[Hong Wu]

"Non-existent college rape epidemic"? When just over the summer there have been a several high-profile rapists getting light sentences so as to not ruin a "good kid". lol okay son.

Remember the Rolling Stone hoax? One incident, or a few incidents, doesn't create an epidemic or a crisis.

[Paradigm]

The thing about people who complain about this supposedly new "gender ideology" is that they seem to assume that their rigid ideas about gender norms are somehow not ideological, which is ludicrous. Now, I'm not wedded to any particular framework about what gender is, or how it's experienced. I find Judith Butler's ideas about gender performativity interesting, but I suspect it's more complicated than that. I don't know if I'll ever truly grasp what it's like to be assigned one gender at birth, but feel deeply within myself that that assignment is wrong. But the fact is that I don't have to understand it, so long as I'm willing to listen to those people's experiences and be humble enough to acknowledge what I don't know, which is precisely what the anti-"genderism" crowd refuses to do.

[Frollein]

I don't know if I'll ever truly grasp what it's like to be assigned one gender at birth, but feel deeply within myself that that assignment is wrong.

I'll probably never understand what it feels like to be a paranoid schizophrenic, but that doesn't mean I have to view it as anything but a mental illness. Gender dysphorics need psychiatric help, not enabling.

[Decky]

Live and let live. Vegetarianism is a mental disorder too but what can you do? Section them?

[Pants-of-dog]

The thing about people who complain about this supposedly new "gender ideology" is that they seem to assume that their rigid ideas about gender norms are somehow not ideological, which is ludicrous. Now, I'm not wedded to any particular framework about what gender is, or how it's experienced. I find Judith Butler's ideas about gender performativity interesting, but I suspect it's more complicated than that. I don't know if I'll ever truly grasp what it's like to be assigned one gender at birth, but feel deeply within myself that that assignment is wrong. But the fact is that I don't have to understand it, so long as I'm willing to listen to those people's experiences and be humble enough to acknowledge what I don't know, which is precisely what the anti-"genderism" crowd refuses to do.

I would agree. I only became aware of transphobia later in my political development. Old enough to understand that I would never really understand. This is one of the reasons why I think it is important to have trans people pead the movement for trans equality.

--------------

I'll probably never understand what it feels like to be a paranoid schizophrenic, but that doesn't mean I have to view it as anything but a mental illness. Gender dysphorics need psychiatric help, not enabling.

Let us assume that all trans people are actually mentally ill, as you believe.

Now, I am not a doctor, and neither are you. I would argue that, like any other medical condition, treatments for illnesses are best left to the discretion of the patients themselves and the medical professionals involved.

Since I also believe in public health care, I also logically support using tax dollars to disburse whatever treatments are decided upon by the aforementioned medical professionals and their patients.

Consequently, I have no trouble supporting trans people even if they are, as you believe, mentally ill.

[Paradigm]

I'll probably never understand what it feels like to be a paranoid schizophrenic, but that doesn't mean I have to view it as anything but a mental illness. Gender dysphorics need psychiatric help, not enabling.

"Mental illness" is as much a political category as a psychiatric one. As a matter of fact, there are societies in which schizophrenia is not as stigmatized as ours. Schizophrenics in these societies often report having pleasant rather than frightening hallucinations, and seem to be much more healthy and well-adjusted than the ones in our society. One is only "mentally ill" relative to society's ability to accommodate it. Trans identity only appears as "mental illness" relative the inability of your bigotry to accept it.

[Hong Wu]

The thing about people who complain about this supposedly new "gender ideology" is that they seem to assume that their rigid ideas about gender norms are somehow not ideological, which is ludicrous. Now, I'm not wedded to any particular framework about what gender is, or how it's experienced. I find Judith Butler's ideas about gender performativity interesting, but I suspect it's more complicated than that. I don't know if I'll ever truly grasp what it's like to be assigned one gender at birth, but feel deeply within myself that that assignment is wrong. But the fact is that I don't have to understand it, so long as I'm willing to listen to those people's experiences and be humble enough to acknowledge what I don't know, which is precisely what the anti-"genderism" crowd refuses to do.

You are assuming they really feel these things just because they say they do, and that if they feel them they must be normal, healthy, therefore acceptable things to feel. Yet it's clearly not healthy. What we're looking at here is western liberalism as a hundreds-year long effort to pervert Christianity, which is itself an attempt to articulate our real selves before they got buried.

To embrace trans-ideology is to say that gender (or what have you) doesn't matter and can therefore be declared, yet it also does matter because the declaration is treated as relevant and people have to respect that declaration, instead of setting up the bathrooms based upon what kind of equipment you have. In other words, they place their declaration about themselves above observable reality. Why would someone do that?

[Paradigm]

You are assuming they really feel these things just because they say they do, and that if they feel them they must be normal, healthy, therefore acceptable things to feel.

I assume that they are better experts on their own experiences than you are. A valid assumption if there ever was one.

Yet it's clearly not healthy.

Says who? They are perfectly capable of living normal and healthy lives, save for the fact that people like you dehumanize them.

What we're looking at here is western liberalism as a hundreds-year long effort to pervert Christianity, which is itself an attempt to articulate our real selves before they got buried.

Western liberalism is an outgrowth of Christianity, and Christianity itself articulates our underlying oneness in God beyond all identity markers, including gender. "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." - Gal 3:28

To embrace trans-ideology is to say that gender (or what have you) doesn't matter and can therefore be declared, yet it also does matter because the declaration is treated as relevant and people have to respect that declaration, instead of setting up the bathrooms based upon what kind of equipment you have. In other words, they place their declaration about themselves above observable reality. Why would someone do that?

To assume that their "declarations" are in conflict with observable reality is to assume that such external features such as genitalia are supposed to determine personality. I've known many trans women, and none of them have been in denial about the fact that they were born with a penis. But they move about in the world as women, and identify as such, and their genitalia does not matter in any social interactions other than with intimate partners. Seeing as this is only a problem for bigots who react violently to people who don't fit into their rigid categories, I see no reason to object.

[Hong Wu]

To assume that their "declarations" are in conflict with observable reality is to assume that such external features such as genitalia are supposed to determine personality. I've known many trans women, and none of them have been in denial about the fact that they were born with a penis. But they move about in the world as women, and identify as such, and their genitalia does not matter in any social interactions other than with intimate partners. Seeing as this is only a problem for bigots who react violently to people who don't fit into their rigid categories, I see no reason to object.

The problem with this argument you are making is that no one attributes greater significance to "I am male/female" than transgendered people. They expect their declaration to bring about very significant change in their lives. I don't think you can have this both ways. Again, it is either significant (in which case the physical reality should probably be observed) or it's insignificant (in which case the declaration should be meaningless and not be made). They can't declare that their physical body has no impact upon their personality while simultaneously claiming to be a woman and thus getting access to all of the trappings that we associate with womanhood. It's a juxtaposition.

I understand that you don't want to hurt people but I think sometimes, hurting someone is unavoidable if you want to help them. This too is a Christian idea I think, such as Christ's suffering.

[Paradigm]

What you are missing is that there is a lot more to being a man or woman than what kind of "equipment" you have. Most of us aren't privy to other people's genitalia, so appealing to "observable reality" is really a cop-out. You've interacted with trans people before and not been aware of it. I can almost guarantee it. Their genitalia is for doctors to know about and deal with, but if they present themselves as female, and identify as such, it's really none of your business what you think they should be called.

[The Immortal Goon]

As normal, I laughed to myself when someone tried to tie this into a Marxist conspiracy theory.

There's a guy that dresses up in skin-tight silver and dances to pop music on the side of the street with, "Ex-Gay," written on him. He stands near my neighborhood and rants and raves about how a 2,000 year old dead carpenter let him be straight after he read a book the carpenter didn't write.

It always makes me smirk because people, like the people in this thread, might ask why someone that prefers a girl's name couldn't be more normal like the guy in spandex ranting and raving to strangers about how God doesn't make him like butt-sex any more while Jars of Clay is playing from his boombox.

The point is, I don't give a fuck about any of ye or your feelings.

I don't care who you want to fuck. I like gothy girls. Who the fuck cares?

I'm sorry your butt-hurt sensitivities aren't the same as everyone on the planet...actually, I'm not sorry. It's hillarious to see conservatives whine and cry because their feelings are hurt when not everyone gets off on what they get off on.

The conspiracy theories about communists and "globalists," and whatever nonsense salve to heal your butt-hurt feelings is only more funny.

[Albert]

"Mental illness" is as much a political category as a psychiatric one. As a matter of fact, there are societies in which schizophrenia is not as stigmatized as ours. Schizophrenics in these societies often report having pleasant rather than frightening hallucinations, and seem to be much more healthy and well-adjusted than the ones in our society. One is only "mentally ill" relative to society's ability to accommodate it. Trans identity only appears as "mental illness" relative the inability of your bigotry to accept it.

Which societies are those?

On the other had by your definition recognizing homosexuality as normal is as political as recognition that it is an illness.

[Saeko]

Which societies are those?

On the other had by your definition recognizing homosexuality as normal is as political as recognition that it is an illness.

If it's an illness, then who is it harming?

[Albert]

Like a good homicide detective you investigate the relatives first.

[Godstud]

Homosexuality is not an illness and only backwards conservatives, who don't like the reality, promote it as such. The most ardent homophobic conservatives usually turn out to be homosexual themselves, too. It's very ironic that the people they hate the most are themselves. You know who you are...

[Albert]

So you hate conservatives, does that make you conservative?

[Godstud]

If consider myself a progressive conservative, as well as a fiscal conservative. I don't hate conservatives. Drlee is a conservative, and I quite like, and respect him. I respect tradition and values, to a point. I am also for equality, fairness, freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of religion/ or lack thereof.

There are backwards conservatives, right wing conservatives and progressive conservatives(which I believe Drlee to be), Trump conservatives, religious conservatives, and many other kinds. Just blurting out conservative doesn't mean much, does it?

Just as you can't put the label Liberal on everything and be right, you have to be specific when mentioning what kinds of conservatives that are problematic. There are some types of liberals that make me go bonkers, but some kinds that I can agree with. Kapeesh?

Question: Is hate a conservative value? Last time I looked, it was not.

[Albert]

K you hate misogynist, does that mean you are actually misogynist? And you are actually ironically hating something about yourself?

[Godstud]

Are you drunk?

Hating something doesn't make you that thing you hate. Take your head out of your ass for a minute.

Hating that some people treat others with no respect, discriminate against them, and demean them, doesn't make you that person.

I understand what you are saying(and it does not apply to everything), but it is a FACT that a lot of the people who have condemned homosexuality, in often the most virulent manner, later were discovered to be homosexuals.

Speaking out against the persecution of others is not the same as condemning others because of your own self-hate.

Treating homosexuals poorly doesn't make you a better person. It makes you a lesser person.

[Albert]

Who are these people Godstud?