Well that's just silly. Trans women are mothers, daughters, and sisters, and plenty of cis women can't give birth to a baby, and some trans men can so none of those markers is helpful.

Luckbox, notice the self-referential BS in this post as well?

Your misunderstanding of the context in which I was using the term subjective is enlightening, because it's like you weren't even following the discussion last night.

You repeatedly gave examples of vague and subjective things like love and kindness to show that the concept of "women" being ill-defined (or not actually defined at all) is not actually a problem. What I said was that subjectivity existing in the world was not a counter argument to anything I was saying. I made it very clear that subjectivity was not a problem.

It's still funny to me that no one seems to be confused about what men are.

What? Obviously it's the identical idea.

Gender is fake for everyone.

No one explicitly. But if you're going to single uke out for having social policy goals, it's only fair to point out that the people who are trying to define transgender people into non-existence also have policy goals.

Seemed like it was an abundantly clear post.

Yes, you did use it in that sense, but did you not also use it in the sense of a sort of personal judgement here:

Regardless, it looks like you've taken the opportunity once again to not describe at all why any of this is remotely problematic. So ok.

I'm pointing out that this is a silly conversation to have dominate the thread. Why should we care if someone can show that using "woman" to identify a trans woman has logical inconsistencies? All that does is empower this kind of thing:

Which, whether rickroll was just being glib or not, can empower those who truly do have an issue with transgender people.

I'm busy being lazy, and you also never asked. But I can talk about it

I think I'm a genius. So, does that mean I am a genius?

I think I'm better looking than Tom Cruise. Does that mean that I am better looking than Tom Cruise?

Yes some woman can not have babies but please provide me with a link to were a man has given birth. You can not As for Trans men I would say biological females

I will acknowledge that a trans woman can be a mother, daughter or sister. Never said they could not. I just gave you my definition You can think its BS just as I think Demi Lavoto and Sam Smith saying they are neither a man or woman is BS

Buddy, you've been promising this DEATH BLOW about why your phil 101 metaphysics objections are actually problematic for ages. Can you skip forward to the part where you tell us the actual real humans who are negatively effected by any of this?

They're called homosexuals who grow up believing that they're in the wrong body, or people who for Freudian reasons grow up hating themselves-- oftentimes because they've been sexually abused, who believe that changing sexes is the cure to their problems. I'm sure without gender ideology some of this would still happen, but I don't see surgery and puberty blockers as a substitute for soul searching and psychotherapy.

Amazing. All this mumbo jumbo about metaphysics and the big reveal is you are against gender affirming medical care.

Trolly sure called that one spot on, huh?

First, I wasn't criticizing uke.

Second, I didn't even suggest he was trying to promote any particular policy goal, much less a goal that I found objectionable. I only suggested that he was offering a definition for the purpose of setting policy (whatever that policy might be), and that his definition might well be good enough for that purpose.

Trying to come up with definitions for real world policy application isn't some sort of sin.

In my opinion.....

1. Modern Psychology is mostly garbage.

2. Psychotherapy is mostly expensive garbage.

3. The Old Testament book Proverbs has 31 chapters. (That is fact, not opinion.) Virtually anyone who reads one chapter a day for a month and takes the counsel contained therein to heart will be more content have more peace than the average person who spends two whole years in psychotherapy. And you can buy a nice King James Bible for under $20.

I wonder why he may have this opinion . My opinion is when your 18 you can do whatever you want when it comes to gender affirming medical care

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...-b2143006.html

In America at least, always follow the money trail! There is big $$$ in the Transitioning business. The more kids they can convince to undergo therapy and surgery, the more $$$ will roll in.

The medical establishment has found a hitherto untapped source of revenue.

And kids are their latest patients victims.

Yeah, follow the money trail: If you could get half the world's population to buy a 200 year old text for $20.00 each, imagine how many more Michelangelo's you could buy.

Trolly has never called anything correctly in his life.

You wanted to know who is being harmed and I told you.

Huh?

Note well that I recommended a bible (the King James Version) which anyone can read for free in its entirety online.

And since the King James Bible is not copyrighted, anyone can buy a brand new copy of it at Dollar Tree for $1.35 including tax.

I suspect that $1.35 wouldn't even pay for two minutes of a psychotherapy session.

addendum: I'm getting a number of whataboutism responses today for some reason.

I'm just glad you finally gave your DEATH BLOW. Honestly, I didn't predict that behind the metaphysics mumbo jumbo was actually you rejecting gender affirming care. It really is quite the dot dot dot there.

If gender doesn't exist then why would we affirm it?

What sort of sense would that make?

There is a version of your arguments that I wasn't impressed with, but was benign enough. It was the phil101 metaphysics paper I kept making fun of you for and it was like sure, the paper is bad, but it is just a phil101 paper so who cares. However, you've now come clean advocating for actual real world things that would harm trans people. If you don't think gender exists in some sort of metaphysical sense you haven't quite been able to articulate then sure, fine, whatever. But gender dysphoria is a real phenomenon that affects real people and gender affirming care can make a real benefit, and somehow trying to connect the metaphysical nonsense with these real world consequences is just.....words escape me.

It's sad.

Haven't I literally said that people can do whatever they want?

What things have I advocated for that you think would harm people?

If I feel being socially oppress by my entourage and I think I am a black person , can I start using the n word even tho scientifically I’m white ?

The internal world We make of ourselves might not actually fit the vast majority of the external world .
When the representation falls to 1-2% , maybe just maybe it signifies more an internal Problem than an external one ..?