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

They/Them She/Her He/Him - as you will

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Nobody claimed it is, and that has nothing to do with hormone replacement. You are thinking of genital reassignment, which is not done for kids.
Yes, genital 'reassignment' is done on kids, as are mastectomies. That you are ignorant of this while championing medical transition is disturbing but not surprising.
Nobody here is endorsing that. That you are ignorant of this means that you are not even reading your own thread. Disturbing but not surprising.
I often remind you of this but you keep forgetting, and trying to act like this is ever a thing I have endorsed. Please stop that; it would be exceedingly dishonest to make that mistake again.
It is exceedingly dishonest of you to say I made implications about your position that I did not.

I implied you endorse halting puberty and giving children wrong-sex hormones. I am, of course, correct about that. Indeed, you not only endorse it, but in my opinion, seem almost religiously excited by the idea.
I am indeed excited at the idea that people like myself, like Sigma, like my husband, or a number of my friends, like my ex wife, like KIS, will be able to grow up without draconian assholes forcing them to let their body develop in ways they would see it not, that nobody is forced further from the life they seek to lead.

We come to a conflict insofar as I see "wrong sex hormones" as "whichever hormones the one being forced to take them considers 'wrong'".

You're forcing your religious view of what is right and wrong on people now, children no less.
 

Metaphor

Sjajna Zvijezda
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
10,825
Location
Slouching towards Bethlehem
Nobody here is endorsing that. That you are ignorant of this means that you are not even reading your own thread. Disturbing but not surprising.
I did not accuse anybody in particular of endorsing childhood genital "reassignment". That you continue to insist that I did is disturbing but not surprising.

I am indeed excited at the idea that people like myself, like Sigma, like my husband, or a number of my friends, like my ex wife, like KIS, will be able to grow up without draconian assholes forcing them to let their body develop in ways they would see it not, that nobody is forced further from the life they seek to lead.
The people who want to stop medical experimentation on children are not the ones forcing anything on anyone.

We come to a conflict insofar as I see "wrong sex hormones" as "whichever hormones the one being forced to take them considers 'wrong'".
Of course we are at a conflict because you do not live in reality. Female hormones are wrong-sex hormones for males, and male hormones are wrong-sex hormones for females. Sex is a reality.

You're forcing your religious view of what is right and wrong on people now, children no less.
Refraining from pumping children with puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones is not a religious act.
 

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
597
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
I say, let's follow the advice of the American Academy of Pediatrics!

I'm not big on accepting authority. An authority might agree with me, that's great when it happens. But it's not an argument or evidence beyond somebody's opinion.
Tom
I was not aware that you were anti-science. The official statements of the American Academy of Pediatrics constitite the united opinion of one of the most respected pediatric organizations in the world, and their statements are based on peer reviewed research that must be vetted by the editors of the most high impact peer-reviewed journals in the world.

Since you are anti-science, though, that must not mean very much to you.
View attachment 36426

There are experts, and then there are experts.

No single option, no matter how expert, a scientific consensus makes.
I think you might have misinterpreted me, or I was not entirely clear. For one thing, I was not discussing genetics or semantics, but I was discussing the practical clinical care given to transgender children by actual pediatricians. The AAP is actually an appropriate authority for advice on pediatric care of any type. Another pediatric organization would be an appropriate authority from which to seek an alternate opinion, but I am not aware of any.

Furthermore, I have not claimed to know very much at all about intersex people whatsoever. In fact, as a transgender woman, I am really astonishingly ignorant regarding intersex people. I know nothing about them or their particular sensitivities. In fact, I am just as likely as anybody else, if not more so, to accidentally offend one of them. My few experiences with them did, however, give me an insight as to how other people might react to me if I became overzealous about my pronoun enforcement. In fact, that is why I tell people, "I prefer she/her, but if you make mistakes from time to time, I won't hold it against you or even really dislike you. I do not seek perfect compliance, merely a general understanding that masculine pronouns do not really reflect how I see myself." I decided that this would be how I spoke after I got flamed for trying to tell an intersex person, "I am very sorry to have offended you, but I only used the word 'hermaphrodite' because I find the word to be very charming. I was not aware that you did not appreciate it. It might take me a long time to adjust to this because I have habitually used the term, in my own niche communities, ever since 1997, and it is very hard to change a two decade old habit, but I promise that I will try." I realized then that I had asked someone's standing pardon for a social error that they found to be profoundly offensive, and I could not find in myself the nerve to refuse the same sort of pardon to others if I had previously asked for it from somebody else.

Regardless, you would not look for the opinion of a geneticist on how to provide practical clinical care for a transgender CHILD, but you would ask a large, well-vetted pediatric organization that has actively attempted to find a good policy.


There is their official POLICY STATEMENT. That is not just a single study by a single researcher, but it is the policy that the entire organization has gotten behind, united, as their consensus on how to properly provide suitable care to transgender children.

I was answering the fanatical accusations, by our resident <Snip> that is tolerated for reasons that I cannot understand except <snip>, that I am motivated by a "gender cult" in the formation of my views on pediatric care. I honestly am unbelievably ignorant about pediatric care and know almost nothing about children except that, theoretically, I used to be one. I have blocked most of my memories of it, though. Therefore, I do not have a personal opinion on the pediatric care of transgender people, but I do believe that it is advisable to seek out an appropriate authority on the subject if one actually is attempting to raise a transgender child. The official policy statement of the AAP constitutes the strongest type of scientific authority because it represents the consensus of several scientists from robustly interdisciplinary backgrounds, not just one.

An appropriate counter-argument would have to be based on the opinions of another pediatric organization, but even that would not make it less valid to argue that a pediatrician that had followed the AAP's advice had done due diligence to seek valid advice on how to proceed in the care of a transgender child, especially if their practice is directly associated with the AAP.

That was all that I meant.
Mayo clinic also has a very strong stance on the care for transgender children. They are one of the most well respected medical organizations in the world.

If you want to see Metaphor's other hobby horse wake up and go zombie walking across the forum for two weeks though, bring up FGM. I mean, please don't, it's your right but seriously, it's not a great idea. It will be hijacked in two seconds by people complaining (and rightly so) about all genital mutations and "what about men?"

Now, I'm mostly of the opinion that the only person who decides how their genitals may be modified, outside of lifesaving or otherwise organ-saving interventions, is the owner of them.

Metaphor tried so hard to frame a decision made by an individual as adults forcing things on them with regards to genital reassignment surgeries.

You know what was forced on a lot of trans girls by adults who could have done otherwise? Male puberties.
Trans-boys being forced through female puberty tend to have worse issues, to be honest. They can become seriously injured by using inappropriate methods of chest-binding. Their rate of attempted suicide is considerably higher.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Nobody here is endorsing that. That you are ignorant of this means that you are not even reading your own thread. Disturbing but not surprising.
I did not accuse anybody in particular of endorsing childhood genital "reassignment". That you continue to insist that I did is disturbing but not surprising.
You used it in a direct reply to something I said. If it is not in reply to what I said, then do not include it in replies to what I say as a reply to what I say.
I am indeed excited at the idea that people like myself, like Sigma, like my husband, or a number of my friends, like my ex wife, like KIS, will be able to grow up without draconian assholes forcing them to let their body develop in ways they would see it not, that nobody is forced further from the life they seek to lead.
The people who want to stop medical experimentation on children are not the ones forcing anything on anyone.
good thing nobody is endorsing medical experimentation on children. The science is quite well understood.
We come to a conflict insofar as I see "wrong sex hormones" as "whichever hormones the one being forced to take them considers 'wrong'".
Of course we are at a conflict because you do not live in reality. Female hormones are wrong-sex hormones for males, and male hormones are wrong-sex hormones for females. Sex is a reality.
Then you should have no issues holding up evidence for this claim.

I will hold you to also providing evidence for the begged question in the middle that they are in some real way "wrong" and not merely "normally unavailable".
You're forcing your religious view of what is right and wrong on people now, children no less.
Refraining from pumping children with puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones is not a religious act.
No, it isn't. Standing between children and their power to pump themselves full of puberty blockers and as adults standing between them and the hormones they seek, that's pretty religious.

It's the religious believe that they ought not because of what I have pointed out are very bad arguments.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
27,278
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Point of information:

There are no hormones in humans that are not present in both male and female humans.

Ovaries and testes both produce testosterone, with ovaries typically producing between 5 and 10 percent of the amount produced by testes. Progesterone is also produced in the testes, and is an essential precursor for testosterone production.

Adult men typically have a similar oestrogen level to that of non-ovulating adult women.

The differences between sexual development of men and women are due to the differing ratios of these hormones, not their presence or absence.

Thank you for your attention. I now return you to your scheduled flame-war.
 

Metaphor

Sjajna Zvijezda
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
10,825
Location
Slouching towards Bethlehem
You used it in a direct reply to something I said. If it is not in reply to what I said, then do not include it in replies to what I say as a reply to what I say.
I was explaining the loss of sexual function involved in medically transing children. Now, as part of the suite of policies you endorse, it makes genital "reassignment" surgery.

good thing nobody is endorsing medical experimentation on children. The science is quite well understood.
So the loss of sexual function is acknowledged and intended.

Then you should have no issues holding up evidence for this claim.

I will hold you to also providing evidence for the begged question in the middle that they are in some real way "wrong" and not merely "normally unavailable".
It's quite simple. One of the differences between the sexes is the amount and type of sex-based hormones circulating in their bodies. Trans-women take testosterone blockers because testosterone is the male hormone.
No, it isn't. Standing between children and their power to pump themselves full of puberty blockers and as adults standing between them and the hormones they seek, that's pretty religious.

It's the religious believe that they ought not because of what I have pointed out are very bad arguments.
Children have no such power. Immoral adults have the power. And when the number of detransitioned people reach critical mass, there will be a reckoning.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
You used it in a direct reply to something I said. If it is not in reply to what I said, then do not include it in replies to what I say as a reply to what I say.
I was explaining the loss of sexual function involved in medically transing children.
No, you were claiming it. "Explaining" requires evidence, models, information, not just smoke blown out your ass in the general direction of mine so as to not even manage to get any of the smoke in.
Now, as part of the suite of policies you endorse, it makes genital "reassignment" surgery.
I endorse body reassignment surgeries.

I'd totally take turns with my husband between our bodies, to be sure.

I hope to pioneer the technology to make that possible!

So of course I endorse genitals reassignment surgery.

I'm sure if someone offered people dissatisfied with the fact they were altered from factory form, such as say circumcision, they would take the opportunity to get that repaired. Maybe that involves regrowing some skin.

Only instead of being altered by a doctor, they are assembled by a piece of chemical machinery in a way that does not match their permanently installed driver package. Oops, came out different.

Life does that a lot. .5-3% of the population is a lot.

What do you propose, just leaving people to suffer knowingly as an entity that is denied something that it is shaped to be reliant on?
good thing nobody is endorsing medical experimentation on children. The science is quite well understood.
So the loss of sexual function is acknowledged and intended.

Then you should have no issues holding up evidence for this claim.

I will hold you to also providing evidence for the begged question in the middle that they are in some real way "wrong" and not merely "normally unavailable".
It's quite simple. One of the differences between the sexes is the amount and type of sex-based hormones circulating in their bodies. Trans-women take testosterone blockers because testosterone is the male hormone.
You only managed to defend "merely normally available" here.

You have not justified that it is in some way "right".

You have held up differences, an "is". You need to get to "ought". Otherwise you are invoking the naturalistic fallacy.
No, it isn't. Standing between children and their power to pump themselves full of puberty blockers and as adults standing between them and the hormones they seek, that's pretty religious.

It's the religious believe that they ought not because of what I have pointed out are very bad arguments.
Children have no such power. Immoral adults have the power. And when the number of detransitioned people reach critical mass, there will be a reckoning.
Children absolutely have the power to pump themselves full of hormones. The problem is that some seek choice, clearly and of their volition, to pump themselves with the hormones other kids are being allowed to pump themselves full of, instead of the one they are about to be subjected to. They want the power to choose. An underwhelming minority seek this right to choose, and pass through a very long road to get to make that choice, and in the mean time get to delay.

There will never be a critical mass of detransitioned people near the mass of satisfied transitioners because people are overwhelmingly satisfied with it!

The reckoning is in your head and fantasies.
 

Metaphor

Sjajna Zvijezda
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
10,825
Location
Slouching towards Bethlehem
What do you propose, just leaving people to suffer knowingly as an entity that is denied something that it is shaped to be reliant on?
I propose the genitals of children are not mutilated. It's really quite easy. What you do is: you refrain from mutilating them.

Adults can seek whatever genital "reassignment" surgery they want. All the results will be unsatisfactory but as long as surgeons do not mislead them, it's no skin off my nose.
Children absolutely have the power to pump themselves full of hormones. The problem is that some seek choice, clearly and of their volition, to pump themselves with the hormones other kids are being allowed to pump themselves full of, instead of the one they are about to be subjected to.
Ludicrous. Puberty is not pumping yourself full of hormones.
There will never be a critical mass of detransitioned people near the mass of satisfied transitioners because people are overwhelmingly satisfied with it!

The reckoning is in your head and fantasies.
There could never be a critical mass for you, because it is outside your narrative.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
But you know what gay men never demanded of straight people? We never demanded that you look at us and call us 'straight'.


Lindsay Graham would like a word.
Also, many of folks do rightly demand that people not call them gay in public.

The consequences of being outed for not being straight can be deadly.

The same goes for not being "cis".
There's a fairly important difference between prohibiting a thing and compelling a thing. They aren't synonymous. Prohibiting certain language is substantially different from compelling certain language.

Just consider the intersection of church and state. The state prohibiting a prayer from being said during a public process is worlds apart from the state compelling that everyone say a prayer during a public process.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Letting people do to their own body as adults
Do you believe that parents should be REQUIRED to allow their 13 year old children to get full-face tattoos if those children wish to do so?

, and letting people engage in hormonal realities that we do not deny others;
This is nonsense. We neither deny nor allow the reality of puberty to occur. That's not in our control. It's a natural process, and it is intermingled with several other biological processes that occur at the same time. What you're actually asking for is that parents be REQUIRED to provide their children with exogenous drugs that artificially derail their natural maturity in a way that does harm to them long term.

Let's try an alternative approach. If a male child very strongly desired to be extremely masculine, and wanted to take extra testosterone during puberty, do you think parents should be compelled to provide that additional testosterone? If a female child strongly desired to be extremely feminine, do you think parents should be compelled to provide additional estrogen?

and not playing some facile game where we pretend that everyone can or should reproduce or that not reproducing means not having a meaningful experience as a parent?

This is what you have a problem with?

Evil sentiments, indeed.
Honestly, I find it baffling that you think it's perfectly acceptable to sterilize a child - even though a fair number of detransitioners already exist.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
It is a crime for people to notice black people "are different" (they are not in any meaningful way) and to treat them differently for it in particular contexts, and always a violation of social decorum otherwise, and a very good reason to be ejected with great prejudice from any private place of civility.
Um, okay, but there are also many contexts in which it is both acceptable and necessary to notice that black people are different and to treat them differently.

For instance, when it comes to medicine, there are some drugs that work better in people of predominantly european descent, and others that work better in people of predominantly african descent. There are some illnesses and diseases that are found within people of african descent far more commonly than people of european descent. It would be idiotic to demand that a doctor or a nurse pretend that black people and white people have the same risk profile for sickle cell anemia or for lactose intolerance.

Similarly, it would be downright dumb to force people to pretend that there's no difference between black people's hair and white people's hair. Different products and different treatments are reasonable and appropriate.

No matter how much you might wish to believe otherwise, males and females are FAR more different from each other than a black man and a white man are. And there are many, many situations in which it would be dangerous, unethical, and damaging to force people to pretend that no difference exists. It's not an even level of risk either - that pretense results in danger being faced largely by females, and has virtually no impact on males.

So... you are essentially arguing that doctors must be forced to pretend that black men are exactly the same as white men, even though that results in inappropriate care for black men and poorer health outcomes. Does that actually make sense to you?
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I'm the most vocal trans activist on this thread.
Yes, you are. Far more vocal and dogmatic than the actual transgender members of this forum are. I have notices that in many cases in the past decade, the "activist allies" are for more zealous and authoritarian than the people they claim to be acting on behalf of.

I am the disproof of your claim.

Your claim was disproved in the post you were arguing against with that claim!

You saying "nuh-uh" and engaging in ad hominems and fallacious argument does not constitute a disproof.

It means you are willing to publicly declare private and unimportant information when you fail to use neutral pronouns while under belief that the pronoun being requested is misplaced. That you have expressed a willingness to out people.

And herein lies that problem: It is NOT private information. Humans above the age of about 6 are about 98% accurate at sexing adult humans on the basis of faces alone, even absent any fashion indicators like hair style, make-up, and clothing. The natural faces of adult humans display our sex to everyone around us. Our natural bodies do so even more strongly.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
It is a violation of someone's privacy to assume their history, past, culture, just by looking at the shape of their eyes or the color of their skin, and then say such things as you assume.
It is beyond inane to insist that people pretend that epicanthic folds do NOT indicate asian ancestry. It is completely irrational to pretend that visually obvious elements of a person are somehow magically unknown.

Seriously, you seem to be arguing that these meat-sacks we walk around in are a completely arbitrary and separate costume that is divorced from our "real selves"... where that "real self" seems to be a code word for "souls".
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Now you answer the same question with trans people the subject.
Why would I need to call transgender identified males anything other than males? Solely and exclusively for the purpose of courtesy.

It is certainly NOT the case that a transman is actually a man. A transman is a transgender identified female who wishes to live life in as close an approximation of a human male as can be done.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
You said no gay men want to be called straight. Obviously this is wrong because there are plenty of gay men that are not out and want to be thought of as straight.
Noooo.... not exactly. They don't want people to know that they are actually gay. It's not the same as demanding that people who know for a fact that they are gay pretend that they are straight.

If a transman doesn't want people to know that they are actually female, well, that's fine, but it's on them to convincingly pass as male. If a transman has double-D boobs, a tiny waist, broad hips, round eye sockets, s mall hands, and a female gait... their desire for people to not know they are actually female is going to be really hard to pull off. People will look at them and will see a female human being, and will perceive them as a woman regardless of whether they want other people to know that or not.

If a gay man is constantly talking about the great butt sex they've been having with Henry the Bear... it's hardly rational for them to insist that people don't "out" them as gay, and everyone pretend they are straight.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
But someone's need to define people by what they percieve as birth anatomy trumps safety concerns.
Well, unless it's women we're talking about. And then of course, the fact that those female prisoners perceive the bepenised individual as male means fuck-all for the safety of those women. Those women's safety doesn't matter nearly as much as the feelings of the male-bodied person with a penis that wants to be housed with females.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Most people most of the time should not make an observation so "obvious" as "race", in public or even to themselves if possible.
This is ridiculous. It is laughably ridiculous. I observe that I am fucking white, and that my sister is fucking mixed and that my dad is fucking black. My best friend is a fucking redhead. Her spouse is fucking hispanic. I observe that my dad is of average height for a male, and that my mom is of below average height for a female. My neighbor is obviously, blatantly, clearly of Indian descent.

Why on earth would you think it's appropriate or even plausible that people lie to themselves and pretend that what is visually obvious is magically unknown? It's asinine.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Most people most of the time should not make an observation so "obvious" as "race", in public or even to themselves if possible.

Just because SOME people can SOMETIMES tell about SOME people merely by looking at them does not justify telling of the thing.

Seriously, it's not OK for kids to point out someone's pissed pants

We are talking explicitly about a population that is ambiguous, and for whom the better they pass, often, the safer they are.

You know, I can imagine a playground with a bunch of kids. There one who has peed their pants, and a bunch of other kids. The one with the pissy drawers is attempting to get away.

Now, I can imagine two very illuminating reactions: the kid who points at the obvious and says "hey, that kid pissed their pants!" And the kid who notices and instead walks out to the front and side of the kid so that nobody can see what happened and can thus escape.

These are two very different reactions to an obvious piece of true information seen. One will result in shame and trauma and the other in a friendship and no trauma, though perhaps still a little shame.
Notice that in your example, even the "nice" kid does actually notice and is aware that the other kid has experienced a bladder accident. They have most definitely made the observation of reality, and have acknowledged it as reality. The nice kid helping to shelter another from shame is certainly not unaware of the pee, nor are they pretending that the kid didn't pee themself. The only way for them to even lend support is literally to observe and take action on that observation of pee covered pants.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Yes, observing that someone was born "male" by whatever standard you wish to use at the moment may be tantamount to pointing at them and proclaiming before all and sundry that they have pissy pants.
I'm sorry, but Alex Drummond and Laurel Hubbard and Lia Thomas and Rachel Mckinnon and Andrea Long Chu and Eddie Izzard are all male. They are OBSERVABLY male. Nobody needs to point anything out at all.

You are not asking that we be nice to the kid who peed their pants; you're insisting that nobody could even possibly be aware that they peed their pants, and that if we notice wetness on their pants, we should all assume that it's in our imagination and the pants are actually dry.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
No. I don't know what somebody's gender identity is when I look at them because I don't ask them and I don't care.
Yet you make assumptions about it when you use a pronoun. Fascinating.

No, that's absurd. You don't make an assumption about someone's gender identity. You make an assumption about their sex.

LD, I have to assume that you would refer to me as a woman, and use the pronoun "she" when talking about me, correct? Do you have any insight into my gender identity whatsoever? I submit that you do NOT know a goddamned thing about my gender identity. What you do have information about is my sex. I have never hidden my sex, I have never pretended to be anything other than female. I have talked about my experiences as a female - the experience of having a female body and being treated in the way that my society treats females on the basis of our sexed bodies. You know that I am female.

You know fuck-all about my gender identity.

I know that Laurel Hubbard is a transwoman. I know that Laurel Hubbard is a male person who identifies as, and is more comfortable living as, a woman. Laurel Hubbard also knows this. If I'm ever interacting with Laurel Hubbard in person, I will respect their preference and pretend that I can't tell that they are a male. But everyone knows that Hubbard is male, and I don't think there's any actual harm in referring to Hubbard as "he" in a random internet discussion that he is not part of.
 

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
597
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
You said no gay men want to be called straight. Obviously this is wrong because there are plenty of gay men that are not out and want to be thought of as straight.
Noooo.... not exactly. They don't want people to know that they are actually gay. It's not the same as demanding that people who know for a fact that they are gay pretend that they are straight.

If a transman doesn't want people to know that they are actually female, well, that's fine, but it's on them to convincingly pass as male. If a transman has double-D boobs, a tiny waist, broad hips, round eye sockets, s mall hands, and a female gait... their desire for people to not know they are actually female is going to be really hard to pull off. People will look at them and will see a female human being, and will perceive them as a woman regardless of whether they want other people to know that or not.

If a gay man is constantly talking about the great butt sex they've been having with Henry the Bear... it's hardly rational for them to insist that people don't "out" them as gay, and everyone pretend they are straight.
I actually dress in practical attire for my job, plus a little bit of silly costumery not related to my gender. Come to think of it, my place of work is relaxed enough that I wear a pair of dragon wings to work, and reactions are positive. I am really too lighthearted, most of the time, to really be insecure about what people think of me identifying as a woman in spite of appearances. I don't even get mad when people misgender me. I just politely correct them, and if they apologize, I assure them that it's no big deal, except it sounds odd to me.

And one of many ways that my life is kind of cool is that, for now, I can use a urinal. Urinals are actually kind of neat. I'll miss those when I eventually go under the knife.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I reject any importance you place on what I judge as an incoherent and facile model of sex.
I will stick with the definition used by biologists, thank you very much. If you wish to proclaim an entire branch of science as incoherent and facile, you're going to have to provide some incredibly convincing arguments to support that assertion.

As soon as you show me a sperg, I shall begin to question the premise of reproductive sex.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I am routinely mistaken for female on the phone. Obviously, at least after passing through the frequency filters of the phone people can't tell the gender of my voice. And in hiking in the winter I have often found myself unable to determine someone's gender without seeing their face
And yet, by seeing someone's face, you are usually right... interesting.

divas_las_vegas_carpet.jpg


Which one is a guy?

All except one.
 

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
597
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
I reject any importance you place on what I judge as an incoherent and facile model of sex.
I will stick with the definition used by biologists, thank you very much. If you wish to proclaim an entire branch of science as incoherent and facile, you're going to have to provide some incredibly convincing arguments to support that assertion.

As soon as you show me a sperg, I shall begin to question the premise of reproductive sex.
You know the sexual behavior of non-humans can, in some species, be kind of brutal, right? The only thing that really tempers the rape culture, in nature, is that most animals are born with knives on their hands and feet and daggers in their mouths. Therefore, most of them observe at least a semblance of respect because THEY DON'T WANT TO BE CUT OPEN LIKE A FISH. It can still be kind of brutal.

We humans, in most cultures at least, try to live with a higher standard of dignity. The idea of sexual consent is one example. Gender-affirmation is another, even though it is a slightly newer idea.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,189
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
What do you propose, just leaving people to suffer knowingly as an entity that is denied something that it is shaped to be reliant on?
I propose the genitals of children are not mutilated. It's really quite easy. What you do is: you refrain from mutilating them.

And when is gender reassignment surgery done on children???

Ludicrous. Puberty is not pumping yourself full of hormones.

Learn some biology!
 

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
597
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
If I'm no longer obligated to behave with courtesy toward society just because it's arguably not natural, then I am going to stop wearing clothing altogether, and I might make like Diogenes and start masturbating in public. If only I could fill my belly by rubbing it, too.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Yup, although you did have the context that I had been talking about a drag show.
Well... also the fact that all of them have pretty definitively male faces. The Cher impersonator is actually pretty good, but Cher has relatively masculine facial structure to begin with so I took a guess that it was a man. The only one that actually looks female to me would be the blue-haired one, and I *think* that would be a Katy Perry impersonator?

Most of them LOOK male to me.

Also, interestingly, female humans are better at correctly identifying the sex of other adults than males are.

I wonder what might have prompted that particular evolutionary development?
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Trans-boys being forced through female puberty tend to have worse issues, to be honest. They can become seriously injured by using inappropriate methods of chest-binding. Their rate of attempted suicide is considerably higher.
The rate of attempted suicide for transgender identified teenage females is approximately the same as for lesbian teenage females... which is also about the same rate as for teenage females that experience anorexia, bulimia, or cutting.

That's higher than the rate for teenage females who do not have mental health disorders... and the rate for females in general is higher than for teenage males of all sorts.

The number of detransitioners are also highly disproportionately female... nearly all those who ultimately understand that they are lesbians, not transmen. And one of the biggest expressed regrets is that they surgically removed healthy breast tissue and took cross-sex hormones that has left them either sterile, or with a dramatically reduced number of viable eggs.

Also worth noting that Sweden's Karolinska Institute - one of the most progressive institutions, and one of the first to strongly champion affirmative-only models of care for gender dysphoric children - has changed their policy during the last year, based on studies done on the outcomes of affirmatively treated children. They no longer recommend puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones, but prefer a "watch and wait" model. This is due to the lack of improvement in mental health conditions paired with the deleterious impacts of both puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones on the long-term health of those individuals.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Puberty is not pumping yourself full of hormone
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

...

:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

...

So where are the hormones coming from, then, sky faeries?
They are produced in your body.
So your body, specifically the gonads part, something which is a part of yourself... Is pumping out hormones... Into yourself...

I do not see how this could be a hard concept for a fifth grader let alone a grown ass man.
 

Metaphor

Sjajna Zvijezda
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
10,825
Location
Slouching towards Bethlehem
if you like, they were 'assigned female at birth'
It's really more a case of "assigned female at conception by the sperm that got there first being one that carried an X gene".
The trans activists and gender cultists have really had the upper hand with normies for a while now, and it has started with the cultist seizure of the language. Once you are debating on their terms, they've won the battle.

The gender cultists think--and have persuaded normies to gloss over--the idiotic phrase "assigned male at birth" or "assigned female at birth" makes sense. My hat goes off to them, in a kind of supervillain admiration way, for how much work is done with these four words:
  • That 'gender', not sex, was the thing 'assigned' at birth
  • That it was 'assigned', as if it were arbitrary, as if doctors and nurses picked out folded squares of paper from a tombola drum
  • That it was done 'at birth', as if the moment in time had a special meaning, as if your sex is not your sex from before your birth and afterwards for your entire life.
Every time I hear the phrase AFAB or AMAB the first thing I do is say "no, sex is observed and recorded at birth".
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I reject any importance you place on what I judge as an incoherent and facile model of sex.
I will stick with the definition used by biologists, thank you very much. If you wish to proclaim an entire branch of science as incoherent and facile, you're going to have to provide some incredibly convincing arguments to support that assertion.

As soon as you show me a sperg, I shall begin to question the premise of reproductive sex.
Using definitions of biologists in normal casual speech is not generally recommended.

There are all sorts of elements to our biology that are varied and complicated, the brain part most of all and most importantly of all.
if you like, they were 'assigned female at birth'
It's really more a case of "assigned female at conception by the sperm that got there first being one that carried an X gene".
The trans activists and gender cultists have really had the upper hand with normies for a while now, and it has started with the cultist seizure of the language. Once you are debating on their terms, they've won the battle.

The gender cultists think--and have persuaded normies to gloss over--the idiotic phrase "assigned male at birth" or "assigned female at birth" makes sense. My hat goes off to them, in a kind of supervillain admiration way, for how much work is done with these four words:
  • That 'gender', not sex, was the thing 'assigned' at birth
  • That it was 'assigned', as if it were arbitrary, as if doctors and nurses picked out folded squares of paper from a tombola drum
  • That it was done 'at birth', as if the moment in time had a special meaning, as if your sex is not your sex from before your birth and afterwards for your entire life.
Every time I hear the phrase AFAB or AMAB the first thing I do is say "no, sex is observed and recorded at birth".
No, it's assigned. We've been through this merry-go-round already, @SigmatheZeta has lots of fun research to show that the thing you think makes someone "entirely male" or which your language tries to so name, is "existentially female". Apparently you did not read it or you would not be banging on a PRATT.
 

Metaphor

Sjajna Zvijezda
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
10,825
Location
Slouching towards Bethlehem
ell... also the fact that all of them have pretty definitively male faces. The Cher impersonator is actually pretty good, but Cher has relatively masculine facial structure to begin with so I took a guess that it was a man. The only one that actually looks female to me would be the blue-haired one, and I *think* that would be a Katy Perry impersonator?

Most of them LOOK male to me.

Also, interestingly, female humans are better at correctly identifying the sex of other adults than males are.

I wonder what might have prompted that particular evolutionary development?
I hate playing these 'spot the male' games with the gender cultists.

Here's the deal: present one of those drag queens naked and see how many people mistake the sex of that person.

And: if, in my day to day interactions, I interact with a male and have no fucking idea he is male, and I call him 'she' and think of him as a woman, congratulations! I won't be any the wiser and that person will have been validated and we can all sing kumbayah!

But no, that isn't what they want us to do. They want us to look at somebody that is obviously male and pretend we don't notice. Jarhyn thinks that noticing an obvious male is special divination magic and it's outing him to process the images sent to your brain. It's unhinged.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I actually dress in practical attire for my job, plus a little bit of silly costumery not related to my gender. Come to think of it, my place of work is relaxed enough that I wear a pair of dragon wings to work, and reactions are positive. I am really too lighthearted, most of the time, to really be insecure about what people think of me identifying as a woman in spite of appearances. I don't even get mad when people misgender me. I just politely correct them, and if they apologize, I assure them that it's no big deal, except it sounds odd to me.

And one of many ways that my life is kind of cool is that, for now, I can use a urinal. Urinals are actually kind of neat. I'll miss those when I eventually go under the knife.
That's wonderful, I'm glad you are in a position where you can be lighthearted and fun.

In light of the direction of this discussion... would it be reasonable to assume that neither you nor your co-workers actually believe that you are a for-realsies dragon when you put on pink wings? They understand that it's fund and it's an expression of your personality, but that you're still actually human and that the risk of you breathing fire in the office is non-existent?

I'm also quite curious, if you're willing, to get your take on the distinction between "identifying as a woman" and "being a woman". Do you view them as being perfectly synonymous, or do you think there's a distinction between them?
 

Metaphor

Sjajna Zvijezda
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
10,825
Location
Slouching towards Bethlehem
No, it's assigned. We've been through this merry-go-round already, @SigmatheZeta has lots of fun research to show that the thing you think makes someone "entirely male" or which your language tries to so name, is "existentially female". Apparently you did not read it or you would not be banging on a PRATT.
No idea what your sentence means but I know it is wrong.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
No, it's assigned. We've been through this merry-go-round already, @SigmatheZeta has lots of fun research to show that the thing you think makes someone "entirely male" or which your language tries to so name, is "existentially female". Apparently you did not read it or you would not be banging on a PRATT.
No idea what your sentence means but I know it is wrong.
":lalala:"
 

Metaphor

Sjajna Zvijezda
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
10,825
Location
Slouching towards Bethlehem
No, it's assigned. We've been through this merry-go-round already, @SigmatheZeta has lots of fun research to show that the thing you think makes someone "entirely male" or which your language tries to so name, is "existentially female". Apparently you did not read it or you would not be banging on a PRATT.
No idea what your sentence means but I know it is wrong.
":lalala:"
Yes, luv. The man who had me on 'ignore' accuses me of sticking my fingers in my ears.

The absolute cheek.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
So your body, specifically the gonads part, something which is a part of yourself... Is pumping out hormones... Into yourself...

I do not see how this could be a hard concept for a fifth grader let alone a grown ass man.
Your body also produces insulin. Unless you're already an insulin-dependent diabetic... taking exogenous insulin can kill you quite effectively.

Taking a large volume of hormones that a body is not evolved to produce can have very deleterious effects.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Yes, observing that someone was born "male" by whatever standard you wish to use at the moment may be tantamount to pointing at them and proclaiming before all and sundry that they have pissy pants.
I'm sorry, but Alex Drummond and Laurel Hubbard and Lia Thomas and Rachel Mckinnon and Andrea Long Chu and Eddie Izzard are all male. They are OBSERVABLY male. Nobody needs to point anything out at all.

You are not asking that we be nice to the kid who peed their pants; you're insisting that nobody could even possibly be aware that they peed their pants, and that if we notice wetness on their pants, we should all assume that it's in our imagination and the pants are actually dry.
Honestly, that would in fact be the kindest outcome, to just forget it ever happened for their sake. Or to try. The next best thing we can do is stay silent except for to kick the shit out of anyone who does say anything to try to foment a mob.
So your body, specifically the gonads part, something which is a part of yourself... Is pumping out hormones... Into yourself...

I do not see how this could be a hard concept for a fifth grader let alone a grown ass man.
Your body also produces insulin. Unless you're already an insulin-dependent diabetic... taking exogenous insulin can kill you quite effectively.

Taking a large volume of hormones that a body is not evolved to produce can have very deleterious effects.
So, first of all, we have a wide variety of examples of humans with otherwise similar enough biology being exposed to exactly those chemicals in exactly those amounts, and living happy, productive lives.

Second, nobody is taking "large volumes" of hormones in a body not evolved to produce them. Human bodies evolved to produce them, specifically, and to adapt to them. You are committing a naturalistic fallacy and also ignoring the longstanding evidence of a whole generation of trans kids so as to put yourself over them and their wishes for their own bodies.

Quit pretending you forcing a puberty on a child who has clearly stated their intent is nothing less than denying them power of self determination.

It is entirely within our power to choose, so even just denying them access is making that choice for them.
 

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
597
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
Trans-boys being forced through female puberty tend to have worse issues, to be honest. They can become seriously injured by using inappropriate methods of chest-binding. Their rate of attempted suicide is considerably higher.
The rate of attempted suicide for transgender identified teenage females is approximately the same as for lesbian teenage females... which is also about the same rate as for teenage females that experience anorexia, bulimia, or cutting.

That's higher than the rate for teenage females who do not have mental health disorders... and the rate for females in general is higher than for teenage males of all sorts.

The number of detransitioners are also highly disproportionately female... nearly all those who ultimately understand that they are lesbians, not transmen. And one of the biggest expressed regrets is that they surgically removed healthy breast tissue and took cross-sex hormones that has left them either sterile, or with a dramatically reduced number of viable eggs.

Also worth noting that Sweden's Karolinska Institute - one of the most progressive institutions, and one of the first to strongly champion affirmative-only models of care for gender dysphoric children - has changed their policy during the last year, based on studies done on the outcomes of affirmatively treated children. They no longer recommend puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones, but prefer a "watch and wait" model. This is due to the lack of improvement in mental health conditions paired with the deleterious impacts of both puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones on the long-term health of those individuals.
The American Academy of Pediatrics does not recommend the "watchful waiting" model.


From the American Academy of Pediatrics| Policy Statement| October 01 2018

Ensuring Comprehensive Care and Support for Transgender and Gender-Diverse Children and Adolescents​


Acknowledging that the capacity for emerging abstract thinking in childhood is important to conceptualize and reflect on identity, gender-affirmation guidelines are being focused on individually tailored interventions on the basis of the physical and cognitive development of youth who identify as TGD.45 Accordingly, research substantiates that children who are prepubertal and assert an identity of TGD know their gender as clearly and as consistently as their developmentally equivalent peers who identify as cisgender and benefit from the same level of social acceptance.46 This developmental approach to gender affirmation is in contrast to the outdated approach in which a child’s gender-diverse assertions are held as “possibly true” until an arbitrary age (often after pubertal onset) when they can be considered valid, an approach that authors of the literature have termed “watchful waiting.” This outdated approach does not serve the child because critical support is withheld. Watchful waiting is based on binary notions of gender in which gender diversity and fluidity is pathologized; in watchful waiting, it is also assumed that notions of gender identity become fixed at a certain age. The approach is also influenced by a group of early studies with validity concerns, methodologic flaws, and limited follow-up on children who identified as TGD and, by adolescence, did not seek further treatment (“desisters”).45,47 More robust and current research suggests that, rather than focusing on who a child will become, valuing them for who they are, even at a young age, fosters secure attachment and resilience, not only for the child but also for the whole family.

Instead, they recommend embracing a non-binary model of gender precisely due to the criticisms that you have brought to this discussion. They believe that embracing a non-binary concept of gender tends to limit "detransitioning," which is the reason why we have been humoring the peculiar neo-pronouns. However, I am partly to blame for ones like the sie/hir pronouns: I used them a lot in my roleplaying life during my youth, and I may have contributed to them catching on by simply using them frequently and being a gifted writer. Anyhow, non-binary gender identities are useful for stymieing how often young people start medical procedures when they are not really emotionally ready, and this is why we humor the neopronouns, at least for the sake of helping children form secure family attachment and resilience. This is the pediatric community's official answer to your concern.

While "detransitioners" and "desisters" may exist, maintaining secure family attachments is more important, and allowing the use of non-binary gender identities can stymie the excessive reliance upon hormone replacement therapy in situations where it is not clearly necessary or appropriate.

*tilts her head playfully* And this is why you must call @Jarhyn a wizard, and you should also acknowledge that I am, indeed, a dragon.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Trans-boys being forced through female puberty tend to have worse issues, to be honest. They can become seriously injured by using inappropriate methods of chest-binding. Their rate of attempted suicide is considerably higher.
The rate of attempted suicide for transgender identified teenage females is approximately the same as for lesbian teenage females... which is also about the same rate as for teenage females that experience anorexia, bulimia, or cutting.

That's higher than the rate for teenage females who do not have mental health disorders... and the rate for females in general is higher than for teenage males of all sorts.

The number of detransitioners are also highly disproportionately female... nearly all those who ultimately understand that they are lesbians, not transmen. And one of the biggest expressed regrets is that they surgically removed healthy breast tissue and took cross-sex hormones that has left them either sterile, or with a dramatically reduced number of viable eggs.

Also worth noting that Sweden's Karolinska Institute - one of the most progressive institutions, and one of the first to strongly champion affirmative-only models of care for gender dysphoric children - has changed their policy during the last year, based on studies done on the outcomes of affirmatively treated children. They no longer recommend puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones, but prefer a "watch and wait" model. This is due to the lack of improvement in mental health conditions paired with the deleterious impacts of both puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones on the long-term health of those individuals.
The American Academy of Pediatrics does not recommend the "watchful waiting" model.


From the American Academy of Pediatrics| Policy Statement| October 01 2018

Ensuring Comprehensive Care and Support for Transgender and Gender-Diverse Children and Adolescents​


Acknowledging that the capacity for emerging abstract thinking in childhood is important to conceptualize and reflect on identity, gender-affirmation guidelines are being focused on individually tailored interventions on the basis of the physical and cognitive development of youth who identify as TGD.45 Accordingly, research substantiates that children who are prepubertal and assert an identity of TGD know their gender as clearly and as consistently as their developmentally equivalent peers who identify as cisgender and benefit from the same level of social acceptance.46 This developmental approach to gender affirmation is in contrast to the outdated approach in which a child’s gender-diverse assertions are held as “possibly true” until an arbitrary age (often after pubertal onset) when they can be considered valid, an approach that authors of the literature have termed “watchful waiting.” This outdated approach does not serve the child because critical support is withheld. Watchful waiting is based on binary notions of gender in which gender diversity and fluidity is pathologized; in watchful waiting, it is also assumed that notions of gender identity become fixed at a certain age. The approach is also influenced by a group of early studies with validity concerns, methodologic flaws, and limited follow-up on children who identified as TGD and, by adolescence, did not seek further treatment (“desisters”).45,47 More robust and current research suggests that, rather than focusing on who a child will become, valuing them for who they are, even at a young age, fosters secure attachment and resilience, not only for the child but also for the whole family.

Instead, they recommend embracing a non-binary model of gender precisely due to the criticisms that you have brought to this discussion. They believe that embracing a non-binary concept of gender tends to limit "detransitioning," which is the reason why we have been humoring the peculiar neo-pronouns. However, I am partly to blame for ones like the sie/hir pronouns: I used them a lot in my roleplaying life during my youth, and I may have contributed to them catching on by simply using them frequently and being a gifted writer. Anyhow, non-binary gender identities are useful for stymieing how often young people start medical procedures when they are not really emotionally ready, and this is why we humor the neopronouns, at least for the sake of helping children form secure family attachment and resilience. This is the pediatric community's official answer to your concern.

While "detransitioners" and "desisters" may exist, maintaining secure family attachments is more important, and allowing the use of non-binary gender identities can stymie the excessive reliance upon hormone replacement therapy in situations where it is not clearly necessary or appropriate.

*tilts her head playfully* And this is why you must call @Jarhyn a wizard, and you should also acknowledge that I am, indeed, a dragon.
Well, it is not that she must call me a wizard. I would never demand that. I would like it if she acknowledged what I am, but I will be it with or without her acknowledgement.

I would, admittedly, love to hear her set some goalposts, but I know Emily possibly has a twin sister in Lucy, though while Lucy tends to move the ball, Emily tends towards moving goalposts. We'll see, I guess.
 

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
597
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
I actually dress in practical attire for my job, plus a little bit of silly costumery not related to my gender. Come to think of it, my place of work is relaxed enough that I wear a pair of dragon wings to work, and reactions are positive. I am really too lighthearted, most of the time, to really be insecure about what people think of me identifying as a woman in spite of appearances. I don't even get mad when people misgender me. I just politely correct them, and if they apologize, I assure them that it's no big deal, except it sounds odd to me.

And one of many ways that my life is kind of cool is that, for now, I can use a urinal. Urinals are actually kind of neat. I'll miss those when I eventually go under the knife.
That's wonderful, I'm glad you are in a position where you can be lighthearted and fun.

In light of the direction of this discussion... would it be reasonable to assume that neither you nor your co-workers actually believe that you are a for-realsies dragon when you put on pink wings? They understand that it's fund and it's an expression of your personality, but that you're still actually human and that the risk of you breathing fire in the office is non-existent?

I'm also quite curious, if you're willing, to get your take on the distinction between "identifying as a woman" and "being a woman". Do you view them as being perfectly synonymous, or do you think there's a distinction between them?
On the point of me being a dragon, it kind of started in the late 1990's. There were not as many options for young transgender women, and the only outlet for my gender identity was roleplay. Before starting hormone replacement therapy, I identified as essentially gender non-binary. For some reason, the HRT has been adequate to make the "female" gender identity feel appropriate. Anyhow, I avoided suicide by engaging in deep emotionally and mentally immersive roleplay, which allowed me to have a social life in which I did not feel so horribly wrong. It might just be a matter of sentimental value, but Sigma was the version of me that was willing to continue living. I do not expect anybody else to take it seriously, and I don't want them to. The emotional significance is lost on anybody besides myself and my dearest friends. It's like a tattoo that only has true significance to its bearer: you may admire its beauty, but do not pretend you can understand it.

As far as my identity, I am a transgender woman. I am open about this. I have no interest whatsoever in "going stealth." From that information, you can infer easily enough that I was assigned male at birth. I do not care if you know. If I wanted to extend more of an effort, then I could fool you into believing that I had been born as a woman, but I have no interest in doing so.
 

SigmatheZeta

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2021
Messages
597
Gender
she/her
Basic Beliefs
Generally, I am rooted in both ancient Epicurean and ancient Pyrrhonist sentiments, although I am somewhat sympathetic toward the intentions behind ancient Cynicism.
@Emily Lake, I am going to give you what I hope is a helpful parallel, here, but I don't want to be misunderstood. I would not be very happy if you pretended to fully understand what it's like to be transgender, since you really can't. Likewise, I will not pretend to understand fully the issues of cis-women. I am not endeavoring to make you believe I understand something that it's impossible for me to really understand, but I think that I can understand it just enough for the sake of creating an extremely rough juxtaposition.

Imagine a woman who got knocked-up by her boyfriend, but instead of staying around to help raise his child, the motherfucker just applied for a job out-of-state and moved a thousand miles away in order to avoid the issue. Imagine if, instead of feeling sorry for herself, she were to just embrace the idea of being a single mother, and she realized it was, while not always easy, not a terrible thing. Imagine that she raised her child on television shows where a child was being raised by single parents, such as Hilda, and she encouraged that child to believe that single-parent families were a valid type of family. She might never really forgive that child's father for being a deadbeat, but she can give her child a fair chance at living a fulfilling life and at developing a positive self-concept.

However, imagine that a fundamentalist Christian were to try to teach that child that their mother is sinful for her adultery, and that fundamentalist Christian were to lament how their mother had done them a grave injustice by depriving them of a father. Imagine that that child were to believe the fundamentalist Christian, and that child became unhappy and depressed.

Now, imagine you had another friend that was trying to raise a child that might or might not be transgender, and your other friend were trying to maintain the trust of their child by giving them a sense of affirmation and support, rather than trying to correct them when they did not really have to. That parent reinforces their case by seeking out the opinion of a licensed pediatrician, and that child's pediatrician has confirmed that this were the best way to make sure that that child grows up with secure attachment.

However, imagine that an alt-right asshole were start telling that child that there is really no such thing as gender non-binary or transgender people, and that child were to be told they are somehow broken for being what they are. And imagine that alt-right asshole were to tell them their parents are liars for saying they accept them for what they are. Imagine that child growing unhappy after that conversation.

Sure, those situations might not be exactly the same, but they are not fundamentally different. They are both situations where a child has been born with something noticeably different about them, and their parents are trying their best to make them feel happy with themselves. It is not really helpful when other people attempt to shame them for being different, and really, it's unnecessarily destructive.

I am a transgender adult. Yeah, you might be able to offend me in regard to my gender, but as much as I wish that people wouldn't, I am not really at risk of hurting myself because of this matter. A child, on the other hand, actually is. Therefore, my stance on transgender issues is really focused mostly on how people choose to behave toward children and young adults. As an adult, I might feel that it is respectful for you to affirm my gender, but I also mature enough to recognize that your respect has to be earned. The way I understand the world, you stop getting free stuff, besides a little bit of help with your higher education, the day that you have a right to vote, except if you have a very serious disability that effectively makes you as helpless as a child. To me, this discussion is really about the health of kids. It is a child's unique prerogative to be fragile, and if you are not going to help protect them, then you should consider giving them the right to vote.

I really disapprove of transgender adults that are thin-skinned and paranoid in how they deal with the issue of gender-affirmation. I don't think that works. I think that they can come across as bullies, and I think that it's partly because of their behavior that some people have grown to be resentful toward attempts to protect transgender people's health. We ought to learn how to see the respect we want as something we should try to earn. It is really hard to respect an adult that is thin-skinned.

If you shared a place of work with me and I wanted to use the women's restroom, assuming the restrooms were divided based on gender, I feel that I would be obligated to take special pains to make you feel comfortable with me, at an individual level. It would be up to me to earn your individual trust and to make you feel comfortable. I feel it would be up to me to make sure that I did not look out-of-place in that space. This is a matter of earned mutual respect and trust.

We do have to make special concessions to make sure that gender expansive kids feel as comfortable as we can make them. They are an especially vulnerable risk group. It is not unreasonable to make an extra effort to make their lives as manageable as possible. However, the right agencies to make those kinds of decisions need to be pediatric and teachers' associations. A layperson does not have the intimate knowledge of these conditions to make authoritative decisions. It is not the layperson's business to know how it's done. It's the layperson's business to know that authority has been invested in appropriate professional organizations that they trust.

I see my views on this as moderate, realistic, and fair.
 
Last edited:

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Well, it is not that she must call me a wizard. I would never demand that. I would like it if she acknowledged what I am, but I will be it with or without her acknowledgement.
I acknowledge that you are a human male who does not possess magic powers of any sort whatsoever, but who really likes to dress up in a cloak and wander around with a staff.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,798
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Well, it is not that she must call me a wizard. I would never demand that. I would like it if she acknowledged what I am, but I will be it with or without her acknowledgement.
I acknowledge that you are a human male who does not possess magic powers of any sort whatsoever, but who really likes to dress up in a cloak and wander around with a staff.
I reiterate, you have never once given me a standard or goalpost to knock the ball over...

While I do not have faith that you are not Lucy's twin, waiting instead to pull the goalposts rather than the ball, you are the one who needs to set the standards for belief, and in a way that is not "ha, you can't by definition do something that is definitionally impossible therefore you cannot be what you are."

Until you do that, you are just in petulant denial of what may exist, an ostrich burying her head in the proverbial sand.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
We do have to make special concessions to make sure that gender expansive kids feel as comfortable as we can make them. They are an especially vulnerable risk group. It is not unreasonable to make an extra effort to make their lives as manageable as possible. However, the right agencies to make those kinds of decisions need to be pediatric and teachers' associations. A layperson does not have the intimate knowledge of these conditions to make authoritative decisions. It is not the layperson's business to know how it's done. It's the layperson's business to know that authority has been invested in appropriate professional organizations that they trust.
I'm all for being gender expansive. Partly, that's because I view the concept of gender as deleterious in and of itself - it's confining, regressive, and harmful to expect conformity to social roles and behaviors. In my view, a little boy who likes tutus and butterfly wings should have every right to dress in frills and skip around town as any girl would. A little girl who loves climbing trees and playing cops and robbers should have every right to be rambunctious, loud, aggressive, and dominant as any boy would. Any person should be able to dress, comport, and express themselves as they feel comfortable, without judgement. For me, this is a very deeply held principle that I've had ever since I was that little girl climbing trees, making my own bow and arrow, and starting fires at the park while pretending to be an indian brave. I was, and absolutely continue to be, gender non-conforming.

My concern is that such non-conformity is no longer empowering and freeing... it is now being pathologized. That same rejection of gender roles and stereotypes that was freedom for me now risks children being given cross-sex hormones and surgeries in order to fit them into a different gender basket. Instead of tearing down the cages, we just stick them in one of the other color. And it worries me.

Part of that worry is very personal. I have a then-nephew-now niece who is, to be a bit callous "genuine transgender". Even as a child, they were fairly feminine, and had expressed that they wanted to grow up to be a woman many times. She has now transitioned, and she's much happier, and is living a good life with her partner. She waited until she was 21 before she began transitioning, even though that meant that she went through a male puberty with all that entails for her physique and voice. Her younger sibling is 16... and has never expressed any kind of dysphoria or discomfort with her body. My younger niece (and I *will* say niece here) has very recently started identifying as "trans" along with five of her close female friends. The odds of that are astronomical. She has developed back problems and shortness of breath from constantly wearing a binder over her very large breasts. She has a history of depression and anxiety, and is highly likely to be bipolar, as is her mother (my sister).

My younger niece started testosterone a few months ago... after a single one-hour session with a counselor. They did not discuss her anxiety and depression at all, they did not discuss her lack of dysphoria. Essentially, she said "I'm trans I want testosterone" and the doctor said "oh you're so brave, here you go".

I think my older niece would have been a good candidate to have cross-sex hormones during puberty. I would have supported her in that. But I deeply, sincerely, do NOT think that my younger niece is a good candidate for it at all, and I think her identification as transgender is a coping mechanism for other problems. And I am genuinely worried that she is going to be permanently and irreversibly damaged as a result of this affirmation model of care.

Despite how @Jarhyn tends to characterize me, I'm NOT AT ALL opposed to transgender people, nor am I opposed to making accommodations for transgender people. I do think that there's an ideological aspect involved in this topic though, and I dearly wish it weren't there so we could simply talk about policies and reasonable accommodations as rational adults. I don't think it's unreasonable to take a position that male prisoners with penises should not be placed in the female prison. I'd be happy to set aside a separate wing for transgender penis-havers... and I'm happy to allow post-surgical transwomen to be placed in the female prison. It seems like a very rational solution to me. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect non-medicalized teenaged transgender students to compete against their own biological sex. I don't think it's unreasonable to acknowledge that male bodies have a definite athletic advantage and that including them in female sports reduces the fairness and equality of those women. I think there are lots of ways that we can be accommodating and rational all at the same time... but the discussions so often end up firewalled to a "no debate" rhetoric that it's very frustrating.
 

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,171
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Well, it is not that she must call me a wizard. I would never demand that. I would like it if she acknowledged what I am, but I will be it with or without her acknowledgement.
I acknowledge that you are a human male who does not possess magic powers of any sort whatsoever, but who really likes to dress up in a cloak and wander around with a staff.
I reiterate, you have never once given me a standard or goalpost to knock the ball over...

While I do not have faith that you are not Lucy's twin, waiting instead to pull the goalposts rather than the ball, you are the one who needs to set the standards for belief, and in a way that is not "ha, you can't by definition do something that is definitionally impossible therefore you cannot be what you are."

Until you do that, you are just in petulant denial of what may exist, an ostrich burying her head in the proverbial sand.
You're not a goddamned wizard! You like to think of yourself as one, but you aren't! Magic is not real, you don't fucking practice it!

I absolutely refuse to kowtow to your religious beliefs. You can believe them all you want, but you have absolutely no right to force those beliefs on me or anyone else at all. You can "identify" as the second messiah for all I give a fuck... it will not actually make you the son of a nonexistent fucking god!

But hey, if you want to play that game, I fucking identify as Shiva and I have blue skin and four arms. You can't see them though, because they're invisible to mere mortals like you... but I insist that you recognize me as a literal fucking god and bow before me from this day forth. And if you fail to do so, then you're a fucking bigot who I will use my power to utterly destroy and I shall haunt your days from now to eternity!

1641338231448.png
 

Trausti

Contributor
Warning Level 1
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
My younger niece started testosterone a few months ago... after a single one-hour session with a counselor. They did not discuss her anxiety and depression at all, they did not discuss her lack of dysphoria. Essentially, she said "I'm trans I want testosterone" and the doctor said "oh you're so brave, here you go".

I think my older niece would have been a good candidate to have cross-sex hormones during puberty. I would have supported her in that. But I deeply, sincerely, do NOT think that my younger niece is a good candidate for it at all, and I think her identification as transgender is a coping mechanism for other problems. And I am genuinely worried that she is going to be permanently and irreversibly damaged as a result of this affirmation model of care.
This really gets me. It's totally normal to feel weird and awkward in your teens and early 20's. I think all of us did something. But for all the earlier generations, we didn't do any permanent damage to our bodies to be "different." We were able to grow out of it. Young people ought to be told this. This push to put young people on hormones and surgeries is ghastly.

If these young punks lived today they'd be all about their pronouns and gender fluidity instead of their dress.

 
Top Bottom