California Doing California Things

[TSwizzle]

She holds the same views that most people do about trans issues e.g. it's not possible to change one's biological gender. It's not a matter of debate, it's a matter of fact. God forbid someone not engage in this fantasy.

Facts aren't actually defined by your feelings, buddy. Or Jo's. If these were facts, ie objectively legible points of data, access to those facts would be the major factor in what people believed about gender, not political, ideological, or cultural commitments. In this case, however, the more educated a person is on the science of sex and gender, the less likely they are to be dogmatically dedicated to the claims of Western Christianity regarding dualistic gender essentialism.

It really is a religion for you.

 

[Derec]

In this case, however, the more educated a person is on the science of sex and gender, the less likely they are to be dogmatically dedicated to the claims of Western Christianity regarding dualistic gender essentialism.

I see both extremes as wrong here. Most people fall neatly into the gender binary, because normally you get full sex differentiation in the fetus.

In cases it doesn't, you get an intersex condition. And genital differentiation can proceed normally while taking a different path in the brain.
But these are exceptions. Exceptions we should not dismiss, or treat as freakish, but we should not pretend that they are the norm either.
The norm is still the gender binary, so I do not think much of the activists who want to "overthrow" it.

As a practical matter, I think people who are e.g. born male but identify as female should not be persecuted, and should be given opportunities to align their identity with their body as much as medically possible. But they still need to acknowledge that they are different than biological women, and that for example affects physical performance in sports. I also do not think that everybody should be pressured to declare their pronouns as became the fad - pushed by the activist class - a few years ago.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

She holds the same views that most people do about trans issues e.g. it's not possible to change one's biological gender. It's not a matter of debate, it's a matter of fact. God forbid someone not engage in this fantasy.

Facts aren't actually defined by your feelings, buddy. Or Jo's. If these were facts, ie objectively legible points of data, access to those facts would be the major factor in what people believed about gender, not political, ideological, or cultural commitments. In this case, however, the more educated a person is on the science of sex and gender, the less likely they are to be dogmatically dedicated to the claims of Western Christianity regarding dualistic gender essentialism.

A trans person can't reproduce. That's a fact. The only feelings I have about it are towards people who are hellbent on refusing to acknowledge reality. It's aggravating.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

She holds the same views that most people do about trans issues e.g. it's not possible to change one's biological gender. It's not a matter of debate, it's a matter of fact. God forbid someone not engage in this fantasy.

Facts aren't actually defined by your feelings, buddy. Or Jo's. If these were facts, ie objectively legible points of data, access to those facts would be the major factor in what people believed about gender, not political, ideological, or cultural commitments. In this case, however, the more educated a person is on the science of sex and gender, the less likely they are to be dogmatically dedicated to the claims of Western Christianity regarding dualistic gender essentialism.

A trans person can't reproduce. That's a fact. The only feelings I have about it are towards people who are hellbent on refusing to acknowledge reality. It's aggravating.

The problem with "acknowledging reality" is that our brains are finely tuned to our perception of it. It can be a bit like the Renshaw Cow or the All is Vanity painting (woman in mirror / skull). Perception isn't the end of understanding.

It gets tougher too because our brain rewards obfuscation and maintaining the path, instead of accepting truth or something that is more truthful.

Gender v sex v dangly bits v hormores v the microcosm that is our consciousness is an absurdly complicated construct that we tried to manage into a single dichotomy that damn well know, isn't that simple. And, in general, compassion and humanity is never part of the discussion. Particularly when one group doesn't even want to recognize transgenderism is even a thing.

*looks up*

WTF? This isn't remotely on-topic with the thread regarding California, instead of the actual transgender thread. I'm going to stop here.

 

[Politesse]

She holds the same views that most people do about trans issues e.g. it's not possible to change one's biological gender. It's not a matter of debate, it's a matter of fact. God forbid someone not engage in this fantasy.

Facts aren't actually defined by your feelings, buddy. Or Jo's. If these were facts, ie objectively legible points of data, access to those facts would be the major factor in what people believed about gender, not political, ideological, or cultural commitments. In this case, however, the more educated a person is on the science of sex and gender, the less likely they are to be dogmatically dedicated to the claims of Western Christianity regarding dualistic gender essentialism.

It really is a religion for you.

No, sport. Science is not a "religion", it is a methodology of study that assumes the priority of empirical evidence over belief or perception.

 

[Politesse]

I must say, after watching the gubernatorial debate tonight, I'm rather proud of my state. It was one of the most civil, orderly, consistently on topic political debates I've seen in years. No screaming, not much interruption or mugging for viral clips. Just politely debating the issues the state faces. I'll happily vote for any of these folks, aside from the fascisti of course.

 

[Tigers!]

I must say, after watching the gubernatorial debate tonight, I'm rather proud of my state. It was one of the most civil, orderly, consistently on topic political debates I've seen in years. No screaming, not much interruption or mugging for viral clips.

So what fun is that? I thought politics was a blood sport? or it seems like it at times.

Just politely debating the issues the state faces. I'll happily vote for any of these folks, aside from the fascisti of course.

What if the fascists are civil, orderly, on topic too?

 

[Politesse]

So what fun is that? I thought politics was a blood sport? or it seems like it at times.

If you want blood sport, try NASCAR or ice hockey. In government, we deserve at least some modicum of adult temperament from our elected representatives.

What if the fascists are civil, orderly, on topic too?

They were, in fact. Neither Bianco nor Hilton said anything beyond the acceptable bounds of polite debate.

I'm not voting for any Republican, though. There's good manners, and there's complicity in a conspiracy to undo democratic governance of the nation. Anyone who values their connection to Trump more than their loyalty to their own state and its citizens is not qualified to be governor. Bianco in particular directly admitted to the illegal seizure of election ballots, in this very debate. He was polite about it, but that's still illegal.