Firstly, the "fake boob guy" is publicly identifying as a woman. You don't have to like her actions, but please don't misgender her.

Secondly, it only hurts the cause if we let it. Are we going to take every extreme fringe story of someone being mentally ill - your words - and amplify that craziness repeatedly? As in, are we going to centre our conversation about trans people on examples like this. You have thrice tried to do this. As you know, the right eats this stuff up. Well sorry, I'm not going to centre the discussion of trans people around the craziest examples we can find to make fun of trans people about. I'm not in the business of carefully handholding the right through every attempt to frame trans issues through the lens of the worst caricatures social media can curate for us.

Finally, I really hate that you try to lump this story together with Demi Lovato. Trans people or gender fluid people or non-binary people don't have to fit into the precise mold the right wing demands of them. Nobody needs to be sorry that Demi's journey with her gender identity isn't completely binary and obvious and fits those molds. However, she is incredibly brave and absolutely power to her for sharing so personally her journey with the public. Personally I think she really helps her fans see a realistic and evolving relationship with gender identity that isn't completely static, and this is great.



You misunderstood. I didn't suggest you were the "far right". I provided a list of people using that particular tactic that you used, which is indeed also common among the far right. I know you have a few pantomimes to the lef.

Why do you think this is happening more in females than in males? This isn't meant to be any sort of gotcha question but surely you're aware that trans-identification is disproportionately led by females and I'm curious as to your take there.

I'm sorry, but why are you still ****ing this up? It is "trans man" not "transman". Just as it is "black man" not "blackman". I'm not sure whether it is that weird stubbornness where when I inform you that your language is problematic that you just double down and do it more, or if you are still just confused and unable to shake the habit. But you really should stop this.


In your fantasy scenario, are you completely unaware of whether the person goes by "father" or "mother"?

This shouldn't be hard. Trans men are sons/fathers/brothers/uncles/etc, broadly speaking. They identify as male and thus use the male terms and celebrations. That is the general trend, clear as day, and should be utterly unconfusing to you. You seem quite desperate to concoct some very special fringe case scenario where you are terribly confused what to do and think having to ask is a bit "gotcha". It isn't.

I have no idea why biological females have higher prevalence of transitioning, but I can't see any way that your "gender and race aren't real" take is going to inform you about this or in fact any actual real world situation about trans people at all. Gender is apparently not real, yet nevertheless people still transition. It's just a massive flop.

Are you actually confused as to why he's doing this?

Undoubtedly, but it doesn't matter. The point is the claim "race isn't real" doesn't inform anything. Whenever we go out and study a particular phenomenon, that analysis remains the same whether we accept or reject your pseudo-intellectual phil 101 premise. If you want to measure how much police violence there is on black people, that data is collected and analyzed precisely as it would be either way.

You've yet to show me a single actionable way I would look at the world and jump to different political, cultural, or economic conclusions if I accept or reject your premise. So why should I care?

Looking at the way that society shapes these real world situations is certainly going to give me a lot more insight into this than looking at biology-- which offers very little.

This is a part of what makes this whole thing interesting and also potentially tricky to navigate. But given the importance that society is placing on "gender" and identity, this paradox isn't too hard to resolve.

You're missing the point. We shape the world with our attitudes. Having a world based on truth is preferable to one based on lies and mythology. The world that we have today is based on the latter so it should come as no shock that we find evidence of its precepts.

Your position is essentially conservative. You're arguing that the status quo exists for a reason and that those reasons are valid and self-evident. But it's those reasons themselves (race and gender in this case) that create and define the status quo, and you're limiting the potential for change when those fallacious reasons are left unchallenged.

Ah, but this is quite a different thing. You aren't just asking me to accept your thesis that race and gender aren't real. You are saying the entire world that is based on these ideas should all also change and people's behaviours in that world will now be radically different. Well sure, if people behave radically differently then that will make different. But in the world we actually have, whether I accept or reject your premise doesn't affect my analysis of things like whether trans people should be accepted or what policies to impliment that acceptance should happen.

See? I told you it would be just pseudo-intellectual mumbo jumbo!

Based on your other responses I'm assuming that you also don't care why-- as you'll argue that it doesn't matter and that we should treat everyone equally.

But having a little bit of curiosity about these things is going to make you a better advocate than just repeating the same line.

Meh. I remember back in the marriage equality debates there was a certain type who was similarly focused on the nature vs nurture question. Is the existence of gay people a biological thing? Or is it more a reflection of our culture. You get spectrums of beliefs here (neverlucky appears to be on an extreme end), but I never really cared. I thought people should be allowed to marry who they wish regardless of whether being gay is more a nature thing or a nurture thing. It's sort of interesting to read some of the papers in this field, but not when that entire debate is just weaponized to attack gay people.

I think the same is true here with trans people. It seems to be that you are trying to suggest being trans is more a nurture thing than a nature thing. Ok. So what? What policy should I thus pass?

edit:

A good guess. Indeed, I care about real world consequences of real people with their real attitudes and real behaviours. I don't much care about intellectual games about whether race is "real". And I do actually have a "little bit of curiosity" for nature vs nurture type things, but I don't see how it is particularly relevant for the mission of helping trans people be included in our society.

You do care, it's why you felt the need to include me.

I'm coming around more to you recently because you are making decent points.

I don't care about sides.

Please just argue with intellectual integrity because that's what holds most people who are actually listening.

I'll keep responding to the other stuff so if I don't hit all of your points I'll go back to them, but our preconceptions do have real world consequences. We can imagine a million hypotheticals or use actual history to show this is true.

What great insights have you discovered?

First let's hear your take on open borders then I'll address additional questions from you.

I favor abolishing ICE and giving dreamers an easy path to citizenship, but I don't see what that has to do with this thread.

Your turn.

I think you have more girls transitioning because they feel like life will be easier as a male, and because there is already a higher prevalence of females more willing to be same-sex attracted than males, and due to the cultural climate instead of being a lesbian or bi they have decided to be trans.

The idea that gender or sexual orientation is something you decide on or will yourself into seems quite wrong.

There can be conscious decisions and there can be subconscious decisions.

Is it your position that there are more girls transitioning just because more girls are trans?

So you will not criticize 'fake boob guy' but you certainly will jump in to defend her.


And then you will act 'surprised', 'stunned' 'incredulous', when parents and people in the broader community, with kids in that community,






This is exactly why people like you and the broader left are the main part of the problem.

People can see the hypocrisy of the left and that if this was some type of perceived 'right leaning' person bringing whatever political or social statement this trans person is trying to make, in to the classroom, how the far left would attack that right leaning person for bringing that in to the classroom.

You as an educator should understand that acutely. But all you can do uke, is see 'sides' and no matter what happens, if it is perceived to be on your 'side', you reflexively then go into deflect and protect mode. You do not see how that leads the 'other side' to see the left as not rationale and to be ignored and as a force in society they think needs to be defeated.

I guess if your goal is more 'bad people' to fight though, it might all be going to plan.

More people are coming out about their gender/sexuality because there are fewer bigots like QP harassing them. The idea that anyone would decide to make themselves trans because it's trendy is just standard Facebook Boomer nonsense.

Wrong.

Oh noes, I am defeated with facts and logic.

Perhaps but you didn't explain why it's more females than males.