|
On October 23 2018 05:02 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 04:41 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't even know what to do with this. This is such an impressively stupid hill to die on...
Think of all the complaints that you had about conservative voices being erased, on campuses for example. I don't know your position about the war on Christmas but that was a thing as well according to Trump and a bunch of your party, and we were supposed to treat all of that seriously. Some dude didn't want to bake a cake and you had to stop the country for a few months. This is about 100 times more violent than anything that's ever been done to conservatism. Yep. Conservatives have the right to exist on college campuses. We have in the past agitated for the right to invite speakers, free from onerous security fees or the protestors veto on the speech. The Colorado baker advocated not for his right to exist as a religious man, but for the right to exercise his religion within his owned business in the way he saw fit. He’s been denied that twice now. He’d be just a foolhardy as you to say he’s been denied his right to exist. Existence kind of sidesteps the whole debate in lines of extremist rhetoric.
Even in this situation that is, as you point out (but I also did), 100 times less violent, we still get some war rhetoric. War on christmas, war on conservatism in college campuses, war on religion. Freedom of speech is under threat. And so on. If anything even half as violent as this ever happens to conservatism, you'll be screaming about erasure much sooner than you'll be asking where all the conservative bodies are.
|
On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables.
You don't get bonus points for behaving better than the Nazis as a government. The government of a country that used to recognize trans people's existence may no longer do that, and it made that decision in spite of logic, science and reality. I can't think of very many things that deserve the label more than this.
|
On October 23 2018 05:18 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 05:02 Danglars wrote:On October 23 2018 04:41 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't even know what to do with this. This is such an impressively stupid hill to die on...
Think of all the complaints that you had about conservative voices being erased, on campuses for example. I don't know your position about the war on Christmas but that was a thing as well according to Trump and a bunch of your party, and we were supposed to treat all of that seriously. Some dude didn't want to bake a cake and you had to stop the country for a few months. This is about 100 times more violent than anything that's ever been done to conservatism. Yep. Conservatives have the right to exist on college campuses. We have in the past agitated for the right to invite speakers, free from onerous security fees or the protestors veto on the speech. The Colorado baker advocated not for his right to exist as a religious man, but for the right to exercise his religion within his owned business in the way he saw fit. He’s been denied that twice now. He’d be just a foolhardy as you to say he’s been denied his right to exist. Existence kind of sidesteps the whole debate in lines of extremist rhetoric. Even in this situation that is, as you point out (but I also did), 100 times less violent, we still get some war rhetoric. War on christmas, war on conservatism in college campuses, war on religion. Freedom of speech is under threat. And so on. If anything even half as violent as this ever happens to conservatism, you'll be screaming about erasure much sooner than you'll be asking where all the conservative bodies are.
Why stop there? We had a War on Poverty! If we step back a pace, you’re trying to generalize “right to exist” to “war rhetoric.” I’m not going there. The culture wars are just a bitter fight, and many times there’s a winner and a loser who both can’t be victors simultaneously. It’s a very core part of calling it a war. When you say some issue involves a right to exist, you say their simple existence is threatened. You can call yourself whatever you want and lobby your state for special privileges. The acquiescence or non-acquiescence of that state does not threaten your very existence. Period. So leave your analogies to violence and wars in the gutter; nobody’s existence is threatened. Say what you want about this or that right and mean what you say if you want me to take you seriously and at your word, with a minimum of “but war on Christmas” whataboutist tangents.
On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables.
The succinct version. If you can’t handle the debate without nonsense rhetorical ploys, go back to fringe activist groups where those kind of things are encouraged and debate is not encouraged.
|
My position is coherent. You're trying to poke holes in it by calling it rhetorical and by showing that it doesn't fit well with debates, but that's literally the first thing I said, that I don't think this should be debatable. Lately you've done this a few times, accuse me of doing things that I readily admit I'm doing, it's kind of funny. The rhetoric that is being used is consistent with the rhetoric generally being used in all political discourse when taking into account the particular violence of the attack. You and xDaunt presented a version of denial of right to exist under which a government like today's US government literally cannot be guilty of doing that, which is convenient for you I guess but not really interesting in terms of what's happening.
|
On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables.
Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity.
|
On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity.
I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing.
If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing.
|
On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing.
I disagree with the notion that adjusting your perception of what's normal constitutes thought policing. I've seen the phrase thrown around a lot in the past few pages, I've yet to see it adequately applied. This country doesn't become a George Orwell novel the moment pre-existing norms get challenged.
I also don't agree that anyone is saying transgender folks should have special privileges. As far as I can tell, people are advocating for their right to exist as they are and not get harassed and assaulted for it.
|
On October 23 2018 06:46 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing. I disagree with the notion that adjusting your perception of what's normal constitutes thought policing. I've seen the phrase thrown around a lot in the past few pages, I've yet to see it adequately applied. This country doesn't become a George Orwell novel the moment pre-existing norms get challenged. I also don't agree that anyone is saying transgender folks should have special privileges. As far as I can tell, people are advocating for their right to exist as they are and not get harassed and assaulted for it.
Creating special bathrooms is a special privilege. Allowing people with penises to go into the ladies room is a special privilege. And no one is advocating for the abuse and assault of transgender people. So drop the strawman. Let's face it. Your entire position is pure rhetoric and a practical zero. You don't understand what the battle is or why it is being fought. Here's a hint: it really has nothing to do with transgendered people.
|
On October 23 2018 06:51 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 06:46 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing. I disagree with the notion that adjusting your perception of what's normal constitutes thought policing. I've seen the phrase thrown around a lot in the past few pages, I've yet to see it adequately applied. This country doesn't become a George Orwell novel the moment pre-existing norms get challenged. I also don't agree that anyone is saying transgender folks should have special privileges. As far as I can tell, people are advocating for their right to exist as they are and not get harassed and assaulted for it. Creating special bathrooms is a special privilege. Allowing people with penises to go into the ladies room is a special privilege. And no one is advocating for the abuse and assault of transgender people. So drop the strawman. Let's face it. Your entire position is pure rhetoric and a practical zero. You don't understand what the battle is or why it is being fought. Here's a hint: it really has nothing to do with transgendered people.
Then do educate me.
|
On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing.
You're not denying them anything, you've just defined recognizing their existence as a special privilege that you don't want to give them. Eh, that's mildly clever at least.
|
On October 23 2018 07:19 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing. You're not denying them anything, you've just defined recognizing their existence as a special privilege that you don't want to give them. Eh, that's mildly clever at least.
After reading through his post a little more closely, he wants me to think that he accepts transgender people just fine everywhere, except when it comes to what bathroom they use. Then, and only then, does he believe the only option left to a transgender person is to deny their own identity whenever they must use a public bathroom, in a society where people like him, in every other aspect of life, fully accept transgender people. In other words, he's proposing that someone who was born a man, but transitions into being a woman, is for all intents and purposes a woman. Even in his own eyes. And is also proposing that someone who is, for all intents and purposes, a woman, should walk into the men's room every time they need to use a public restroom.
Reading between the lines, he doesn't acknowledge them at all.
And another aside, the comment about no one advocating for the assault of trans people is bullshit. They still get attacked and killed when someone who doesn't like it finds out about it. Let's not pretend we're past that.
|
On October 23 2018 07:19 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing. You're not denying them anything, you've just defined recognizing their existence as a special privilege that you don't want to give them. Eh, that's mildly clever at least.
I pretty much completely disagree with both but xDaunt's arguments are consistently stronger than Danglars imo. I pretty much said what I have to say on all that.
I honestly didn't realize that conservatives genuinely feel so threatened and bothered by finding out that people with genitals they wouldn't expect have been using bathrooms they wouldn't expect since we've had bathrooms and Obama argued that if people figure it out they don't get to force them into the other bathroom.
This did get us to an interesting question I alluded to earlier. For a person with a DSD where they have a penis, breasts, feminine facial features and the body shape of a woman, which bathroom is for them?
|
On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing.
How is it a special privilege to be able to use the bathroom that corresponds to one's gender?
You're trying very hard to twist yourself out of this knot you're in, but failing. Your argument hinges entirely upon denying the existence of transgender people, because if you accept their existence, then they should be allowed to use the bathroom that corresponds to their actual gender, not the one that they were assigned at birth.
So either you are denying them something - their right to an identity they're comfortable with - or you aren't, and you're a-ok with them using the correct bathroom. In addition, the 'special privilege' argument doesn't work because that implies the privilege wouldn't apply to anyone else, when in fact it would. The fact that only transgender people are likely to use it is irrelevant. You could take advantage of the same mechanics to define yourself as a woman if you so desired. Hence, no special privilege.
|
On October 23 2018 07:19 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing. You're not denying them anything, you've just defined recognizing their existence as a special privilege that you don't want to give them. Eh, that's mildly clever at least.
Has it ever dawned on you to really consider what it means to deny someone their existence? I can no sooner deny that transgendered people exist than I can deny that the sky is blue. We are talking about real people, not the boogeyman. This argument that conservatives are denying transgendered people their existence is beyond stupid, and I'm disappointed at how heavily you are pushing it. This issue isn't whether transgendered people get to exist or whether their existence will be acknowledged. The real issue is whether society must be forced to consider transgenderism a normal state of being.
|
On October 23 2018 10:52 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 07:19 Nebuchad wrote:On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing. You're not denying them anything, you've just defined recognizing their existence as a special privilege that you don't want to give them. Eh, that's mildly clever at least. Has it ever dawned on you to really consider what it means to deny someone their existence? I can no sooner deny that transgendered people exist than I can deny that the sky is blue. We are talking about real people, not the boogeyman. This argument that conservatives are denying transgendered people their existence is beyond stupid, and I'm disappointed at how heavily you are pushing it. This issue isn't whether transgendered people get to exist or whether their existence will be acknowledged. The real issue is whether society must be forced to consider transgenderism a normal state of being.
We accommodate all sorts of abnormal "states of being" society shouldn't need to be forced, and as I mentioned earlier particularly not one that supposedly adheres to a philosophy that advocates that they be judged not by how they treat fellow believers, but how the least among them.
As to the "existence" argument I think the point is that despite whatever genitals (it's not just penises and vagina's as you would recognize them btw) people are born with they are still complete people that you want to deny a part of them based on outdated understandings of physiology and Victorian era morality.
|
On October 23 2018 08:50 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. How is it a special privilege to be able to use the bathroom that corresponds to one's gender?
It's pretty simple and easy when you view sex/gender as a fixed genetic concept, and deviations from that paradigm as being emblematic of a disorder.
You're trying very hard to twist yourself out of this knot you're in, but failing. Your argument hinges entirely upon denying the existence of transgender people, because if you accept their existence, then they should be allowed to use the bathroom that corresponds to their actual gender, not the one that they were assigned at birth.
There is no knot. My explanation is quite elegant in its simplicity. And I'm not denying transgendered people their right to identify as whatever they want to identify as. What I am doing is subordinating their desire to use their restroom of choice to the desires of the majority to maintain a strict dichotomy between genetic genders. Let's not pretend that there aren't people who abuse the concept of self-identity.
So either you are denying them something - their right to an identity they're comfortable with - or you aren't, and you're a-ok with them using the correct bathroom. In addition, the 'special privilege' argument doesn't work because that implies the privilege wouldn't apply to anyone else, when in fact it would. The fact that only transgender people are likely to use it is irrelevant. You could take advantage of the same mechanics to define yourself as a woman if you so desired. Hence, no special privilege.
I'd suggest to you that anyone whose identity is strictly tied to which restroom they can use is mentally ill and has problems far beyond whether they get to use their restroom of choice. Like I said, I'm quite comfortable in compelling the transgendered minority to acquiesce to the desires of the majority in this circumstance.
|
On October 23 2018 11:00 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 10:52 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 07:19 Nebuchad wrote:On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing. You're not denying them anything, you've just defined recognizing their existence as a special privilege that you don't want to give them. Eh, that's mildly clever at least. Has it ever dawned on you to really consider what it means to deny someone their existence? I can no sooner deny that transgendered people exist than I can deny that the sky is blue. We are talking about real people, not the boogeyman. This argument that conservatives are denying transgendered people their existence is beyond stupid, and I'm disappointed at how heavily you are pushing it. This issue isn't whether transgendered people get to exist or whether their existence will be acknowledged. The real issue is whether society must be forced to consider transgenderism a normal state of being. We accommodate all sorts of abnormal "states of being" society shouldn't need to be forced, and as I mentioned earlier particularly not one that supposedly adheres to a philosophy that advocates that they be judged not by how they treat fellow believers, but how the least among them. As to the "existence" argument I think the point is that despite whatever genitals (it's not just penises and vagina's as you would recognize them btw) people are born with they are still complete people that you want to deny a part of them based on outdated understandings of physiology and Victorian era morality.
The morals are outdated in your opinion, but they have served society quite well for centuries, and I'm in no hurry to tear them down. Newer isn't always better, which is something that post-modernism has badly failed to grasp as it continues to lead western society off a cliff.
|
On October 23 2018 11:06 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2018 11:00 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 23 2018 10:52 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 07:19 Nebuchad wrote:On October 23 2018 06:40 xDaunt wrote:On October 23 2018 06:32 NewSunshine wrote:On October 23 2018 05:09 xDaunt wrote:
This idea that transgender people are being denied the right to exist is rhetorical nonsense. This isn't Nazi Germany where we're putting them on trains with the rest of the undesirables. Much like how one doesn't have to wear a white hood to be a racist, one does not have to be "putting them on trains" to be denying them their identity. I'm not denying them anything. Conservatives aren't denying them anything. No one's stopping transgenders from doing anything that anyone else can do. What I disagree with is this idea that they should be afforded special privileges or considerations by virtue of their being transgender. I also disagree with the idea that transgenderism must be seen as being normal, because that's little more thought policing. If you progressives really gave a shit about "denying people their identity," you'd be calling out your own for harassing conservative politicians and figureheads in restaurants or assaulting them in public. Fix your own illiberal shit before you start accusing us over nothing. You're not denying them anything, you've just defined recognizing their existence as a special privilege that you don't want to give them. Eh, that's mildly clever at least. Has it ever dawned on you to really consider what it means to deny someone their existence? I can no sooner deny that transgendered people exist than I can deny that the sky is blue. We are talking about real people, not the boogeyman. This argument that conservatives are denying transgendered people their existence is beyond stupid, and I'm disappointed at how heavily you are pushing it. This issue isn't whether transgendered people get to exist or whether their existence will be acknowledged. The real issue is whether society must be forced to consider transgenderism a normal state of being. We accommodate all sorts of abnormal "states of being" society shouldn't need to be forced, and as I mentioned earlier particularly not one that supposedly adheres to a philosophy that advocates that they be judged not by how they treat fellow believers, but how the least among them. As to the "existence" argument I think the point is that despite whatever genitals (it's not just penises and vagina's as you would recognize them btw) people are born with they are still complete people that you want to deny a part of them based on outdated understandings of physiology and Victorian era morality. The morals are outdated in your opinion, but they have served society quite well for centuries, and I'm in no hurry to tear them down. Newer isn't always better, which is something that post-modernism has badly failed to grasp as it continues to lead western society off a cliff.
The understanding of physiology is objectively/scientifically outdated, the morality is old yes but that's not why I think it's a silly framework. That has to do with the practical question I asked and you didn't answer. Pretty sure we have different perspectives of the benefits and drawbacks of stuff that was/is perfectly moral behavior in such a moral system as well (or at least it's practical application anyway).
|
What question did I miss?
|
On October 23 2018 11:38 xDaunt wrote:
What question did I miss?
. For a person with a DSD where they have a penis, breasts, feminine facial features and the body shape of a woman, which bathroom is for them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
