All Things LGBTQ+ (2 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]

Differences are not a social construct. Otherwise, Ancestery.com and other s would be out of business.

The physical differences within human beings are not a social construct, but race is. But before we get into some pedantic semantics argument, let's just say I think humans are one species no matter the minor differences in appearance.

Rightfully so!

How so?

The idea that I could be treated as less optimal by the government bothers me. I wish we were all one group.

Agreed, but given the history of the country...

There is racism in every corner of the world. However, people of African ancestry in France have less issues than in the USA.

I'll ask Algerians about that...

 

[coldseat]

Most grow to be boys just as most girls raised as boys in Pakistan grow up to be girls. Biology is extremely powerful. Biology can be modified by societal norms. However, biology wins most of the time.

Biology is also a strong force with regards to the differences between biological men and women.

Yes it is. And I'm not here trying to minimize the role of our biology in how we feel about our gender. But that story provides two very important points to this discussion.

1.) Just because we assign a person a gender at birth that we believe (mistakenly or not) corresponds to their biological sex, it does not make it so. Those kids new themselves that their gender did not match their appearance for the ones that chose to transition to a male gender after puberty.

2.) The fact that some of those kids chose to remain female, even after puberty, provides proof of gender being more than just our biological sex.

 

[Paul]

2.) The fact that some of those kids chose to remain female, even after puberty, provides proof of gender being more than just our biological sex.

Yes, you are correct. BTW, the term gender is new and i don't believe it was used in the old days. However, as a kid in high school I was aware some girls and boys wanted to be different. We accepted that as a normal variation, no big deal.

 

[MT15]

Biology is not as simple as you guys would like to believe. You who are saying it’s only XX or XY are simply not correct.

And the differences between men and women (whether physical or social or psychological) are far more of a sliding scale than you possibly want to believe also. I understand it makes certain folks uncomfortable that everything in nature doesn’t fit neatly into two categories.

 

[V Chip]

man xy chromosomes
woman xx chromosomes

What about those who are neither XX or XY? There are a bigger percent of people who fit that category than the percent of people who are (natural) redheads, for example.

 

[SystemShock]

Biology is not as simple as you guys would like to believe. You who are saying it’s only XX or XY are simply not correct.

That is true, there are other combinations of chromosomes... however, as far as we know, the overwhelming majority of people are either xx or xy.

And the differences between men and women (whether physical or social or psychological) are far more of a sliding scale than you possibly want to believe also. I understand it makes certain folks uncomfortable that everything in nature doesn’t fit neatly into two categories.

Which, to me, it begs the question - albeit more philosophical than anything - : why are some people so bent on classifying themselves as "man" or "woman"?

 

[Paul]

What about those who are neither XX or XY? There are a bigger percent of people who fit that category than the percent of people who are (natural) redheads, for example.

Red haor is much more common and not a congenital anomaly.

Nature is imperfect, I agree.

The incidences of the most common sex chromosome abnormalities were Klinefelter syndrome, 1 per 576 boys; XYY, 1 per 851 boys; triple X, 1 per 897 girls; Turner syndrome, 1 per 2130 girls.

Red hair (or ginger hair) occurs naturally in one to two percent of the human population, appearing with greater frequency (two to six percent) among people of Northern heritage.

What is your point? I am not saying there is anything wrong with transgenderism. I think it is quite OK.

 

[Paul]

That is true, there are other combinations of chromosomes... however, as far as we know, the overwhelming majority of people are either xx or xy.

Guys: Sex chromosome aberrations simply means that nature is not perfect. People with extra chromosomes have medical problems.

Which, to me, it begs the question - albeit more philosophical than anything - : why are some people so bent on classifying themselves as "man" or "woman"?

Because that is the way it has been since the beginning of time. Blame biology and evolution. There was no convention where people planned this. But, most importantly, there is nothing wrong with trans or cis. One is simple much more common.

 

[Paul]

Biology is not as simple as you guys would like to believe. You who are saying it’s only XX or XY are simply not correct.

And the differences between men and women (whether physical or social or psychological) are far more of a sliding scale than you possibly want to believe also. I understand it makes certain folks uncomfortable that everything in nature doesn’t fit neatly into two categories.

How many sexes exist among humans?

 

[Farb]

People are also born with one arm. That doesn't mean the normal position for a human is to have 1 arm does it? There are all types of exceptions in nature, that doesn't make the exception the norm.

 

[Paul]

People are also born with one arm. That doesn't mean the normal position for a human is to have 1 arm does it? There are all types of exceptions in nature, that doesn't make the exception the norm.

I agree being born with one arm is abnormal if we follow the scientific definition of what is normal. However, anyone unfamiliar with science may have an apoplexy. From a social justice point of view one arm is as normal as two arms for the sake of equality.

 

[MT15]

How many sexes exist among humans?

That’s not even a relevant question. At least, IMO. it really doesn’t have anything to do with my point.

The strongest woman is stronger than a certain percentage of men. It’s a continuum. Not two separate “bubbles” with zero intersection. Any tendency or attribute you can bring up, is contained in both sexes, to varying degrees.

This preoccupation with categories is not particularly helpful or relevant to our lives. Not really. And I find it fascinating that almost everyone obsessed with it is a conventional man. It’s almost like they feel they have the right to classify other people, and speak for trans women.

The confidence displayed by some men about just any subject you can bring up is almost funny sometimes.

 

[coldseat]

Nobody has claimed that variances in chromosomal make up in humans are the norm. Just that chromosomal make ups beyond XX and XY exist. If we can all accept that they exist, which is seems like we all agree that they do, then is doesn't seem that far a stretch that variances in genders beyond traditional man and woman also exist. They're not the norm and probably don't apply to you, but they still exist.

 

[MT15]

True - saying they aren’t the norm is sort of beside the point.

 

[Paul]

That’s not even a relevant question. At least, IMO. it really doesn’t have anything to do with my point.

The strongest woman is stronger than a certain percentage of men. It’s a continuum. Not two separate “bubbles” with zero intersection. Any tendency or attribute you can bring up, is contained in both sexes, to varying degrees.

This preoccupation with categories is not particularly helpful or relevant to our lives. Not really. And I find it fascinating that almost everyone obsessed with it is a conventional man. It’s almost like they feel they have the right to classify other people, and speak for trans women.

The confidence displayed by some men about just any subject you can bring up is almost funny sometimes.

Thank God my wife taught me not to ever mansplain.
Yes. there are many women that are stronger and bigger than men. However, we do not have a matriarchy. We have a patriarchy. Why is that?

There are two human sexes and that does not contradict nothing you have said. No worries.

 

[Paul]

Nobody has claimed that variances in chromosomal make up in humans are the norm. Just that chromosomal make ups beyond XX and XY exist. If we can all accept that they exist, which is seems like we all agree that they do, then is doesn't seem that far a stretch that variances in genders beyond traditional man and woman also exist. They're not the norm and probably don't apply to you, but they still exist.

You are preaching to the choir. I have no arguments about that.
All I said above is that biological women have XX chromosomes and that trans women have XY chromosomes. They are both women, I do not argue that. I simply point out a fact about chromosomes.

 

[MT15]

Okay Paul, why don’t you explain it to me. Use only small words, I wouldn’t want to get the vapors trying to understand what you say.

 

[Paul]

Okay Paul, why don’t you explain it to me. Use only small words, I wouldn’t want to get the vapors trying to understand what you say.

What do you want me to explain? I am confused. We are just chatting about stuff. Where is the dilemma?