• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Colorado club shooter is non-binary, CNN repeatedly misgenders them.

I can definitely see why you guys object so vehemently to higher education.
I graduated from both of my university degrees with first class honours.

Objecting to the groupthink and rigorously prescribed orthodoxy that are the result of the long march through the institutions does not mean I object to 'higher education'.

Try harder, Politesse.
Try harder Politesse? You have got to be kidding, Metaphor. And class rank? What are you? 17?
:picardfacepalm:

You have a problem with class rank, but you don't have a problem with "I can definitely see why you guys object so vehemently to higher education."? If in fact Metaphor responded like a 17-year-old then he showed considerably more maturity than Politesse did, or, frankly, than the person who wrote "You won’t tolerate any other opinion." did. If you want the discussion elevated, stop misrepresenting other people.
 
I can definitely see why you guys object so vehemently to higher education.
I graduated from both of my university degrees with first class honours.

Objecting to the groupthink and rigorously prescribed orthodoxy that are the result of the long march through the institutions does not mean I object to 'higher education'.

Try harder, Politesse.
Try harder Politesse? You have got to be kidding, Metaphor. And class rank? What are you? 17?
:picardfacepalm:

You have a problem with class rank, but you don't have a problem with "I can definitely see why you guys object so vehemently to higher education."? If in fact Metaphor responded like a 17-year-old then he showed considerably more maturity than Politesse did, or, frankly, than the person who wrote "You won’t tolerate any other opinion." did. If you want the discussion elevated, stop misrepresenting other people.
You really ought to take your own advice.

Bringing up class rank as some sort of credential in a discussion is juvenile. Posters are free to their opinions, even if you have hypocritical issues with them.
 
I'm proposing that Oleg's response to Southernhybrid's statement was anti-science BS. The neurobiology of the brain and the sexual differences of portions of it are well established.
So you can cite some specific neurobiology research showing that people who behave like the girl in the video in post #253 have brains anatomically different from the brains of ciswomen and anatomically different from the brains of transmen, in some way that is systematically different from the way the brains of narcissistic people anatomically differ from the brains of normal people? Did you see Southernhybrid say she wasn't talking about transgender?
Thanks, no. That's been done more than adequately by Jarhyn several times.
Do tell. I've seen Jarhyn post data about the brains of trans people, but that's not what's in dispute. Where the heck did you see Jarhyn ever cite research about people who expect the rest of us to pay attention to their "gender fluid" mood swings?

Again, this applies to Oleg's statement. I haven't formed an opinion on gender fluidity yet, other than live and let live.
:consternation2: Oleg was talking about gender fluidity! If you haven't formed an opinion on gender fluidity yet then what the heck did he say that you think conflicts with neurobiology research?
 
I mentioned so-called "reverse discrimination" because it's a common right wing phrasing, not because I endorse its use.

The only time I have ever heard its use is by left-leaning people who are mocking the very concept.
 
I mentioned so-called "reverse discrimination" because it's a common right wing phrasing, not because I endorse its use.

The only time I have ever heard its use is by left-leaning people who are mocking the very concept.
I thought you’d been posting here for some years?
 
Try harder Politesse? You have got to be kidding, Metaphor. And class rank? What are you? 17?

Politesse made a sweeping accusation about conservatives, and I offered counterevidence to his narrative.

The advent of compensatory initiatives and policies such as affirmative action in the early- to mid-1970s were seen by many white people, and some black people, as reverse discrimination. T...[/URL]

It's plain discrimination.

This “background circumstances” test has been widely followed since first laid down by another federal appellate court in 1981 as a way to deal with bias claims by White (or male) employees. Some critics find it vague; others think it unfair. My concern is that in their constant invocation of “reverse discrimination,” the precedents are unhappily worded. That term and the concept behind it share a history sufficiently odious that I’d advise critics of affirmative action to find a different form of words. Because there’s been scarcely a moment of progress toward racial equality that hasn’t met the same criticism.

We can trace similar language at least back to 1854, when a North Carolina newspaper registered its dismay at the contents of an abolitionist pamphlet: “[T]here seems to be a prejudice against a white skin, and in favor of black one, that would be amusing if it were not disgusting.” In 1866, during the Reconstruction Era, newspapers across the country reprinted an anonymous essay condemning the Freedmen’s Bureau for “discrimination against the white race.”

I have a different word for the phrase 'reverse discrimination', the phrase that so troubles this author. It's 'discrimination'. I notice the author doesn't volunteer any suggestions himself. It seems to me 'discrimination' would not suit his purpose, which is to remove any possible moral social stigma from discrimination against whites and males. Perhaps "corrective selection".
 
I mentioned so-called "reverse discrimination" because it's a common right wing phrasing, not because I endorse its use.

The only time I have ever heard its use is by left-leaning people who are mocking the very concept.
I thought you’d been posting here for some years?
Yes. Are the people on this board generally not left-leaning? I may have missed some non-left leaning person using the phrase or be misremembering.
 
Try harder Politesse? You have got to be kidding, Metaphor. And class rank? What are you? 17?
:picardfacepalm:

You have a problem with class rank, but you don't have a problem with "I can definitely see why you guys object so vehemently to higher education."? If in fact Metaphor responded like a 17-year-old then he showed considerably more maturity than Politesse did, or, frankly, than the person who wrote "You won’t tolerate any other opinion." did. If you want the discussion elevated, stop misrepresenting other people.
You really ought to take your own advice.
What did I say that you're claiming was a misrepresentation, and what evidence do you have?

Bringing up class rank as some sort of credential in a discussion is juvenile.
I didn't say it* wasn't. Making up positions for one's opponent out of whole cloth, which both Politesse and Toni did, is more juvenile.

(* Metaphor appears to have brought up class rank not as a credential but as evidence against Politesse's trumped-up accusation. But if that's a distinction that doesn't matter to you, whatever. Either way he wins the who's-less-juvenile contest.)

Posters are free to their opinions,
Free to what their opinions? Free to hold them? Nobody indicated that we aren't. Free to express them? Who indicated that we aren't besides the folks trying to enforce rules against what they illogically label "misgendering"?

even if you have hypocritical issues with them.
Your hypothetical issues are your problem.
 
Try harder Politesse? You have got to be kidding, Metaphor. And class rank? What are you? 17?
:picardfacepalm:

You have a problem with class rank, but you don't have a problem with "I can definitely see why you guys object so vehemently to higher education."? If in fact Metaphor responded like a 17-year-old then he showed considerably more maturity than Politesse did, or, frankly, than the person who wrote "You won’t tolerate any other opinion." did. If you want the discussion elevated, stop misrepresenting other people.
You really ought to take your own advice.
What did I say that you're claiming was a misrepresentation, and what evidence do you have?

Bringing up class rank as some sort of credential in a discussion is juvenile.
I didn't say it* wasn't. Making up positions for one's opponent out of whole cloth, which both Politesse and Toni did, is more juvenile.

(* Metaphor appears to have brought up class rank not as a credential but as evidence against Politesse's trumped-up accusation. But if that's a distinction that doesn't matter to you, whatever. Either way he wins the who's-less-juvenile contest.)

Posters are free to their opinions,
Free to what their opinions? Free to hold them? Nobody indicated that we aren't. Free to express them? Who indicated that we aren't besides the folks trying to enforce rules against what they illogically label "misgendering"?

even if you have hypocritical issues with them.
Your hypothetical issues are your problem.
History has taught me that dealing with your misconceptions is fruitless. So carry on as usual- it is what you do best.
 

Again, this applies to Oleg's statement. I haven't formed an opinion on gender fluidity yet, other than live and let live.
:consternation2: Oleg was talking about gender fluidity! If you haven't formed an opinion on gender fluidity yet then what the heck did he say that you think conflicts with neurobiology research?
Oleg was talking about much more than gender fluidity. Try again.
Oleg said:
Narcissism. It’s all narcissism. It’s the current way to be unique and important. Everyone must bow. But in reality it’s completely meaningless. The only categories that matter are male / female and gay / straight / bi.
 
I'm not talking about transgender. That's easy to understand. The brain matter doesn't always match up with the body parts. Those folks should be given the option to transition and be accepted for who they are. It's just a little harder to understand the concept of being gender fluid. Actually, it's becoming difficult to understand what the term gender even means.
Narcissism. It’s all narcissism. It’s the current way to be unique and important. Everyone must bow. But in reality it’s completely meaningless. The only categories that matter are male / female and gay / straight / bi.
Anti-science BS.
:consternation2:
Are you proposing that sociology qualifies as a science? Or are you claiming chemistry or neurobiology or some other actual science has discovered empirical evidence that objectively distinguishes "categories that matter" from "categories that don't matter"? If you meant the latter, share.
I'm proposing that Oleg's response to Southernhybrid's statement was anti-science BS. The neurobiology of the brain and the sexual differences of portions of it are well established.
You might want to remind Jab of that too....
 
History has taught me that dealing with your misconceptions is fruitless. So carry on as usual- it is what you do best.

Me as well.

People who are racist simply won't notice their own assumptions. No matter how Woke they are.
Tom
 
I'm not talking about transgender. That's easy to understand. The brain matter doesn't always match up with the body parts. Those folks should be given the option to transition and be accepted for who they are. It's just a little harder to understand the concept of being gender fluid. Actually, it's becoming difficult to understand what the term gender even means.
Narcissism. It’s all narcissism. It’s the current way to be unique and important. Everyone must bow. But in reality it’s completely meaningless. The only categories that matter are male / female and gay / straight / bi.
Identifying with the other sex, if you have gender dysphoria, I can see as a coping mechanism.

But identifying as "Non-binary" seems to me an exercise in narcissism. It is somebody who needs to be the specialest snowflake. And it requires no change in any perceivable appearance or behaviour--because of course there is no non-binary sex.

I know a woman who calls herself 'they/them', and even has adopted the label 'queer' for herself. She is an attractive, feminine, heterosexual woman who has only ever been in monogamous relationships with men. Of course, she isn't remotely bisexual or lesbian, and even if she pretended she were, those identities no longer have any social currency. But if you are 'non-binary'? Girl you're dismantling the heteropatriarchy like nobody's business.
I don't know about that. I watched a bunch of videos by people who identify as nonbinary. They seemed very sincere and they did seem a bit out of what we might call mainstream gender. I'd call them nerdy or off beat, if I had to judge them.

While I don't really understand exactly why they feel this gender concept is so important, they didn't seem narcissistic. They just seemed to think that their gender ID was very important to them. I don't understand why being misgendered is such a terrible thing, but I'm not one who ever lets other people's opinions of me hurt me, so it's always been difficult for me to understand why other people's feelings get so easily hurt, especially by people who they barely know. Apparently, not everyone is able to ignore the things that others say about them that they feel are insulting. I don't think anyone should be discriminated against or bullied due to being a minority of any type. That's different from simply being called a she when you feel like a they, assuming it's not done out of malice.

I just like to understand where people are coming from as much as possible and how best to make them feel comfortable around me. If it takes referring to one as they, that's cool, even if I don't understand it. There are certainly far more important things to be concerned about in today's world. I would hope that all of us could agree on that, regardless of how we perceive our genders.

What I really dislike about some of this gender stuff, is that is seems to put too much emphasis on stereotypical gender roles. I read about one woman who lost her husband. He had been a truck driver and after he died the wife became a truck driver and then started to identify as mostly male. WTF! I've known of female truck drivers. I met a woman who was an awesome tow truck driver. Sure, she was large and very strong, but she had a husband and children and considered herself a woman. Shouldn't gender stereotypes and roles be dead by now? I think that may be why some of this seems contradictory to me, despite my best efforts to understand it.

Then again, maybe there are some people who literally have an odd mix of white and grey brain matter or a hormonal mix that makes it difficult for them to identify as one gender. I don't think we know at this point whether nonbinary gender is purely a social construct or if there is something more to it.


Anyway......I think I've said more than enough.
In a lot of ways, folks like me are nonbinary specifically as a rejection of gender norms.

What most of those who refuse to accept pronoun suggestions perhaps realize but do not wish to speak out loud is that no matter what they claim, with pronoun use comes sex essentialism riding on its coattails.

People expect something from "men".

People expect something from "women".

And moreover they don't want to be expected not to expect as much!

What they expect is often purely behavioral, and while some people seek to fulfill the "best of" and the "worst of" these stereotypes, often as a matter of course or perhaps without any conscious effort at all, some people don't, can't, or won't play that game.

What o do know is this: over the last month I've been experimenting with different doses of Spironolactone. It is a testosterone antagonist. At my current dosage I am expected to be about as impacted by testosterone as a prepubescent individual, mostly because I want to keep my bones from leeching calcium.

Just this last week I had my first follow-up and testing session, which was primarily to monitor possible effects with respect to my kidneys at a known dosage, however now I have been given leave to experiment on dosage with respect to Double and Nothing.

Yesterday was my first, and last day, not taking any. I absolutely hated the intrusiveness of the "sexual" thoughts. For weeks I've been free of it all, and then yesterday it was as if it had turned up to 15, on a scale of 10.

If there were boobs? I found myself being  shoved to stare at them, even if the result of staring was "I don't even like looking at these why am I looking at these? Can I please not?"

Imagine this: you probably either now or when you were younger didn't like other people staring at your breasts. Imagine not liking breasts being stared at by your eyes, the lecherous perv being inside your brain somewhere but not exactly the part of you that is "you" in the same way as the part of you that beats your heart or breaths air into your lungs.

You know, for the past 25 years I just chalked it up to the fact I hate looking at faces, and shirts have interesting stuff on them? The fact that I always look down and away? But no, it was like a website trying to advertise a product I don't even like by shoving it into the frame constantly... but by my own fucking endocrine system.

Sometimes it has as much to do with something inside you pushing you to be something that does not fit the person who you are, something which gains in strength from the presence or absence of a hormone, something that pushes you on who you are even if the push is unwanted, even if it is a gross violation. Imagine being touched in an unwanted way not on your body, but your very thoughts!

Imagine a father in your life who keeps telling you to be a "proper lady", and that "you will never find a man acting like that", and to "smile more"... But instead of another person it's something inside your own head.

For many trans people it starts with living while fighting against a current in one's head that is very insistent on telling them to be something they are not. In the instance of mere behavioral transition it lets someone experiment, even in the face of a wind fighting against them, to discover ways of acting that more befit their own desires for themselves above those desires of compartments fueled by their endocrine balance.

I can say this with distinct confidence now, that this is the case, because I have lived it. I have directly observed, through differential diagnosis, that testosterone is the driver of those nerve cells and their unwanted intrusive thoughts and even behaviors.

I can't decide to suddenly LIKE the effects testosterone has on me. The effects only make me miserable. I had some respite from just ignoring them to the best of my ability but now that I don't have to I feel at peace.

Being misgendered sucks specifically because it is a return, an echo of that droning force, that expectation, but foisted upon you by others, expected by others. It's saying "you are that voice from the back of your head that you already are fighting against, and you can never escape it, a d you shouldn't even try. It defines you!"

It's a statement that they don't trust someone to have more leverage over themselves than the leverage held by a droning "hormone monster", even when that hormone monster has been killed. It's demoralizing and moreover counterproductive to the act of self-actualization.
 
History has taught me that dealing with your misconceptions is fruitless. So carry on as usual- it is what you do best.

Me as well.

People who are racist simply won't notice their own assumptions. No matter how Woke racist they are.
Tom
FIFY - that is much more accurate.

Exactly.
Here in contemporary U.S., racists come in many flavors. Including Wokesters.
Tom
Thank you Captain Obvious.
 
History has taught me that dealing with your misconceptions is fruitless. So carry on as usual- it is what you do best.

Me as well.

People who are racist simply won't notice their own assumptions. No matter how Woke racist they are.
Tom
FIFY - that is much more accurate.

Exactly.
Here in contemporary U.S., racists come in many flavors. Including Wokesters.
Tom
Thank you Captain Obvious.

Brilliant response.
Bless Your Heart.

Tom
 
I can definitely see why you guys object so vehemently to higher education.
I graduated from both of my university degrees with first class honours.

Objecting to the groupthink and rigorously prescribed orthodoxy that are the result of the long march through the institutions does not mean I object to 'higher education'.

Try harder, Politesse.
Try harder Politesse? You have got to be kidding, Metaphor. And class rank? What are you? 17?
:picardfacepalm:

You have a problem with class rank, but you don't have a problem with "I can definitely see why you guys object so vehemently to higher education."? If in fact Metaphor responded like a 17-year-old then he showed considerably more maturity than Politesse did, or, frankly, than the person who wrote "You won’t tolerate any other opinion." did. If you want the discussion elevated, stop misrepresenting other people.
Fair enough, methinks.
 

Again, this applies to Oleg's statement. I haven't formed an opinion on gender fluidity yet, other than live and let live.
:consternation2: Oleg was talking about gender fluidity! If you haven't formed an opinion on gender fluidity yet then what the heck did he say that you think conflicts with neurobiology research?
Oleg was talking about much more than gender fluidity. Try again.
Oleg said:
Narcissism. It’s all narcissism. It’s the current way to be unique and important. Everyone must bow. But in reality it’s completely meaningless. The only categories that matter are male / female and gay / straight / bi.
No. I am referencing gender fluidity as pointless; because it is. Everyone has quirk, or a preference for this or that. These quirks or preferences do not create 100 genders needing their special snowflake flags. That's just narcissism.
 
:consternation2: Oleg was talking about gender fluidity! If you haven't formed an opinion on gender fluidity yet then what the heck did he say that you think conflicts with neurobiology research?
Oleg was talking about much more than gender fluidity. Try again.
Oleg said:
Narcissism. It’s all narcissism. It’s the current way to be unique and important. Everyone must bow. But in reality it’s completely meaningless. The only categories that matter are male / female and gay / straight / bi.
I take it the statement you bolded is your answer to my question -- it's the thing Oleg said that you think conflicts with neurobiology research. So then that's a yes to my question in post #254 -- you actually are claiming neurobiology has discovered empirical evidence that objectively distinguishes "categories that matter" from "categories that don't matter". :facepalm:

Whether a category matters is not a scientific question. It's a value judgment. Oleg was expressing his subjective opinion, not making an empirical claim that neurobiological observation could in principle verify or falsify. Neurobiology can no more tell us whether some category such as "gender-fluid" matters than it can tell us whether gender-fluidity sucks or is awesome.
 
Back
Top Bottom