• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Social Justice Transgender and gender identity discussion

Derschieber said:
Leave the children out of it.
Click to expand...
3182051.jpg
 
Foreigner said:
I can expound upon why if you wish.
Click to expand...

I do. Explain to me how hundreds of years of left-wing thought somehow were condensed into a particular current of a particular theory unbeknownst to the millions of people on the left who espouse opposing views.

Also maybe actually address what I said instead of dodging it by being a pedant.
 
Factualist said:
I do. Explain to me how hundreds of years of left-wing thought somehow were condensed into a particular current of a particular theory unbeknownst to the millions of people on the left who espouse opposing views.

Also maybe actually address what I said instead of dodging it by being a pedant.
Click to expand...

You keep shifting the goal posts. I am talking about modern neo-Marxism, which is part and parcel with post-modern liberalism. I don't have to explain the history of liberal philosophy to you because it's not relevant to what I'm even talking about.

Neo-Marxism subjugates individual identity into group identity. Group identifiers take the place of individual autonomy. Notice how leftists proclaim their group identifiers whenever entering a conversation. Also notice how these qualifiers must always be assessed as part of whether or not a person's knowledge is deemed acceptable. Two people can say the exact same thing but one will be wrong and one will be right based on their group-isms. They have created an entire hierarchy around this.

Neo-Marxism is actually antithetical to western liberal philosophy because it abdicates the individual to the group think-speak, which is exactly what happened in Russia when Marxism took over.

I am an individual before I belong to any group. According to Neo-Marxism, it's the opposite.

w01fg4ng said:
You are also selective with the words you choose to read. It's a title, how difficult can it be to comprehend?

The dad who gave birth: ‘Being pregnant doesn't change me being a trans man’
Click to expand...

He's not a dad like any other dad though. We should stop pretending he is. Dads don't have uteruses.

You're acting like I have a comprehension problem when really it's that I don't agree with the premise.
 
Foreigner said:
He's not a dad like any other dad though. We should stop pretending he is. Dads don't have uteruses.

You're acting like I have a comprehension problem when really it's that I don't agree with the premise.
Click to expand...
I think you do have a comprehension problem.

What does being a dad mean to you?
 
w01fg4ng said:
You are misquoting the title. I didn't think a title would be that hard to read, but I guess I need to repost it for you.

The dad who gave birth: ‘Being pregnant doesn't change me being a trans man’



Farmers and scientists disagree with you.


The Six Most Common Karyotypes
The six biological karyotype sexes that do not result in death to the fetus are:

  • X – Roughly 1 in 2,000 to 1 in 5,000 people (Turner’s )
  • XX – Most common form of female
  • XXY – Roughly 1 in 500 to 1 in 1,000 people (Klinefelter)
  • XY – Most common form of male
  • XYY – Roughly 1 out of 1,000 people
  • XXXY – Roughly 1 in 18,000 to 1 in 50,000 births
https://www.joshuakennon.com/the-six-common-biological-sexes-in-humans/
Click to expand...

In a sense, these conditions do constitute a different biological sex. However, often they still fall somewhere along a continuum of male and female in terms of gender identity. Thus, in a sense they're not exactly 'outside of the gender binary' but still can be very different from biological males and biological females in many ways. For instance, XXYY males often have ADHD and/or autism. In addition, there are other potential problems associated with this. However, people with it tend to have a normal life expectancy.

XYY males generally are often not much different from ordinary XY males, but there tends to be somewhat of an amplification of normal male characteristics. In some cases, this can result in over-aggression and difficulties with anger, but this is not necessarily the case depending on one's own psychological tendencies if they have the condition. However, there certainly are still differences that result from being XYY as opposed to having XY chromosomes. Klienfelter's Syndrome generally does not cause too much issues medically speaking, but males who have it tend to be somewhat more feminine in terms of physique. So, it definitely does produce significant effects in terms of physiological differences.

Turner's Syndrome can cause some differences from XX females. This syndrome can cause some medical issues, such as heart problems and learning disabilities. It also has a tendency to result in a shorter height than is typical. So, these chromosomal differences definitely do seem to result in some differences when it comes to gendered traits. While people who have them are still on the 'gender binary' continuum in a sense, these conditions are arguably something that could be considered different "biological sexes" in a sense. So, I would largely agree that these conditions are in a sense, separate sexes.

However, they are still either largely male or largely female. Yet while there is no "third gender", there clearly as one can see from these conditions, people who lie on a somewhat different place in the gender continuum than XY males or XX females as a result of their biology. Furthermore, something interesting to note is that since chromosomes are not ordinarily tested, any male who hasn't had chromosomal testing could theoretically have one of these chromosomal patterns and not know it. For instance, it's theoretically possible that a male could be XYY or XXY without even realizing it or having any real signs. And the condition is not normally tested for at birth.
 
Last edited:
Something that I keep finding a little odd and presumptuous about this line of argument...

Why is it being assumed that xx means female and xy means male? I mean I guess I know why, because it's what society teaches us. We grow up hearing it. But it's not the only way to interpret the observations, and scientifically we do know it's pretty much wrong.

It'd be much more accurate to say that having a functioning Y chromosome makes you male, while not having one makes you female. That would eliminate all those chromosomal disorders in a way consistent with observation.

My point is, there's no reason to even think atypical chromosomes imply atypical sexes. The only reason some people do is they've been told some thing wrong by society.
 
Not a fan of the song, but I agree with the premise. It takes it a step further than the dad who got pregnant, because unlike that dad, this one doesn't even identify as male.

Why does it even matter? Fuck your gender norms.

 
I remember when that movie came out. Arnold was YUGE but he got suckered into taking that role. Total boner kill for him.
 
Foreigner said:
You keep shifting the goal posts. I am talking about modern neo-Marxism, which is part and parcel with post-modern liberalism
Click to expand...

I'm not shifting the goal posts lol, nice try. You said all modern radical leftists are neo-Marxists and that's just so patently not true it's almost ridiculous to indulge it with a response. Even then, neo-Marxism is not "part and parcel" with "post-modern" liberalism. They are diametrically opposed systems of beliefs. Liberals are not on the left, "post-modernist" or otherwise. It's as simple as that. They adopt certain tenants from us while disagreeing that capitalism is inherently unsustainable and destructive. They think it can be tamed with regulations, stabilized, and made to benefit the people, we do not.

I don't have to explain the history of liberal philosophy
Click to expand...

That's fine, I've already taken quite a few courses about political theory and philosophy. But then again, that was at a post-modern Neo-Marxist brainwashing center, so maybe you could grace me with the real truth.

Foreigner said:
Neo-Marxism subjugates individual identity into group identity. Group identifiers take the place of individual autonomy. Notice how leftists proclaim their group identifiers whenever entering a conversation. Also notice how these qualifiers must always be assessed as part of whether or not a person's knowledge is deemed acceptable. Two people can say the exact same thing but one will be wrong and one will be right based on their group-isms.
Click to expand...

Lot to unpack here. None of these statements really mean anything concrete. They're so sweeping and vague (presumably intentionally) that they're impossible to really address because I don't even know what the fuck you're actually talking about. They sound like they came from a Jordan Peterson quote generator. I have some ideas, but presumably any thread that I pursue will be met with "that's not what I met", which is a really standard argumentative tactic on the right. For someone who seems to love logic and precise language you're not really using any.

The only thing that immediately comes to mind that "Notice how leftists proclaim their group identifiers whenever entering a conversation" could possibly mean is preferred pronouns, which I mean if that's the case a person saying "actually I go by <nickname>" is doing the same thing. It's not a "group identifier", it's what they want to be called. Or do you mean people talking about their sexuality? Their ethnicity? What?

Ok, I think "Neo-Marxism subjugates individual identity into group identity" confuses individualism and individuality. No one on the left is saying that we need to be like the borg collective except black and trans. Pushing to collectivize ownership of the means of production and eliminate prejudice and bigotry does not imply the erasure of identity. This is slightly adjacent to the misconception that people on the left are pushing for equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity. The former is obviously undesirable and unattainable. One of Marx's most famous quotes "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need" fundamentally implies that human beings are naturally unequal and that they should contribute their unique talents and be provided with their individual needs.

"Also notice how these qualifiers must always be assessed as part of whether or not a person's knowledge is deemed acceptable" is presumably a misunderstanding of the idea that members of certain oppressed groups understand their own unique struggle better than people who aren't a part of those groups. That isn't to say that we can't talk about these issues, and no one legitimately thinks this. I can speak on black issues despite being white and women's issues despite probably not being one, I can recognize and fight against the subjugation of those in the developing world by imperialist nations like the US and China despite never having been to one. I just don't know everything about these issues, and I'm not as intimately familiar with them as I am with issues pertaining to sexuality and gender identity, because those affect me personally every single day. All people ask is that you listen to them, they aren't saying that what you think is less important, they might be saying that it's wrong, but it's not wrong because you're who you are, it's wrong because it's wrong.

"Two people can say the exact same thing but one will be wrong and one will be right based on their group-isms.". Yeah this just doesn't happen. This is a sky is green and grass is blue type statement, there's no way to address it.

And just for fun:

Foreigner said:
Dads don't have uteruses
Click to expand...

For someone who values individuality above all else, you certainly do give a lot of credence to arbitrary and meaningless distinctions that society (a collective) imposes on us. There is obviously, objectively a difference between sex and gender, and mom/dad obviously refer to gender, but even if you don't believe that, which I'm going to go out on a limb and say you probably don't, why do you care so much what other people call themselves? Who are you to say this? Are you a biologist? a psychologist? Sociologist? No, you're just someone who feels something should be true. Reals over feels smh
 
It's certainly very cute. Pre-school shootings too, which makes it extra cute.

Can you imagine a world where we are reduced to just having a penis or vagina? Your pronouns would be dick or pussy. It's a rather porn like world, not meant for cute children most likely.
 
Here's a movie from that same era that actually discussed gender identity, instead of reducing us all to a dick or pussy. We've come a long way, but this was good in it's time.



mrs-doubtfire-robin-williams.jpg
 
I really wouldn't called Mrs doubtfire a movie about gender.

It's a movie about a man who's love for his kids drives him to such insanity that he thinks impersonating a female nanny in the middle of a custody battle was a remotely good idea. :D

Ironically being simply transgender would be far far more mentally healthy than his actual behavior in the movie. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top