Is this what society has come to?

[DaGaffer]

Now what's being suggested is that we shouldn't allow people to know that they can have operations (IF THEY WANT, THEY ARE NO PUSHED) to 'correct' their gender.

Problem with that is that operations don't "correct" anything. No matter where you go, there you are.

And I note you carefully say "people", not "adults", and you can just gtfo with that shit.

Oh, and you're still lumping in homosexuality with trans issues.

 

[Gwadien]

"I want people to do what they want so long as they don't hurt other people."

Beautiful, heart warming PC line. So black and white. Only it isn't.

About a year ago, I had a twit feud with a few pro gender dysphoria people - the whole shebang, starting from pronouns, to allowing children to "develop" naturally - meaning playing into "my boy likes dolls, therefor I'm thinking he needs to transition" kinda crowd.

These messages ARE dangerous. Much like anti-vax people are. Anything you pass or consider as free information may be used, channeled and misconstrued into disinformation, which in turn will HURT people. And it does, today.

You can play your PC tunes all you want - and I'll sing along when it comes to actual rights and liberties. But fck off on this one mate, you're pandering to crazies.

We have had experts in the field for a very long fucking time.

Operations aren't a new thing, this is all hyped up Twitter bullshit.

As I've said a billion times before, if parents start cutting their kids balls off because they don't like their gender they'll be arrested.

 

[Gwadien]

Problem with that is that operations don't "correct" anything. No matter where you go, there you are.

So therefore you don't believe Trans is a real thing.

So therefore we're done with this conversation

Don't be angry because you're the old man in a new society.

I'm sure your parents had similar arguments for homosexuality

 

[DaGaffer]

So therefore you don't believe Trans is a real thing.

So therefore we're done with this conversation

Don't be angry because you're the old man in a new society.

I'm sure your parents had similar arguments for homosexuality

Except they didn't (and don't be a cunt) and you're proving exactly what I was talking about earlier in this thread.

I absolutely do think gender dysphoria is a thing, I just don't believe surgery is the default answer (and never for kids), because elective surgeries are almost never the answer to any question. Just go and read up on the history of surgical interventions to fix mental health issues and show one that's actually worked as advertised. We'll look back on gender-assignment surgery with the same horror as leeches and lobotomies.

 

[dysfunction]

It's the same for people going for cosmetic surgery because they think it will make them feel good about themselves. It doesn't in the long term. They need someone to talk to and have counselling so they can come to terms about who they are not having some surgical procedure.

 

[Scouse]

Yep, absolutely fall on the side of 'when they've fully matured we'll spend taxpayers money helping them, but not before' argument.

Rich kids of means can cut their own balls/tits/flaps off - at their own expense - but everyone else can be in their mid 20's before we start artificially adjusting their actual physiology.

The rest? We've long since passed the point where we can justify single sex hospital wards/changing rooms/toilets - so non-extreme trans rights, even for pre-teens, shouldn't be an issue.

 

[Wij]

Yep, absolutely fall on the side of 'when they've fully matured we'll spend taxpayers money helping them, but not before' argument.

Rich kids of means can cut their own balls/tits/flaps off - at their own expense - but everyone else can be in their mid 20's before we start artificially adjusting their actual physiology.

The rest? We've long since passed the point where we can justify single sex hospital wards/changing rooms/toilets - so non-extreme trans rights, even for pre-teens, shouldn't be an issue.

Buh?

 

[Scouse]

Buh?

Pretty clear. Which bit don't you get?

I don't approve of gender reassignment surgery in kids. I don't see any problem with kids self-identifying how they like and think traditional sex-segregated spaces are an anachronism.

If people hit their mid 20's and are still desparate to go under the knife, fair enough. The rest? No problems other than moral outrage by terrified parents.

 

[old.Osy]

Pretty clear. Which bit don't you get?

I don't approve of gender reassignment surgery in kids. I don't see any problem with kids self-identifying how they like and think traditional sex-segregated spaces are an anachronism.

If people hit their mid 20's and are still desperate to go under the knife, fair enough. The rest? No problems other than moral outrage by terrified parents.

See, I disagree a bit here. If collectively as a society we shrug and go "This is ok once you reach the arbitrary age of 18" citing personal freedom (which it totally is), and leaving it at that, the message we are sending to people that are mentally ill is that this is _normal_.

I'm not saying we tell people what to do with their body, and how many bits they can lob off or put on - that's entirely up to them. But normalizing it is where I take issue, because it sends the wrong message to less than stable minds, or easily influenced people - like many people that are mentally unsound are.

I would draw a forced parallel as I did above - this is up there with anti-vax, religious extremism, animal cruelty, you name it - stuff that we as society have outgrown and figured out it's WRONG.

 

[Scouse]

@old.Osy - I take your point but how are you so certain that gender fluidity is 'WRONG' when we've multiple examples of human cultures who acommodate and deal with the concept seamlessley both currently and througout history? That fact, coupled with the clear and obvious fact that we're slowly escaping the mental and cultural shackles of millenia-long enforced judaeo-christian 'morality' gives space for doubt.

In that case, don't enforce what is 'normal' - because we can't say what is with any certainty. Instead just make sure potential physical damage is removed from the most vulnerable (children) and give space for a new, and healthy, normal to develop - without prohibitive presceiption by an older generation who still suffer the hangover of a past we know was abusive to the whole population.

 

[old.Osy]

@old.Osy - I take your point but how are you so certain that gender fluidity is 'WRONG' when we've multiple examples of human cultures who accommodate and deal with the concept seamlessly both currently and throughout history? That fact, coupled with the clear and obvious fact that we're slowly escaping the mental and cultural shackles of millenia-long enforced judaeo-christian 'morality' gives space for doubt.

In that case, don't enforce what is 'normal' - because we can't say what is with any certainty. Instead just make sure potential physical damage is removed from the most vulnerable (children) and give space for a new, and healthy, normal to develop - without prohibitive prescription by an older generation who still suffer the hangover of a past we know was abusive to the whole population.

Morality as it stands today would not exist without religion. Sad state of affairs really, that we needed a cult to behave in a "proper" way. But, it is what is, and as a convinced atheist, it's the only positive I can attribute to religion - thou shalt not kill, steal, etc.

Doesn't mean it's not fluid and ever transforming - we've slowly moved away from tribalism towards globalism across our history, and there's still a long way to go to reach a generally accepted "Hey, this societal model is pretty good and covering for everyone and anyone."

To that end, "normality" is also fluid and ever transforming, but even so, at any given point in time you have a relatively stable mould of it, a reference set. What I'm trying to say, with all conviction, is that mental illness (because it is that) should not sieve into the process of defining morality or normality around gender dysphoria - as we're not talking about science advancement here.

Reducing it a lot, and in no way pretending it covers the whole spectrum of these trans issues - we should strive to get them proper medical help, perhaps even educate better, rather than encouraging it as the new "normal".

 

[Scouse]

Morality as it stands today would not exist without religion. Sad state of affairs really, that we needed a cult to behave in a "proper" way.

Absolutely and completely refute that.

Christianity laid claim to that, laid claim to being moral arbiters without the existence of which we'd all be savages. It doesn't take a seconds thought to understand that claim is complete a bullshit con-job. A basic knowledge of egyptology shows that major bits of christianity are a lift-and-shift direct from Egyptian religion, not to mention older societies' religions. And to say 'morality' only existed since christianity existed to tame us discounts the other 148,000 years of human societies which figured out the basic lessons that it's not ok to kill each other and stealing is bad.

Bull. Shit.

 

[Gwadien]

You're a bit different, you should go and see your GP to become normal.

LOL.

 

[old.Osy]

Absolutely and completely refute that.

Christianity laid claim to that, laid claim to being moral arbiters without the existence of which we'd all be savages. It doesn't take a seconds thought to understand that claim is complete a bullshit con-job. A basic knowledge of egyptology shows that major bits of christianity are a lift-and-shift direct from Egyptian religion, not to mention older societies' religions. And to say 'morality' only existed since christianity existed to tame us discounts the other 148,000 years of human societies which figured out the basic lessons that it's not ok to kill each other and stealing is bad.

Bull. Shit.

I said religion, not Christianity. All its forms. There's a moral component in any and every religion, and it has more often than not given moral compass to society.

Little known fact, the Aztecs had their moral compass rooted in art and philosophy, and extracted the "good" values from that. That they were sacrificing human lives to the gods...

 

[old.Osy]

You're a bit different, you should go and see your GP to become normal.

LOL.

Are you suggesting we don't treat or address mental illness? I've also said educate better, but of course you would cherry pick.

 

[Job]

Theres just a rush of liberal hedonism.
Where conservative cultural norms are seen as oppressive and unfair, but little attention is paid to why the vast majority of the world is conservative and why its intertwining roots are there.
They are going for a crash and burn approach, I fear they are pissing off too many people along the way and the backlash will make it worse in the long run.
When I say 'they', I dont know who these people are...a collective of a activists and progressives?
The greatest weapon is the endorced PC culture and corporate fear.

 

[Scouse]

I said religion, not Christianity. All its forms. There's a moral component in any and every religion, and it has more often than not given moral compass to society.

Little known fact, the Aztecs had their moral compass rooted in art and philosophy, and extracted the "good" values from that. That they were sacrificing human lives to the gods...

You can point at societies and say "this" but all organised religions have claimed moral authority as their own by appealing to common-sense rules: don't kill, don't steal, don't fuck your mate's wife.

Those rules pre-existed all organised religion because from an evolutionary standpoint those behaviours make human survival more likely. They weren't derived from some mythical belief system. Religion lays claim to those common sense rules and uses that claimed "moral authority" for social control and power.

Organised religion, everywhere, is corrupt and bereft of real moral authority.

You point at the aztecs killing a few thousand people as an example? I'll point at the catholics butchering and torturing millions of their own populations to gain a stranglehold of power, regularly using the most intricate and horrific torture methods ever devised and, with an example from modern days - outlawing life-saving contraception in vulnerable societies leading to a drastic worsening of AIDS epidemic, and the confusion of a message that has lead directly to baby-rape. All because the paedo-hiding church needs more suckers.

Fuck that. At no turn can religion, any religion, lay claim to moral guidance of any kind. We would have done better without their overarching interference down the centuries. The catholic church kept us in the intellectual dark ages for centuries, started holy wars, and on and on.

Religion poisons everything. We are better moral creatures without it.

 

[old.Osy]

I agree with you. We would have been better without, I guess. But the reality is it has been an integral part of our history, and whether you like it or not, religion did give us moral compass, and our morality today would be entirely different without it.

You caught on I'm atheist, right? I don't like this more than you do.
I don't like that there's constant tension between me and the in-laws because of it, and I don't like that I specifically have to ask them not to spew or display religiousness indoctrination around my kid.

And, to get things back on track a bit, I also would not like to live in a world where someone will tell my little girl she can be a boy by just imagining it, and that she can impose this onto the people around her as absolute truth - bending the fabric of gender and sex on a whim.

 

[Scouse]

our morality today would be entirely different without it.

Absolutely. It would be better, kinder and more acommodating.

I also would not like to live in a world where someone will tell my little girl she can be a boy by just imagining it, and that she can impose this onto the people around her as absolute truth - bending the fabric of gender and sex on a whim.

Whilst I understand your fears I think they're exaggerated and overblown - almost everything you see if a reposting of the most extreme niche cases in order to get retweets or sell papers.

What is clear is that our judaeo-christian binary view doesn't reflect actual human nature and throughout the ages, including today, other non-christian-abused societies deal with this seamlessly and harmoniously.

My point is that we should protect our children from danger (surgery at a time when they're most confused) whilst allowing them the freedom to grow outside a discredited system we know to be abusive.

The gap is that we don't know what will emerge, that mistakes will take place along the way and humans, very naturally, feel fear of that unknown. However, fear is no sort of argument to stop necessary change happening.

What's actually happening, for the vast majority, is no biggie. But as we've not lived it we can't understand it. Our kids will be better than us, in the long run*.



*unless we fuck the planet first. A topic of far more import than how humans want to be.

 

[Wij]

What is clear is that our judaeo-christian binary view doesn't reflect actual human nature and throughout the ages, including today, other non-christian-abused societies deal with this seamlessly and harmoniously.

Biological sex is not a judeo-christian legacy.

You seem to be arguing that those of us who express concerns on this are doing so because we have fixed views about gender that are being threatened by new views on gender.

I couldn't give a fuck about gender. It isn't even a real thing. It's labels on certain types of behaviour. Call yourself what you want.

What it shouldn't do is erode hard-won rights based on biological sex. It shouldn't allow people to imagine themselves into other people's single-sex spaces or sports or into their sexual preferences. It shouldn't encourage kids to mutilate themselves.

 

[Scouse]

Whining about the extremes again @Wij. Only arseholes are banging on about who should fancy who and why. You need to ditch twatter as all it does is give prominence to that sort of unreasonable shit.

No surgery until mid 20's? Single-sex spaces should be trashed. Sport is a tricky one but it'll get sorted. Basically, it's only an issue because parents are terrified. But then, parents always are.

 

[Wij]

Whining about the extremes again @Wij. Only arseholes are banging on about who should fancy who and why. You need to ditch twatter as all it does is give prominence to that sort of unreasonable shit.

No surgery until mid 20's? Single-sex spaces should be trashed. Sport is a tricky one but it'll get sorted. Basically, it's only an issue because parents are terrified. But then, parents always are.

Why should single-sex spaces, like refuges, be trashed? Have you asked women who use them how they feel about that? How will sport be sorted?

Do you also agree that puberty blockers for kids should be banned as well as surgery? Do you think we should indulge kids who are unhappy with their bodies and assume they are correct because they have gendered souls or take a more measured approach?

 

[Wij]

Also. Is this hate-speech or just a simple fact?


View: https://twitter.com/anyabyke/status/1125481180168708097

 

[dysfunction]

No idea as I cant read it

 

[Scouse]

Why should single-sex spaces, like refuges, be trashed? Have you asked women who use them how they feel about that? How will sport be sorted?

Do you also agree that puberty blockers for kids should be banned as well as surgery? Do you think we should indulge kids who are unhappy with their bodies and assume they are correct because they have gendered souls or take a more measured approach?

FS @Wij. Going round in circles much? We've covered refuges already. We've covered sport already (it's not up to me to decide how it pans out - but pan out it will - and if how we play games together can't be sorted out there's no hope for us).

As for the rest. Twitter seems be rotting your mind. You're clearly not ready to talk about a "measured" approach. As far as I'm concerned "surgery" can go alongside "medical interventions" - which I've covered before.

You don't like it. I get it. You're old and outraged (because:twitter). You'll not be happy until I say "lets just keep things the way they are". Well tough titties, change is clearly needed. The shape of that change is being hammered out. Instead of reacting to clear idiots on social media why not push a moderate viewpoint of your own?

And once again - storm:teacup. Bigger fish to fry - if we have any fish left.

 

[Wij]

FS @Wij. Going round in circles much? We've covered refuges already. We've covered sport already (it's not up to me to decide how it pans out - but pan out it will - and if how we play games together can't be sorted out there's no hope for us).

As for the rest. Twitter seems be rotting your mind. You're clearly not ready to talk about a "measured" approach. As far as I'm concerned "surgery" can go alongside "medical interventions" - which I've covered before.

You don't like it. I get it. You're old and outraged (because:twitter). You'll not be happy until I say "lets just keep things the way they are". Well tough titties, change is clearly needed. The shape of that change is being hammered out. Instead of reacting to clear idiots on social media why not push a moderate viewpoint of your own?

And once again - storm:teacup. Bigger fish to fry - if we have any fish left.

That's just a load of sophistry. You're arguing against things I'm not saying and deflecting.

Picking through though. You agree that medical interventions on kids are wrong full stop yes? Cool.

We didn't really cover refuges. You said it wouldn't be a problem. I posited that maybe you should talk to actual users who might know more than you.

Sports. Can you not agree that men in women's sport is unfair to women? Just because it's not up to you doesn't mean you can't have an opinion. You could say that about literally anything.

I'm not old and outraged. Gay people, trannies, whatever have always been the norm to me.

I'm pointing out people trying to define biological sex out of existence. That's just bullshit. You can be nice to people without indulging them with lies. Lesbians don't have penises (which was an actual banner unfurled at a Pride parade which Stonewall decided was a hate crime and called the police).

Yes, I see some of this on Twitter but that's because it's out there. People are being shamed because their sexuality doesn't include people of the opposite sex. I'm pretty sure that's not a progressive, enlightened attitude.

And kids are still getting mutilated. You say you're against it but would you say it in public or be worried that you'll get shamed for your old and outraged attitude?

(I get you about the ecology thing but different subject).

 

[Wij]

And meanwhile another nail in the coffin of women’s sport:


View: https://twitter.com/fairplaywomen/status/1125765610972045313

 

[Exioce]

I found this really useful and inspiring, a clear-headed, compassionate and authoritative piece on the IAAF ruling. Cuts through a lot of the confusion I've seen on social media, and provides a robust ethical defence of womens' sports.

A Victory for Female Athletes Everywhere - Quillette

It's a long read so here are my cliff notes:
The IAAF ruling and reasoning

• Ruling: A woman in sport is to be anyone whose legal identity is female and who has testosterone (T) levels in the female range.
• The female range for testosterone is categorically different from the male range. In general, males have 10 to 30 times more T than females. There is no overlap.
  
• T is the best single physiological marker for sport’s purposes. It accounts for an average of 10-12% performance gap between the sexes.
• 13yo boys trash elite female world records on a weekly basis.
• Without sex segregated sports, no girl or woman would win any event ever again. There would be no role for women in competitive athletics.

Caster Semenya and the 800m

• Caster, the multiple World and Olympic champion in the 800m, is intersex "Differences of Sex Development (DSD)". She was born with indeterminate genitals and classed as female at birth, but has XY chromosomes and testes that produce T in the normal male range.
• Womens' Gold, Silver and Bronze in the Rio Olympics 800m were all taken by DSD athletes. Biological females were locked out of the podium entirely.

 

[Gwadien]

I found this really useful and inspiring, a clear-headed, compassionate and authoritative piece on the IAAF ruling. Cuts through a lot of the confusion I've seen on social media, and provides a robust ethical defence of womens' sports.

A Victory for Female Athletes Everywhere - Quillette

It's a long read so here are my cliff notes:
The IAAF ruling and reasoning

• Ruling: A woman in sport is to be anyone whose legal identity is female and who has testosterone (T) levels in the female range.
• The female range for testosterone is categorically different from the male range. In general, males have 10 to 30 times more T than females. There is no overlap.
  
• T is the best single physiological marker for sport’s purposes. It accounts for an average of 10-12% performance gap between the sexes.
• 13yo boys trash elite female world records on a weekly basis.
• Without sex segregated sports, no girl or woman would win any event ever again. There would be no role for women in competitive athletics.

Caster Semenya and the 800m

• Caster, the multiple World and Olympic champion in the 800m, is intersex "Differences of Sex Development (DSD)". She was born with indeterminate genitals and classed as female at birth, but has XY chromosomes and testes that produce T in the normal male range.
• Womens' Gold, Silver and Bronze in the Rio Olympics 800m were all taken by DSD athletes. Biological females were locked out of the podium entirely.

So just as I said.

The bodies that matter are giving fair and reasonable rulings.

 

[Wij]

So just as I said.

The bodies that matter are giving fair and reasonable rulings.

Occasionally. When pushed.

Look at cycling now though. Female-identifying, male-bodied cyclists have won many events recently and will dominate in future if the trend isn't checked by rule-changes.

Weightlifting and netball would be a farce if clear rulings aren't made now. Even with Testosterone-suppression that doesn't change the average height, muscle-density, bone-density, muscle-to-fat ratio which get set at puberty.

Sensible rulings won't get made if the only people kicking up a fuss are the ones who think this is all fine.