That Trans Thread

[Fake Messiah]

Hitler was also very big on blaming LGBT+ people, the first victims of the holocaust, despite Rowling's constant denials.

Sure, he also blamed non-white people and in the end he blamed his closest allies - like Himmler and Göring for losing the war because they betrayed him and were always secretly working against him. In other words, Hitler was never wrong because he always put the blame on others - sounds familiar?

[Pat Mustard]

Oh dear, he dreaded tomboy label. I wonder—was the offense truly in the labeling, or in the retrospective interpretation of it?

After all, the term tomboy never denied biology; quite the opposite—it acknowledged a girl acting outside expected norms without claiming she wasn’t a girl. Contrast that with today’s curious fashion of insisting that certain behaviors must mean something about one’s identity, or even one’s sex.

Ironically, the very “rules” you found restrictive are now enforced with far greater zeal by ideologues who believe a preference for trucks over tiaras indicates an ontological mismatch. One might ask: is the modern view truly more liberating—or simply more dogmatic in different clothing?

Of course, I welcome your thoughts—assuming they haven’t been pre-approved by the Gender Compliance Committee.

It is clear you don't know what gender dysphoria means. 

FYI bigots howling about the inherent injustice of them having their imaginary "right to express that bigotry" being curtailed, just makes me laugh so hard it gives me an "ice cream headache". But then I lived through the same empty wailing when they were told they couldn't openly persecute people based on skin colour and ethnicity, or sex, or being gay, or...well you get the picture, the same risible objections are being raised this time, but decent societies moves on, and one less group is being persecuted.

This trans exclusionary* "crusade" is simply the homophobes trying to unperson non cis hets again by going through a different angle.

*This is their own name for themselves, they should not be allowed use the lying term "gender critical".

[Pat Mustard]

JD Vance immediately becomes the most blocked man on Bluesky after trans post

Pink News

That's kind of brave for Vance, being a marshmallow expressing as a man.  The Supreme Court ruling is very prejudicial against him.

[arewethereyet]

Allowing the immature behavior of a troll to change the title of a thread seems dubious.

It is clearly stated that this thread was closed (pardon me - serious tag removed) due to it no longer being handled in a serious manner.  

The topic is important and should be discussed in a serious fashion.  Anyone here is free to start a similar thread and staff will work to make sure it doesn't go sideways.

If that still seems dubious, I don't really know what answer you want.

[Rev. Rye]

Well, I guess if J or any other trans person here starts to get more meme-minded, they can mix some memes into the discussion.

[Mr Greene]

Hitler was also very big on blaming LGBT+ people, the first victims of the holocaust, despite Rowling's constant denials.

Sure, he also blamed non-white people and in the end he blamed his closest allies - like Himmler and Göring for losing the war because they betrayed him and were always secretly working against him. In other words, Hitler was never wrong because he always put the blame on others - sounds familiar?

That's true of all fascists; Exagerate any success to the point of self parody, sweep any failure under the rug and when they can't twist the truth to blame anyone they can.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Army Major Speaks Out About Trans Ban

But U.S. Army Major Anthony Guerrero, in a scathing op-ed published by the New York Times early Monday morning, June 30, lays out some reasons why he is vehemently opposed to the Trump Administration's anti-transgender policy.

"The president issued the order in January, and the Supreme Court last month allowed the (Trump) Administration to start enforcing it," Guerrero explains. "The order may be legally sound, but it is neither moral nor ethical. I believe that it is my duty as an officer to dissent when faced with such an order."

The U.S. Army major continues, "I may not be the sort of person you would expect to oppose a ban on transgender troops. I am a conservative evangelical Christian and a Republican. Though I have deep compassion for people who feel they are in the wrong body, I do not think that transitioning — as opposed to learning to love and accept the body God gave you — is the right thing to do in that predicament. But my views are irrelevant to the issue of transgender troops."

"The executive order barring transgender troops is a legal command that provides cover for bigotry," Guerrero laments. "It delivers hate in the guise of a national security issue, dressed up in medicalized language. The meek compliance of military leadership with the ban sends a chilling message to all service members — namely, that our ranks are open only to those who fit a specific ideological mold, regardless of their ability to serve."

"Disobeying an order from a superior officer is punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice by dismissal, loss of pay and confinement," Guerrero explains. "But this issue is too important to me. I cannot remain quiet while the Army that I love ignores lessons that it should have learned long ago."

Ballsy guy.

Boru

[GrandizerII]

Why are people even talking about it.

Suppose you have two people in a room, and both of them declare "I am a woman." But one of them is lying.

What objective evidence could we discover in a test that would show which is lying? 

We know that gender is NOT determined by chromosomes, anatomy, hormones, etc. 

Here is a case where we believe only the subjective reporting of the individual. And I think this is fairly unusual, since normally we insist on objective evidence before we believe something. 

(For the record, I am not saying that this thought experiment is a likely scenario, or that anyone is lying about their gender. I'm only pointing out that objective tests seem not to exist for something we believe quite strongly.)

I disagree that gender is not partially a function of hormones. But then again, I don't agree with many others that gender is just simply a social construct. But even if we just consider social variables, one can still make objective tests out of them by probing into their life and noting down the quantity of preferences and dispositions that tend to align with one gender moreso than the other. Under an ideal situation, of course.

[The Grand Nudger]

Girly boys and boyish girls. What you're talking about (and what gender as social construct describes) is that those tests would be (semi)objective quantitative measurements of relativist qualities. Just to bring it around full circle, the respondents can and will lie. Some because they fear being exposed and others because they wish it were so.

FWIW, I don't believe a person actually typifies whatever gender they identify as merely because they claim to be that gender - and yet I manage not to be a dick. This framing is straw, meant to excuse being an asshole by, essentially, claiming that being an asshole is just correct. When it gets pointed out that it is not, in fact, correct, the straw vendor will then bitch about a persons moral right to be wrong. It's tedious.