[Puffer Fish]

This isn't so much about "Morals & Ethics" but is about philosophical and ideological issues, in the social sphere.
I know many of the readers here come from Europe, so what you have to realise is the transgender ideology has taken the U.S. by storm, like a new fad, becoming one of the biggest recent issues there.


Several years ago (maybe late 1998 to 2012) one of the "theories" coming from Progressives were that there are no fundamental differences between males and females, with the claim that it is almost entirely a just a "social construct".
For example, there were many progressives who absolutely denied that any male/female brain differences existed, and they absolutely couldn't be convinced otherwise.
But just a few years later, the "transgender" phenomena became the new leading ideology coming from Progressives.

But here's a question: If gender difference is almost entirely just a "social construct", why would it matter so much if an individual wants to be "male" or "female"? Wouldn't that just be an absurd and arbitrary designation?
It would just involve a few superficial differences in body appearance. Why support anyone going to the drastic effort of cutting and surgically altering their body, if gender does not really matter? And not only that, but the insistence they be recognised as the gender they want to identify as.

There appears to be a bit of cognitive dissonance, or a logical contradiction.

Can anyone please explain how these two different progressive-supported ideologies can possibly be reconciled with each other?

[Puffer Fish]

I think the renewed transgender movement started in Northern Europe beginning about 2009, and then finally made its way to the U.S. around 2014, beginning in San Francisco before that, years earlier, and gaining momentum in that city.

[ingliz]

why would it matter...

It doesn't, so why not let people choose a pronoun?

Why support...

Body autonomy.

[Puffer Fish]

If gender is not a fundamental human trait and does not matter, then there is no compelling that anyone would need to change their gender.

To draw an analogy, it would be the same as being transracial (wanting to change your race/ethnicity, with cosmetic surgery).

(Remember, progressives claim transgenderism has nothing to do with sexual attraction, so differences sexual attraction cannot be one of the reasons why gender would matter in this situation)

[ingliz]

transracial (wanting to change your race/ethnicity, with cosmetic surgery).

People try that too.

Examples:

Michael Jackson - Anything that made him look whiter.

Kim Kardashian - Arse surgery used to mimic steatopygia (Hottentot buttocks).

In Japan, double eyelid blepharoplasty - a procedure to transform the Asian monolid into a Western-style double-lid - is one of the more popular cosmetic surgeries.

[wat0n]

Having gender affirming surgery is not the same as forcing third parties to recognize whatever you identify as.

[Puffer Fish]

This was posted by someone else in another forum:

One of the biggest problems with supporting trans ideology is the lack of any sort of logical consistency within the reasoning for it. We are told it is both mental and physical but that one addresses the other while also not at all being tied to the other.

We see statements like.... a trans woman is a woman. A woman isn't biology but how you identify. A woman is a state of mind, state of being, how you feel internally.

Yet all of this needs to be "affirmed" with surgery and hormones.

So if your gender isn't your biology, it isn't your sex organs, if gender and sex are two different things, then why do people keep insisting on fighting and altering those things to "affirm" their gender?

Just explain how if gender and sex are different then why do people keep wanting to alter their sex to affirm their gender. They're different and unrelated. If a woman can have a penis, then a woman shouldn't need to cut off her penis to affirm her gender. If a man can have a vagina, then a man shouldn't need profoundly invasive plastic surgery to create a neo-penis to affirm their gender.

This of course doesn't even begin to address non-binary, the host of other genders and so on.

Don't wander off into the weeds on this. Don't start with the bullshit about transphobia. Don't lecture and explain while saying nothing. The premise is that gender and sex are different. Yet we keep being told that they must be aligned because they can't be different.

There's a reason many more people supported LGB and do not support 2STQIA++. The former have a logical consistency while the latter are just a ridiculous mess of dogma, platitudes and nonsense.

[Puffer Fish]

If they're "born the way they are", then they do not need to change that, do they?

If a person feels like they have a brain that is more like a different gender, why do they need their body to also conform to the typical body characteristics of that other gender, when their own body is already perfectly normal?

It seems like a case of trying to surgically alter the body to conform to the mind.

I thought LBGT was trying to celebrate diversity and differences. Why the need to try to conform through surgery?

Each person is unique. Why not just accept that your mind is more like the mind typical of one type of gender group in society while your body is typical of a different gender from that?

Unless it's not really about trying to match body to mind, and rather you're just trying to match your body to the gender you would prefer to be.
Even though that's likely to make you an abnormality, irrevocably trapped in some weird in-between gender zone, and less attractive in the dating pool.


"Some of us ended up with brains that do not align with the genitals of our bodies."

Response:
What's so important about aligning? Isn't this all really a social construct, when we think about it?

If -- hypothetically -- male brains were in bodies that had vaginas and female brains were in bodies that had a penis, then there would be no problem, right?
Your brain and body would then match up to everyone else in society (or at least one half of them), correct?
And then there would be the absurd situation of some individuals with vaginas wanting to get penises because they felt they had a more female brain, and wanted to try to more closely match up to everyone else in society who had a female brain.

I'm just trying to highlight the whole absurdity of the situation.

It doesn't really make logical sense, medically modifying your body to conform to society's ideals of gender, trying to be more like one of the two common gender groups in mind and body.

If that were really the point, which I suspect it is actually not.


I think maybe there are actually two transgender groups - one of them is just gay and confused, or has a fantasy that once they change their body all their desired gender group will be attracted to them.
The other one is more like Buffalo Bill in Silence of the Lambs.
(He was sexually obsessed with women -- so he wanted to transform himself into one, as a form of possessing the body which he coveted)

Either case is a sexual dysfunction.


And I even have a test for the theory. What are the percentage of transgenders who are fully bisexual? If my theory is correct, it should be vanishingly small relative to the rate in the general population. Because, according to my theory, if an individual were bisexual, there would exist no motivation to change gender.
But, on the contrary, according to conventional gender theory that is being touted these days, one would very much expect the rates of bisexuality to be much higher among the transgender group.

[Pants-of-dog]

Human rights are social constructs. Do human rights not matter?

Money us a social construct. Is money therefore unimportant?

[skinster]

But here's a question: If gender difference is almost entirely just a "social construct", why would it matter so much if an individual wants to be "male" or "female"? Wouldn't that just be an absurd and arbitrary designation?
It would just involve a few superficial differences in body appearance. Why support anyone going to the drastic effort of cutting and surgically altering their body, if gender does not really matter? And not only that, but the insistence they be recognised as the gender they want to identify as.

This is one of the many contradictions in the delusional ideology about gender. If people really believe there is something innate that makes them the opposite sex, why go through mimicking the opposite sex if that is what you are? Why perform sex stereotypes?

There is a teeny minority amongst the delusional who don't bother to do anything beyond identifying as the opposite sex (or even of no sex - non-binary - in the even more bizarre cases) but most of all these people think dressing and mutilating themselves to be the opposite sex will affirm their delusional beliefs.

People who have been detransitioning however, have said time and time again that all these magic tricks of dress and surgery didn't fix their dysphoria. Which should be pretty obvious it wouldn't, but unfortunately some people have had to learn this the hard way...

[Puffer Fish]

Human rights are social constructs. Do human rights not matter?
Money us a social construct. Is money therefore unimportant?

Do you think it would be mentally healthy if a gay person tried to change themselves so they would align to what is the norm in society?
(which would either involve attempted gay conversion therapy, or a sex change operation in an attempt to make them "heterosexual", and make the gender of their body conform to the orientation of their sexual attraction)

[Godstud]

@Puffer Fish Gay people aren't trying to change their gender. They just prefer people of their own gender, sexually. Homosexuals and bisexuals are not trying to change their gender. That's why the LGB part of the acronym LGBTQA+ shouldn't actually be included in this, as they aren't trying to change what they actually are. They aren't trying to change their gender.

[Pants-of-dog]

Do you think it would be mentally healthy if a gay person tried to change themselves so they would align to what is the norm in society?
(which would either involve attempted gay conversion therapy, or a sex change operation in an attempt to make them "heterosexual", and make the gender of their body conform to the orientation of their sexual attraction)

They call it conversion therapy.

Transphobic people support it for trans kids, despite the fact that it drives up suicide rates.

But you are ignoring my point:

Why do you assume that something is unimportant if it a social construct?

[skinster]

[Pants-of-dog]

@skinster

Please define “consent”.

Thanks.

[skinster]

www.dictionary.com

[Pants-of-dog]

@skinster

Mr. Turing did not consent to the estrogen treatment.

Doctors cannot force medical treatment on patients except in very clear circumstances, and so trans patients consent to the treatment.

Your Twitter feed seems unable to grasp this distinction.

[late]

Back in the 1950s; there were programs trying to cure gay.

The weird thing about them is that the successes were worse than the failures. The people that gave up sex didn't fit in gay or straight culture.

They became alone, thus the high suicide rate.

"The intent makes the crime."

The intent was to impose an anti-life morality on gay people.

The intent with trans is to help them find themselves. Whether or not that's a good idea I am not ready to discuss.

But the stark difference should be obvious to anyone that isn't dead inside...

[skinster]

@skinster

Mr. Turing did not consent to the estrogen treatment.

Doctors cannot force medical treatment on patients except in very clear circumstances, and so trans patients consent to the treatment.

Your Twitter feed seems unable to grasp this distinction.

I think you missed the part where it wasn't claiming that kids are being forced, but the same castrating medication is being offered to confused kids.

Like this one:

[Pants-of-dog]

This thing where you depict kids with neurodivergences as confused and easily manipulated is insulting and ableist.