221–230 of 257 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sex is binary, with the exception some extremely rare cases of non XY / XX chromosome options. Gender used to be a synonym for sex until the language got hijacked in the last few years to try and make it mean "gender identity" for political reasons.
If there's cases that don't fit the simplistic binary, the more accurate and comprehensive view is that it's not binary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there's cases that don't fit the simplistic binary, the more accurate and comprehensive view is that it's not binary.
I agree. To say it's overwhelmingly binary would be more accurate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The reality is, proponents of the idea of "toxic masculinity" provide almost no examples of "healthy masculinity" (or "toxic femininity"). Almost any article you read about toxic masculinity and in every discussion where it comes up, proponents take pains to point out, often in laborious detail, and to futile effect, that the term isn't meant to assign toxicity to all masculine behaviors. One shouldn't need to provi…
It would have made for a more persuasive rebuttal if you'd also included an example of non-toxic masculinity, don't you think? Just one would do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. To say it's overwhelmingly binary would be more accurate.
I agree. And since I both care about minorities and don't care to deeply interrogate people's medical histories, I'm ok with calling people whatever the heck they want to be called. No skin off my elbows. It'd be pretty silly if we thought the arguably more objective sex characteristics of a person were not binary but thought that their gender had to be binary, wouldn't it?
To imply that those who don't wish to act the way you wish them to don't care about minorities is invidious and not supported by any evidence I've seen.
> I'm ok with calling people whatever the heck they want to be called.
As are most people until they are compelled.
> It'd be pretty silly if we thought the arguably more objective sex characteristics of a person were not binary but thought that their gender had to be binary, wouldn't it?
Would it? If, as some do, we posit that there can be an infinite number of genders or even a large number like… 42, are there 42 different categories of sex? If not, and I don't believe there are, then it's possible for multiple sexes to fit into a gender category and multiple genders into a sex category. You could probably fit all 42 into male and female and cut out a lot absurdities.
I'd go for 3, male, female and 3rd sex. Come up with a better name if you like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. And since I both care about minorities and don't care to deeply interrogate people's medical histories, I'm ok with calling people whatever the heck they want to be called. No skin off my elbows. It'd be pretty silly if we thought the arguably more objective sex characteristics of a person were not binary but thought that their gender had to be binary, wouldn't it?
> And since I both care about minorities To imply that those who don't wish to act the way you wish them to don't care about minorities is invidious and not supported by any evidence I've seen. > I'm ok with calling people whatever the heck they want to be called. As are most people until they are compelled. > It'd be pretty silly if we thought the arguably more objective sex characteristics of a person were not bina…
It is if how I wish them to act is to care about minorities, like for instance the population that is not a part of, in your words, the population that's "overwhelmingly binary" - aka a minority, by definition.
> As are most people until they are compelled.
So you're ok with calling people what they want to be called. Nice!
> You could probably fit all 42 into male and female and cut out a lot absurdities.
Why do you, of all the people in the world, get to decide what is and isn't absurd? Is there a particular scientific method you're using to define absurdity?
> I'd go for 3, male, female and 3rd sex. Come up with a better name if you like.
I'd suggest if you need a better name for people that are neither male nor female you educate yourself. Lumping people into "other" isn't particularly useful for those people or even descriptive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That study is worthless based on the small sample size. I'm also a trans woman and I hate when this study is brought up. I think brain development could be a reason but I also think how a person is raised could play into being transgender for some people. Our generation will likely never know for certain. I just don't think there is an all encompassing answer for everyone.
I don't understand the matter of it either. If you badly feel you're in the wrong body and you want it changed, I'm ok with that. I don't see any other reasons are needed.
Should this apply to other physical/genetic characteristics as well, such as ethnicity? Should Caucausians be able to change their physical appearance (via tanning, etc...) to Native American, identify as such (cough Elizabeth Warren cough), and then be entitled to any/all social benefits legally accorded to Native American people?
What sort of implications would that have, internationally? Say someone has their body altered to appear Han Chinese, and then they go to China, expecting to be treated as a Chinese (or at least an ABC), because that's how they "identify". What are the second and third-order implications for how the world views American leadership?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And since I both care about minorities To imply that those who don't wish to act the way you wish them to don't care about minorities is invidious and not supported by any evidence I've seen. > I'm ok with calling people whatever the heck they want to be called. As are most people until they are compelled. > It'd be pretty silly if we thought the arguably more objective sex characteristics of a person were not bina…
> To imply that those who don't wish to act the way you wish them to don't care about minorities is invidious and not supported by any evidence I've seen. It is if how I wish them to act is to care about minorities, like for instance the population that is not a part of, in your words, the population that's "overwhelmingly binary" - aka a minority, by definition. > As are most people until they are compelled. So you'…
I get to decide what I think is absurd, because:
a) I'm free. b) I would still value my opinion as good enough for me even if I wasn't.
To think otherwise would be absurd, and the irony of being told this by one who wishes to impose their view upon others else they be othered is, at the very least, amusing.
> It is if how I wish them to act is to care about minorities
You're running around in circles now and thus, there is little point in continuing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would have made for a more persuasive rebuttal if you'd also included an example of non-toxic masculinity, don't you think? Just one would do.
Seeking out mental health assistance more proactively, discussing mental health with their friends.
2. You appear to be seeking out a personal argument with me, I suggest you desist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand the matter of it either. If you badly feel you're in the wrong body and you want it changed, I'm ok with that. I don't see any other reasons are needed.
>>>If you badly feel you're in the wrong body and you want it changed, I'm ok with that. I don't see any other reasons are needed. Should this apply to other physical/genetic characteristics as well, such as ethnicity? Should Caucausians be able to change their physical appearance (via tanning, etc...) to Native American, identify as such ( cough Elizabeth Warren cough ), and then be entitled to any/all social benefi…
Let's try...
> Should this apply to other physical/genetic characteristics...
you can change your physical characteristics, you can't (that I can think of) change your genetic ones.
> ...such as ethnicity?
Ethnicity, hmm. I don't know how to define that, so from wiki:
"An ethnic group or ethnicity is a category of people who identify with each other, usually on the basis of a presumed common genealogy or ancestry or on similarities such as common language or dialect, history, society, culture or nation.[1][2] Ethnicity is often used synonymously with the term nation, particularly in cases of ethnic nationalism, and is separate from but related to the concept of races"
Unless you pin down what you mean by ethnicity, I can't even begin answer. It's too broad. Ethnicity seems a social construction - I know a (lapsed) jew and she's ethnically one, but you couldn't tell from native english from looking at her (same as I can often tell a pole by looking, or a turk, or even some londoners), so is she because she was born one, or isn't she because she gave it up, or what?
But, maybe. After all an american indian guy decided to 'identify' as a tiger " rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking_Cat>. While that's a very odd decision to me, I'm not going to step in and physically stop him. Would you?
> cough Elizabeth Warren cough
plesse leave politics out of this, ta, it's complex enough.
> What sort of implications would that have, internationally? [...]. What are the second and third-order implications for how the world views American leadership?
What?? Seriously? This is about people who feel they don't fit their body and you try to drag in this?And why do you assume I'm from the US? To try to answer your question differenty, are you suggesting that we don't necessarily do 'the right thing' morally because people are watching?
Final question, have you ever met a trans person? Or understand what they can choose to undergo because they feel so wrong - they can go through a lot, it's not an easy thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So... is this a tentative win for the nurture crowd then? Or did they strictly only show that there is no correlation between testosterone, without going into alternative options? EDIT: glaugh's comment[0] explains why it is not. TLDR: this research debunks earlier research with a similar scope, but more long-term effects of testosterone are not accounted for. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21143846
Nature versus nurture is such a boring debate, honestly. The driving force behind the nature versus nurture debate seems to be people attempting to use science to justify their positions on pop philosophy, but the science rarely actually connects to the pop philosophy position. It's basically: take a specific scientific fact, try to use it to prove a very nonspecific idea (nature or nurture?) and then use that nonspe…
EDIT: I should clarify: I agree with your point. This is not stopping actual brain scientists from making really disturbing claims about genetic determinism, completely oblivious to their own political leanings. I'm speaking from experience of having shared departments with them.