Yes that is My Opinion of the State of California and the Liberal Looney's that live there.
Why, you may ask?
Just read the Headlines.

Quote:California would ban boys and girls sections at big retailers under proposed law

They just can not leave people alone to live life and shop the way you want.

Quote:California’s large retailers would have to do away with boy and girl signage for toys and child care aisles, under a bill being considered by state lawmakers.
Assembly Bill 1084 would require retailers with 500 or more employees “to maintain undivided areas of its sales floor where the majority of those items being offered are displayed, regardless of whether an item has traditionally been marketed for either girls or for boys,” according to the Legislative Counsel’s digest of the bill.
The bill would also prohibit the use of signage to indicate whether a particular child care item or toy is for boys or girls. Online retailers with a physical presence in California would be required to label their toy and child care sections in a unisex or gender neutral way.

The bill, which if passed would go into effect Jan. 1, 2024, contains a provision to punish violating retailers with a $1,000 civil penalty.
The bill is co-authored by Assemblyman Evan Low, D-Campbell, who chairs the California Legislative LGBT Caucus, and Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia, D-Bell Gardens, who chairs the California Legislative Women’s Caucus.

Source

Yeah, Transgender people, we don't care if you shop in any section you want, you should not let your leaders force their ideas of a better world on others.
JMHO

The way government wants to insinuate itself into and control every aspect of life is revolting.   This is one great example.  Another is Fauxi:  "It's okay to hug people in your own household now if you've both been vaccinated."   Hey, asshole.   We were never waiting for your permission.

What exactly do you think are the motives to pushing this "no gender" BS?  I mean, it's at the point of being both totalitarian and insane.

(03-06-2021, 04:40 PM)guohua Wrote: Yeah, Transgender people, we don't care if you shop in any section you want, you should not let your leaders force their ideas of a better world on others.
JMHO

I don't lay any great claim to understanding transgenderism, but it seems to me that transgender folks are just as proud of their gender as not-transgender folks, "chosen" or not. How can they celebrate their gender when the government is busy trying to stamp out gender?

I think this lunacy will eventually go away, only to rear it's ugly head again in a few decades. Does anyone else recall the "unisex" attempts at a trend back in the 70's? This seems to me to just be a California attempt to codify an ancient and outdated concept.

Any trans folks who may read this, please be gentle with my use of language. I'm an old guy, and can't keep up with Newspeak changes to the common English I learned as a kid. To me, "gender" means whether you are male or female, and "sex" means the thing you do to cause more folks to be born, regardless of gender, just as it did back when English was still English, before Newspeak.

.

(03-06-2021, 05:26 PM)Ninurta Wrote:

(03-06-2021, 04:40 PM)guohua Wrote: Yeah, Transgender people, we don't care if you shop in any section you want, you should not let your leaders force their ideas of a better world on others.
JMHO

I don't lay any great claim to understanding transgenderism, but it seems to me that transgender folks are just as proud of their gender as not-transgender folks, "chosen" or not. How can they celebrate their gender when the government is busy trying to stamp out gender?

I think this lunacy will eventually go away, only to rear it's ugly head again in a few decades. Does anyone else recall the "unisex" attempts at a trend back in the 70's? This seems to me to just be a California attempt to codify an ancient and outdated concept.

Any trans folks who may read this, please be gentle with my use of language. I'm an old guy, and can't keep up with Newspeak changes to the common English I learned as a kid. To me, "gender" means whether you are male or female, and "sex" means the thing you do to cause more folks to be born, regardless of gender, just as it did back when English was still English, before Newspeak.

.

Ninurta is well know by us to be a gentle kind, the type that loves to grow roses, indeed he is well known to show great kindness to unwelcomed people by showing his rose beds from the (under)ground up.

Now im different im a mean SOB, so here is my take on transgenderism
There are as many emotional sexes as people need there to be.
Physical sexes there are two, male and female. You are your birth sex your DNA proves that. If you wish to change sex and have your bits cut off and others added that at the moment it is your right. But remember you have only changed your body shape your DNA still shows what your "birth" sex is and this should not be a big deal for anyone

(03-06-2021, 05:01 PM)drussell41 Wrote: What exactly do you think are the motives to pushing this "no gender" BS?  I mean, it's at the point of being both totalitarian and insane.

@"drussell41", I'll give you an answer. It will sound "crazy" to most everyone who hasn't looked into this topic. But, what I've learned over the last year or so is, the Elite want to turn humans into robots, connect our brains to computers, and have us serving them with a flick of a switch. They will control our thoughts and have access to anyone who might start having ideas that conflict with theirs. They can simply turn us off when needed. 

The first step is to get people brainwashed into believing there is no difference in genders. Next step is to get everyone on board with connecting/merging their brains with computers. They are on both these steps now. 

I guess the next step is to turn on the switch.  

Miss Guohua it didn't use to be. But certainly now it is. When I was young in the 60's there was alot to do as a kid, mostly the freedom brought from bicycles and skateboards. The roads were never bumper to bumper and an average new three bedroom cost around $14K. There were not any gangs or drugs, and the seldom murders made front page and was unusual, very unusual. Then the hippy movement came and LSD and pot became rapidly popular. Rock and Roll changed and the mindset was about Love. People behaved as they should, and yes you still had bullies and social problems born of race. The Mexican population had noticed the generosity of the northerners and began to flood the state. 

Hollywood created stereotypes of non-Californians as bumbling hillbillies or simpletons. A lot of those people, fed up with their cold climates in the east and north migrated there to escape the cold. As you had that migration come in a second round, a lot of mal-contents decided Cali was Mecca. They brought their BS with them sadly. In the early days like the 40's and 50's and even earlier, it was mostly white with a growing Mexican population. 

Money came to California and the money rush was on. The sad part was that developers found  it ripe to plunder the state. Cities rose, roads were built, and pristine tracts of land destroyed with the blight of cookie-cutter tract homes. By the thousands, sometimes four or five tracts going at a time under construction until all the land was gone, and already developed. Beautiful Vistas lost forever. Earthmovers, graders and bulldozers destroying everything in their path for the sake of developers and the almighty $. Once you had so many homes, you had blight enter. Ethnic strongholds rose and color between whites and browns became an issue. Population increased dramatically and a lot of aerospace and aircraft facilities were born. Kaiser and other major companies were unregulated  and spewed all manner of toxins. The Mexican population brought  tuberculosis with them. And that was when California's government became the nanny. Law after law was implemented. Regulation after regulation. The government realized what an untapped bounty that the state had at their disposal.

 And yea, as laws came and people poured in, it started it's downhill decline. Taxes would change, and instead of owning a home...... it would own you. Banking would flourish, as would gas stations. One on every corner, unregulated. Unions tried to make an entry and develop a stronghold there, Democrats were the popular mindset. AND Cuba brought it all to a halt for 13 days. We recovered back to business as usual. The rich were in it for the money and were generally unfriendly arrogant and uncaring. And the lure of fast money attracted even more of the type. But us normal native Californians still knew the cool places to get away and have fun until the rich developers found that they could buy for next to nothing and charge entry somehow. Fun was not free anymore unless you escaped into the Sierras or Mojave desert. And they would also succumb to pay to play.  The $ money changed people, and Hollywood sold them a vision of plenty and happy people all the while devolving into a debaucherous  cesspool of sex and violence, instant wealth and pleasures all could be had there. Chanel 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11 and 13 could show you all the stuff you Really Needed ....  then UHF came out and even more stuff for sale and half-baked loonies on TV looking to relieve you of your wealth and morals. California had a price, and it was your morals and soul. 

And they were still left, the Native Californians once kind hearted and compassionate. The warmth and compassion was replaced with suspicion and  contempt.... But not by everybody, but it was coming like a tidal wave and would wash over all the good and bad. 

I lived there until 2006 and left for good. I was there 54 years..... born there a couple generations old already native to the place. SO YEA, there is scarcely any defense for denying it's path to destruction. The southern half of the state has become an empire of Blight, there's no denying that. The north I feel sorry for, above Sacramento. It is in the last heaves of destruction. One day it will look like Mexico city, indistinguishable. There is still good there, but it is WELL hidden. Calamity is about upon them any time now. The Lord has abandon them to their pleasures and evil thoughts. SO YEA, then you have every manner of perversions, eagerly awaiting the participant. By then you have entirely Sold Your Soul... yes sold out.

(03-06-2021, 05:01 PM)drussell41 Wrote: What exactly do you think are the motives to pushing this "no gender" BS?  I mean, it's at the point of being both totalitarian and insane.

It is a variant on an old ploy.

After the communists took power in Russia, they went through a period in which people were urged to explore their sexuality, engage in multiple relationships, ignore the constraints of marriage etc.

It was all part of subverting the society's traditional behavior.

When the communist government had seen enough, the whip was cracked and many of the practices were forbidden.  The goal of undermining the society to make it more easily controlled had been achieved.

So much for LONG VIEW.  In terms of BIG PICTURE, I'd say a big difference between the America of today and the Russia of then is that the USA has many sources and inspirations for defining "proper" behavior in society.  Russia was an easier social nut to crack because there were really only two big sources for defining behavior -- the Church and the State, both of which were corrupted and controlled by the communists.

In the USA, they won't be able to corrupt ALL of the sources and inspirations because they are many and varied; but, they can destabilize our society on some very basic levels, one of which is the destruction of the age-old realization that there are two genders.  It is one avenue of forcing cognitive dissonance upon us because what we know to be true is derided and mocked.

Is American society strong enough to resist that kind of undermining?  Years ago, I would have said 'yes'.  Now, I am unsure.

Cheers

Everybody's name is "Lou" 

(03-06-2021, 07:12 PM)F2d5thCav Wrote:

(03-06-2021, 05:01 PM)drussell41 Wrote: What exactly do you think are the motives to pushing this "no gender" BS?  I mean, it's at the point of being both totalitarian and insane.

It is a variant on an old ploy.

After the communists took power in Russia, they went through a period in which people were urged to explore their sexuality, engage in multiple relationships, ignore the constraints of marriage etc.

It was all part of subverting the society's traditional behavior.

When the communist government had seen enough, the whip was cracked and many of the practices were forbidden.  The goal of undermining the society to make it more easily controlled had been achieved.

So much for LONG VIEW.  In terms of BIG PICTURE, I'd say a big difference between the America of today and the Russia of then is that the USA has many sources and inspirations for defining "proper" behavior in society.  Russia was an easier social nut to crack because there were really only two big sources for defining behavior -- the Church and the State, both of which were corrupted and controlled by the communists.

In the USA, they won't be able to corrupt ALL of the sources and inspirations because they are many and varied; but, they can destabilize our society on some very basic levels, one of which is the destruction of the age-old realization that there are two genders.  It is one avenue of forcing cognitive dissonance upon us because what we know to be true is derided and mocked.

Is American society strong enough to resist that kind of undermining?  Years ago, I would have said 'yes'.  Now, I am unsure.

Cheers

Never let it be said that I don't think "outside the box".     

(03-06-2021, 05:40 PM)Wallfire Wrote: Ninurta is well know by us to be a gentle kind, the type that loves to grow roses, indeed he is well known to show great kindness to unwelcomed people by showing his rose beds from the (under)ground up.

Now im different im a mean SOB, so here is my take on transgenderism
There are as many emotional sexes as people need there to be.
Physical sexes there are two, male and female. You are your birth sex your DNA proves that. If you wish to change sex and have your bits cut off and others added that at the moment it is your right. But remember you have only changed your body shape your DNA still shows what your "birth" sex is and this should not be a big deal for anyone

Physical genders can get a mite fuzzy, too. It's not always as cut and dried as simply looking at the DNA.

DNA occasionally undergoes aberrations, strange combinations in which the usual X and Y chromosomes, which determine gender, get out of whack. Instead of the usual XY, there may be XXY, or XYY, or, in some especially vexing cases, an XX in which some Y chromosome material has recombined with the X, giving male characteristics to a genetic female.

Sometimes, this results in a condition known as "intersex", which used to be known as "hermaphroditism" before the Thought Police started changing language. In some intersex individuals, it may be impossible to determine  gender either physically OR genetically. The gender determining chromosomes are too scrambled up to tell, and that can create an individual with ambiguous genitalia such that gender cannot be determined there, either.

.

This bill was co-authored by Assemblyman Evan Low. Low said he took inspiration for the bill from a staffer’s 9-year-old daughter, who wanted to know why she had to go into the “boys” aisle to find science-related toys.

Stores like Target began moving away from gendered signage such as removing aisles labeled as girl’s toys and boy’s toys in 2015.

Quote:(from 2015)
The retail giant announced last week its stores would begin phasing out some gender-specific product categories and switch to gender-neutral displays and colors after guests complained, or, as a company statement said, “raised important questions.”

“Right now, our teams are working across the store to identify areas where we can phase out gender-based signage to help strike a better balance,” the statement, posted to Target’s website, said. “For example, in the kids’ Bedding area, signs will no longer feature suggestions for boys or girls, just kids. In the Toys aisles, we’ll also remove reference to gender, including the use of pink, blue, yellow or green paper on the back walls of our shelves. You’ll see these changes start to happen over the next few months.”

source

(03-06-2021, 05:01 PM)drussell41 Wrote: What exactly do you think are the motives to pushing this "no gender" BS?  I mean, it's at the point of being both totalitarian and insane.

If you want answers to this question, look no further than to 3rd and 4th wave feminism. Look also at how this “gender BS” has been politicized and weaponized as a wedge issue between the left and the right. You can only push a group of disenfranchised people so far before they collectivize to push back against what they see as totalitarian and insane. The silent majority of trans people just want to live their lives without being used as pawns in a political game of football and when you consider there are currently 20 states with pending anti-trans legislation in the works, it is kind of hard to not be on the defensive.

(03-06-2021, 05:26 PM)Ninurta Wrote: I don't lay any great claim to understanding transgenderism

Let me help you with that. The first area you might improve your understanding is to understand “trangenderism” is anything but an ism.  An –ism is a suffix added to the end of a word to indicate that the word represents a specific  unique or distinctive practice, system, or philosophy and as someone familiar with the transgender “community”, I can tell you that the “transgender umbrella” or “transgenderism” is anything but unique and distinctive. In fact, the term transgender is so broad and diverse that it is absolutely meaningless and in my opinion, is detrimental and harmful to those of us that have been mistakenly subsumed into this “movement”.

Just as I’m sure there would be pushback if I were to say that all conservatives and Trumpists are redpilled white supremacist neo-nazi Christian fundamentalist members of a radical violent militia trying to force their ideology down people’s throats, it is equally wrong to assume that all trans people are gender abolitionists or that all left leaning people are Marxist commie members of Antifa out to “destroy the fabric of society”.

Whether you consume media or not, one needs to recognize what sells papers or gets clicks is what makes the headlines and in most cases, those with the loudest or most obnoxious voices, the fringe at both ends of a spectrum that can be pitted against one another in controversy makes a good story and without nuance or a deeper understanding of the issues, it is easy to fall into poorly informed beliefs. Regardless of how one believes their thoughts are independent, collectively we have been programmed to a degree whether we want to believe this or not. This whole idea that transgender and transsexual people are some monolithic entity or that all of them (us) are activists on the same page believing in the same thing and waving the same flag is a gross misunderstanding and an inaccurate categorization but yet this is how most people see things. This is most unfortunate.

What most think they know about “transgenderism” comes from what they’ve seen or heard rather than actually knowing or loving someone trans such as a child, parent, sibling or romantic partner and as noted, most of that knowledge comes from the loudest or most extreme voices who generally are in no way representative of the whole. Personally speaking, I think so called “trans activism” is a cancer that does more to obfuscate and confuse the issue than it does to help.

There are reasons for that and one cannot fully grasp the situation without a bit of history or an understanding of the etiologies involved which within the modern trans ideology itself is considered heretical and blasphemous knowledge and subjects one to shunning and cancel culture for even mentioning – that not all trans people are the same or are trans for the same reasons.

Up until the mid-1970s, there were no what we think of as transgender people today but there were those with transsexualism which truly is an –ism and a very distinct and unique and rare legitimate medical phenomenon that had been scientifically studied for many decades. The criteria for diagnosing someone as transsexual were very strict and narrowly defined and as German physician and sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld noted in the early 20th century, those afflicted with this condition presented in two prominent groups that have gone by a variety of different labels over time such as true/pseudo transsexuals, primary/secondary, nuclear/non-nuclear, etc.

In a 1974 paper by Dr. Norman Fisk published in The Western Journal of Medicine, the indications for transsexualism were liberalized with introduction of the reconceptualized notion of “Gender Dysphoria Syndrome” which relaxed the stringent criteria and erased the distinction of the two different typologies. This opened the door and gave birth to a movement for those who would otherwise not have been considered transsexual in the past. In today’s modern transgender community, those once considered pseudo or secondary are the vast majority, are the loudest and the champions of trans activism that has become radicalized and unreasonable

Once these doors were unhinged others flooded in to where everything under the sun now falls under the umbrella of “transgenderism”. Drag queens, 96 different genders, neo-pronouns, gender abolitionists, gender non-conformists and vocal blue haired “non-binary” feminists have become the face of the community to the point now those of us that are traditional in our lives and gender roles i.e. the “true” transsexuals are being silenced and canceled for trying to distance ourselves from the madness. What is even worse is that our narratives and experiences are being co-opted by the masses for some sense of their legitimacy.

It is not those of my kind that seek to destroy gender or change society and culture to accommodate us. All we want is to go about our business quietly and get on with our lives as normal binary traditional men and women and we want to fit into stereotypical gender roles, not tear them down. My transness is not something I am proud of or advertise and only my family and most intimate friends even know I wasn’t born female as it is nobody’s business and not relevant to my everyday life but, when I see ignorance (lack of knowledge), bias, prejudice or bigotry online, I feel compelled to thrown in my 2¢ with the hope I can help others be more informed and educated about this subject.

’Ninurta’ Wrote:Any trans folks who may read this, please be gentle with my use of language. I'm an old guy, and can't keep up with Newspeak changes to the common English I learned as a kid. To me, "gender" means whether you are male or female, and "sex" means the thing you do to cause more folks to be born, regardless of gender, just as it did back when English was still English, before Newspeak.

To me, one of the true signs of being old is when one is unwilling to or simply stops learning new things or in other words, closed-mindedness. Knowledge and understanding as well as language evolves and is not static and turning off your brain because you’ve reached a certain age is just a cop out.

The distinction between sex and gender has been scientifically studied and written about for over 100 years. Sexologist John Money introduced the terminological distinction between biological sex and gender as a role in 1955, the year I was born. Try this Wiki for a more in-depth look at this or if you will, consider that sex is male or female and gender is boy/girl/man/woman.

Don’t worry, old man.    You won’t offend me and I’m more than happy to discuss any of this with you or anyone that has questions and would like to know more.

(03-06-2021, 05:40 PM)Wallfire Wrote: Now im different im a mean SOB, so here is my take on transgenderism
There are as many emotional sexes as people need there to be.
Physical sexes there are two, male and female. You are your birth sex your DNA proves that. If you wish to change sex and have your bits cut off and others added that at the moment it is your right. But remember you have only changed your body shape your DNA still shows what your "birth" sex is and this should not be a big deal for anyone.

Do you really think that DNA/chromosomes make a single bit of difference to me? This primary school understanding of genetics is notoriously unreliable anyway. Do you also think that when they dig my bones up 100 years from now I’ll really give a damn what they may find out?

Regardless of popular opinion, folks like me are not delusional about biology, that’s what makes us trans and I am fully aware of the ways my body is different from natal females. Genetically, as far as I know at least because I’ve never been tested, I am and as you said always will be male but morphologically with the exception of having no uterus, ovaries and a vestigial  atrophied prostate gland, I am female, outwardly, hormonally and socially and what matters to me is if I’m in a traffic accident and taken to the hospital or when I crawl into bed to have sex with someone that is what I’m seen as.

How I was born is irrelevant to my everyday life. I’ve never lived as or been seen as a man and to suggest that I was one because of invisible chromosomes would be considered ludicrous if you knew me.

(03-06-2021, 07:12 PM)F2d5thCav Wrote: After the communists took power in Russia, they went through a period in which people were urged to explore their sexuality, engage in multiple relationships, ignore the constraints of marriage etc.

Citations requested.

Biological sex is "the science", slice and dice is mutilation. Blah, blah, blah, and in addition, yahda, yahda, blankity blank. After 3 pints of beer, that how it is, and likely after I sober up too.

(03-07-2021, 08:17 AM)Michigan Swamp Buck Wrote: Biological sex is "the science", slice and dice is mutilation. Blah, blah, blah, and in addition, yahda, yahda, blankity blank. After 3 pints of beer, that how it is, and likely after I sober up too.

I thought you were going to quit posting at ATS? Maybe you should reconsider? Your rational, intelligent, well thought out and finely crafted response is certainly up to their standards.

However, you are entitled to your opinion and thanks for your contribution. If you'd like to sober up and discuss your point of view as an adult, I'd be more than happy and willing to engage in more productive dialog.

Thanks!

@"Freija" 

Quote:Citations requested.

The irony here is that you are probably a lot closer to good sources in a university library than I am.  Sorry, but the wonder that is the internet doesn't have much on minor aspects of history that occurred prior to the emergence of the internet itself.  That said, this is the best I could find quickly, from Wikipedia.

Quote:After the October Revolution in Russia, Alexandra Kollontai became the most prominent woman in the Soviet administration. Kollontai was also a champion of free love. However, Clara Zetkin recorded that Lenin opposed free love as "completely un-Marxist, and moreover, anti-social".[39] Zetkin also recounted Lenin's denunciation of plans to organise Hamburg's women prostitutes into a "special revolutionary militant section": he saw this as "corrupt and degenerate."

Despite the traditional marital lives of Lenin and most Bolsheviks, they believed that sexual relations were outside the jurisdiction of the state. The Soviet government abolished centuries-old Czarist regulations on personal life, which had prohibited homosexuality and made it difficult for women to obtain divorce permits or to live singly. However, by the end of the 1920s, Stalin had taken over the Communist Party and begun to implement socially conservative policies. Homosexuality was classified as a mental disorder, and free love was further demonized.

From their article on "Free love".  But I didn't learn about that from Wikipedia, my own education is a lot more ancient in origin than the internet.

I expect Russian sources would have much more on this, but that would require translation I am not up to.

FWIW, Freija, I don't toss statements out to make ideological points, unless I am providing an opinion, in which case it will be clear that my statement is such.  I am not into the modern practice of everyone trying to be a clever debater.  When I state something I believe to be fact, it can be taken or left as one wishes.

Cheers

ETA: If you can find this work in a library, it should address the topic. As I am not in the USA, accessing this work would be difficult for me:

The Family in Soviet Russia, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1968. Author is H. Kent Geiger.

(03-07-2021, 03:53 AM)Freija Wrote:

(03-06-2021, 05:26 PM)Ninurta Wrote: I don't lay any great claim to understanding transgenderism

Let me help you with that. ...

... I feel compelled to thrown in my 2¢ with the hope I can help others be more informed and educated about this subject.

I'm always open to education. The only thing that stops learning is death, and that will come too soon for us all. Until then, I learn.

Language is a funny thing. it means something until it doesn't. I was taught many moons ago that the only purpose of language is communication, and when it no longer communicates, it no longer has a purpose. My objection is in redefinition of already existent words. Words mean something until they don't, and when they cease meaning that thing, communication no longer happens, and in that event, those words become useless, meaningless. They have left the language. If folks want to communicate a new concept, make new words - don't co-opt and redefine existing words. That just confuses folks, and I suspect that is the objective of redefinition.

I will, however, accept that "transgenderism" is no really an "ism", except to the extent that it is pushed by activists. From my perspective, you are either male or female, not "trans" anything. Trans implies a crossing of boundaries, and once you've declared a major, then there are no more boundaries. You are what you are, and that goes for all of us. Your "major" is not so much declared as it is what it is. Folks are what they are.

So, from my perspective, there is no such thing as "transgender" or "transgenderism" either one.  There are no boundaries crossed, folks just are what they are.

Quote:

’Ninurta’ Wrote:Any trans folks who may read this, please be gentle with my use of language. I'm an old guy, and can't keep up with Newspeak changes to the common English I learned as a kid. To me, "gender" means whether you are male or female, and "sex" means the thing you do to cause more folks to be born, regardless of gender, just as it did back when English was still English, before Newspeak.

To me, one of the true signs of being old is when one is unwilling to or simply stops learning new things or in other words, closed-mindedness. Knowledge and understanding as well as language evolves and is not static and turning off your brain because you’ve reached a certain age is just a cop out.

Guilty as charged. Words have meaning, and I'm too old to redefine them. I'll leave that for younger folks to wrassle with. It's their language now, not longer mine. To be honest, I don't care to talk with many of them anyhow, Most of them seem to be not entirely sane to me, and I don't want to catch it - catch the insanity, that is.

Quote:The distinction between sex and gender has been scientifically studied and written about for over 100 years. Sexologist John Money introduced the terminological distinction between biological sex and gender as a role in 1955, the year I was born. Try this Wiki for a more in-depth look at this or if you will, consider that sex is male or female and gender is boy/girl/man/woman.

Oh, no doubt. It's been scientifically studied near to death, and still no real consensus. That's what happens when academics get politically active and attempt to redefine words to have brand new meanings. Language naturally evolves among the people speaking it. Artificial redefinition never really works out well. That may be what Orwell was getting at, or trying to get at.

Try as I might, I cannot grasp the concept that "sex" is male or female. "Sex" is in and out, generally repeatedly if you're doing it right. Gender is male or female. Boy/girl/man/woman are all related in one way or another to male and female. "Boys/men", for example, are "male". it has nothing to do with genitalia, as I will get to shortly. It has to do with who one IS.

Quote:Do you really think that DNA/chromosomes make a single bit of difference to me? This primary school understanding of genetics is notoriously unreliable anyway. Do you also think that when they dig my bones up 100 years from now I’ll really give a damn what they may find out?

Now here is where I get into genitalia. Not literally, of course. About 150 years ago, a branch of my family produced two sisters who may have been brothers. No one can say for sure now, but they led a hell of a confusing life. They were presumably assigned "female" at birth, because they had feminine birth names. One fine day, they were plowing the fields in dresses, while sporting beards, and the sheriff was sent 'round to give them a talking to. This was 150 years ago, so of course they ran for their lives. Literally. Thereafter, they took up male names and male habits in another area where the circumstances of their births were not known, and both married women in time. One "had children", which I suspect were more along the lines of adoptees, or something similar - as "similar" as one could perhaps get 150 years ago. I have no doubt the kids' mother was biological, but I do harbor some doubt the father was really biological.

So, given the female birth names, and the male lives in later years, the general consensus is that they were what is now called "intersexed". Doesn't matter to me - they declared their major, and stuck to it. Funky genes run through that branch of the family tree, which is why I know about the genetics of the matter.

Both of them died as men. they never wavered, despite whatever plumbing they may have had, which I think may have been confusing at best, given the history.

The important thing, to me, is that they declared their major, and stuck with it. They knew who they were, and made it work for them in an era when surgical alteration was not an option. It's how they lived, it's how they died, and it is who they were. As you mentioned previously, there was no "ism" to it.

Quote:Regardless of popular opinion, folks like me are not delusional about biology, that’s what makes us trans and I am fully aware of the ways my body is different from natal females. Genetically, as far as I know at least because I’ve never been tested, I am and as you said always will be male but morphologically with the exception of having no uterus, ovaries and a vestigial  atrophied prostate gland, I am female, outwardly, hormonally and socially and what matters to me is if I’m in a traffic accident and taken to the hospital or when I crawl into bed to have sex with someone that is what I’m seen as.

How I was born is irrelevant to my everyday life. I’ve never lived as or been seen as a man and to suggest that I was one because of invisible chromosomes would be considered ludicrous if you knew me.

So, you have declared your major. I have no issues with that. You are who you are. Biology is one thing, mentality another, and the two do not always coincide. What is important is that you know who you are, and have taken steps to make your physiology agree with your mentality. What is, is, and what was is not as imperative, because it is gone. The past is past, and all we have is the present. In the present, you are who you are. I might be persuaded to be offended if you were to go all activist on us, but I suspect that is a thing that won't happen. Only insecure people are activist. You seem pretty secure to me. Insecure people offend me.

I understand your defensiveness upon occasion. That does not equate, however, to the activism borne of insecurity. I would imagine you have put up with some shit in your day. That it has not made you insecure is nothing but a credit to you. Strength of character, regardless of the gender of that character, is a thing to be admired.

.

@Freija 
I understand you are in attack/defense mode and I do understand why. Every thing I wrote is correct and is not an attack on you. People can respect you but not agree with you. If you read what I wrote
But remember you have only changed your body shape your DNA still shows what your "birth" sex is and this should not be a big deal for anyone.
Im a bit different, its very very important to me who the person is, outward looks not so much so, love is hard enough to find without limiting the possibility's, and yes I have lived by that.
I feel you live by, attack is the best defense, its not.

Freija

(03-07-2021, 08:17 AM)Michigan Swamp Buck Wrote: Biological sex is "the science", slice and dice is mutilation. Blah, blah, blah, and in addition, yahda, yahda, blankity blank. After 3 pints of beer, that how it is, and likely after I sober up too.

I thought you were going to quit posting at ATS? Maybe you should reconsider? Your rational, intelligent, well thought out and finely crafted response is certainly up to their standards.

However, you are entitled to your opinion and thanks for your contribution. If you'd like to sober up and discuss your point of view as an adult, I'd be more than happy and willing to engage in more productive dialog.

Thanks!

No thanks, you seem to have things covered around here. There are many other forums I frequent, it doesn't have to be here or ATS. Regardless, I don't see having any productive dialog with anyone with that kind of attitude.

My sauced up comment still stands, biological sex is "science" all this gender reassignment crap is mutilation, you don't need an adult to tell you that. That's my opinion, and your entirely welcome for thanking me on my contribution.

I hate in interject here about gender assignment but I will tell you what I have been told by a couple of Aunts (long Dead) that have been with me for most of my life, guide of my spirit guides you might say.
Yes, I can see them at time (so does my husband) and I hear them clearly and can feel their presents.

OK, for most of our reincarnations events we are the same sex as when we left this body and in the Spirit Realm you have choices, you can stay as my two Aunts and a Uncle has chosen to do for a very long time or you can reincarnate.

Your sex is already reassigned UNLESS you choose to change and gradually get use to the other sexes way of living (yes males and females think and act differently) but there are instances when a newly past spirit wants to or needs to return in a new body immediately and will Jump right back into a fetus with out questioning or knowing the sex, if they are a Male and returned immediately and are now a Female, they either adjust or insist on staying Male.
That is what I was told and shown.

Let me work backwards on my replies here and go for the low hanging fruit first.

(03-07-2021, 02:47 PM)Michigan Swamp Buck Wrote: Regardless, I don't see having any productive dialog with anyone with that kind of attitude.

MY attitude? LOL!  

Let me just point out using the word mutilation to describe trans genital surgery is a highly inflammatory buzzword used by TERFs and other “gender critical” feminists and is part and parcel of anti-trans commenters everywhere. Throwing out a pejorative without expanding on why you think this way then using blah, blah, yahda, yahda [sic] and blankity blank to cement your argument really comes across as lazy and un-original rhetoric. I would expect this from the shitshow that is ATS but not here where we tend to act in a more civilized and mature manner.

Surveys show that only around 18% of people know someone trans and considering that about 80% of trans people do not have “bottom surgery”, it is understandable why the poorly informed lack knowledge of such procedures and how this so called “mutilation” can positively influence one’s quality of life. Speaking personally, I wouldn’t be around if it weren’t for the life saving nature of this “mutilation”.
_________________________

@Wallfire

I apologize if you saw my comments as an attack. That was not my intent but let me explain…

It is inevitable that in every discussion of the trans topic, someone will always bring up DNA/chromosomes as a way to invalidate the lives, experiences and identities of trans people and it is a big deal for some who wish to weaponized this fact against us and think it is the drop-the-mic end of the discussion and the ultimate authority that wins any debate.

Like I said, we are not oblivious to this fact but the influence that “DNA” has on our daily lives is negligible other than maybe making us aware we may rarely experience certain health situations that those with natal bodies may not. This argument is so widely used against trans folks as to become a meme in itself hence my comment about digging up my bones 100 years from now which is about as lame, overused and a decade ago as the “I identify as an attack helicopter” diss.

Thankfully, so far at least, RN3 has not been the abusive and downright hateful cesspool like that other place when it comes to this subject but I have to admit I am a bit gun shy and maybe a bit triggered from past experiences and that I am perhaps somewhat preemptively defensive when it comes to discussing these matters but my intent is to be educational and informative rather than antagonistic. In a predominantly conservative and right-wing venue such as this and with anti-trans rhetoric imbedded in the Republican platform, it is only natural to expect facing a phalanx of detractors when this subject comes up. Again, I am sorry if you took my comments as an attack against you personally. If anything, it was an attack against ignorance in these matters in general. I will try to watch my tone and do better.
_________________________

@F2D5THCAV
I appreciate your comments and thank you for your response and information. I was unaware of this period in Russian history although I am somewhat familiar with LGBT life in pre-Nazi Weimar Germany. When I can find time, at your urging I will look into this further.
_________________________

@Ninurta et al. At this point I need to take a break. I’ve written much more and it needs some revision but I’ve only had about three hours of sleep and need to take a little nap first.

Standby for the rest of my responses in a few hours. Thanks to all involved in this discussion.