what about trans ppl?

and what about the ppl who have both or part of both sex organs? or apparent women who have a much higher amount of testosterone like caster semenya?

ya, I dont think it is that simply distinct. otherwise we would not be having these conversations.

When you say "new" here, what general time frame do you have in mind? Just looking for a ballpark here... the last 100 years, 10 years, the last year, this month? How has the "mainstream leftist" view changed over that period. It's hard to take you seriously when you use such vague terms.

When you say "leftists", who are you referring to? Do you mean anti-capitalists? Librulz? Donkeys? The Elephant establishment? Anyone who isn't a neo-fascist? It's hard to take you seriously when you use such vague terms.

I'd say there are very few peeps in the US that would make such a claim. It's absurd on the face of it. So, I'd make that maybe 0.1% of the population as a whole. I would also be highly sceptical that this tiny demographic statistically aligns with any coherent political or ideological leanings.

You really need to cite an example of some peep saying this shiz, at the very least, to have a constructive conversation regarding these peeps you have identified.

Well, you know... we've been trying to figure out who these pesky SJWers actual are not for about 100k posts ITT. Perhaps before trying to engage these shadowy reclusive and shy SJWers in an "argument" about "leftist" whateverness... maybe you should back up a bit, and start at the basics?

How many SJWers are there, roughly, in the USA?

How many SJWers, IYO, are active here in Baja Politards?

they are people suffering from gender dysphoria

they are people with genetic conditions. these people are almost always assigned a male or female sex and live their lives as either male or female.

it is that simple. the reason we're having these conversations is because radical leftists have gone completely off the rails and thrown biology in the garbage.

Mainstream actually has a definition. If you just randomly select an article off of the internet you have no idea if that article represents the mainstream, especially if it's from a publication that no one has heard of.

Or your category method is narrow and exclusionary. You stop short, such as at biology and act supreme. Fail to listen.

One of the major issues neuroscience faces is that there is no such thing as a brain in its natural state. All brains which can be examined are tainted by experience and environment. And this goes right down to hormone levels foetuses are exposed to in the womb.

One example of this is in feral children, or seriously neglected children, that don't develop a language. When you look at a brain scan you find that they have less developed areas associated with language. That is, the environment and culture (or lack thereof) they developed in has permanently changed the physical development and structure of the brain.

Now this creates a whole host of problems when examining differences in the sexes, because even when you find differences you might not have any hope of determining whether it's a physical difference independent of culture. But there are indicators which can predict the sex of a person based on brains. Unfortunately, they aren't highly accurate because individuals have huge variability.

You then have all this trouble that we can change people's moods and behaviour patterns by playing with hormone levels, and we know that the sexes have different hormone levels. But then we know that your environment and conditioning also affects your hormones.

You also get the old cases, there was a good documentary on this that I might be able to find for anyone interested, on intersex people in the UK. A few decades back, the prevailing theory was nurture>nature, so the doctors told parents of intersex kids: raise them as what you want. A couple of cases had kids who had serious accidents or illness where they lost their penis and so the parents and doctors figured "raise him as a her then". Turns out, many of those kids grew up to be horrendously uncomfortable with their designated gender, leading people to think "Ah, it's not nurture at all then".

But if it's not nurture at all then we run into a bunch of problems about how what it means to be a man or woman varies massively over time and space. And with specific regards to trans people, you get interesting things like this: when you look at biological males who lose their penises (due to accident or cancer or whatever) you get huge rates of phantom pain. When you look at trans people who have surgery, you get much much lower rates. So there's reason to think being trans has a biological basis.

The best guess is that human personality traits have a biological basis which is massively affected by environment and usually not in an obviously reductive way. We can't do a Freud and say "his mother hugged him too much or not enough". All we can say is that it's some mix of both and we can't easily tell which way or how.

The MOST important thing is that it turns out that not letting trans people express their preferred gender has staggeringly awful effects. Helping them to transition, on the other hand, and increasing societal acceptance, relieves their suffering. Trans people aren't delusional. They don't look at their chest or crotch and see something other than what is (the way an anorexic might really believe they're fat, or a schizophrenic really believes the voices are real). They just don't see what they want; what would make them comfortable.

To try to reduce this down to "It's all biology" or "It's all culture" is a binary which I don't think anyone credible buys into.

Those are sex chromosomes, not gender chromosomes.

Psh, you've never heard of the plaid zebra? What a square.

The last 2 years. But it's really ramped up in the last year. 5 years ago I can't recall this being any kind of issue. Gender was never brought up outside of the context of male and female interaction. Not that these are new ideas. Just recently resurrected.

I'm referring to people on the extreme left of the political spectrum. calling them liberals would be an insult to actual liberals. i'm not using a vague term, it's not my fault you don't know what it means.

you're right, it is an absurd claim.

http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/t...feminisim.html
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/08/04/woman-2

there are plenty of articles by feminists making this claim in "academic" journals which i don't have access to.


i don't know, i'm just looking for one to defend the positions on gender and transgenderism simultaneously held by the radical left which appear to be at odds with each other.

So is leftists becoming the new SJWs?

Who gives a **** what the radical left thinks? Would you entertain answering the question of "Why does the right want to hang black people from trees?" If the desire is only held by those farthest on the right?

The sex of a body isn't a complete tell of a human being's gender is not a contradiction.


Here is a problem. It's not even a real political topic. Why would you ever really want to vote to tell someone any thing like their gender or such as that? Look at you in such an odd position. That's not political how can it be leftist?

See, the reason the "leftists" make a distinction between sex and gender is because there is one.

You can't explain why pink is a colour for girls and blue is a colour for boys in the UK by looking at chromosomes. Those are cultural associations. Gender constructs change radically over time and vary across the world.

And even the definition of biological sex changes. Prior to DNA's discovery there were still biological bases for differentiating sex.

These concepts are malleable.

I didn't see where either of these sources claimed that "male and female brains are the same." The New Yorker mentioned that radical feminists don't believe in a "female brain," but by definition radical is not mainstream.

i agree with this, don't want to seem like culture doesn't play a role on how gender is expressed. but it's not the defining factor that the new left tells you it is.


this is not true and is basically the only reason i bother speaking up on this. transgender people have a 40% lifetime suicide rate whether they transition or not. in some cases, transitioning makes it worse, as the suicide rate goes up for those who transition but are not "passable."

you say they aren't delusional and then go on to explain exactly how they are delusional. at the very least, if you don't grant that these folks have gender dysphoria, transgenderism is HIGHLY linked with mental illness. insanely high rates of depression and a 40% suicide rate.

i'm not pretending like trans people can just go see a therapist and everything will be just fine. it's a dark path no matter what they do. but it's not helping them to pretend that gender dysphoria is just a personality quirk and that they are totally normal.

it seems to me like the equivalent of telling someone with multiple personality disorder that it's true that they are actually multiple people inside one body.

because radical leftist views are becoming mainstream while radical right wing views are not.

just posted this but i'll repeat myself, radical leftist views are quickly becoming mainstream.

please find one politician from the democratic party who will disavow 3rd wave feminism's views on gender.

You don't support transgender people and you know they are historically prone to states and conditions which lead to suicide, so you should stay away and mind your own business.

You use rhetoric to seize control of others people gender based on your ideology about chromosomes. You are the radical right.

So you mean anti-capitalists only? So you are not referring to pro-capitalists like the Librulz & Donkeys & Elephants at all?

Dude, you're in the wrong place.

There are almost -zero- anti-capitalists or "radical left" here in Los Dos Politards. Besides, as I previously mentioned, basically nobody believes that "chicks & dudes brains are exactly the same". I'd guesstimate that only about 0.1% of peeps hold that view, say 350k. Of that 350k, I'd guess only about 0.1% are anti-capitalists or "radical left", so maybe 350 peeps in the whole country.

What made you imagine or think one or more of those maybe 350 peeps hang out in an obscure OT forum on a poker website ??

If you haven't read it, ST trying to get FoldN to "define the far/extreme/radical left" was an epic exchange.


p.s. Yeah, I know, it was from awhile back and I'm too lazy to search right now.

What do you mean by "defining factor"? It certainly seems to be a defining factor, if not the.


Trans people have a much higher suicide rate after transitioning when compared with those of the corresponding biological sex e.g. Male-to-female transgenders have a much higher suicide rate than females. The outcomes compared to trans folk who have not transitioned are better in terms of suicide and overall well-being, as far as I'm aware.

They are not delusional in a strict sense. It is not a delusion to say they feel like a man or woman. They do. It would be a delusion for an anatomically intact male to look at his crotch and sincerely believe he saw a vagina there. But that's not what trans people do. They see their actual body the way it is.

You're mistaking the way a person feels for the way they perceive reality.

i'm not saying there is no distinction between sex and gender expression. but the new left claims that they vary independently in everybody. this is absurd because there is an extremely high correlation between biological sex and the gender expression. 95%? 99%?

forgive me for assuming your gender but it appears that you are a male. do you know what it's "like" to be a woman? transgender people claim to have this special knowledge. somehow, they know what it's like to be a man and what it's like to be a woman and are able to identify which one is "true" despite their physical sex.

how did they obtain this special knowledge?

Also,

You seem to be arguing against a lot of things nobody here appears to be claiming. So either this place isn't mainstream and you should look for people elsewhere, or you're misjudging what is mainstream because the world is now full of blogs on every topic.