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

Gruffalux

Omackeral wrote: »

Arguing in bad faith yet again. It doesn’t matter to me if Page (specifically Page) is attracted to men, women, both or neither. I was asking in a broader sense what it means if a trans man is in a relationship with a woman and how I should/would/could address that. You don’t want people being misgendered , do you want them being misrepresented with their orientation? I was genuinely asking what is the state of play with that but yet my motives are questioned or I get it’s none of of your business. I’m trying to find out other points of view and that’s what a discussion board should be about. “Do your own research”. Maybe this is part of it. Maybe I’d like a human input from someone identifying as LGBT who is not gonna have their backs up because I might not be au fait with the terminology in use.

No point engaging you on this from what I can see. Maybe another poster can be more enlightening and less catty.

If by self identifying as a man Page becomes eligible to enter male sports, male toilets, male dressing rooms, tell male rape victims they are a male for the purposes of counselling, inherit as a male, be recognised wholly and solely as a man in all respects going forwards then I cannot see, using gender ideology reasoning, how Page is not now in a heterosexual marriage between a man and a woman. Page is no longer a lesbian, nor is their wife, if one follows the general reasoning that is sought to be applied elsewhere.

Sir Oxman

Omackeral wrote: »

Arguing in bad faith yet again. It doesn’t matter to me if Page (specifically Page) is attracted to men, women, both or neither. I was asking in a broader sense what it means if a trans man is in a relationship with a woman and how I should/would/could address that. You don’t want people being misgendered , do you want them being misrepresented with their orientation? I was genuinely asking what is the state of play with that but yet my motives are questioned or I get it’s none of of your business. I’m trying to find out other points of view and that’s what a discussion board should be about. “Do your own research”. Maybe this is part of it. Maybe I’d like a human input from someone identifying as LGBT who is not gonna have their backs up because I might not be au fait with the terminology in use.

No point engaging you on this from what I can see. Maybe another poster can be more enlightening and less catty.

Here's a little primer...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPEMn-CpzEI

One eyed Jack

Omackeral wrote: »

Arguing in bad faith yet again. It doesn’t matter to me if Page (specifically Page) is attracted to men, women, both or neither. I was asking in a broader sense what it means if a trans man is in a relationship with a woman and how I should/would/could address that. You don’t want people being misgendered , do you want them being misrepresented with their orientation? I was genuinely asking what is the state of play with that but yet my motives are questioned or I get it’s none of of your business. I’m trying to find out other points of view and that’s what a discussion board should be about. “Do your own research”. Maybe this is part of it. Maybe I’d like a human input from someone identifying as LGBT who is not gonna have their backs up because I might not be au fait with the terminology in use.

No point engaging you on this from what I can see. Maybe another poster can be more enlightening and less catty.

Not arguing in bad faith at all, I think I was fairly cordial in the face of what I considered to be a ridiculous question that wouldn’t take you all of two minutes to research using your preferred search engine, more time if you were really interested. Because no individual can answer your questions for anyone else. They can only answer for themselves, and I gave you what I consider to be the answer I find myself mostly in agreement with. I think there’s more to it and I could write a thesis on it but frankly I can’t be arsed.

I don’t want people being misgendered and I don’t want people’s sexual orientation misrepresented, but I’ll always prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt in these matters like when someone says of a couple for example “they’re gay for each other”. I’ve heard it a few times and it’s not limited to any specific demographic, but I’m not going to assume any ill intent on their part, it’s just the way they use language and I know what they mean. I think I’ve made it clear already I detest the pronoun police as much as I detest the idea of anyone trying to police how other people express themselves when it’s obvious there was no malice intended. Someone going out of their way to continue to refer to someone in a way they know is a violation of that person’s dignity, is an asshole, IMO. You may view it differently, but don’t try and pretend you’re not an adult with enough life experience under your belt to know better.

LLMMLL

Gruffalux wrote: »

TRAs claim exactly that "I identify as" has a material consequence. You just personally want to limit it to gender (and given your past invention of transfemale, sex).

There are other genuine dysphorias that create very strong emperically-observable identities. Body dysmorphic disorders of various kinds affect up to 3% of people and include Body Integrity Identity Disorders, eg dysphoria about limbs or abilities.
Some people with Body dysphoria identify as disabled even though they are not disabled. They do this sincerely and it feels real for them. In some body dysphoria disorders very emaciated people may identify as obese. Society generally does not enable this identification as it is so harmful to the person.

Extremely obese people may identify as simply curvaceous and wish to avoid labels of adverse health implications and fat shaming. This has been embraced by the wider queer movement in some places.

People in other words identify as being a lot of things that objectively are incorrect identifications. But it seems that only when it comes to gender does this identification have a permissable transubstantiation effect in your opinion.


As it happens I think transpeople can identify as they wish. If they are not harming themselves then no problem. Harming of minors bodies creates a whole other area. In terms of material consequences, however, re law, language, sex based rights, trans rights, sports, refuges, representation and so on, all conflicts of interest will have to be dealt with in a manner that reflects reality, maintains safeguarding and does not prejudice anyone.
It may be that the older distinction between transsexual and transgender will have to be ressurrected. Transgender is too amorphous as a concept - too broad an umbrella at this stage. It works fine at a personal level but at a wider social level it attempts to prioritise what can be fluid personal identities over reality and that cannot hold.

But like the other posters it is YOU who claims these things are the same or similar.

Body dysmorphia is clearly a completely different issue than trans identification. I know someone medically diagnosed with it and it really has nothing in common. This person would never use the language of identification.

You just hear the words “dysmorphia” and “dysphoria” and assume there are commonalities between people who the term can be applied to. The only guaranteed commonality between people with dysphoria is: a feeling of dissatisfaction, anxiety, and restlessness.

Nobody has claimed or made an implicit claim that dysphoric feelings lead to material effects. That’s YOUR interpretation.

TRAs have no obligation to defend claims they never made. You need to show how other dysphorias are the same issue as trans issues.

Gatling

Omackeral wrote: »

No point engaging you on this from what I can see. Maybe another poster can be more enlightening and less catty.

So if a lesbian comes out as a self identifying male or vice versa ,it could come down to consent issues with a partner or potential future partner ,If a male suddenly self identifies as a woman ,and they are in a straight relationship the other person might not consent to being In a lesbian relationship and vice versa ,a gay would become a straight woman ,and if either say no they aren't part of this new dynamic they will labeled and lambasted for being transpobic

Wibbs

LLMMLL wrote: »

Elliott Page. Yes you can say his vagina. I don’t really have an opinion on whether it’s a homosexual act. If the guy considers it a homosexual act I’d be like “ok cool”. If he doesn’t consider it a homosexual act I’d also be like “ok cool”. Why do you feel the need to obsessively define it. What difference does it make to you.

I care little about subjective self identifications but beyond them definitions matter, actual demonstrable realities matter, so stating "his vagina" is a medically and biological nonsense.

B.A._Baracus

"his vagina" ... ah here :pac:

LLMMLL

Wibbs wrote: »

I care little about subjective self identifications but beyond them definitions matter, actual demonstrable realities matter, so stating "his vagina" is a medically and biological nonsense.

They might matter to you. But you shouldn’t assume what matters to you matters to other people. The words “him” and “his” have no medical or biological impact. Medicine and biology can proceed perfectly fine if people say “his vagina”. I think you’ll find that most scientific practitioners will shrug their shoulders and get on with their actual work and leave the obsessive authoritarians to try and impose language restrictions.

Gruffalux

LLMMLL wrote: »

But like the other posters it is YOU who claims these things are the same or similar.

Body dysmorphia is clearly a completely different issue than trans identification. I know someone medically diagnosed with it and it really has nothing in common. This person would never use the language of identification.

You just hear the words “dysmorphia” and “dysphoria” and assume there are commonalities between people who the term can be applied to. The only guaranteed commonality between people with dysphoria is: a feeling of dissatisfaction, anxiety, and restlessness.

Nobody has claimed or made an implicit claim that dysphoric feelings lead to material effects. That’s YOUR interpretation.

TRAs have no obligation to defend claims they never made. You need to show how other dysphorias are the same issue as trans issues.

Both conditions very often share important features - notably dysphoria about the body. I do not ''assume'' there are commonalities - because there are in many cases. Otherwise why would people have or seek to have healthy organs/appendages removed.

One can never get an example that is an exact match for transgenderism just as if you say to me show me something that is exactly comparable to a football. I cannot - there are only footballs that are exactly like footballs. So it is an impossible task you ask. But there are objects that are similar. Just as say for example if I compare asthma to COPD, or rheumatism to arthritis, though they are not the same there are commonalities.

I did not claim dysphoric feelings lead to material changes. I said that the identity that is claimed in the wake of dysphoric feelings re gender is claimed to have material effects - by you. I compared this to the identity as disabled that may be claimed by someone with BIID.
In my opinion neither identifications change material reality. In your opinion one does.
In my opinion it matters not a jot if adults want to believe either example of identification changes material reality... until there is a conflict of rights or harm done to the vulnerable.

Gruffalux

LLMMLL wrote: »

They might matter to you. But you shouldn’t assume what matters to you matters to other people. The words “him” and “his” have no medical or biological impact. Medicine and biology can proceed perfectly fine if people say “his vagina”. I think you’ll find that most scientific practitioners will shrug their shoulders and get on with their actual work and leave the obsessive authoritarians to try and impose language restrictions.

Blood transfusions cannot proceed perfectly fine if people are not clear about factual sex. A male has a 13% extra chance of dying in the following couple of years if he gets blood from a female who has ever been pregnant.

Indeed medicines are processed quite differently by male and female bodies and thus biological sex matters.


https://www.livescience.com/60702-blood-transfusions-women-men.html

Overall, nearly 4,000 participants died during the study period. For male patients, there were 101 deaths per 1,000 people per year among those who received blood from female donors with a history of pregnancy, compared with just 80 deaths per 1,000 people per year among those who received blood from male donors. This increased rate of death was seen only for men ages 50 and younger.

Among the men who received blood from women without a history of pregnancy, there were 78 deaths per 1,000 people per year — about the same as the rate of death among men who received transfusions from male donors.

For women, there was not an increase in the rate of death among those who received blood from ever-pregnant or never-pregnant women, compared with those who received blood from male donors.

Wibbs

LLMMLL wrote: »

They might matter to you. But you shouldn’t assume what matters to you matters to other people.

And the irony bypass strikes again.

The words “him” and “his” have no medical or biological impact.

This is the epitome of the delusion often found in self identity politics. Of course they have an impact. Saying to a doctor "his pregnancy" or "her testicular cancer" brings up a long list of medical questions and a large side order of WTF and will have real world impacts for diagnosis and treatment and outcome.

Medicine and biology can proceed perfectly fine if people say “his vagina”.

Maybe in tumblr or twitterland, but because actual science is fundamentally based on agreed on and backed up by observation and experiment definitions the vagina is a female physiological structure and the penis is a male physiological structure. Brace yourself: These are facts. Facts that are about as old and agreed upon as one can find. Saying "his vagina" or "her penis" is akin to saying "human wings", it's a complete bloody nonsense.

I think you’ll find that most scientific practitioners will shrug their shoulders and get on with their actual work and leave the obsessive authoritarians to try and impose language restrictions.

and will leave the scientifically delude to believe what they are happy to believe while they work with empirical definitions and realities not modish identity politics gone daft.

One eyed Jack

Gruffalux wrote: »

Blood transfusions cannot proceed perfectly fine if people are not clear about factual sex.

You know they do blood tests and don’t just take your word for it? That aside, did you not read this at the bottom of the article -


But the study had limitations. For example, because the patients in the study received blood transfusions from only one type of donor, these patients tended to receive fewer transfusions than the average transfusion patient. (The chances that a patient received transfusions from more than one type of donor increases with the number of transfusions.) So it's unclear how well the findings apply to the general population of transfusion patients (who may be sicker than those in the study), the researchers said.

In addition, the finding of an increased risk of death among men who received transfusions from ever-pregnant women was true only for men ages 50 and younger. "This makes the findings very tentative, and they require validation in other studies," the researchers wrote.

But if future studies do show a similar link, "blood centers and transfusion services will need to mitigate this risk," Cable and Edgren said in their editorial. This might be done by matching donors and recipients based on sex, or by modifying donor blood in such a way as to further remove immune system factors that might be responsible for the link, they said.


In reality, the factor that will have the most impact is cost. I had an autologous transfusion done for my first operation. The second time I was told it was no longer being done because it was too costly. There’s some amount of legalese involved if you refuse to allow a blood transfusion, and there’s a risk that the anaesthesiologist will go through you for a shortcut :pac:

RWCNT

Wibbs wrote: »

And the irony bypass strikes again.
This is the epitome of the delusion often found in self identity politics. Of course they have an impact. Saying to a doctor "his pregnancy" or "her testicular cancer" brings up a long list of medical questions and a large side order of WTF and will have real world impacts for diagnosis and treatment and outcome.

Maybe in tumblr or twitterland, but because actual science is fundamentally based on agreed on and backed up by observation and experiment definitions the vagina is a female physiological structure and the penis is a male physiological structure. Brace yourself: These are facts. Facts that are about as old and agreed upon as one can find. Saying "his vagina" or "her penis" is akin to saying "human wings", it's a complete bloody nonsense.

and will leave the scientifically delude to believe what they are happy to believe while they work with empirical definitions and realities not modish identity politics gone daft.

You've said yourself that you're happy to use male or female pronouns on request out of politeness, why would we change that when we get down to discussing what bits people have?

What sort of impacts are we talking about and what ties them to the use of admittedly weird sounding language like "His pregnancy"? My thinking as a lay person would be a doctor should be told if a patient is trans as there may be extra considerations at play due to medications being taken etc. Your last sentence basically cuts to the core of it - a dick doctor is going to treat a dick like a dick as is appropriate with the patient's medical history and needs, whether it's referred to as his,hers,zis or xer's dick probably doesn't make much difference. I may well be missing something, just not seeing how this conversation around the language is particularly important.

Dyr

grassylawn wrote: »

They're a very charming person

suicide_circus

LLMMLL wrote: »

They might matter to you. But you shouldn’t assume what matters to you matters to other people.

So if my understanding of reality dosnt matter to you, why would i give a fiddlers about your version of reality? At least my version has vast swaths of evidence backing it up.

LLMMLL

Gruffalux wrote: »

Both conditions very often share important features - notably dysphoria about the body. I do not ''assume'' there are commonalities - because there are in many cases. Otherwise why would people have or seek to have healthy organs/appendages removed.

One can never get an example that is an exact match for transgenderism just as if you say to me show me something that is exactly comparable to a football. I cannot - there are only footballs that are exactly like footballs. So it is an impossible task you ask. But there are objects that are similar. Just as say for example if I compare asthma to COPD, or rheumatism to arthritis, though they are not the same there are commonalities.

I did not claim dysphoric feelings lead to material changes. I said that the identity that is claimed in the wake of dysphoric feelings re gender is claimed to have material effects - by you. I compared this to the identity as disabled that may be claimed by someone with BIID.
In my opinion neither identifications change material reality. In your opinion one does.
In my opinion it matters not a jot if adults want to believe either example of identification changes material reality... until there is a conflict of rights or harm done to the vulnerable.

I’ve never claimed identifications change material reality. I’ve said they reflect it.

LLMMLL

Gruffalux wrote: »

Blood transfusions cannot proceed perfectly fine if people are not clear about factual sex. A male has a 13% extra chance of dying in the following couple of years if he gets blood from a female who has ever been pregnant.

Indeed medicines are processed quite differently by male and female bodies and thus biological sex matters.


https://www.livescience.com/60702-blood-transfusions-women-men.html

And if someone presents as Male and mentions their vagina I think a medical professional has the capability of getting the necessary facts they need to pick the right treatment. Terminology will have no effect here.

LLMMLL

Wibbs wrote: »

And the irony bypass strikes again.
This is the epitome of the delusion often found in self identity politics. Of course they have an impact. Saying to a doctor "his pregnancy" or "her testicular cancer" brings up a long list of medical questions and a large side order of WTF and will have real world impacts for diagnosis and treatment and outcome.

Maybe in tumblr or twitterland, but because actual science is fundamentally based on agreed on and backed up by observation and experiment definitions the vagina is a female physiological structure and the penis is a male physiological structure. Brace yourself: These are facts. Facts that are about as old and agreed upon as one can find. Saying "his vagina" or "her penis" is akin to saying "human wings", it's a complete bloody nonsense.

and will leave the scientifically delude to believe what they are happy to believe while they work with empirical definitions and realities not modish identity politics gone daft.

Yet you are able to show no consequences or “real world impacts” of this language usage.

Doctors treat trans people all the time. They are well able to deal with the language surrounding diagnosis and treatment.

It’s just language authoritarians telling us we must speak exactly how they speak or the sky will falll down yet unable to specify exactly what disastrous consequences we supposedly will see

Gruffalux

LLMMLL wrote: »

I’ve never claimed identifications change material reality. I’ve said they reflect it.

I know, really, what you claim. Your claims have gone so far over the other side of the mountain that the concept has to be parsed into little journeys that people can relate to...

Just in case people do not understand what you mean by these 2 sentences, you believe that the female who now says I am a man is expressing the reality of who they are (reflecting it). This reality is not something that has ''changed'' - it simply is. They have always been a man. Are a man now. And always will be a man. Their expression of identity is just to reflect this.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

And if someone presents as Male and mentions their vagina I think a medical professional has the capability of getting the necessary facts they need to pick the right treatment. Terminology will have no effect here.

Presents as male?

A woman who dresses and acts like a man you mean?

But how can that be when gender stereotypes are all social constructs?

What does "presenting" as a male entail in your mind?

B.A._Baracus

This is all getting a little mad now

LLMMLL

Gruffalux wrote: »

I know, really, what you claim. Your claims have gone so far over the other side of the mountain that the concept has to be parsed into little journeys that people can relate to...

Just in case people do not understand what you mean by these 2 sentences, you believe that the female who now says I am a man is expressing the reality of who they are (reflecting it). This reality is not something that has ''changed'' - it simply is. They have always been a man. Are a man now. And always will be a man. Their expression of identity is just to reflect this.

Yes.

Words do not change reality.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Presents as male?

A woman who dresses and acts like a man you mean?

But how can that be when gender stereotypes are all social constructs?

What does "presenting" as a male entail in your mind?

I’m talking about cis men and trans men. Presenting as Male could involve lots of things. Ticking the M box on a medical form for example.

One eyed Jack

LLMMLL wrote: »

And if someone presents as Male and mentions their vagina I think a medical professional has the capability of getting the necessary facts they need to pick the right treatment. Terminology will have no effect here.

Exactly. There weren’t testing for sex before now and patients haven’t been dropping off like flies, and in a later Canadian meta-analysis in 2019, two years after the Dutch study, scientists were still saying that their findings had to be interpreted with caution -


Dr. Zeller’s team summarized the evidence from studies that compared outcomes in patients who received sex-matched or sex-mismatched red blood cell transfusions. Their analysis suggests that sex-mismatched red blood cell transfusions may be associated with a higher risk of death, but more investigation is needed.

Dr. Zeller notes that the findings need to be interpreted with caution because the quality of the evidence from the studies they analysed was very low. “Although our study looked at the outcomes of over 85,000 patients, we found only observational studies — which have a higher risk of bias — available for our analysis,” she says. “But the findings suggest sex-mismatching in red blood cell transfusion is a potentially important issue that needs to be more rigorously examined.”


The point really was the definition of flinging excrement and hoping something sticks. In order to be taken seriously it would still have to be weighed against a whole multitude of other risks of blood transfusion procedures and processes in order to determine if the risks outweigh the benefits, before it even gets down to making decisions about individual patients healthcare and overall outcomes.

Gatling

LLMMLL wrote: »

. Presenting as Male could involve lots of things.

Like what exactly

Dante7

Gatling wrote: »

Like what exactly

Any of the traditional male gender stereotypes, obviously.

Sooner or later the penny will drop about how regressive the whole trans agenda is.

Gruffalux

If self identity reflects reality - no changes involved - then this represents people who have always been a man and a woman.

o1s1n

Gruffalux wrote: »

Just in case people do not understand what you mean by these 2 sentences, you believe that the female who now says I am a man is expressing the reality of who they are (reflecting it). This reality is not something that has ''changed'' - it simply is. They have always been a man. Are a man now. And always will be a man. Their expression of identity is just to reflect this.

Is that not just historical revisionism and gaslighting?

'No, it was always like that, don't question it, move along now please'

Caitlyn jenner wasn't always Caitlyn Jenner, there are literally words inscribed into gold medals to prove it.

Wibbs

RWCNT wrote: »

You've said yourself that you're happy to use male or female pronouns on request out of politeness, why would we change that when we get down to discussing what bits people have?

Because one is subjective. If someone wants me to call them an extraterrestrial it's no skin off my nose, even if I think it daft and I will out of courtesy refer to them as such, however if they the go on to insist they're actually an extraterrestrial and this is backed up by some nebulous "science" and berate me for not automatically respecting that, indeed insisting that I suspend belief in an obvious fact then I will all BS when I see it.

I may well be missing something, just not seeing how this conversation around the language is particularly important.

Because language is important when it comes to provable realities and realities are being ridden rough shod by a current and very loud identity politic with ever shifting definitions.

Gruffalux

o1s1n wrote: »

Is that not just historical revisionism and gaslighting?

'No, it was always like that, don't question it, move along now please'

Caitlyn jenner wasn't always Caitlyn Jenner, there are literally words inscribed into gold medals to prove it.

It is interesting regarding what it means for detransitioners, desisters, and gender fluid people. Also from my reading of trans people's opinions many do not want their past erased. They know they are fathers, mothers, were girl or boy children, went through sexed puberties, etc. Trans Rights Activists seem to often be much more ideologically possessed than transgender people themselves.