Mad stuff, dafuq is the world coming to?
The biological boy IS a male.
We'll go round the circle again. By your logic, that assuming that a 'biological' boy will identify as a male (a subjective decision) is an abomination. Want to go around a third time.
Of course genders exist on a subjective basis. Hundreds are invented each month.
You can have an individual subscribe to agender, then 2-years later to demi-gender, then 20-years later to neutrois.
For sure, these "genders" subjectively exist - and those who subscribe to them are quite happy with these labels.
But these labels do not objectively exist.
They are, as I have said many times now, personality descriptions - nothing more to make the person feel special and unique about themselves.
To impose that severe level of social subjectivity onto children, and to assume they know exactly what they are doing, at 4-years old, is a catastrophe. It really is an abomination.
Shame real life isn't as simple. If only it was.
Nah. A male child being a boy isn't a matter of opinion.
Yeah. I don't think you can follow that thought through. Genders are a personality trait about 20 minutes ago. Now, when that doesn't get you where you want to go, now Genders don't exist
In your opinion.
You are treating the child as a boy.
Because he is one.
Gender doesn't exist.
What part of that don't you understand?
You have boys, and you have girls. That's it.
The mermaids .....
Barbie at one end Gi Joe at one end and 10 others in between ,
Neither dolls display gender specific organs ,none nothing.
That's not scientific, not in any way ......
Biology and science say that there are two genders though.
Again by your words,
A) a child with male sex organs is objectively a boy.
B) However, the child's gender is subjective. Could be anything. Could be cis, could identify as a male, might not be. It's subjective.
"Therefore imposing subjectivity (any gender) upon a 4 year old is an affront against humanity"
Therefore imposing any gender on a 4 year old (even assuming that the objectively male child will identify as male) is an affront against humanity.
My belief that men are men and women are women may be wrong?
Is that a genuine question?
I mean, you may as well be asking if it might be possible that my belief that ears are responsible for being able to hear is incorrect.
How?
I've already said that biological sex is objective.
Gender cannot be proved. By what test can we prove gender and/or gender identity?
For sex, we know exactly what we would do.
For gender, we rely on subjective opinion - which is the opposite of objectivity.
By your logic, raising a "biological male" as a boy is an affront against humanity.
The hermaphrodite and the intersex individual are a different category of person, and must not be conflated with the transgender individual. For instance, most people who are intersex do not identify as transgender. Even if they did, that wouldn't validate your point.
People can indeed choose to change their gender (as is often the case), that's my point. That it can be changed through subjective choice.
Sex cannot be changed, no matter what you believe or think.
Therefore imposing subjectivity upon 4-year old children, who can barely count, is an affront against humanity.
So, you do not have a problem with people choosing/changing their gender?
As an aside, do you believe hermaphrodites exist?
We can objectively test for the existence of sex.
Gender is subjective. What gender a person chooses today can be changed in 2 weeks, 2 months, or 20 years from now. It's the very opposite of objective.
There is nothing provable about the existence of gender. It's nothing more than a personality description that can shift with time.
So yes, problem solved - unless you have evidence that contradicts any of the above.
Great. Problem solved.
I propose that gender doesn't even exist.
Sex, yes - objectively exists.
Gender is nothing more than personality descriptions.
The difference is that those who propose the spectrum approach to gender do not exclude those who would be 100% feminine or 100% masculine.
Those who propose that gender is not a spectrum but one based on two biological sexes excludes the experience of many. It seems allowing for the experience of others is difficult for some. Not sure why.
Throw away the labels, and let those poor children be.
It's really not complicated.
Not sure why you're talking about masculine vs feminine. There are plenty of feminine guys I know and they are male. They are not 87% male or 50% male.
For someone who claims to be against identifying gender with toy-choice you are very happy to conflate stereotypical masculine traits with being male when it suits you.
Gender IS a spectrum, that's for sure (at least that's what we're told).
Gender is a vast spectrum that extends from the zenith of masculinity to the nadir of feminism - and everything in between. Given the social construct is to vast, broad and even more extensive, it means that all of us - regardless of whether we identify as trans- or non-trans - fall on this spectrum in some way.
I myself am not 100% masculine. Maybe 89%, perhaps 92% - who knows. Certainly not the perfect example. Where would you fall?
And that's the point.
If we are to accept the principle that gender is a spectrum, then all of us - no matter who we are, nor what we believe - fall onto that spectrum and must, by definition, be transgender to some degree.
Is there a human being on the planet we can point to who is 100% masculine?
Is there a human being on the planet we can point to who is 100% feminine?
No, of course not.
But, we are not all transgender.
And that's the problem. And it's a problem that the pro-trans lobby singularly fails to address.
This is a religion. Facts and evidence are set aside. No evidence can possibly be produced to convince the other side they may be wrong. Instead, it comes down to the classic age-old method of religious fundamentalism - namely, proselytization, what you feel, and how you must convert the "other" to the just position.
Quite a lot of scientific research, check the literature.
I seem to have made a mistake.
I wrongly assumed that the poster was talking about condemning or repealing all trans- legislation/rights. I'm obviously against that. Trans- rights exist and we must support those rights - to a point, when it doesn't interfere with the rights of legitimate women.
And I'm definitely against the introduction of this pernicious "guidance", which - in my view - is nothing more than a Trojan horse for far worse legislation yet to come.
Ok, that's your belief. Other people have other beliefs.
The scientific research is ongoing. Would you ever consider that it's possible that your beliefs may be shown to be wrong?
"No reason for children to even know about this nonsense"
It's gas like, you are conveniently ignoring the fact children inherently know this. The know what gender they perceive themselves. They don't need labels and it's nothing to do with Barbie's or boys wearing dresses. That's some (ignorant) adults thinking being put onto children.
People need to get a grip of themselves, thus really is about providing a little bit of support to children who may be trans. Not converting kids en masse or some "trans agenda" to trans everyone up or any other such nonsense.
None of which is proof/evidence that people would seek to take the right away from adults to make such a choice.
The difference is when that choice interacts with other peoples lives, and their own perceived rights. For people like yourself, you seem to believe that the perceived rights of trans people trumps that of everyone else.
You see? I can make a statement based from basically nothing too, although you made a more definite statement by using "would", as opposed to my "seem to". In any case, both statements are based on nothing except opinion.
As for trans people not existing, that's the extreme response by advocates of transgender topics, whenever someone says that they believe in biology over the wishes of people.. It's been thrown at quite a few posters on this thread, when they questioned the beliefs of the trans ideology. Generally speaking, most posters against the trans movement, know that there is a tiny percentage of the population that are genuinely trans... but will point out that the remainder claiming such a state are delusional, misguided or mistaken.
But at the same time anyone who disagrees is a rabid transphobe , homophobic , woman hater because they don't believe a man who says they are a real woman just by saying that they are a woman .and the word Woman , women ,girls , mother is offensive to these men ,so women should be replaced with those who menstruate ,or those who carry children .
This is Why threads go aray ,you have a tiny militant group who think there here to stop any discussions on the topic . unless they can decide what words and phrases are banned because someone , somewhere might be offended
Thank you for your show of support for the LGBTQ community
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/9c6ef39403f5dc93bd4b9e77a11c1821.svg)