[__ Science __ ] Male Lawmaker Claims He Is “Every Bit as Biologically Female” As a Woman

[Milk-Drops]

So you agree the trans world , statistically , is overwhelmingly a man's world

I don't think you have the stats to prove it either way. I personally don't care.

 

[Consecrated Life]

I don't think you have the stats to prove it either way. I personally don't care.

I not trying the prove anything .
I'm asking a question based the ratios of male to female trans as opposed to female to male trans involved in national news stories which have been reported for at least 3 or 4 years now.
You don't this is something that is wrong to ask ?

 

[Milk-Drops]

I not trying the prove anything .
I'm asking a question based the ratios of male to female trans as opposed to female to male trans involved in national news stories which have been reported for at least 3 or 4 years now.
You don't this is something that is wrong to ask ?

No one is saying you can't ask the question. You did come into this thread proclaiming the high suicide rate and talking about the pointlessness of their lives. So already showed you are not here in good faith.

If you want to talk about news stories, the people I hear the most trans stuff from are people complaining about it. I have known about and know trans people for years, decades in some cases. Its now to the current go to culture war topic.


I don't know where you would figure out if there are more FTM or MTF trans people. I know that MTF trans people are the go to punching bag because its easy to stoke fear for bathroom stuff.

It was the same for Gay men and black men. Culturally women and children have been seen as needing to be protected, so whenever there is a culture war issue we see this. How is it a danger to women and children. You don't hear much about trans men and lesbians because they are not seen as a threat to women and children.

 

[Consecrated Life]

No one is saying you can't ask the question. You did come into this thread proclaiming the high suicide rate and talking about the pointlessness of their lives. So already showed you are not here in good faith.

If you want to talk about news stories, the people I hear the most trans stuff from are people complaining about it. I have known about and know trans people for years, decades in some cases. Its now to the current go to culture war topic.

Why are all the news stories about men trying to be women.
I thought we were supposed to follow the science on these physiological issues
Is this happening because men are more genetically pre-disposed to this ?

 

[Milk-Drops]

Why are all the news stories about men trying to be women.

I am pretty sure I answered that above. It's because it's a topic that can be used for interest. Focusing on mtf trans people can be used to go into other topics to get people to watch. Sports. Women, children, etc.

Its not as easy to make ftm trans people to look scary, so they are not reported on as much.

This is speculation, then again your question is about your awareness and the news media is not forced to give equal coverage of both ftm and mtf.

I thought we were supposed to follow the science on these physiological issues

So, what literature have you read on this? If your only source is just news media, you are not following the science. If you want to follow the science. I recommend getting a text book from your library on gender studies. The text will give you examples and names of studies you can read.

Is this happening because men are more genetically pre-disposed to this ?

I would recommend getting a gender studies book that looks into the research.

 

[Consecrated Life]

Its not as easy to make ftm trans people to look scary, so they are not reported on as much.

what do you mean by " look scary " ?

 

[Milk-Drops]

what do you mean by " look scary " ?

See post 23.

 

[Tim Broom]

Why are all the news stories about men trying to be women.

I don't think it would be accurate to say all the stories are about men trying to be women, but I think men transitioning to women, (or at least, claiming they want to be women) is more topical because of the sporting issue, where biological males transitioning to female then want to compete in female sports.

There's two issues here; one is that it is understandable that they'd want to do what women do if they see themselves as women, but the other is that, despite whatever feelings they may have about themselves, they need to recognize that it's not all about them. Biological males have a factual, provable physical advantage over biological females. There's no feelings in this particular case; it's just biology. Despite whatever feelings they have about themselves, they still need to be reasonable in how they act on those feelings. Insisting they they (biological males) should be allowed to compete against bio-females, simply because they personally want to identify as female, is not reasonable.

 

[Milk-Drops]

I don't think it would be accurate to say all the stories are about men trying to be women, but I think men transitioning to women, (or at least, claiming they want to be women) is more topical because of the sporting issue, where biological males transitioning to female then want to compete in female sports.

There's two issues here; one is that it is understandable that they'd want to do what women do if they see themselves as women, but the other is that, despite whatever feelings they may have about themselves, they need to recognize that it's not all about them. Biological males have a factual, provable physical advantage over biological females. There's no feelings in this particular case; it's just biology. Despite whatever feelings they have about themselves, they still need to be reasonable in how they act on those feelings. Insisting they they (biological males) should be allowed to compete against bio-females, simply because they personally want to identify as female, is not reasonable.

Makes sense for topical reasons. I am aware that no major sports organization just allows men to simply identify as women to play with maybe a couple exceptions. The Daily Wire made a comedy movie called Lady Ballers about the topic. Originally the movie was supposed to be a documentary, but the DL could not find an organization that simply allowed people born male to join. There was a lot of regulations and testing that had to be met beforehand.

I personally think its because we have a culture that sees men doing feminine things generally as wrong. So a person transitioning to a female roll is seen as wrong socially on a wide scale.

Heck, I got called girly because I preferred reading to football in elementary. Ironicly I grew up to be a 6ft 2, built, tradesman, with a beard.

Still prefer reading to football however. Now Hockey and the world cup I can watch.

 

[Tim Broom]

I personally think its because we have a culture that sees men doing feminine things generally as wrong. So a person transitioning to a female roll is seen as wrong socially on a wide scale.

Sure, there is an element of macho posturing, like ridiculing a boy for preferring to read to something more physically challenging like sports. That kind of thing has gone on for a long time and in some cases has been quite intense, to the point of bullying.

Now, it appears there is an overreaction happening from the other side in response to all that bullying, where they've got some momentum and it's taking the form of compelling others to participate in their ideals of self-identity. One example is a law compelling the use of personalized pronouns. Another is the use of social media to cancel those who criticize or even just disagree with the way a situation is being handled.

I think there is plenty of room to show care and compassion for people who suffer from various forms of mental illness, like body dysmorphia (which is usually what causes people to want to transition from one sex to another), but also what we're seeing goes far beyond that, where society as a whole is being compelled to participate in a person's individual perception of him/herself as proof that society is civilized.

For example, you see a person who is clearly a biological male who puts on a dress and some makeup, and then insists that everyone around him pretend that he really is a woman, and if they don't then he will claim that he's being persecuted, and then laws are set up to protect his preferences from criticism or opting-out of participating in them.

 

[Milk-Drops]

Sure, there is an element of macho posturing, like ridiculing a boy for preferring to read to something more physically challenging like sports. That kind of thing has gone on for a long time and in some cases has been quite intense, to the point of bullying.

Now, it appears there is an overreaction happening from the other side in response to all that bullying, where they've got some momentum and it's taking the form of compelling others to participate in their ideals of self-identity.

That's the thing. We hear this claim that kids are being compelled, but it is not materializing. Most news on the subject is about parents being upset that libraries have a book or that schools have policies where if a child identifies as thrans the school will repect it. Quite frankly teachers barely have the resources to do the basics let alone try8ng to turn kids trans.

One example is a law compelling the use of personalized pronouns.

This fear has flaotwd around even before 2016. It started gaining traction with Jordan Peterson in Ontario Canada. Generally schools tend to have policy where if a child has preferred pronouns, the school would respect the family/child's identity. It's similar to if a child named James wants to be called Jimmy.

Another is the use of social media to cancel those who criticize or even just disagree with the way a situation is being handled.

This has existed since the internet started, but an aspect people misunderstand is that you can't cancel someone who isn't part of your group. Canceling is where a person gets disowned from their own group because of actions taken against the group. If a liberal candles a conservative, nothing happens because liberals were not the intended group for the conservative.

Now, if you say something that would bully some kid and you are an educator, you might get canceled by the parents of kids in your district out of concern that an educator would bully a kid.

I think there is plenty of room to show care and compassion for people who suffer from various forms of mental illness, like body dysmorphia (which is usually what causes people to want to transition from one sex to another), but also what we're seeing goes far beyond that, where society as a whole is being compelled to participate in a person's individual perception of him/herself as proof that society is civilized.

I have had this conversation with others in real life and The idea of being compelled always makes me curious. We are talking about a spaced we share socially
I am me and you are you. Your name is what we call you. Technicly I am being compelled to call you by your name instead of a name I make up for you in my head. If you call a person a girl and they correct you by saying they are a boy it ends there. You can think whatever you want about a person, but you can not dictate to a person that they have to be what you want them to be. A person has rule over themselves, you have rile over your identity. Why do your presume you know more about another's identity then they do?

For example, you see a person who is clearly a biological male who puts on a dress and some makeup, and then insists that everyone around him pretend that he really is a woman, and if they don't then he will claim that he's being persecuted, and then laws are set up to protect his preferences from criticism or opting-out of participating in them.

What do you mean clearly a biological male? Are children running around class rooms naked now?

 

[Tim Broom]

We hear this claim that kids are being compelled, but it is not materializing.

I did not specify that it is children who are being compelled. Adults are being compelled to play along with people's individual fantasies about their own personal identity, i.e. laws compelling bathroom use, sports involvement, and personal pronouns.

This fear has flaotwd around even before 2016. It started gaining traction with Jordan Peterson in Ontario Canada. Generally schools tend to have policy where if a child has preferred pronouns, the school would respect the family/child's identity. It's similar to if a child named James wants to be called Jimmy.

I think you may be experiencing some bias without realizing it. First, it's not a fear that, at least in some places, people are being compelled by law to use specific pronouns which cater to a person's personal ideal about themselves in order to make them feel better about those ideals, e.g. we are told that we must agree that a man who says he is a woman literally becomes a woman so that he will feel better about himself.

But, then you go on to suggest that this is little more than a kid wanting to use one variation of his name as opposed to another. Clearly they are not the same thing, and I do believe your attempt to downplay this difference illustrates my point.

you can't cancel someone who isn't part of your group.

A casual, two second google search will bring up dozens of examples which go far beyond criticizing someone "of your own group". Again, it does sound like you're downplaying this issue. I am no Trump supporter, but it has been strongly suggested that the reason he won again is because of this kind of stubborn insistence that there is no problem.

In an episode of the Jon Oliver show immediately following Trump's second victory, Jon addresses this issue but criticizes Kamala for not doing enough to respond to accusations that she supports biological males being allowed to play in female sports.

He lists three responses; 1, that there aren't enough examples for people to be genuinely upset over, 2, that there's no evidence that biological males have an advantage over females, and 3 that anyone who is upset over the issue is just a weirdo, even following this up with the rather bold assertion that what females are really upset about is weird guys liking their instagram pics.

Do you see how he just totally dismissed people's concerns, and not only that, he ridiculed them for having concerns in the first place. Obviously, this is not a position which attracts people and, again, I do not think Trump should be president, but at the time he represented the only alternative to people being told they are weird for their concerns in this area.

In other words, the left ended up shooting themselves in the foot with their extreme downplaying of other people's concerns.

 

[miamited]

The main difference between male and female DNA is that male DNA contains one X chromosome and one Y chromosome, whereas female DNA contains two X chromosomes.

I'm guessing that this male lawmaker doesn't believe that DNA is a part of one's biological make-up. My guess is that what they really meant was that they could act like a female as well as any female, because there are quite a few biological differences between a male and female.

 

[miamited]

that there's no evidence that biological males have an advantage over females,

Really!!!!? Jon couldn't find any evidence to support the long, long, long standing argument for female sports to be separate from male sports because men generally have greater upper body strength. And hey, I've never seen a woman standing up and peeing behind a tree. They usually squat so they don't pee their pants. And of course, there is the long-standing fact that females don't produce sperm, which is necessary for the continuation of the human race. So, just in the continuation of the human race, males have an advantage over females. Of course both are needed, and females have the advantage of being able to produce an egg that the male sperm will join with.

 

[Milk-Drops]

I did not specify that it is children who are being compelled. Adults are being compelled to play along with people's individual fantasies about their own personal identity, i.e. laws compelling bathroom use, sports involvement, and personal pronouns.

Such as?

I think you may be experiencing some bias without realizing it. First, it's not a fear that, at least in some places, people are being compelled by law to use specific pronouns which cater to a person's personal ideal about themselves in order to make them feel better about those ideals, e.g. we are told that we must agree that a man who says he is a woman literally becomes a woman so that he will feel better about himself.

What laws?

But, then you go on to suggest that this is little more than a kid wanting to use one variation of his name as opposed to another. Clearly they are not the same thing, and I do believe your attempt to downplay this difference illustrates my point.

Because to my understanding your argument is that someone isn't identifying how you want. I'm pointing out that the same logic can be used on names.

A casual, two second google search will bring up dozens of examples which go far beyond criticizing someone "of your own group". Again, it does sound like you're downplaying this issue. I am no Trump supporter, but it has been strongly suggested that the reason he won again is because of this kind of stubborn insistence that there is no problem.

The problem we are having here is you are not telling me what laws you are talking about. There has been fear mongering for years, but no solid explanation of law.

In an episode of the Jon Oliver show immediately following Trump's second victory, Jon addresses this issue but criticizes Kamala for not doing enough to respond to accusations that she supports biological males being allowed to play in female sports.

Ok.

He lists three responses; 1, that there aren't enough examples for people to be genuinely upset over, 2, that there's no evidence that biological males have an advantage over females, and 3 that anyone who is upset over the issue is just a weirdo, even following this up with the rather bold assertion that what females are really upset about is weird guys liking their instagram pics.

I would have to see the episode for myself.

Do you see how he just totally dismissed people's concerns,

Rge concerns are dismissed because there isn't data to back uo the fear mongering. For years media had tried to show that the concerns are overblown. However the people pushing the fear mongering will continue until a new boogey man is found. We have seen this cycle repeat over and over.

and not only that, he ridiculed them for having concerns in the first place.

I'm not playing this game. We literally have a president right now who has mad his political career by being a bully and ridiculing his opponents. His side, the same one that keeps fear .mongering over teans stuff demand he gets infinite passes but the people being ridiculed have to constantly defend. Olic3r can ridicule people for the same reason Trump can, the daily wire can, etc.

Obviously, this is not a position which attracts people and, again, I do not think Trump should be president, but at the time he represented the only alternative to people being told they are weird for their concerns in this area.

I am trying to address your concerns, but when we drill down the concerns are over hypothetical people that could demand something unreasonable of you.

Not actual people, but hypothetical. We don't have people being thrown in jail for solely misgendering people.

The same fear mongering was used during the AIDS crisis and during the same sex marriage arguments. When both situation got tired we started seeing it shift to trans people.

People are tired of repeatedly having the same few arguments over and over again.

In other words, the left ended up shooting themselves in the foot with their extreme downplaying of other people's concerns.

No, that's cope. Democrats got lazy and ignored the working class issues. Ran campaigns since Clinton on ' We aren't them' and it finally stopped working. The dems lost because they stink at massaging. Yhe Republicans are good at just repeating the same talking points over and over.

 

[Tim Broom]

Democrats got lazy and ignored the working class issues.

They didn't just ignore it. They accused them of being weird for their legitimate concerns.

 

[Milk-Drops]

They didn't just ignore it. They accused them of being weird for their legitimate concerns.

I have noticed you keep skirting around telling me what laws we are even talking about. Primarily because the laws don't exist. I can address your concerns, but it doesn't seen to matter if you can't even state the law you are concerned about. Oliver is possibly mocking people because they are worried about a law that doesn't exist and it has been explained repeatedly.

You want me to take you seriously, yell me the law.

 

[Tim Broom]

it doesn't seen to matter if you can't even state the law you are concerned about.

This is why Trump is president again. Pat yourself on the back, while you're at it.

 

[Milk-Drops]

This is why Trump is president again. Pat yourself on the back, while you're at it.

What law? Name it please.

 

[Tim Broom]

What law? Name it please.

I'll be quoting from this information update from the Canadian government.

There are two laws being used in tandem. This first is called OHRC.

Since the changes brought forth by Bill C-16 do not mention pronouns, both Cossman and Brown cite a 2014 policy released by the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) for guidance.

Page 18 reads: “Gender-based harassment can involve: (5) Refusing to refer to a person by their self-identified name and proper personal pronoun.”

The second is BIll C-16.

The bill, which enshrines the rights of transgender or gender-diverse Canadians by including them under human rights and hate-crime laws,


Does the bill legislate the use of certain language? And could someone go to jail for using the wrong pronoun?

In the Criminal Code, which does not reference pronouns, Cossman says misusing pronouns alone would not constitute a criminal act.

And finally,

The OHRC is a provincial body, however — whereas Bill C-16 is federal — but Brown says the Department of Justice has said the federal guidelines will mirror the OHRC policy.

There is law which can be used to compel compliance at the risk of criminal offence. All you have to do is prove the person is harassing you. I agree that harassment is a real thing that really happens. There really are hateful people acting out, and it is not acceptable. Harassed people do need to be protected. I don't think even the strongest opponents of compulsary use of preferred pronuns would agree with harassment.

But, is it really harassment that I may choose not to participate in your ideals about yourself? I mean, if you come to me in a friendly way, I might choose to participate out of care for you, especially since the way a person wants to be identified isn't a moral issue.

But, I don't want to be compelled to. You can see this happening in the Jordan Peterson video that propelled him into the spotlight, where he's arguing with all those young people at a university. Even staunch advocates for lgbt protections expressed some embarassment for how the students behaved, shouting Jordan down and getting in to personal attacks.

But, in one particilar part, One of the kids asks if someone politely requested him to use their preferred pronouns, would he, and he replied, "I'd consider it, though it'd depend on the manner in which it was asked" and the kid immediately shouted back, "So, no!?!?" Becasue Jordan did not conform immedately, without reservation, the kid concluded that he was being stubborn. The comment was framed as a question, but in his mind he was thinking of it as an ultimatum; if you don't comply, you're bad.

I think this is an area where the harassment can work in the opposite direction. Sometimes these nonconforming people are dressed in a way the brings confusion, like a woman dressed like a man and then getting upset when someone uses a male pronoun for her.

And, then there's people who sometimes want to be called he and sometimes want to be called she, and then at times some other thing. If you're not familiar with the outrage some people express at being misgendered, sometimes from the first interaction, you can try a search for it on youtube, as there are many examples. If the offender doesn't immediately apologize for the mistake, the nonconformist gets offended and then it becomes a domination game where, if you don't apologize, then you could be cited for harassment.

I mean, consider this quote from the article:

the words “gender identity or expression”...was added to a section of the Criminal Code that targets hate speech — defined as advocating genocide and the public incitement of hatred — where it joins other identifiable groups.

The obvious implication here is that choosing not to adhere to a person's demands about what they should be called could amount to incitement of genocide. I mean, rationally, no of course it is not, but when so much of the discussion is based on the way a person feels about themselves, it is not a streth for emotional people to argue that they are victims of genocide. It would be foolish of them, but the damage is already done when other people identify with those feelings and themselves start promoting the genocide argument. The word evokes big feelings.

There was a huge kerfuffle over the years because of J.K. Rowlings comments on trans, to the point that abc news had to release a statement assuring the world that J.K. would not be arrested for her comments. Because, that many people were calling for her to be arrested, with abc itself needing to retract some of their comments about her, because they'd hopped on the outrage bandwagon.

Here's a quote from this article:

Last month, she was accused of holocaust denialism: replying to a commenter who made reference to the Nazi persecution of trans people and the burning of trans books,

So, yeah, the trans community has suffered a lot over the decades and that is not right, but now they are going the opposite way.