Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

How can it be both clear and the child makes a mistake.

Either the child's view is evidence of it being clear in which case saying it is clear but the child is mistaken is a massive contradiction.

Or the child's view is not evidence of it being clear and what you mean is that you believe sex is clear no matter what a child woukd think. In which case why bring up a child's view at all?

I think you'll find it was you who brought up your daughter as a gotcha argument not me.

This is ridiculous.

Transwomen are not identifiable as women to children unless they a) make the physical effort to dress up and b) undergo surgery.

If neither of the above took place i.e. in natural biologic form; the child would perfectly identify that it's a man.

By dressing up, all it does is attempt to fool the child.

LLMMLL

Gentlemanne wrote: »

My friend calls Debbie Hayton and Blaire White "Auntie Blaires", the transgender version of an Uncle Tom. They sure are good at sucking up to people who hate them.

I'm not familiar with Blir White but it's pretty clear if you follow DH at all that she's an attention seeking contrarian.

You would think someone who campaigns against trans women using women's toilets might....stop using women's toilets.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is ridiculous.

Transwomen are not identifiable as women to children unless they a) make the physical effort to dress up and b) undergo surgery.

If neither of the above took place i.e. in natural biologic form; the child would perfectly identify that it's a man.

By dressing up, all it does is attempt to fool the child.

So you're saying a child can't tell the difference. We are in agreement.

BattleCorp

LLMMLL wrote: »

I'm not familiar with Blir White but it's pretty clear if you follow DH at all that she's an attention seeking contrarian.

You would think someone who campaigns against trans women using women's toilets might....stop using women's toilets.

A trans person who is attention seeking.............well I never!

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

My daughter's mistaken belief?

That men and women are biologically different???

…

And as for my daughter's beliefs meaning nothing? Well that's charming.

That’s not the belief that was being referred to, and you know it. It was written clearly in the post you quoted -

LLMMLL wrote: »

One could equally say your 10 year old mistakenly believes she can identify whether someone is a man or a woman based on first appearances because of the influence of her father.

The part in bold is the belief that was being referred to, and while what your daughter believes is obviously important to you - by your own standards, it shouldn’t offend you that other people do not consider your daughters beliefs as evidence of demonstrating anything about people who are transgender.

As an aside, I detest the idea of anyone weaponising someone’s own children against them, by using that person’s children in some hypothetical scenario to support their own ideological beliefs. Granted you opened the door by introducing your daughter into the conversation, but I think it’s wrong that other people would then try and use your daughter in trying to make their own points.

I’d say the same of anyone trying to weaponise children against their parents tbh, it wasn’t just because it’s your daughter in this particular circumstance. I’d say the same of people who tried to argue that their parents being transgender is going to “confuse” their children, or make them believe they are transgender, or any of the other sort of ignorant nonsense about people who are transgender.

It’s not unlike the same shìtty arguments that were made during the marriage referendum campaign about people who are gay - that their children would be “confused”, that they should be able to get married but shouldn’t be able to adopt children, etc.

If there were any validity to the idea that people have a choice with regard to their gender or sexual orientation having to do only with how they were raised by their parents, that logic dictates there should be no examples of people who are gay or transgender throughout the history of time when marriage was only considered possible between a man and a woman and solely for the purposes of procreation. If that’s all a person knew because they were raised in a bubble where no other possibilities were presented, then I’d understand a person presenting that view as an objective truth. I don’t expect it of posters here whom I expect have greater experience of the world around them where there is plenty of evidence to suggest that what they previously held to be objectively true, is demonstrably false, that their beliefs are predicated upon previously ill-informed assumptions which were informed by the limited evidence they had available to them.

What some people here appear to be doing is the same thing that John Money tried to do, which was to try and make the evidence fit his argument, even though the evidence demonstrably contradicted his argument that gender could be socially constructed. He ruined countless people’s lives through his own arrogance and his steadfast refusal to acknowledge that the evidence directly contradicted his theories, and his influence is still in effect today in people who imagine that gender is socially constructed or can be socially constructed, or that it can be associated with a person’s political views. Listening to Beyoncé is no more likely to influence a teenage girl to identify themselves as transgender any more than Elvis or The Beatles or David Bowie were likely to influence teenagers to consort with the Devil. Abigail Shriers book should be regarded in the context of the audience for which it is written and squarely aimed at, the same people who have historically fuelled moral panics about anyone who was in any way different from themselves.

Especially in an American context, it’s no surprise that some people in American society are evangelical in their beliefs.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

So you're saying a child can't tell the difference. We are in agreement.

In most cases of transwomen, it's 99.5% obvious that there is something not quite right.

Children can pick up on that. They're not stupid.

But all you are describing is the degree to which you can try to fool a child 100% of the time.

What the hell is gratifying about that?

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

In most cases of transwomen, it's 99.5% obvious that there is something not quite right.

Children can pick up on that. They're not stupid.

But all you are describing is the degree to which you can try to fool a child 100% of the time.

What the hell is gratifying about that?

Firstly your description of transwomen as something not quite right is nasty.

Secondly using made up percentages does not lend your argument any credibility.

And children aren't being fooled. They may see a masculine looking cis woman and make a mistake, or they may see a trans woman and identify her as a woman and be correct.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Firstly your description of transwomen as something not quite right is nasty.

Secondly using made up percentages does not lend your argument any credibility.

And children aren't being fooled. They may see a masculine looking cis woman and make a mistake, or they may see a trans woman and identify her as a woman and be correct.

This is the most pointless and superfluous line of questioning I have ever come across on any thread in this forum.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is the most pointless and superfluous line of questioning I have ever come across on any thread in this forum.

I didn't ask you any questions...

keano_afc

LLMMLL wrote: »

But they are mistaken if they identify a trans woman as a man or a trans man as a woman.

And if they do identify a trans woman as a woman does that mean you agree that the trans woman is a woman as a 10 year old can't be mistaken apparently.

You dont even believe this yourself, hardly fair to accuse someone else of not believing it.

LLMMLL

keano_afc wrote: »

You dont even believe this yourself, hardly fair to accuse someone else of not believing it.

I don't believe it. I know it.

keano_afc

LLMMLL wrote: »

I don't believe it. I know it.

No you dont.

You dont have a meaning for the word woman, so stating that anyone or anything is a woman means absolutely nothing.

Gentlemanne

What is this obsession with surgery. Do ye realise that for most Hormone Replacement Therapy is all that's needed? Also you cannot "tell every single time" that someone is trans. Its actually giving me second hand embarassment thinking of claiming something like that.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

How can it be both clear and the child makes a mistake.

Either the child's view is evidence of it being clear in which case saying it is clear but the child is mistaken is a massive contradiction.

Or the child's view is not evidence of it being clear and what you mean is that you believe sex is clear no matter what a child woukd think. In which case why bring up a child's view at all?

I think you'll find it was you who brought up your daughter as a gotcha argument not me.

I mentioned that a child could IN ALMOST ALL instances decipher between a man and a woman.

Children do make mistakes though.

But it is quite clear in ALMOST MOST cases who is a biological man and who is a biological woman.

LLMMLL

keano_afc wrote: »

No you dont.

You dont have a meaning for the word woman, so stating that anyone or anything is a woman means absolutely nothing.

I do have a meaning. I don't have a definition.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I mentioned that a child could IN ALMOST ALL instances decipher between a man and a woman.

Children do make mistakes though.

But it is quite clear in ALMOST MOST cases who is a biological man and who is a biological woman.

Has this been your point all along?

That individuals with XY chromosomes are different biologically from individuals with XX chromosomes?

I think everyone is in complete agreement on that. Not sure why you're bringing kids opinions into this.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

I do have a meaning. I don't have a definition.

Lol.

Seriously?

I hate to do this, but what's your definition of "meaning"?

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Has this been your point all along?

That individuals with XY chromosomes are different biologically from individuals with XX chromosomes?

I think everyone is in complete agreement on that. Not sure why you're bringing kids opinions into this.

Yes. My point is that men and women are different.

BattleCorp

LLMMLL wrote: »

I don't believe it. I know it.

Gentlemanne wrote: »

What is this obsession with surgery. Do ye realise that for most Hormone Replacement Therapy is all that's needed? Also you cannot "tell every single time" that someone is trans. Its actually giving me second hand embarassment thinking of claiming something like that.

Whether or not a trans woman looks like a biological woman or not makes no difference. They aren't the same thing. One is a biological man who chooses to live as a woman and the other is a biological woman.

Gentlemanne

Speaking of definitions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0

Gentlemanne

Gentlemanne wrote: »

Speaking of definitions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0

Haha. Exactly.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Lol.

Seriously?

I hate to do this, but what's your definition of "meaning"?

Didn't we do this like 2 days ago. Why are you pretending to be surprised?

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Didn't we do this like 2 days ago. Why are you pretending to be surprised?

I'm genuinely surprised that a grown adult continues to double down on a patently bizarre premise.

You do you chief. You do you.

keano_afc

LLMMLL wrote: »

I do have a meaning. I don't have a definition.

So what does it mean? I'll even start you off

The meaning of woman is....

All you have to do is complete that sentence. No nonsense, no jargon, no paragraphs on linguistics. A simple, straightforward statement please.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes. My point is that men and women are different.

I agree cis and trans men are different than cis and trans women.

LLMMLL

keano_afc wrote: »

So what does it mean? I'll even start you off

The meaning of woman is....

All you have to do is complete that sentence. No nonsense, no jargon, no paragraphs on linguistics. A simple, straightforward statement please.

You really seem to believe that meaning and definitions are the same thing.

They're not. You are asking for a defintion. I am talking about meaning. Two different things.

And before you accuse me of being absurd or crazy this is absolutely accepted and standard in science.

keano_afc

LLMMLL wrote: »

You really seem to believe that meaning and definitions are the same thing.

They're not. You are asking for a defintion. I am talking about meaning. Two different things.

And before you accuse me of being absurd or crazy this is absolutely accepted and standard in science.

The meaning of woman is....

If you please.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm genuinely surprised that a grown adult continues to double down on a patently bizarre premise.

You do you chief. You do you.

It's part of the conservative viewpoint. Not only disagreeing with other people's views but actually being surprised that others aren't in complete agreement with you.

You do you chief. You do you.

LLMMLL

keano_afc wrote: »

The meaning of woman is....

If you please.

Do you acknowledge that your are asking for a definition of woman?

keano_afc

LLMMLL wrote: »

Do you acknowledge that your are asking for a definition of woman?

The meaning of woman is....

If you could just complete the sentence, please.