.

And "we" are not speaking of transitioning from male of female of the species and vise versa because it is not possible.
One can transition to another gender, but gender is now a spectrum which underlying commonality is "how one feels" or "how one identifies as", and now the definition of "woman" has been altered to include people who identify as women, so by the new definition a woman can be a person who removes their genitals and shoots up opposite sex hormones, or simply a person who wears a dress and make up, but keeps the plumbing, like Kathlyn Jenner.

Still, none of anything you say addresses the male-female division in sports, and the fact that the division is between the males and females of the species.

So, why don't you cut to the chase? If you are trying to shoehorn transgender women into females of the species, you are just wasting my time. And obviously, if you have anything that disputes the fact that the division in sports is between the males and females of the species, by all means...

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I am not deflecting anything. And it's not just genitals, but the entire physiology; after all, genitals don't play sports, bodies do.

And you are not trying to clarify anything, on the contrary, but I know where this is going.

The last few times you claimed you knew where I was going, you were wrong I even told you where I was going with my argument, but you still claim that I'm trying to make a point that I'm not trying to make.

Here is another fact for you: you can't transition from male of the species to female of the species, or vise versa.

And "we" are not speaking of transitioning from male of female of the species and vise versa because it is not possible.
One can transition to another gender, but gender is now a spectrum which underlying commonality is "how one feels" or "how one identifies as", and now the definition of "woman" has been altered to include people who identify as women, so by the new definition a woman can be a person who removes their genitals and shoots up opposite sex hormones, or simply a person who wears a dress and make up, but keeps the plumbing, like Kathlyn Jenner.

I'll clarify. We are discussing transgender athletes who have undertaken the process of transitioning, up to and including gender affirmation surgery.

Still, none of anything you say addresses the male-female division in sports, and the fact that the division is between the males and females of the species.

So, why don't you cut to the chase? If you are trying to shoehorn transgender women into females of the species, you are just wasting my time. And obviously, if you have anything that disputes the fact that the division in sports is between the males and females of the species, by all means...

I mean... we've seen openly trans athletes compete in a few different Olympic trials and events, including MTF and FTM. There's been an openly transgender American MMA fighter. Renee Richards is a retired tennis player who competed after transitioning.

I would say the fact that it's happening disputes your "fact" that the division in sports is between male and female, based on how you are defining male and female. I would also say that different governing bodies for national sports around the world, as well as bodies that govern international events, have their own rules and criteria that athletes must meet, which makes this a much more complex topic than you care to admit. This was the point I was making that you rejected to substitute your own strawman bullshirt.

 

[SystemShock]

The last few times you claimed you knew where I was going, you were wrong I even told you where I was going with my argument, but you still claim that I'm trying to make a point that I'm not trying to make.

Right..

I'll clarify. We are discussing transgender athletes who have undertaken the process of transitioning, up to and including gender affirmation surgery.

You are discussing that. I am talking about the actual division in sports.

I mean... we've seen openly trans athletes compete in a few different Olympic trials and events, including MTF and FTM. There's been an openly transgender American MMA fighter. Renee Richards is a retired tennis player who competed after transitioning.
I would say the fact that it's happening disputes your "fact" that the division in sports is between male and female, based on how you are defining male and female.

It does not. You are merely pointing out some outliers (as I said you would) who have sneaked in. Renee Richards? LOL. Fallon Fox? There was tremendous controversy in MMA circles and many opposed Fox being licensed to fight with the real women. Fox getting a license to fight in women's MMA was more of a PR/money stunt, mixed in with the pressure of being woke.

How about we listen to a female MMA fighter who fought Fox?

During Fox's fight against Tamikka Brents on September 13, 2014, Brents suffered a concussion, an orbital bone fracture, and seven staples to the head in the 1st round. After her loss, Brents took to social media to convey her thoughts on the experience of fighting Fox: "I've fought a lot of women and have never felt the strength that I felt in a fight as I did that night. I can't answer whether it's because she was born a man or not because I'm not a doctor. I can only say, I've never felt so overpowered ever in my life and I am an abnormally strong female in my own right," she stated. "Her grip was different, I could usually move around in the clinch against other females but couldn't move at all in Fox's clinch ..."

Fox did lose 1 fight, but you have to see the jaw on Ashlee Evans-Smith.

I would also say that different governing bodies for national sports around the world, as well as bodies that govern international events, have their own rules and criteria that athletes must meet, which makes this a much more complex topic than you care to admit.

And none of that disproves the male-female division in sports.

And to me it isn't that complex: create transgender divisions. The other alternatives, one would be unfair to both females (physiological differences) and males (allowing one set of individual access to PED's but not the other), the other will be decried as a grave invasion of privacy and transgender rights, if not downright inhumane.

 

[Farb]

I haven't got the patience.

agreed

 

[Farb]

“Idaho Democrats will continue to fight for the right of every Idahoan to be proud, love openly and live authentically,” Necochea said. “LGTBQ+ youth are particularly vulnerable to bullying and shaming. We condemn the Idaho GOP for targeting youth while distorting the truth for political gain. To our young people, we say, you are perfect just the way you are.”

Nothing says pride and acceptance as much as dancing in drag for adults. Makes perfect sense.

 

[Farb]

So you cannot find any. I’m not surprised.

besides the one already posted? Sure. Go with that.

 

[Farb]

This one was covered by CNN, which presented a pretty balanced report as far as one can tell.

Do you think this case was handled incorrectly? Or were the grandparents correctly concerned about the 17 yo committing suicide, which he had evidently threatened? As you can see, this isn’t a case of the state just swooping in to a family that is doing fine and snatching away a child. This 17 yo was in some sort of deep distress to publicly threaten suicide and his distress (according to him) was caused by his parents’ behavior toward him.

But you want to count this as injurious to the child? If the grandparents were ignored and the child committed suicide, then what? Just “oh, well”?

To me, this is one time when family courts can and should intervene - when the child’s life is in danger. I’m surprised you cannot see it that way.

Can you prove that if a child alters his/her body to accommodate gender dysphoria has any effect on that childs mental well being in the long term (does it help prevent suicide)? It appears to proven science so the data should be readily available.

 

[Farb]

So, this happened:

Can you provide a link on this besides a random twitter? This feels like a 'this didn't happen like it is being said it happened' incident.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Right..

You are discussing that. I am talking about the actual division in sports.

Specifically, you are talking about a division based on birth genitals that has been shown to you time and again to be far less cut and dry than you make it out to be.

It does not. You are merely pointing out some outliers (as I said you would) who have sneaked in. Renee Richards? LOL. Fallon Fox? There was tremendous controversy in MMA circles and many opposed Fox being licensed to fight with the real women. Fox getting a license to fight in women's MMA was more of a PR/money stunt, mixed in with the pressure of being woke.

You mentioned outliers in the context of chromosomal issues, birth defects, and other issues present at birth. Here, I can quote it for you:

Playing the chromosome game is not going to help you here... while some estimates have the percentage of people who have other than XX / XY as high as 40%, still, barring birth defects or outliers, the overwhelming majority of people are born male of the species or female of the species.

How about we listen to a female MMA fighter who fought Fox?

During Fox's fight against Tamikka Brents on September 13, 2014, Brents suffered a concussion, an orbital bone fracture, and seven staples to the head in the 1st round. After her loss, Brents took to social media to convey her thoughts on the experience of fighting Fox: "I've fought a lot of women and have never felt the strength that I felt in a fight as I did that night. I can't answer whether it's because she was born a man or not because I'm not a doctor. I can only say, I've never felt so overpowered ever in my life and I am an abnormally strong female in my own right," she stated. "Her grip was different, I could usually move around in the clinch against other females but couldn't move at all in Fox's clinch ..."

Fox did lose 1 fight, but you have to see the jaw on Ashlee Evans-Smith.

Should Evans-Smith not be allowed to compete with women, then, since she has such a strong jaw? Ronda Rousey has multiple 1st round wins via KO. Should we create a new division for her as well?

And none of that disproves the male-female division in sports.

Except that it does, because these governing bodies allow trans athletes to compete, which negates your premise. You say that trans people are male or female based on genitals and physiology and that there's no changing that. If we accept that premise as true, then the governing bodies that allow trans athletes to compete in classes/divisions that match their gender identity actively disproves your assertion that there are male-female divisions.

And to me it isn't that complex: create transgender divisions. The other alternatives, one would be unfair to both females (physiological differences) and males (allowing one set of individual access to PED's but not the other), the other will be decried as a grave invasion of privacy and transgender rights, if not downright inhumane.

It isn't complex to you because you've already made up your mind.