A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
Trajk Logik
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 12:35 pm

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by Trajk Logik »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:29 pm
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:22 pm Exactly. There are positions that are not left or right, or behaviors that are not masculine or feminine. But when a trans person claims that they actually are a woman or a man they are reinforcing binary genders. They should say that they are neither a man or a woman and start their own sports leagues and have their own bathrooms.
The entire language of "claims" is misguided here. In fact pulling the philosophy card in context makes you part of the problem.

A person finds themselves born into a world.

They get bullied and kicked out of the bathrooms labeled "women" AND they get bullied and kicked out of the bathrooms labelled "men".
They piss outside - they get arrested and bullied some more.

Where should they piss? When did you have to start your own bathrooms?

Not only can they not use the fucking bathrooms - they also can't use the fucking language now?

Man! Woman! I don't give a fuck what you call me - WHERE SHOULD I FUCKING PISS?!?!?

Should they host hold it in until we finish philosophising about the problem?
Straw man. No one is being kicked out of both bathrooms.
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by Skepdick »

Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:41 pm Straw man. No one is being kicked out of both bathrooms.
Jesus fucking christ. Look at this idiot thinking this is an argument.

Would you like a bowtie for your pompous ass too?
Last edited by Skepdick on Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Trajk Logik
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 12:35 pm

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by Trajk Logik »

Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:36 pm
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:22 pm All you've done is try to define an ill-defined word, "gender" with another ill-defined word, "soul".
I've gotten misunderstood here by more than one person so it's probably my lack of clarity. The topic is about a contradiction in the woke community. I am not making a case for souls. Nor am I explaining 'gender.' I am not asking people to use that word or whatever concept I intend with it. My point was that a monist, in this case generally a physicalist, has a problem accepting that transpersons have the wrong birth body. I do not have this problem because my metaphysics leaves room for this. I don't think a physicalist's metaphysics does. That was why I brought up my belief, to contrast it with the physicalist position. Not to replace it, but to make it clearer what I think the physicalist problem ought to be with transpersons who say their body is not right for them.

So, why physicalism? Well, because wokism in general goes with a physicalist model. They may not use that term or even 'materialist', but I think generally, with exceptions of course, they are physicalists and also monists. Bringing in the latter is redundant but points to the problem with 'this is not the right body for me.' Who is this me and what are they made of?
Free speech and thought are the enemy of mass delusions, which is why it is so dangerous for people in power to share in these delusions.
What's 'freedom'? What's thought? If we're going to focus on ill-defined words, we could start with those. Though perhaps in another thread.
I'm not woke and I'm saying that gender and biological sex are one and the same. So it's not a dualism vs. physicalism debate. Dualism just unnecessarily complicates things.
User avatar
Trajk Logik
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 12:35 pm

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by Trajk Logik »

Skepdick wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:43 pm
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:41 pm Straw man. No one is being kicked out of both bathrooms.
Jesus fucking christ. Look at this idiot thinking this is an argument.
Fuck Jesus Christ. Look at this idiot using an example that has nothing to do with what was said, nor is it an example that has occurred. This idiot thinks that if they can imagine it, it must be possible.
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by Skepdick »

Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:45 pm I'm not woke and I'm saying that gender and biological sex are one and the same. So it's not a dualism vs. physicalism debate. Dualism just unnecessarily complicates things.
Suppose they are the same. Where should the people getting kicked out of both bathrooms piss while you philosophise about it?
Suppose they are not the same. Where should the people getting kicked out of both bathrooms piss while you philosophise about it?
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by Skepdick »

Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:47 pm Fuck Jesus Christ. Look at this idiot using an example that has nothing to do with what was said, nor is it an example that has occurred. This idiot thinks that if they can imagine it, it must be possible.
It has occurred, you moron. Your ignorance of it having occurred doesn't precluding it from having occurred. Nor does it preclude it from still occurring.

Maybe we should put video cameras in all bathrooms so that your sceptical ass can acquire the evidence you need to abandon your premise?
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6716
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by Iwannaplato »

Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:45 pm I'm not woke and I'm saying that gender and biological sex are one and the same.
Right, if you say they are the same, you're not woke.
So it's not a dualism vs. physicalism debate.
I am not framing the entire debate. There are likely all sorts of ways of approaching the issue. I pointed out one problematic area.
Dualism just unnecessarily complicates things.
I think, as I said, it clarifies the problem with the contradictory woke positions. One implies something dualistic. The dualism is already there in the idea of 'this is not my right body'. I am not complicating the issue, I am responding to an already present (in the woke position) duality. I don't think they want to notice this. And that it doesnt fit well with the 'gender is only a social construct', nor with their in general monist positions elsewhere.
Last edited by Iwannaplato on Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:26 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8560
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by Sculptor »

Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:45 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:36 pm
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:22 pm All you've done is try to define an ill-defined word, "gender" with another ill-defined word, "soul".
I've gotten misunderstood here by more than one person so it's probably my lack of clarity. The topic is about a contradiction in the woke community. I am not making a case for souls. Nor am I explaining 'gender.' I am not asking people to use that word or whatever concept I intend with it. My point was that a monist, in this case generally a physicalist, has a problem accepting that transpersons have the wrong birth body. I do not have this problem because my metaphysics leaves room for this. I don't think a physicalist's metaphysics does. That was why I brought up my belief, to contrast it with the physicalist position. Not to replace it, but to make it clearer what I think the physicalist problem ought to be with transpersons who say their body is not right for them.

So, why physicalism? Well, because wokism in general goes with a physicalist model. They may not use that term or even 'materialist', but I think generally, with exceptions of course, they are physicalists and also monists. Bringing in the latter is redundant but points to the problem with 'this is not the right body for me.' Who is this me and what are they made of?
Free speech and thought are the enemy of mass delusions, which is why it is so dangerous for people in power to share in these delusions.
What's 'freedom'? What's thought? If we're going to focus on ill-defined words, we could start with those. Though perhaps in another thread.
I'm not woke and I'm saying that gender and biological sex are one and the same. So it's not a dualism vs. physicalism debate. Dualism just unnecessarily complicates things.
Gender and biological sex are so obvious NOT the same thing: check out any definition.
And NEITHER gender nor biological sex are simply binary.

Are you able to accept that the brain and organs of reproduction might not align with the social norms of gender?
Are you able to accept gender ambiguity regardless of the possession of a penis or not?
Are you able to accept the existence of hermaphrodites? Or neuters?
Asexual people?

Is it not bleeding obvious that a person's sexuality is innate, social, genetic, physical and personal, and not easy to unpack with simple philosophical concepts.
Last edited by Sculptor on Tue Mar 28, 2023 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Skepdick
Posts: 14366
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by Skepdick »

Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:56 pm I think, as I said, it clarifies the problem with the contradictory woke positions. One implies something dualistic. The dualism is already there in the idea of 'this is not my right body'. I mention this and point out how this does not cause me problems but ought to cause woke monists problems. I don't think they want to notice this.
Any implication you read into "this is not my right body" is your own projection given your own (mis)understanding. You are trying to frame the whole issue in philosophical terms. Ideas, monisms, dualisms, right, wrong. Problems. Solutions. You've already made the wrong turn trying to (over) analyse the situation.

Stop. Breathe. Resist philosophising at all costs.

The person isn't making a claim of any sort - they are simply using whatever language at their disposal to express discomfort, frustration, limitation. That's literally why it's called dysphoria.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Sculptor wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:59 pm
Trajk Logik wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:45 pm
Iwannaplato wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 3:36 pm I've gotten misunderstood here by more than one person so it's probably my lack of clarity. The topic is about a contradiction in the woke community. I am not making a case for souls. Nor am I explaining 'gender.' I am not asking people to use that word or whatever concept I intend with it. My point was that a monist, in this case generally a physicalist, has a problem accepting that transpersons have the wrong birth body. I do not have this problem because my metaphysics leaves room for this. I don't think a physicalist's metaphysics does. That was why I brought up my belief, to contrast it with the physicalist position. Not to replace it, but to make it clearer what I think the physicalist problem ought to be with transpersons who say their body is not right for them.

So, why physicalism? Well, because wokism in general goes with a physicalist model. They may not use that term or even 'materialist', but I think generally, with exceptions of course, they are physicalists and also monists. Bringing in the latter is redundant but points to the problem with 'this is not the right body for me.' Who is this me and what are they made of?

What's 'freedom'? What's thought? If we're going to focus on ill-defined words, we could start with those. Though perhaps in another thread.
I'm not woke and I'm saying that gender and biological sex are one and the same. So it's not a dualism vs. physicalism debate. Dualism just unnecessarily complicates things.
Gender and biological sex are so obvious NOT the same thing: check out any definition.
And NEITHER gender nor biological sex are simply binary.

Are you able to accept that the brain and organs of reproduction might not align with the social norms of gender?
Are you able to accept gender ambiguity regardless of the possession of a penis or not?
Are you able to accept the existence of hermaphrodites? Or neuters?
Asexual people?

Is it not bleeding obvious that a person's sexuality is innate, social, genetic, physical and personal, and not easy to unpack with simple philosophical concepts.
If there is no such thing as a 'woman' then how can men 'feel' like they are 'women'? What exactly is this 'feeling' that they are 'feeling'? Your position is completely moronic and you know it. You are letting your own rabid misogyny over-ride the glaringly obvious. It's none of your fucking business anyway. It's not men who are being erased. It's women's rights that are being trampled on, not men's. 'Trans' have the same human rights as everyone else. If they want their own spaces then they can fight for them just as women had to.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

According to sculptor women have penises and prostates. So glad that he's not a doctor. The penises certainly come in handy when they are raping people.

''Transgender ideology boils down to the belief that the most vulnerable and oppressed women on Earth are the ones somehow, unexplainably, stuck inside men.

This is Scientology levels of batshittery, but it has captured nearly every major institution in the West.''
Last edited by vegetariantaxidermy on Tue Mar 28, 2023 11:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8560
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by Sculptor »

Most trans women are more woman than the rancid vegetable.
IT (she?) ought to know that there is a difference between having a cont and being a cont.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

''Transgender ideology boils down to the belief that the most vulnerable and oppressed women on Earth are the ones somehow, unexplainably, stuck inside men.

This is Scientology levels of batshittery, but it has captured nearly every major institution in the West.''
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Sculptor wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 11:23 pm Most trans women are more woman than the rancid vegetable.
IT (she?) ought to know that there is a difference between having a cont and being a cont.
You will have to excuse me. I'm off to get my phantom prostate checked. One can never be too careful.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: A contradiction, I think, between "gender is a social construct" and trans-ness

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Sculptor wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 11:23 pm Most trans women are more woman than the rancid vegetable.
IT (she?) ought to know that there is a difference between having a cont and being a cont.
A book you should read. It might cure you of your disgusting misogyny and misogyny-based ageism:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/ ... ge-of-rage
Post Reply