LogFAQs > #904079633

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, Database 3 ( 02.21.2018-07.23.2018 ), DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
TopicWith Supreme Court Justice Kennedy Gone, Abortion and Gay Rights Are Next
ImTheMacheteGuy
06/27/18 5:44:19 PM
#195:


KhanJohnny posted...
DarkTransient posted...
KhanJohnny posted...
DarkTransient posted...
KhanJohnny posted...
CyricZ posted...
Hey everyone. Howl said it won't happen so feel better.

I'll keep my eyes open, all the same, thanks.

KhanJohnny posted...
Sound reasoning isn't the same as relying on feelings. That I am a man, is based on more than my feelings about it. There is scientific evidence for how we should define men and women, but that only provides the material for us to form our conceptions about the two genders.The progressive understanding of gender, based on the available evidence, is self-contradictory and irrational. That is why it's a bad definition. Not because I feel differently about it.

All you have is evidence to back up your feeling that you're a man. Not proof. Things you have been taught that have told you "you are a man because..."

We keep learning. We evolve our understanding of science. Biological sex is not an immutable "one or the other" and we've known about that for quite some time.

What is self-contradictory about "the progressive understanding of gender"?

I can't go into detail because GameFAQs might ban me. But you can search for yourself arguments against transgender identity quite easily using Google.


There's actually pretty good evidence to back up transgenderism in the case of male-to-female or female-to-male. On the other hand, stuff like "bi-gender" or "genderfluid" or <insert something completely unrelated to male vs female here> has literally zero scientific backing, unless you count sociological studies based on "this is how people told us they feel" or "this is what certain groups have accepted" (ie: nothing based in actual biology, or brain scans, etc).

Though of course, the fact that science backs up that it exists also doesn't mean everyone who claims it applies to them, really is transgender. But you can usually tell those who are vs those who are just playing it for attention, by whether they actively draw attention to that they're trans or try to just blend in as a normal member of their (new) gender.

There is evidence that a male can feel like a female subjectively. None that a male is a female on the basis of such feelings.


Look up studies on brain scans of transgender vs cisgender people, and in particular, whether transgender brain structure is closer to their biological sex or their desired sex.

Though at the end of the day, whether you actually see them as their preferred gender doesn't matter that much, as long as you aren't an asshole to them about it.

Yeah evidence that they might have similar brains in some way or another, is very strong evidence that they can feel like the other sex, but to say that it makes them the other sex, presumes that we base our definition of male and female on the basis of what your brain looks like. That has never been the case in Western history, nor do I think that it should logically be the case now. Again, science does not provide the answer for how we define man and woman.


At one point in history, the science that was used to determine if someone was a witch was such that if they were able to swim and not drown, they were a witch, but if they did drown, they were innocent...
---
Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1