Hungary Scrap Gender Studies Indoctrination Courses

Brian? wrote: »

All you’ve done here is prove my point. A societies definition of what constitutes nudity is entirely subjective and not inate.

I didn't prove your point. You said among such societies "Nudity is not taboo". This is completely incorrect. The line where nudity is perceived is culturally based and I never claimed otherwise, indeed my last post points this out, but the idea of nudity itself is innate and present in near every society save for among Western nudist groups.

Brian? wrote: »

I’ve read many times about how liberal pre Christian societies were in Ireland. Women played a much bigger role in society, homosexuality was accepted and nudity wasn’t as much of a taboo.

More pre "civilised" utopian nonsense. As usual its far more complex than that. Pre Christian societies were anything but liberal by our terms. That they seemed to be OK at times with homosexuality among men(which itself is hard to pin down) and high born women had some rights doesn't really cut it.

The same can be said for pre Christian Italy and Greece.

You must be having a laugh now. With the exception of Sparta at times, where women had more autonomy, the Greek city states made the most right wing modern state look like a US social studies class. Women were not seen and not heard. A walk through the streets of Athens would make you think it a male only culture(with slaves). Women were essentially cloistered for the majority of their lives. Whores actually had more freedom. They were OK with some contextual male nudity, but female nudity not nearly so much(though breasts could be out and about). Homosexuality was based on male pederasty and dominance. Rome while not quite as anti women, was just as complex. Both societies were incredibly patriarchal. If anything homosexuality reinforced this set up. The streets of San Fran it was not. Nudity? Public nudity outside of very specific contexts was seen as shameful in both societies. One reason the Celts freaked out the Romans was the fact they often went into battle in the nip(not quite there either as they usually wore body paint). The Romans were even more dubious of public nudity and it was seen as demeaning or downright immoral.

Compare this with non Abrhamic societies in the Far East and the America’s. These societies were far more accepting of homosexuality in particular and placed no real judgement on nudity.

Again with this notion of nudity.

Brian? wrote: »

Are you saying trans women are fake women?

Personal opinion? I would believe there are three genders. Male, female and intersex. Trans individuals fall into the latter group. Common civility and humanity would have me regard and adresss an individual by their believed and identifying gender, but they're not actually women, or men for that matter in the case of F to M Trans people. I would not regard them as "fake", as such individuals suffer from genetic/congenital/hormonal conditions that "make" them this way through zero fault of their own. And they need help and support for that. However statements like "a woman's penis" or "a man's vagina" are clearly scientifically provable nonsense. That this is even up for rational debate is staggering. Never mind that someone can in some circles be circumscribed for stating such actual facts.

Sardonicat wrote: »

You are aware that people can be born with the sexual organs of both genders, aren't you? There are a number of conditions which result in this. Sometimes it's apparent at birth and sometimes it isn't discovered til puberty or even later. And it's not as rare as you think.

Actually not so. True human hermaphrodites are vanishingly rare. IE what you describe, possessing the sexual organs of both genders. For obvious physiological reasons. The sexual organs of both sexes are analogous to each other. They're not separate things, where someone has both. EG the penis and the clitoris, the testes and the ovaries. Intersex covers a range of conditions alright. Usually presenting at least physically with external sexual organs that are not quite one or the other. EG a girl born with an unusually large clitoris, or a boy born with an unusually small penis. There are other genetic faults and conditions that fall under the intersex banner. In some an individual may not even know they have any condition until say puberty doesn't go normally, or a woman tries for children only to find out she's intersex and infertile. The majority of Trans folks are not classically or clinically intersex. They present physically and chromosomally as the gender they're described at birth.

LLMMLL wrote: »

Can you say “a mans breasts”?

Silly comparison. You can also say a woman/man's shoulders, legs, feet. The vagina is a structure only found in healthy normal women. The penis is a structure only found in healthy normal men. A person that has a penis and external gonads and XY chromosomes is a man, not a woman.