RE: Transexuals
May 19, 2016 at 2:34 am
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2016 at 3:56 am by I_am_not_mafia.)
When people say that they are philosophising by thinking about metaphysical and abstract ideas that have no basis in reality then I see it as something akin to a brain exercise like Sudoku. Utterly pointless but harmless and at least they're not letting their brains go to waste.
When people use that same pseudo intellectualism to actively maintain their bigotry then I have to admit to becoming somewhat peeved.
Contrived and irrelevant Word Salad used to post-rationalise denigration of one of the most vulnerable demographic:
Evidence obtained via the scientific method based on observations of reality:
Evidence on this forum Chadwooters is that you are a pseudo-intellectual bigot.
When people use that same pseudo intellectualism to actively maintain their bigotry then I have to admit to becoming somewhat peeved.
Contrived and irrelevant Word Salad used to post-rationalise denigration of one of the most vulnerable demographic:
(May 18, 2016 at 1:15 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: At one time sex and gender were synonyms for an objective biological feature. Then at the insistence of critical theory proponents, with whom I normally disagree, the meaning of gender was shifted to refer to the subjective social constructs associated with biological sex. This move was not problematic since it allowed people to discuss the subjective associations of otherwise asexual things with traditional notions of masculinity or femininity. For example, how did the color pink came to be associated with femininity? In other words, the shift added clarity. The shift in meaning you are asking society to embrace not only reduces clarity of expression, it undermines any distinction between objective reality and subjective experience. For example, the phrase you used, "allowing trans people to be themselves," is ontologically ambiguous. It does not clarify if "be themselves" refers to something they believe about themselves or their objective identifying features. If you were mugged, you would not identify your attacker by recounting anything about how the mugger feels about him or herself.
If a specific individual in private conversation wishes to be referred to in specific manner, like using only their last name, the pronoun of their choice or title, I am happy to oblige upon being informed of their preference. Until then I will use the most common conventions. I cannot read minds and neither can you. Your insistence that I speak according to your ideological preferences as part of a general conversation is nothing short of totalitarian.
BTW, the post you quoted does not contain a single personal pronoun.
Evidence obtained via the scientific method based on observations of reality:
(April 20, 2016 at 5:13 am)Mathilda Wrote: As already posted on this thread, there is plenty of evidence for the difference in male and female brains that has been in the literature for the last few decades and they also show that transsexuals have the brain of the gender that they identify as. I've even read some of them myself.
http://aebrain.blogspot.co.uk/p/transsex...ntity.html
Previously posted here:
http://atheistforums.org/thread-42551-po...pid1248859
Which also included another newscientist link
Transsexual differences caught on brain scan
Evidence on this forum Chadwooters is that you are a pseudo-intellectual bigot.