J K Rowling under attack - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All sociological topics not appropriate or suited to other areas of the board.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By late
#15057595
Nonsense wrote:
If that is what JKR said, then she shouldn't be condemned for supporting someone of her own sex, spelling out scientifically proven facts.



Sigh.

I did a good post on this earlier in the thread.

Or is reality not entering this conversation? Because if you're riding pink unicorns, you need no help from me.
#15057630
POD wrote:You can use whatever words you like, and refuse to accept the way they self-identify, but it does not change the fact that they identify that way.


I'm not denying however they self-identify because that's up to them, what I'm saying is that being a woman doesn't amount to a set of feelings and dresses.

And mainly, that you can't change your sex. Men can't have babies, for instance.

If that were the case, gender identity would be completely cultural and without a biological basis, but there does seem to be such a basis in neurology.


Gender identity pretty much seems cultural. Sex is biological. And you can't change your sex, but you can surely pretend to.

Please provide evidence for the claim that hormone treatment will have lifelong negative impacts. Thank you.


I can't imagine blocking puberty of a developing child would have positive effects. Not to mention the likely negative psychological effects from grown-ups telling them they can change their sex, realizing it was a lie, etc. But if you think it's all harmless, ok.

Sorry, it was a word I picked up from my trans accepting radical feminist female friends.


Surely they'd be called 'TARFs' then? :eh: :lol:

I don't know any radical feminists who self-identify as "TERFs" because 1) it's basically hate-speech i.e. it is often used alongside threats from transwomen or liberal feminists who don't like women being gender-critical / radical feminists 2) it is a way to shut down debate that includes idealists saying you can be whatever you want to be and materialists who say sex is immutable.

I will not bother to tell these women that they are supposedly misogynist.


It was you I was calling a misogynist. You slip easy into that role when it comes to this issue. I'll note you completely ignored the parts of my post that included the (legitimate) fears women have about sharing their vulnerable spaces with men or transwomen(people with dicks), or about male/trans violence against women, about the encroachment of men/transwomen into our sports etc., or how it is only men who are a threat to trans people. That's why I call you a misogynist, because you seem to not care about women.
#15057633
skinster wrote:I'm not denying however they self-identify because that's up to them, what I'm saying is that being a woman doesn't amount to a set of feelings and dresses.


I doubt very much that trans people have such a shallow idea of gender identity.

And mainly, that you can't change your sex. Men can't have babies, for instance.

And you can't change your sex, but you can surely pretend to.


We can change some aspects of sex. And we may be able to change all of them in the near future if medical science keeps advancing.

Gender identity pretty much seems cultural. Sex is biological.


From the research I have done, it seems like it is both cultural and neurological.

I can't imagine blocking puberty of a developing child would have positive effects. Not to mention the likely negative psychological effects from grown-ups telling them they can change their sex, realizing it was a lie, etc. But if you think it's all harmless, ok.


Again, if you have evidence, please present it.

Surely they'd be called 'TARFs' then? :eh: :lol:

I don't know any radical feminists who self-identify as "TERFs" because 1) it's basically hate-speech i.e. it is often used alongside threats from transwomen or liberal feminists who don't like women being gender-critical / radical feminists 2) it is a way to shut down debate that includes idealists saying you can be whatever you want to be and materialists who say sex is immutable.


Please use whatever terminology you wish to describe radical feminists who attack and oppress trans people.

It was you I was calling a misogynist. You slip easy into that role when it comes to this issue. I'll note you completely ignored the parts of my post that included the (legitimate) fears women have about sharing their vulnerable spaces with men or transwomen(people with dicks), or about male/trans violence against women, about the encroachment of men/transwomen into our sports etc., or how it is only men who are a threat to trans people. That's why I call you a misogynist, because you seem to not care about women.


I ignored these parts because they are not relevant to any claims I made.

If you wish to assume incorrect things about me because of a lack of evidence, I cannot stop you. It is, however, a logical fallacy called an argument from ignorance, and a strawman.
#15057639
Pants-of-dog wrote:I doubt very much that trans people have such a shallow idea of gender identity.


How else are transwomen women then?

We can change some aspects of sex. And we may be able to change all of them in the near future if medical science keeps advancing.


We cannot change our sex. Men can't have babies.

From the research I have done, it seems like it is both cultural and neurological.


It's not biological.

Please use whatever terminology you wish to describe radical feminists who use victim terminology to attack and oppress trans people.


How are radical feminists attacking or oppressing trans people? The threats in the link I shared are coming from your side.

I ignored these parts because they are not relevant to any claims I made.


But they are to mine and other women, who you obviously don't care about.
#15057641
late wrote:Sigh.

I did a good post on this earlier in the thread.

Or is reality not entering this conversation? Because if you're riding pink unicorns, you need no help from me.


Oh WOW! says I, with a hint of sarcasm ;) ,in future, when replying to you, I will first of all, read every thread post to avoid 'plagiarising' someone else's thoughts that may reflect my own musings. :peace:

Seriously, having just read your earlier post, I probably wouldn't have posted my own had I actually read all of them, I see your point, as, I hope that you see mine.
#15057645
skinster wrote:How else are transwomen women then?


In several ways. Socially, hormonally, visibly, targets of sexism, et cetera.

We cannot change our sex. Men can't have babies.


Again, we can change several aspects, and those we cannot may be mutable in the future.

It's not biological.


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 112351.htm

How are radical feminists attacking or oppressing trans people? The threats in the link I shared are coming from your side.


WoLF has filed an amicus brief supporting the firing of a trans person for transphobic reasons.

They are also supporting a Trump campaign to keep trans people out of women's shelters.

But they are to mine and other women, who you obviously don't care about.


Again, I support you and any other woman when she decides that she feels threatened.

I have made no comments either way in the debate about trans women in sports, bathrooms, or women only spaces.

Please do not assume that I have adopted a position and use this assumption to believe the worst about me.
#15057649
Pants-of-dog wrote:In several ways. Socially, hormonally, visibly, targets of sexism, et cetera


You can call them transwomen. They are not women.

Again, we can change several aspects, and those we cannot may be mutable in the future.


No, we can't change our sex.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 112351.htm


There's no such thing as a pink or blue brain.

WoLF has filed an amicus brief supporting the firing of a trans person for transphobic reasons.


What is this?

They are also supporting a Trump campaign to keep trans people out of women's shelters.


Since they're women's shelter and transpeople aren't women, why is this so terrible? Why are men like you and transwomen insistent on encroaching in vulnerable spaces women don't want you in? Spaces they've fought a long time for? Why not create separate trans spaces? This kind of thing reeks of male entitlement.

And what about the hate/attacks that come from people indulging in trans activism against radical feminists? Will you ever comment on those?

Again, I support you and any other woman when she decides that she feels threatened.


No you don't. Women in shelters feel threatened by sharing them with people with dicks and you don't give a single fuck about them, you think they're bigots because of their fears.

I have made no comments either way in the debate about trans women in sports, bathrooms, or women only spaces.


Yes, you ignore the concerns of the plenty of women who oppose all of the above.

Please do not assume that I have adopted a position and use this assumption to believe the worst about me.


Your position is clear from all you've said and ommitted so far. To you, some women matter more than others.
#15057680
@skinster

If you are going to insist on ignoring what I actually write and instead attack strawmen, and insult me at the same time, there is no reason to continue our conversation.
#15057852
Why do doctors treat anorexics differently than trans peoples? If an anorexic went to the doctor and complained that they disliked their body and wanted to change it the doctor wouldn't indulge them and wouldn't enable them but would attempt to treat their mental state and improve their physical health.

Why don't doctors perform amputations on those with BIID?
#15057878
AFAIK wrote:Why do doctors treat anorexics differently than trans peoples? If an anorexic went to the doctor and complained that they disliked their body and wanted to change it the doctor wouldn't indulge them and wouldn't enable them but would attempt to treat their mental state and improve their physical health.

Why don't doctors perform amputations on those with BIID?


I do not know.

Why do you think this is the case?
#15057908


Pants-of-dog wrote:@skinster

If you are going to insist on ignoring what I actually write and instead attack strawmen, and insult me at the same time, there is no reason to continue our conversation.


For someone who ignores what I write, in particular the fears women have of sharing vulnerable spaces with people with dicks(men), the above is pretty rich. But expected; trans activists always run out of debate when they realize they can't argue that you can change your sex because when you actually start debating, the absurdity of their position becomes clearer. That's why they prefer to start and end the debate at "TERF!".
#15057939
If that is what you wish to believe, go ahead.

Please note that I did discuss what changes we can make to our biology and which we cannot.

I also pointed out that we may be able to change even more in the future with medical advances.

For example, genetic engineering may make it possible for someone to go from XY chromosomes to XX chromosomes.

Oh, I see. The poll didn't mean taken to mount Rus[…]

Why are Liberals so retarded so stupid. if you had[…]

Arctic sea ice

... unintentional double post, but through this re[…]

Election 2020

Please, continue telling us embarrassing things a[…]