Do you know any transgender people?

Dannyriver

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Or, now bear with me this is going to sound crazy.....you might just have other things to be doing!

Nobody can keep up to date on everything ffs.

There's no need to be bitchy about someone asking a question!

I wasn t being bitchy that s your own stuff. I was simply making the point that if something is bothering you and you don t understand it, then the onus is on you to become informed. It s not like yu have to take a visit to the library. Just look it up on your phone.

Dannyriver

....... wrote: »

You said you wouldnt be friends with someone who was trying to convince you they were something they werent and in an earlier post said that trans people were attempting to pass for something they werent.

So the logical conclusion is - you wouldnt be friends with a trans person.

Why on earth would you not have things in common with a trans person? They are just people, like non trans people, with a variety of interests. Do you think they only have a narrow set of interests or something?

Exactly , which trans person is he talking about.

.......

Dannyriver wrote: »

Exactly , which trans person is he talking about.

All the many he knows apparently.

Dannyriver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well, of course you’re perfectly entitled to think him a dick for it, but I wouldn’t necessarily agree in all circumstances. To give you an example of where I’m coming from I suppose - I used be friends with a guy who was black, and one day he told me that he didn’t really feel comfortable with us being friends any more as his friends were telling him he was betraying his race. I could see where both he and his friends were coming from. I didn’t appreciate how it was worded, but I could understand the underlying sentiment.

I didn’t perceive it to be anything malicious on their part, any more than I don’t assume malicious intent on the part of anyone who says they would never date someone who is transgender. I don’t consider it any more a dealbreaker than someone who says they would never date someone who is a single parent, or they wouldn’t date someone with severe flatulence issues, they’re just dealbreakers.

If someone doesn’t share my opinion on concepts I consider fundamental to who a person is such as their gender or sex, then I don’t immediately imagine they’re a dick. If they persist in attempting to convince me of something of which I am not convinced, then they’re in dick territory and are likely to be told as much.

Do you think everyone on boards is aged 8 or something. Seriously , worst ever.

Ush1

Dannyriver wrote: »

Do you think everyone on boards is aged 8 or something. Seriously , worst ever.

That is pretty funny actually.:pac:

Dannyriver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Of course a person is prejudiced, and people are prejudiced in many ways against plenty of traits or characteristics in other people. There’s nothing inherently wrong with being prejudiced against people or gravitating towards other people on the basis of prejudice.

What can be wrong though is when those prejudices would cause a person to treat another person with malicious intent, but that’s an observation of that person’s behaviour, not the prejudice itself.

Prejudice is not caused by others its caused by the self. The onus is on you as a prejudiced person to take responsibility for why difference threatens you and if you so wish do something about. Don't be blaming 'traits or characteristics' in others.

.......

Dannyriver wrote: »

Prejudice is not caused by others its caused by the self. The onus is ob you as a prejudiced person to take responsibility for why difference threatens you and if you so wish do something about. Don't be blaming 'traits or characteristics' in others.

Bigots is as bigots does.

sbsquarepants

Dannyriver wrote: »

I wasn t being bitchy that s your own stuff. I was simply making the point that if something is bothering you and you don t understand it, then the onus is on you to become informed. It s not like yu have to take a visit to the library. Just look it up on your phone.

You made a smart arsed comment, there was no need and it added nothing to the discussion, plain and simple.

All the person said was they had to look up what CIS meant, I had to look it up myself a few months back. They never said they were bothered or that they were struggling to find information or anything along those lines, just that they heard a new word and looked up the meaning.

Dannyriver

sbsquarepants wrote: »

You made a smart arsed comment, there was no need and it added nothing to the discussion, plain and simple.

All the person said was they had to look up what CIS meant, I had to look it up myself a few months back. They never said they were bothered or that they were struggling to find information or anything along those lines, just that they heard a new word and looked up the meaning.

Fair play and ill say it again that s not so hard to do now is it. My concern is for those that refuse to become informed yet crib about it all being too confusing when in actual fact they just don t want to know and would prefer to hold on to their prejudice because the whole thing threatens them hiding behind 'oh its all too confusing nonsense'. What s confusing IMO is trying to be yourself in a world that doesn't accept who you are.

PS And Im not categorically stating that the original poster is hiding behind anything and I commend anyone for taking the trouble to become informed

sbsquarepants

Oh I see, so you're not getting at me.... or them....you're actually pissed off at other people....right you are so!:rolleyes:

jimgoose

John Boyne in the paper again, apparently all the letters in "LGBT" don't necessarily like each other:

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/books/there-is-this-misperception-that-all-of-the-letters-in-lgbt-completely-understand-each-other-john-boyne-on-his-new-book-backlash-sex-divorce-and-moving-on-38032562.html?fbclid=IwAR1rPcFA4kwH18hd59-PBq57RSiMqOdOCSpzImomTCEBbt2sSwFXyM0OsYU

Oddly, his previous work about an SS Commandant mistakenly having his small son gassed in Auschwitz wasn't anything like as controversial. :pac:

Dannyriver

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Oh I see, so you're not getting at me.... or them....you're actually pissed off at other people....right you are so!:rolleyes:

Correct quite the contrary in fact..at least you took the trouble to look it up rather than just dismiss the whole thing off hand. If you d like me 'to be getting at you' sorry about that I can t oblige.

suicide_circus

what % of trans men are gay?

eg: FtM who fancies men

Dannyriver

suicide_circus wrote: »

what % of trans men are gay?

eg: FtM who fancies men

Not sure but the link below will probably have what you re looking for

https://transequality.org/issues/resources/frequently-asked-questions-about-transgender-people

suicide_circus

Dannyriver wrote: »

Not sure but the link below will probably have what you re looking for

https://transequality.org/issues/resources/frequently-asked-questions-about-transgender-people

nope. i ask because I've seen, heard and read about trans women being in straight and gay relationships but i've only ever seen or heard of trans men being in straight relationships.

fryup

SlowBlowin wrote: »

TBH it made my life, running the business, a living nightmare. Both were customer facing, and I had to deal with endless situations which required tightrope diplomacy, something I am not good at. Some issues were internal, like the women in the office, none of whom wanted their toilet shared with staff they previously knew as men. Other issues came from customers, I remember when one of them had just started voice coaching (Govt funded) to sound feminine, he would start off telephone conversations with customers as a lady, and gradually change to full masculine at the end. This used to confuse the feck out of customers who didn't know who they were speaking to.
.

is it wrong of me to find that hilarious (:pac:)

ohnonotgmail

jimgoose wrote: »

John Boyne in the paper again, apparently all the letters in "LGBT" don't necessarily like each other:

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/books/there-is-this-misperception-that-all-of-the-letters-in-lgbt-completely-understand-each-other-john-boyne-on-his-new-book-backlash-sex-divorce-and-moving-on-38032562.html?fbclid=IwAR1rPcFA4kwH18hd59-PBq57RSiMqOdOCSpzImomTCEBbt2sSwFXyM0OsYU

Oddly, his previous work about an SS Commandant mistakenly having his small son gassed in Auschwitz wasn't anything like as controversial. :pac:

Understand, not like

There is this misperception that all of the letters in LGBT completely understand each other.

One eyed Jack

RWCNT wrote: »

Without getting into a whole to-do about the definition of racism, we're far enough off topic already, he certainly discriminated against you based on race. I'd be very pissed off and think the guy was a dick tbh. What do you mean when you say you saw where he and his friends were coming from? How were they betraying their race by being friends with you?

It goes back to what I said earlier about prejudice and intent and whether or not the intent is malicious. I didn’t perceive any malicious intent either on his part or their part. I could understand the idea was that basically he was being told to stick to his own group, people who shared his ethnic background, people he had more in common with than the only thing he had in common with me which was that we worked together and sat together at break times.

Also - We could all go around in circles on here all day accusing eachother of lying about our personal experiences. None of us actually know a thing about eachother's lives. Provided the anecdotes told are halfway plausible and relevant are we not better off just taking eachother at our word and having the conversation? Anecdotes are just that - anecdotal, so they're hardly the be all end all of conversations anyway.

We are of course, I wouldn’t have any issue taking anyone at their word simply because I’m not that invested in any kind of a relationship with them. If, for example I were expected to consider a relationship with someone who tells me they are a woman, when I know they are not, then no, I wouldn’t take them at their word as they are presenting me with a fundamental credibility issue which just isn’t plausible on any level, and I don’t imagine there could be much of a friendship, never mind a relationship, when I simply couldn’t trust that person.

One eyed Jack

Dannyriver wrote: »

Do you think everyone on boards is aged 8 or something. Seriously , worst ever.

Danny I’m not the person who expects adults to believe that anyone can change their sex. I don’t know many adults, let alone eight year olds, who are gullible enough to believe that.

Dannyriver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Danny I’m not the person who expects adults to believe that anyone can change their sex. I don’t know many adults, let alone eight year olds, who are gullible enough to believe that.

But, and this is a long shot so apologies if I misjudged you ....I'm guessing you believe someone once rose from the dead yeah?

kildare lad

No , don't know any. I surprised thought because with all the articles in the papers and social media i thought the country would be full of them .

One eyed Jack

Dannyriver wrote: »

Prejudice is not caused by others its caused by the self. The onus is on you as a prejudiced person to take responsibility for why difference threatens you and if you so wish do something about. Don't be blaming 'traits or characteristics' in others.

I didn’t say anything about what actually causes prejudice? I’m well aware that prejudices are innate. I made the point that because someone is prejudiced against something, it doesn’t necessarily follow that they have any malicious intent. Their behaviour towards others based upon their prejudices can be malicious though, or as we have seen in this thread already, people’s prejudices can cause them to assume malicious intent on the part of others where no such intent exists. I agree with you though that it is the responsibility of every individual to address their own prejudices rather than try to impress them upon others.

I disagree that people’s prejudices aren’t based upon their characteristics and traits, that’s exactly what they’re based upon - our observations of similarities and differences in common with or apart from other people. I’m not in the least bit threatened by differences I have with other people, let alone people who are transgender. I have said it previously in this thread that any I know or have known have been harmless. I wouldn’t equate them with the kind of oddball fcukwits that are an infestation on online social media.

One eyed Jack

Dannyriver wrote: »

But, and this is a long shot so apologies if I misjudged you ....I'm guessing you believe someone once rose from the dead yeah?

It’s not a long shot at all, it’s just one less thing we have in common is all.

Dannyriver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s not a long shot at all, it’s just one less thing we have in common is all.

There you go , transgender is for the gullible and men rising from the dead is grand. :eek:

How Soon Is Now

Nope and hoping to keep it that way for there sake.

One eyed Jack

Dannyriver wrote: »

There you go , transgender is for the gullible and men rising from the dead is grand. :eek:

Danny you should go back and read what I actually wrote, as opposed to impressing your own interpretation on what I wrote based upon your own prejudices which at least we are agreed are entirely your responsibility.

klaaaz

I do know transgender people, there is a subset of posters here who hate transgender people with such venom, it's best for transgender people to avoid this place to protect their wellbeing hence I never bring this forum up in conversation with trans people, I don't want them hurt.

Dannyriver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Danny you should go back and read what I actually wrote, as opposed to impressing your own interpretation on what I wrote based upon your own prejudices which at least we are agreed are entirely your responsibility.

you wrote 'It’s not a long shot at all, it’s just one less thing we have in common is all.[/QUOTE]

Apologies in my defense your reply was cryptic ....I read this to believe that you do believe a man rose from the dead ...So now to be sure what you meant was you don't believe a man rose from the dead yes?

One eyed Jack

Dannyriver wrote: »

Apologies in my defense your reply was cryptic ....I read this to believe that you do believe a man rose from the dead ...So to be sure you meant you don't believe a man rose from the dead yes?

Oh I do believe that Danny, I don’t believe this -

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Danny I’m not the person who expects adults to believe that anyone can change their sex. I don’t know many adults, let alone eight year olds, who are gullible enough to believe that.

And like I said, I don’t know many adults, let alone eight year olds, who are gullible enough to believe that a person can change their sex. They hold all manner of fantastical beliefs, but the belief that a person can change their sex? That’s generally not one of them.

i wonder how a pre transition man/woman knows how the other gender 'feels' with such certainty that it requires any drastic steps towards a change in outward presentation.

gender dysphoria as a subset of dysphoria generally is afforded particularly strident and prominent support, no idea myself why ppl insist that its the priority vanguard of human rights

i know one transwoman she is a pretty wonderful person, handled her transition with lightness and grace and humour.

be an example to a few on boards tbh

edit- i know a second from online interaction and met her after transition started. lovely irl, a real pain online about it, i presume im pretty much the same meself on most topics tbf

Dannyriver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Oh I do believe that Danny, I don’t believe this -





And like I said, I don’t know many adults, let alone eight year olds, who are gullible enough to believe that a person can change their sex. They hold all manner of fantastical beliefs, but the belief that a person can change their sex? That’s generally not one of them.

Yeah I thought that s what you meant alright. A man dies and rises from the dead, really Jack ..I mean really Jack ... I had that drilled into me as an 8 year old as well and like you I believed it but then I grew up .

Thankfully the ones that indoctrinated me have been found out for what they are and no longer hold sway in this country so now children are less likely to suffer that kind of mental abuse.

Now children are informed that to be LBGT is not an anomaly or a sin to feel ashamed of. It's the men in the long black dresses and the collars that they see as wierdos now. Didn't expect to see such progress in such a short time but I guess Bishop Casey did some good for the country after all.

Dannyriver

Deleted User wrote: »

i wonder how a pre transition man/woman knows how the other gender 'feels' with such certainty that it requires any drastic steps towards a change in outward presentation.

gender dysphoria as a subset of dysphoria generally is afforded particularly strident and prominent support, no idea myself why ppl insist that its the priority vanguard of human rights

i know one transwoman she is a pretty wonderful person, handled her transition with lightness and grace and humour.

be an example to a few on boards tbh

edit- i know a second from online interaction and met her after transition started. lovely irl, a real pain online about it, i presume im pretty much the same meself on most topics tbf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQwS7LqfJys

The above link gives you a quantitative insight, short history of Trans pioneers.

branie2

No, but if I did, I would respect them.

One eyed Jack

Dannyriver wrote: »

Yeah I thought that s what you meant alright. A man dies and rises from the dead, really Jack ..I mean really Jack ... I had that drilled into me as an 8 year old as well and like you I believed it but then I grew up .

Thankfully the ones that indoctrinated me have been found out for what they are and no longer hold sway in this country so now children are less likely to suffer that kind of mental abuse.

Now children are informed that to be LBGT is not an anomaly or a sin to feel ashamed of. It's the men in the long black dresses and the collars that they see as wierdos now. Didn't expect to see such progress in such a short time but I guess Bishop Casey did some good for the country after all.

There’s quite a bit crammed into one post there, but I’ll do my best to be just as brief, bear with me and we’ll see how this goes.

You grew up and so did I, and yet while you’re trying to convince me that there’s nothing unusual about a man in a dress, you appear to be suggesting that children are more susceptible to being mentally abused by men in dresses. There’s an inherent contradiction in your position already. As far as I can ascertain, men wearing any form of women’s clothing are still generally seen as weirdos, harmless weirdos, but weird all the same. I wouldn’t immediately assume their intentions are to mentally abuse children as that would be assuming malicious intent on their part. I wouldn’t immediately assume any man would intend to cause harm to a child, whether they’re wearing a dress or not, because I don’t believe men generally intend to cause children harm.

Secondly, the men in dresses you’re referring to still very much hold sway in this country and in many countries regarding the education of children, and indeed adults in third level education who are studying to become teachers so that they too can educate children according to their beliefs. Given the majority of those adults teaching children are women, there aren’t too many men teaching children, let alone men in dresses.

Since we’re specifically referring to people who are transgender in this thread, and not to people who are either lesbian, gay or bisexual, I can tell you that children are generally not taught in school that a person can change their sex. There have been concerted efforts by a minority of politicians to try and introduce these beliefs to children in schools in the form of their proposed sex education bill, but I don’t see that gaining any traction in schools under religious patronage, which is, lest you need reminding again, over 90% of schools in Ireland.

As for Bishop Casey, well I don’t know about you but I learned from that whole sorry episode and the way some people still react to it, is that people are generally weird as fcuk and full of contradictions, and if you believe you can find any kind of logical consistency in human nature, I have some magic beans here you may be interested in.

SkepticQuark

Well of course I do, I am trans.

Dannyriver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There’s quite a bit crammed into one post there, but I’ll do my best to be just as brief, bear with me and we’ll see how this goes.

You grew up and so did I, and yet while you’re trying to convince me that there’s nothing unusual about a man in a dress, There’s an inherent contradiction in your position already. As far as I can ascertain, men wearing any form of women’s clothing are still generally seen as weirdos, harmless weirdos, but weird all the same. I wouldn’t immediately assume their intentions are to mentally abuse children as that would be assuming malicious intent on their part. I wouldn’t immediately assume any man would intend to cause harm to a child, whether they’re wearing a dress or not, because I don’t believe men generally intend to cause children harm.

Secondly, the men in dresses you’re referring to still very much hold sway in this country and in many countries regarding the education of children, and indeed adults in third level education who are studying to become teachers so that they too can educate children according to their beliefs. Given the majority of those adults teaching children are women, there aren’t too many men teaching children, let alone men in dresses.

Since we’re specifically referring to people who are transgender in this thread, and not to people who are either lesbian, gay or bisexual, I can tell you that children are generally not taught in school that a person can change their sex. There have been concerted efforts by a minority of politicians to try and introduce these beliefs to children in schools in the form of their proposed sex education bill, but I don’t see that gaining any traction in schools under religious patronage, which is, lest you need reminding again, over 90% of schools in Ireland.

As for Bishop Casey, well I don’t know about you but I learned from that whole sorry episode and the way some people still react to it, is that people are generally weird as fcuk and full of contradictions, and if you believe you can find any kind of logical consistency in human nature, I have some magic beans here you may be interested in.

you appear to be suggesting that children are more susceptible to being mentally abused by men in dresses.

No Im suggesting men in dresses [ie priests/bishops] who have an agenda to indoctrinate children in to the flock,


Secondly, the men in dresses you’re referring to still very much hold sway in this country and in many countries regarding the education of children,

Officially maybe but in reality not at all. Trust me I work in a school, its all lip service.

There have been concerted efforts by a minority of politicians to try and introduce these beliefs to children in schools in the form of their proposed sex education bill, but I don’t see that gaining any traction in schools under religious patronage, which is, lest you need reminding again, over 90% of schools in Ireland.


Only a matter of time

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/overhaul-of-schools-sex-education-programme-is-planned-37636226.html

But even now unofficially its being taught through mental health classes and tolerance for difference.


well I don’t know about you but I learned from that whole sorry episode and the way some people still react to it, is that people are generally weird as fcuk and full of contradictions,


That s what you learned. I learned he was a hypocrite a bully and a pedophile
who was protected by the organisation that spawned him

I have some magic beans here you may be interested in.

I wouldn't doubt that you do if you believe a man rose from the dead. But I'm grand thanks I'll stick with scientific evidence.

Still waters

branie2 wrote: »

No, but if I did, I would respect them.

This strikes me as a really unnecessary thing to say

Wibbs

Dannyriver wrote: »

I wouldn't doubt that you do if you believe a man rose from the dead. But I'm grand thanks I'll stick with scientific evidence.

The scientific evidence that someone can change their sex/gender? I hate to break it to you but such "evidence" is on a par with peace loving and generally sensible Galilean zombies. One can approximate the general appearance and kinda hormonal profile of an opposite gender, but a few simple tests and medical observations will show the original gender.

I am not suggesting Trans folks don't exist and that it's not a medical issue and as I posted previously I would reckon they're a subset of Intersex folks in the sense that they present as their born gender physically, but they have the opposite gender brain and therefore mind.

eviltwin

I know two.

A transgender woman I've become friends with post transition. I've always known her as a woman so she's a woman to me.

A transgender man who I knew as a female for a few years before he started his transition. For a few months I'd make the mistake of using his original name, it was out of habit and we'd joke about it. I just see him as a bloke now, it's funny but it seems right somehow, it's not weird. He's the person he was meant to be now, it makes him happy and that makes me happy

I just take people as I find them tbh. If someone is transgender I don't care, I respect them regardless and will treat them as the sex they identify with. There is enough hate in this world so I'd never want to make anyone feel lesser because of their trans status

batgoat

eviltwin wrote: »

I know two.

A transgender woman I've become friends with post transition. I've always known her as a woman so she's a woman to me.

A transgender man who I knew as a female for a few years before he started his transition. For a few months I'd make the mistake of using his original name, it was out of habit and we'd joke about it. I just see him as a bloke now, it's funny but it seems right somehow, it's not weird. He's the person he was meant to be now, it makes him happy and that makes me happy

I just take people as I find them tbh. If someone is transgender I don't care, I respect them regardless and will treat them as the sex they identify with. There is enough hate in this world so I'd never want to make anyone feel lesser because of their trans status

I'm the exact same, a friend of mine basically told me they identified as female. I knew them via social media as female so it didn't honestly change any perception. I've met them numerous times since and I recognise their gender. I don't see any issues with it, I'd be more concerned about their character as an individual over their gender tbh. They're a fantastically decent individual and gender is just an aspect of them, I've accepted it and it's not something I'm supposed to dispute tbh. Don't really see why I would.

One eyed Jack

Dannyriver wrote: »

No Im suggesting men in dresses [ie priests/bishops] who have an agenda to indoctrinate children in to the flock

There are still plenty of men in dresses, ie men in dresses, attempting to indoctrinate children into their flock as it were, the likes of Rachel McKinnon telling children to reject their biological families and instead find their “glitter families” who will support them (as long as they’re willing of course to support these men in dresses).

Officially maybe but in reality not at all. Trust me I work in a school, its all lip service.

Officially, and in reality Danny, religious organisations are still very much in control in education, that’s not lip service, and neither is the fact that religious organisations are still very much a part of Irish life, whether it be education, sports or charity. Officially, and in reality, just like there’s no avoiding religious influences in Irish society, there’s no avoiding the facts either, and pretending they don’t exist hasn’t made them go away.

Only a matter of time

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/overhaul-of-schools-sex-education-programme-is-planned-37636226.html

But even now unofficially its being taught through mental health classes and tolerance for difference.

It’s not only a matter of time Danny, a proposal is still just a proposal, and with no effect given to it officially, it will always remain wishful thinking on the part of those people who wish to indoctrinate children with their ideology which has no scientific basis whatsoever. It may well be taught unofficially in the school you work in that people can change their sex, and of course I’m willing to take your word for that, but it isn’t something that’s generally taught to children in school, not even unofficially. It’s an idea that’s taught to children by a tiny minority of people, and in spite of the fact that men in dresses have always been a part of society in one way or another, the idea has never really caught on among children that they can change their sex. I don’t expect that it will any time soon either.

In just the same way as you rejected what you were taught in school when it didn’t map to your reality, I don’t expect all that many children will maintain the idea that a person can change their sex once they realise too that such a belief doesn’t map to their reality and what they were taught in those doss classes that adults call mental health classes, wasn’t much more than a crock. Many children are already aware of this fact and are already rejecting the belief that a person can change their sex. Given you work in a school Danny I have no doubt you have witnessed children rejecting the belief that a person can change their sex, no matter how many times they’re told that the belief is backed up by science. They’re being lied to, as there is no scientific evidence whatsoever to support the the belief that people can change their sex. Since you classify indoctrination as mental abuse, perhaps you’d care to explain the difference to me in how you were subjected to mental abuse then, that isn’t mental abuse today? As far as I can see it’s simply substituting one ideology for another, with no scientific evidence for either.

That s what you learned. I learned he was a hypocrite a bully and a pedophile who was protected by the organisation that spawned him.

Hypocrite and a bully perhaps, but there was never any evidence to suggest he was a paedophile? That sounds very much like your unsupported belief that because a man wears a dress he’s more likely to want to mentally abuse children. Actual evidence for this belief is of course something you don’t have, seeing as it’s no more likely that children are abused by men wearing dresses and far more likely that they are susceptible to being abused by members of their own families, who undoubtedly do appear to be more concerned with protecting the abuser than exposing them for what they actually are in reality. I wouldn’t suggest a family were responsible for spawning a child abuser though any more than I’d hold a whole organisation responsible for the actions of an individual. Goes back to that whole people taking responsibility for their own prejudices we talked about earlier - individuals are also responsible for their own actions. I don’t tar whole sections of society with the same brush on the basis of characteristics, traits or beliefs they may share with others, because that would be bigotry based upon my own prejudices, something we’re already agreed that individuals themselves should address within themselves.

I’m not going to call you a hypocrite though for not addressing your own prejudices and trying to suggest that the responsibility for your prejudices lies with anyone else but yourself, because I’m not as quick to pass judgment on people as you appear to be, I’m far more tolerant. That’s not because of anything I was taught in school, but simply something I learned throughout my life by meeting other people who are different from myself and learning that actually we aren’t all the same as each other. That’s the problem with trying to indoctrinate children into diversity in schools - it simply doesn’t work. A person has to experience diversity for themselves, not this ring-fenced belief about diversity imparted by ideologues based upon their interpretation of diversity.

I wouldn't doubt that you do if you believe a man rose from the dead. But I'm grand thanks I'll stick with scientific evidence.

When you’re able to present the scientific evidence for your belief that a person can change their sex, I’m certainly willing to review it without prejudice. Until then, I’ll say you’re welcome to your beliefs, but in just the same way as I wouldn’t try to impose my beliefs on you, I expect the same courtesy in return, especially if you’re also going to try and educate me about diversity while failing to practice what you preach, because that would by your own standards make you a hypocritical bigot. I wouldn’t get too het up about you though because at least you’re not trying to bully anyone into complying with your ideological beliefs, unlike some people who share your beliefs who do try (rather unsuccessfully it has to be said) to bully and intimidate other adults to comply with their beliefs, and when that isn’t working, they choose to target children instead, because children aren’t as easily able to retaliate against adults who are indoctrinating them to believe something that simply makes no sense to them.

klaaaz

Wibbs wrote: »

The scientific evidence that someone can change their sex/gender? I hate to break it to you but such "evidence" is on a par with peace loving and generally sensible Galilean zombies. One can approximate the general appearance and kinda hormonal profile of an opposite gender, but a few simple tests and medical observations will show the original gender.

The HSE clinic run by highly qualified medical professionals like endocrinologists disagree with you and One Eyed Jack's rants https://www.hse.ie/eng/health/az/g/gender-dysphoria/

Medical professionals wrote:

Some transgender people seek to have surgery to permanently alter their biological sex.

RWCNT

klaaaz wrote: »

The HSE clinic run by highly qualified medical professionals like endocrinologists disagree with you and One Eyed Jack's rants https://www.hse.ie/eng/health/az/g/gender-dysphoria/

While of course I'll side with the prevailing view of the medical profession, as erudite as our colleagues on boards may be, I think that HSE are choosing to use "biological sex" here rather than "genitals" so as not to be crude. My understanding was that biological sex referred to your genes/chromosomes as opposed to what equipment you currently possess.

It was also my understanding that the majority of trans people didn't believe themselves to be changing their biological sex, but changing their presentation/pronouns/expression to match the gender with which they identify. Meaning that if they've always identified as the opposing gender to their biological sex, they arn't really "changing" their gender at all as such.

People's belief (or lack thereof) in the difference between biological sex and gender identity always seems to be the crux of most disagreements around this topic.

mcmoustache

klaaaz wrote: »

The HSE clinic run by highly qualified medical professionals like endocrinologists disagree with you and One Eyed Jack's rants https://www.hse.ie/eng/health/az/g/gender-dysphoria/

I'm all for trans rights and I've no problem with the concept of changing gender but the idea that you can change biological sex is a bit silly unless you change the definition of sex.

If you can medically test a trans person and identify their sex at birth, then they haven't changed sex. You can say that they changed gender, sure, but they still have many of the characteristics of their original gender.

There's plenty of pro-trans stuff out there that takes this view - that you can change gender but not biological sex - and it's probably because the idea of changing biological sex is just not convincing.

Dannyriver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There are still plenty of men in dresses, ie men in dresses, attempting to indoctrinate children into their flock as it were, the likes of Rachel McKinnon telling children to reject their biological families and instead find their “glitter families” who will support them (as long as they’re willing of course to support these men in dresses).





Officially, and in reality Danny, religious organisations are still very much in control in education, that’s not lip service, and neither is the fact that religious organisations are still very much a part of Irish life, whether it be education, sports or charity. Officially, and in reality, just like there’s no avoiding religious influences in Irish society, there’s no avoiding the facts either, and pretending they don’t exist hasn’t made them go away.





It’s not only a matter of time Danny, a proposal is still just a proposal, and with no effect given to it officially, it will always remain wishful thinking on the part of those people who wish to indoctrinate children with their ideology which has no scientific basis whatsoever. It may well be taught unofficially in the school you work in that people can change their sex, and of course I’m willing to take your word for that, but it isn’t something that’s generally taught to children in school, not even unofficially. It’s an idea that’s taught to children by a tiny minority of people, and in spite of the fact that men in dresses have always been a part of society in one way or another, the idea has never really caught on among children that they can change their sex. I don’t expect that it will any time soon either.

In just the same way as you rejected what you were taught in school when it didn’t map to your reality, I don’t expect all that many children will maintain the idea that a person can change their sex once they realise too that such a belief doesn’t map to their reality and what they were taught in those doss classes that adults call mental health classes, wasn’t much more than a crock. Many children are already aware of this fact and are already rejecting the belief that a person can change their sex. Given you work in a school Danny I have no doubt you have witnessed children rejecting the belief that a person can change their sex, no matter how many times they’re told that the belief is backed up by science. They’re being lied to, as there is no scientific evidence whatsoever to support the the belief that people can change their sex. Since you classify indoctrination as mental abuse, perhaps you’d care to explain the difference to me in how you were subjected to mental abuse then, that isn’t mental abuse today? As far as I can see it’s simply substituting one ideology for another, with no scientific evidence for either.





Hypocrite and a bully perhaps, but there was never any evidence to suggest he was a paedophile? That sounds very much like your unsupported belief that because a man wears a dress he’s more likely to want to mentally abuse children. Actual evidence for this belief is of course something you don’t have, seeing as it’s no more likely that children are abused by men wearing dresses and far more likely that they are susceptible to being abused by members of their own families, who undoubtedly do appear to be more concerned with protecting the abuser than exposing them for what they actually are in reality. I wouldn’t suggest a family were responsible for spawning a child abuser though any more than I’d hold a whole organisation responsible for the actions of an individual. Goes back to that whole people taking responsibility for their own prejudices we talked about earlier - individuals are also responsible for their own actions. I don’t tar whole sections of society with the same brush on the basis of characteristics, traits or beliefs they may share with others, because that would be bigotry based upon my own prejudices, something we’re already agreed that individuals themselves should address within themselves.

I’m not going to call you a hypocrite though for not addressing your own prejudices and trying to suggest that the responsibility for your prejudices lies with anyone else but yourself, because I’m not as quick to pass judgment on people as you appear to be, I’m far more tolerant. That’s not because of anything I was taught in school, but simply something I learned throughout my life by meeting other people who are different from myself and learning that actually we aren’t all the same as each other. That’s the problem with trying to indoctrinate children into diversity in schools - it simply doesn’t work. A person has to experience diversity for themselves, not this ring-fenced belief about diversity imparted by ideologues based upon their interpretation of diversity.





When you’re able to present the scientific evidence for your belief that a person can change their sex, I’m certainly willing to review it without prejudice. Until then, I’ll say you’re welcome to your beliefs, but in just the same way as I wouldn’t try to impose my beliefs on you, I expect the same courtesy in return, especially if you’re also going to try and educate me about diversity while failing to practice what you preach, because that would by your own standards make you a hypocritical bigot. I wouldn’t get too het up about you though because at least you’re not trying to bully anyone into complying with your ideological beliefs, unlike some people who share your beliefs who do try (rather unsuccessfully it has to be said) to bully and intimidate other adults to comply with their beliefs, and when that isn’t working, they choose to target children instead, because children aren’t as easily able to retaliate against adults who are indoctrinating them to believe something that simply makes no sense to them.

plenty of men in dresses, ie men in dresses, attempting to indoctrinate children into their flock as it were, the likes of Rachel McKinnon

Where are you going with your plenty [mind you from what i see she s transgender not CIS] and then cite one... however I too believe that if a family is unwilling to support their child that perhaps the child should look elsewhere for support. Don't you?

to indoctrinate children with their ideology which has no scientific basis whatsoever.

It is only a matter of time Jack wait and you will see. Besides can you not see the irony of what you are saying supporting the existence of a resurrection and how the church managed to indoctrinate millions of Irish children for centuries ****ing them up with rigid beliefs about heaven and hell and spirits and all manner of irrational nonsense and you giving out about ideologies without scientific basis. Seriously come on.

Hypocrite and a bully perhaps, but there was never any evidence to suggest he was a paedophile?


https://www.irishcentral.com/news/bishop-eamon-casey-raped-assaulted-children

Do we decide all three women are liars or how many allegations do you need. What do you believe the motivations of these women are considering they have to go back to their communities and face the blind worshippers of the catholic church money making machine/scam.

I’m not going to call you a hypocrite though for not addressing your own prejudices and trying to suggest that the responsibility for your prejudices lies with anyone else but yourself, because I’m not as quick to pass judgment on people as you appear to be, I’m far more tolerant.

I have no prejudice against those that want to continue supporting the church if they are happy to ignore centuries of proven abuse. We all have fears of nothingness and if that helps people deal with it then its not for me to take away or belittle whatever panacea they wish to take. But Ill call out anyone who either denies their indoctrination methods or who uses their sex obsessed catechism to prejudice LBGT minorities.

they choose to target children instead, because children aren’t as easily able to retaliate against adults who are indoctrinating them to believe something that simply makes no sense to them.[/QUOTE]


Seriously Jack can you please justify your support of catholic church interference in our school system in light of the above quote I can safely say you ll avoid answering that aspect of my post. But you d never know you might give it a shot. I hope you do, I'm genuinely curious.

One eyed Jack

klaaaz wrote: »

The HSE clinic run by highly qualified medical professionals like endocrinologists disagree with you and One Eyed Jack's rants https://www.hse.ie/eng/health/az/g/gender-dysphoria/

The HSE website you’re linking to isn’t run by highly qualified medical professionals like endocrinologists at all?

From their own About the Health A - Z page -

What is the Health A-Z?

The Health A-Z is an online database of over 600 health conditions and treatments that will support everyone living in Ireland to be well informed about their health, and that of their loved ones. The Health A-Z has been developed by the HSE's National Clinical Programmes based on content shared by the NHS in the UK. The Health A-Z content is now managed through a partership between the HSE and the Forum of Postgraduate Medical Training Bodies.

Source Material

NHS Choices provides open public access to a wide range of UK health information and services. NHS Choices have generously provided the baseline content used in our Health A-Z without cost to the Irish health service.

Adaptation for Ireland

The HSE and its National Clinical Programmes have worked to adapt the initial information provided by NHS Choices to the Irish context, to our population and to our services. A team of senior Public Health Specialists have edited the information to make it suitable for publication in Ireland, and a wide range of Irish health expert groups have provided their assurance as to its quality. After this broad consultation and information sharing process, the Health A-Z Editorial Board is being established to oversee the development, enhancement and expansion of this resource on an ongoing basis.

...

Disclaimer

The Health A-Z is intended as a public information resource, and will enable people to make better use of consultations with health professionals. It will also enable health professionals to engage in more shared decision making with their patients. Reliable, accurate information, provided in the Irish context, is a useful resource and through this governance system, every effort will be made to ensure the information is up-to-date and evidence-based.

However, the fast-moving nature of both health conditions and their available treatments means that the content provided on our site should never replace the advice or assessment of a qualified healthcare professional.

Oversight

The Health A-Z will be governed by a national Editorial Board established by the HSE and the Forum of Irish Post-Graduate Medical Training Bodies. Representation will be invited from the Department of Health; HSE Clinical Programmes and Quality and Patient Safety; Forum of Postgraduate Medical Training Bodies, Nursing Services, Public Health Services, Pharmacy and Patient Representative Groups. The Editorial Board is chaired on an interim basis by Dr. Philip Crowley, National Director, Quality and Patient Safety, and Dr. Aine Carroll, National Director, Clinical Strategy and Programmes. A Health A-Z Clinical Editor will be jointly appointed by the HSE and the Forum during 2013.

Content Experts

Each of the conditions in the Health A-Z has been assigned to an expert group, in most cases, the relevant National Clinical Programme, or where this does not apply, to an associated recognised expert body. These groups provide oversight of the content provided, and are also responsible for directing any ongoing updates or development to their content topics.

Given that whoever manages the website content can’t even link to their own disclaimer at the bottom of the page properly, I don’t imagine they’re paying particular attention to the actual content that whoever is given the responsibility of maintaining the website is putting up there, never mind the fact that it doesn’t appear to have been updated since 2013.

klaaaz

RWCNT wrote: »

While of course I'll side with the prevailing view of the medical profession, as erudite as our colleagues on boards may be, I think that HSE are choosing to use "biological sex" here rather than "genitals" so as not to be crude. My understanding was that biological sex referred to your genes/chromosomes as opposed to what equipment you currently possess.

It was also my understanding that the majority of trans people didn't believe themselves to be changing their biological sex, but changing their presentation/pronouns/expression to match the gender with which they identify. Meaning that if they've always identified as the opposing gender to their biological sex, they arn't really "changing" their gender at all as such.

People's belief (or lack thereof) in the difference between biological sex and gender identity always seems to be the crux of most disagreements around this topic.

It's the hormones and surgery part that people get confused over, transgender
became an umbrella term overriding the traditional transexual term to include those who had no intention of a medical transition in changing their physical body.

mcmoustache wrote: »

I'm all for trans rights and I've no problem with the concept of changing gender but the idea that you can change biological sex is a bit silly unless you change the definition of sex.

If you can medically test a trans person and identify their sex at birth, then they haven't changed sex. You can say that they changed gender, sure, but they still have many of the characteristics of their original gender.

There's plenty of pro-trans stuff out there that takes this view - that you can change gender but not biological sex - and it's probably because the idea of changing biological sex is just not convincing.

Who?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Given that whoever manages the website content can’t even link to their own disclaimer at the bottom of the page properly, I don’t imagine they’re paying particular attention to the actual content that whoever is given the responsibility of maintaining the website is putting up there, never mind the fact that it doesn’t appear to have been updated since 2013.

The process for a medical transition in Ireland has not changed since then hence you are clutching at straws now, given that your "men in dresses" theory about medically transitioned trans people has been debunked.

One eyed Jack

klaaaz wrote: »

The process for a medical transition in Ireland has not changed since then hence you are clutching at straws now, given that your "men in dresses" theory about medically transitioned trans people has been debunked.

Say what now? I’m clutching at straws? I’m not the person who linked to that website as an authority on transgender healthcare, you did, and you’re quite aware that the information presented on the website is misleading.

As for my use of the term “men in dresses”, I was using the term that Danny came up with by way of trying to suggest something untoward about a particular group of men who he perceived to be wearing dresses. I know they’re not actually dresses, but because I’m not a pedant and I try to understand where people are coming from, I don’t mind using the terminology he uses rather than correcting him on it, in the same way as I’ll use a person’s preferred pronouns because I’m not so up my own arse that I’m that concerned with being righteous about petty ****e like that.

I don’t imagine that either myself or Danny were referring to people who have medically transitioned to present themselves as their preferred gender. What you presented as evidence certainly doesn’t debunk the fact that a person cannot change their sex, and until such a time as there is evidence to suggest that a person can change their sex, I’m going to respectfully disagree with you that it is possible for anyone to do so.

Even with the best intentions in the world and access to some of the best healthcare in the world, medical professionals cannot currently overcome the basic limitations of human biology -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZnAsk5vWzE

You won’t find that information on the HSE website.

Wibbs

mcmoustache wrote: »

and it's probably because the idea of changing biological sex is just not convincing.

More than not convincing Mc, it is biologically impossible.

klaaaz wrote: »

The HSE clinic run by highly qualified medical professionals like endocrinologists disagree with you and One Eyed Jack's rants https://www.hse.ie/eng/health/az/g/gender-dysphoria/

Unless I missed the breakthrough where we can now change the chromosomes of every cell in the human body, any "highly qualified medical professional" that baldly states with a straight face that you can change the biological sex of an individual through surgery and hormones is quite simply a quack. Or more likely afraid to put his or her head above the parapet and say what they know to be medically and scientifically true, IE we can't.

Dannyriver

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Say what now? I’m clutching at straws? I’m not the person who linked to that website as an authority on transgender healthcare, you did, and you’re quite aware that the information presented on the website is misleading.

As for my use of the term “men in dresses”, I was using the term that Danny came up with by way of trying to suggest something untoward about a particular group of men who he perceived to be wearing dresses. I know they’re not actually dresses, but because I’m not a pedant and I try to understand where people are coming from, I don’t mind using the terminology he uses rather than correcting him on it, in the same way as I’ll use a person’s preferred pronouns because I’m not so up my own arse that I’m that concerned with being righteous about petty ****e like that.

I don’t imagine that either myself or Danny were referring to people who have medically transitioned to present themselves as their preferred gender. What you presented as evidence certainly doesn’t debunk the fact that a person cannot change their sex, and until such a time as there is evidence to suggest that a person can change their sex, I’m going to respectfully disagree with you that it is possible for anyone to do so.

Even with the best intentions in the world and access to some of the best healthcare in the world, medical professionals cannot currently overcome the basic limitations of human biology -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZnAsk5vWzE

You won’t find that information on the HSE website.

All that stuff is spoken about with mental health/primary care/surgeons before a person/their families makes the transition why do you think it should be on a HSE site?