The Case For Transgenderism In Society - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

The Case For Transgenderism In Society
in Politics

If you're opposed to one being transgender and/or opposed to the normalizing and acceptance of transgenderism in society, why is this so?
I shall test your wit. Do not disappoint me.



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
22%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

  • @Shadowtongue. I think like me most of the opposition comes from the movement wanting things like allowing trans females to participate in female sports, changing the way bathrooms work, and limiting free speech.

  • I have no problem with transgenderism and have several transgender friends. What I dislike is when people pretend that transgender people do not face any issues as a result of transition; in reality, the transition is quite health-damaging and puts one (as of now) on life-long medications and somewhat messes up one's physiology. The long-term effects are not studied very well, as the whole subject was barely talked about up until a few decades ago, but it seems that transgenders have quite a bit shorter lifespan (even when we correct for the suicide cases), are more prone to negative mood swings (not related to just discrimination against them, but directly to the shifts in their physiology), and several other factors like this can be mentioned.

    It is much like obesity acceptance: some people say that it is okay to be obese and there are no issues whatsoever related to it, but that is not true. Now, unlike transgender people, obese people can actually do something about their weight without losing in countless other aspects of their lives - but the drill is the same: it is okay to accept obese people, but it is wrong to ignore the obvious issues related to obesity.

    If someone wants to perform transition, then all the power to them! But they should understand the consequences of that. Telling them, "Oh, just go for it, it will be fine!", on a societal scale is going to ruin a lot of lives. The consequences of the transition should be widely known and spoken about honestly, without all these "You are transphobic!" attacks, so people know what they are signing up for.
    StoneTTBsmoothie
  • My opinion on this matter is probably a little controversial, but here it is anyways:

    First the scientific basis for my stance:

    There is a growing body of evidence which suggests that someone becomes transgender when there is a chemical imbalance in the womb during different stages of development. Although this is not an absolute, it does seem to be the case in many of the circumstances and a root cause of brain developmental changes that lead to gender dysphoria latter in life.
    https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/

    For someone who is transgender, a great expense is required in order to make them comfortable. This can include hormone treatment, therapy, and reasignment surgery. This expense can easily be six figures in the patients lifetime, either as insurance expenses or out of pocket cost.
    https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com/article/transgender-patients-calculating-actual-cost

    It is a fact that transgenders have higher instances of mental illness and receive much more harassment over their lifetimes than those who are born cis-gendered.



    It is my position, that the solution to trans issues is to determine what exactly it is that makes someone become transgender, especially if it is due to hormone imbalance in the womb, and treat it there, so that the child develops into a cis-gendered person and can live a healthy, happy, and productive life, free from the high costs of hormone therapy and the indignation of society.
    AlofRIWe_are_accountable
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation, Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root and developed into the human race, who conquered fire, built societies and developed technology .
    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • AlofRIAlofRI 462 Pts
    If I were a Christian I would have to consider transgenders a creation of God and take care of them like any other. If I were a Christian I would have to consider people of other colors (races), creations of God, and treat them as equals. If I was a Christian I would have to consider this planet a creation of God, and do all I could to protect it. If I were a Christian I would have to reject a philandering, lying, cruel, adulterous leader. 

    That's some of the reason I am not. Only about half of them, in this country, seem to be protective of "God's Creations", like transgenders, like the planet, like races, like women. I'm not interested in joining a club that is only half way humane.
  • @MichaelElpers

    Why shouldn’t we allow trans females to participate in female sports? Define female, also. Why shouldn’t we strive for more universalized bathrooms? And what do you mean by limiting free speech and do you recognize that both free speech and transgenderism can both exist in society?

    I shall test your wit. Do not disappoint me.
  • @Happy_Killbot

    Even if it is true that gender dysphoria is caused by chemical imbalances, why should one not be allowed to pursue transgenderism in light of this?

    Sure, the costs of transgenderism may be high, but don’t all sorts of people have all varying degrees of medical bills to pay as well? Also, how does high medical costs equate to the denial of transgenderism?

    Perhaps transgenders do have higher instances of mental illness and perhaps they will receive harassment, but how do these things bring us to the conclusion of barring or discouraging transgenderism? Do we neglect or deny mental illness in other people? Should we not have given civil rights to non-white people because initial integration would potentially lead to increased harassment?

    If your ultimate end goal is for someone to lead a healthy, happy and productive life, how come one shouldn’t perhaps take the path of transgenderism if they so feel strongly inclined?

    I shall test your wit. Do not disappoint me.
  • @Shadowtongue

    I think you misunderstand what I am saying.

    All of this happens before the individual is born, my goal is not to lead people to happy healthy and productive lives, it is to eliminate the need for someone to take a path that leads to sadness, misery, and become unproductive.

    I don't think that people "choose" to be transgendered, it is something that they physically are. Because of this, it is possible to engineer the solution.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation, Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root and developed into the human race, who conquered fire, built societies and developed technology .
    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 2803 Pts
    edited February 8
    @Shadowtongue

    The reason female sports exist at all is because females biologically have much weaker bodies physically than males. It impairs them in many ways when it comes to most sports, and they cannot seriously compete with men in them - so, in order to allow them to be competitive in their own rights, female leagues are introduced.

    The problem with including MtF transgenders there is that they have biologically male bodies, hence they, with proper training, will statistically easily outcompete all women, defeating the whole purpose.

    To see how huge the difference is, consider the 100 m run: the world record is 9.58 seconds, while the female world record is 10.49 seconds. Rough analysis results in approximately 10,000 male runners in the world being able to beat the fastest female in the world... If just one of these 10,000 males decides to change gender and does the run before HRT weakens his body significantly, then he will set a new world record and make all female attempts to beat the record obsolete for a very long time.

    Now, there is no issue if you do not care about records and results overall and just care about sports in general - in that case, there is no reason to even have two different leagues, and everyone can compete in a single unisex league. However, you are going to repel many women from participating in that, knowing that they will always be second rate sports people. And in some contact sports, such as boxing or football, women even may be in serious danger when competing against men or early MtF transgenders.

    I do not know what leagues transgenders should compete in; it is a tough question. I guess, the best answer I can give right now is that if you want to dedicate your life to professional sports, then you should refrain from transitioning.
    smoothie
  • @MayCaesar

    Perhaps certain aspects of gender transitioning may cause certain downsides, but this can improve over time and you recognize that people take medications or treatments for other kinds of health conditions or issues which may have some downsides but understand they’re for the greater benefit, correct?

    As far as your obesity claim goes, one should indeed accept obese people in society but also not shy away from pointing out the health risks of obesity. Now, the issues that may exist with transitioning and obesity are not exactly analogous, as obesity will always be intrinsically unhealthy by nature of its condition, whereas transgenderism is not intrinsically unhealthy but simply may be hindered by current technology and understanding that can improve over time.

    For your last point, I agree one should be made aware of potential consequences and not be censored from telling so on the basis of fear of offense or anything else of that nature. Transgender discrimination and recognition of health concerns in relation to the contemporary processes of transitioning are indeed vastly different and should not be falsely equated, so I more or less don’t find much to dispute here.

    In all, while there is some minutia of which I may contend with you, I don’t take too much issue on your argument as it is more so about health and practicality concerns as opposed to actual bigotry.

    I shall test your wit. Do not disappoint me.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 2803 Pts
    edited February 9
    @Shadowtongue

    Oh, absolutely, the methods can improve, and perhaps at some point full transition will be possible, where the transgender person cannot be told from a cisgender one. As of now, however, this is not the case, and everyone enrolling in the transitioning process should understand clearly what they are in for.

    Transgenderism may or may not be intrinsically unhealthy; more research is needed to tell for sure. It is very unhealthy in how it works nowadays, however, and while the health damage can be mitigated by various means, it overall seems to be a pretty damaging process.

    I agree that discrimination based on irrelevant issues, such as one's voice, looks or mismatch with the gender on the birth certificate, should be called out. Transgender people already have hard enough lives as it is; there is no need to make it even worse by denying them equal footing in the society.
    At the same time, it is important to respect freedoms of those who, for some reason, refuse to accept them. I do not take much issue with people calling them their biological gender, rather than their preferred gender, although I can understand how painful it can be to the transgender person.
    smoothie
  • I have a transgender friend I met in high school. I met them as a male, and one day they told me they would like to be called a female instead. This was strange to me at the time, but overall we are still great friends. This was hard for me at first, because I only knew them as a male. I still may mindlessly call them a "he" to this day. I know it can be sometimes disrespectful to do this for some people, but it's hard for me to "see" them as another gender if that makes sense. They don't really mind what I call them anymore.

    Transgenders will still remain with secondary-sex characteristics from their biological sex, and I notice them immediately. Face structure is different between sexes, biological men will have broader shoulders, Adam's apple, and natural strength. Biological women will have curvier bodies, much less body hair, and a higher-pitched voice.

    I don't have anything against them and will not discriminate, it's just modern transgender surgeries are not at the point where the transgender looks entirely like their preferred gender so it confuses me at times.
    MayCaesarPlaffelvohfen
    The trolls have taken over this website
  • @Shadowtongue. They shouldnt be able to patticipate in female sports because people born male have a distinct advantage, which is why the sports must be separated by sex in the first place.

    We have men and female bathrooms to allow privacy for the opposite sex...i dont really care what bathroom i use, if its a single use bathroom and i have to go i have no problem using the womens, the bathroom i use is not tied to my identity i do it out of respect for the privacy of others.

    With regards to free speech, lgbtq and their movement push for penalties on those who refuse to use the pronouns they prefer...no other group is protected in this way.  People claim the transgender suicide rate is due to bullying, but their suicide rate is much higher than slaves and jews during the holocaust and that is not comparable.
  • @Happy_Killbot

    You did kind of say that, though. Your first post added, “...so that the child develops into a cis-gendered person and can live a healthy, happy, and productive life...” Also, isn’t the opposite path of sadness, misery and unproductiveness kind of the path of healthiness, happiness and productiveness?

    I agree that people are born with the inclination to be of another sexual orientation. So, if someone doesn’t want to be engineered to be cis-oriented and wants to instead embark on the path of transgenderism, especially in a hypothetical future where such procedures take less tolls, shouldn’t this path be accepted as well as long as those who wish to transition are made aware of potential consequences of transitioning? Not saying that one shouldn’t be allowed to or should be discouraged from such futuristic, hypothetical cis-orientation if they want to take that path instead, but I view that both should be accepted and worked upon so that both options are viable and available to the whims of affected persons.

    I shall test your wit. Do not disappoint me.
  • @MayCaesar

    This reply is in correspondence with your sports comments.

    Well, while I can kind of see some understanding in your argumentation, this does nonetheless create issues. For instance, say a biologically born female is born with a genetic fluke of having masculine-ish strength and stature. Should this non-transgender be barred from female sports now? What about women who may be stronger than other women? What’s the defined strength and stature that objectively should constitute female sports acceptance?

    I shall test your wit. Do not disappoint me.
  • @smoothie

    While it may be true that transgender people currently retain certain secondary-sex features, there is merit in calling them by their preferred pronoun since them having inclination toward the gender creates some objective similarity to that gender. For example, there is no merit in me calling myself a ladybug because I have no natural inclination toward and possess no features of being a ladybug, but say a person was born in a genetic lab and somehow got their genetic code mixed up with ladybug genetic code and they ended up having some associative inclinations toward ladybugs, now this human has objective merit to identify as a ladybug because, while not entirely the same as a ladybug, there is some factual merit which allows for the term to have existing application to this person.

    Also, it can be argued that, in the future, we can have biological and technological innovation which allows for almost flawless transitioning, so this transgender dilemma of which you describe only really is applicable to this point in time and may be totally irrelevant in said hypothetical future.

    I shall test your wit. Do not disappoint me.
  • @MichaelElpers

    I faced a similar argument from @MayCaesar on the front of sports. The crux of my argumentation is that if you start barring transgender women from sports because of their advantages due to strength and stature, can we now bar females who may have genetic flukes to have male-like features and can we just start barring women who are stronger than other women and create an application crisis? What strength and stature objectively applies to allow someone into female sports? If a man is born with feminine strength and stature, can he now participate in women’s sports?

    On your point of bathroom privacy, I suppose this is a better argument, but could we perhaps end this sort of gender segregation, for lack of a better term, and create more secure, unisex bathrooms instead of the way we contemporarily do things?

    The free speech issue you bring up is probably the most interesting part of your reply. You object to penalizing people for using incorrect pronouns, but I do have some objection to your stance. I’ll first say that if one accidentally uses an incorrect pronoun, they shouldn’t receive penalty because it was accidental. However, if you don’t want to penalize people from using incorrect pronoun association intentionally, should we now allow people to speak to others with other kinds of terms of which they don’t like? At work, can I go up to a black employee and call him a racial slur and then decry penalty on the basis that I should be allowed to call him whatever I want? Now, I understand there has to be a standard, and I’d draw a standard at that there should be no obligation to call one by an identity of which there exists no factual merit for application. For example, unlike transgender people, there is no factual merit for one to identify as cotton candy and so I shouldn’t receive penalty for not calling them cotton candy.

    I shall test your wit. Do not disappoint me.
  • @Shadowtongue

    Well, in sports one's biology plays a major role inherently; it is not something that can be avoided. Some sports somewhat mitigate it by further dividing people into categories; for example, in boxing there are multiple weight divisions.

    However, men are systematically stronger than women statistically, to the point where the strongest professional sportswomen tend to be weaker than the average amateur sportsman. If we are to have any division at all, the first division point should be between women and men. Bear in mind that physical strength is not the only relevant divisor between genders, although it is arguably the most significant one; women also, for example, handle physical pain differently from men, and even a woman with a comparable physical strength to that of another man is generally going to be much more fragile than him.

    One could argue for lack of any division; fully unisex sports. There are many issues with that, but it could be one solution to the problem, in principle. The other extreme way is extreme decentralisation of sports, with many different divisions based one people's biological strength and other relevant parameters, but forgoing their gender - however, this would be too complicated a system, and people would take such division much less seriously.

    I think the current system works pretty well, and while it certainly creates inconveniences for some minorities, it is better than any alternative I can think of, which would inconvenience far more people.
  • @Shadowtongue. Men and women are born with different physical stature, but if men could participate in womens sports there would be no women in sports period ( woman is someone born with xx chromosome).

    If you say something inappropriate at your job you are penalized by your private employer, they can set whatever bounds they want.  You wont be penalized legally or federally, that is different.
  • DeeDee 1491 Pts
    @Shadowtongue

    ***** Why shouldn’t we allow trans females to participate in female sports?

    Because in most cases they have an unfair advantage 

     *****Define female, also. 

    A book on biology should sort you out there 

    ****Why shouldn’t we strive for more universalized bathrooms? 

    Who is “we” and do you speak for “we”? My wife for one does not want “universalized bathrooms” I don’t either , so please don’t speak for others 




  • @Shadowtongue Your rebuttal to my opinion is predicated on the assumption that the individual will have a choice in becoming transgender in the first place, however the crux of this assumption is that it doesn't contend with my opinion because the changes I suggest would happen before the individual was concision and would therefore be unable to make a choice in the matter.

    The changes occur before the individual is born.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation, Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root and developed into the human race, who conquered fire, built societies and developed technology .
    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • [For all of whom it may concern, I'm ending this particular debate here. You can decide who is in the factual right on the basis of what has been stated so far.]
    I shall test your wit. Do not disappoint me.
  • @Shadowtongue ; Transgenderism is a mental illness and if not for the unwise passage of the Mental Health Act of 1963 which inadvertently led to the closure of State-run mental health facilities, homosexuality-lesbianism-transgenderism would not be an issue in society today as these lost and hurting and confused individuals would be remitted for care, treatment, internment if necessary.

    When a man or woman is so cognitively confused and distanced from reality that they cannot discern natural human biological physiology and proper sexual protocol as per Nature, this is an untenable psychosis that certainly does not belong in the public square or in positions of influence and authority. America has so fallen from moral absolutes that a flagrant and boisterous sodomite is presently vying for the position of President of the United States. This fact alone confirms that America is a morally and ethically sick society and the United States is certainly under God's wrath for the shedding of innocent blood in the perversity of abortion and LGBTQ is the tell-tale sign of God's displeasure.


    smoothie
  •  First and foremost, people can do to their bodies what they wish. They can wear what they want. They can have things removed. They can take hormones. They can look however they feel. However, a wig does not a female make. It does not matter what is physically changed, their DNA remains the same and cannot be changed. Transgender is not a sex. As a definition it is" denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex." Hence, it was what sex they feel like they should be with no change to what they actually are biologically. There is no technical gender argument because science speaks for itself. 
      When it comes to issues like men who feel like they should be women, participating in sports with those who actually are women, it is mind blowing to me that there is actually an argument about it. For all intents and purposes, a man is demanding to play women's sports. This may seem like no big deal but when if it acceptable in one sport, it should be acceptable in all and that would include sports like wrestling and boxing. This is absolutely dangerous and unacceptable. The same general thought process should go into the bathroom and locker room issue, but of course, it didn't because people are more concerned about political correctness than common sense. I have no shame telling anyone that my daughter nor my granddaughters should be in a bathroom with any man, regardless of what they look like or what they feel like. 
      Also, the National Academy of Pediatrics released a paper recently that detailed, in cases of transitioning in children, it should be considered child abuse. 
      At the end of the day, adults can do what they want to. They should be able to dress, look and feel whatever way they want to without being abused, attacked or otherwise. However, their rights should not endanger others or their rights. Female athletes are fine with people who choose to physically change their appearance, but are just asking that they not be affected negatively by said person's choices. 
  • My opinion on this matter is probably a little controversial, but here it is anyways:

    First the scientific basis for my stance:

    There is a growing body of evidence which suggests that someone becomes transgender when there is a chemical imbalance in the womb during different stages of development. Although this is not an absolute, it does seem to be the case in many of the circumstances and a root cause of brain developmental changes that lead to gender dysphoria latter in life.
    https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/

    For someone who is transgender, a great expense is required in order to make them comfortable. This can include hormone treatment, therapy, and reasignment surgery. This expense can easily be six figures in the patients lifetime, either as insurance expenses or out of pocket cost.
    https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com/article/transgender-patients-calculating-actual-cost

    It is a fact that transgenders have higher instances of mental illness and receive much more harassment over their lifetimes than those who are born cis-gendered.



    It is my position, that the solution to trans issues is to determine what exactly it is that makes someone become transgender, especially if it is due to hormone imbalance in the womb, and treat it there, so that the child develops into a cis-gendered person and can live a healthy, happy, and productive life, free from the high costs of hormone therapy and the indignation of society.
    I disagree. If someone wants to become transgender, they should be free to do so. Transgenderism is a choice, not a chemical imbalance.
  • piloteerpiloteer 580 Pts
    edited February 16
     First and foremost, people can do to their bodies what they wish. They can wear what they want. They can have things removed. They can take hormones. They can look however they feel. However, a wig does not a female make. It does not matter what is physically changed, their DNA remains the same and cannot be changed. Transgender is not a sex. As a definition it is" denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex." Hence, it was what sex they feel like they should be with no change to what they actually are biologically. There is no technical gender argument because science speaks for itself. 
      When it comes to issues like men who feel like they should be women, participating in sports with those who actually are women, it is mind blowing to me that there is actually an argument about it. For all intents and purposes, a man is demanding to play women's sports. This may seem like no big deal but when if it acceptable in one sport, it should be acceptable in all and that would include sports like wrestling and boxing. This is absolutely dangerous and unacceptable. The same general thought process should go into the bathroom and locker room issue, but of course, it didn't because people are more concerned about political correctness than common sense. I have no shame telling anyone that my daughter nor my granddaughters should be in a bathroom with any man, regardless of what they look like or what they feel like. 
      Also, the National Academy of Pediatrics released a paper recently that detailed, in cases of transitioning in children, it should be considered child abuse. 
      At the end of the day, adults can do what they want to. They should be able to dress, look and feel whatever way they want to without being abused, attacked or otherwise. However, their rights should not endanger others or their rights. Female athletes are fine with people who choose to physically change their appearance, but are just asking that they not be affected negatively by said person's choices. 
    How do we apply "birth sex" in society? It is applied through a system of social constructions pertaining to ones "birth sex". Those social constructions are now called gender identity or gender roles. There is nothing in anybody's DNA that says a woman cannot physically or mentally do or achieve anything a man can do, and vice versa! But when we apply gender roles to the equation, it is no longer a question of whether a woman can do anything a man can, it is now a question of whether a woman should do anything a man can. It is now a stereotypical image of men and woman that is applied socially. These gender roles are now applied socially in a manner of what is and is not socially acceptable for a man and woman to do. There's one blatantly obvious problem with these gender roles. They're not backed by science. They're only a system of social order and socially accepted behaviors, but they do not pertain to what men and women are actually physically and mentally capable of achieving. Another blatantly obvious problem with these gender roles is that they are not written in American law. There is nothing in the law that stipulates that men and women must adhere to gender roles, or that anybody must adhere to socially accepted behaviors. All we need to adhere to is the law, and social orders and socially accepted behaviour is not a legal stature of American law.

    Whether ones "birth sex" cannot be physically changed (as of now) is of no importance whatsoever. What is of importance is whether men and women can be allowed to circumvent socially acceptable behaviors and do what it is they want and are permitted to do by law. By laws that do not view gender identity or gender roles as a legitimate legal precedent. The purpose of the transgender movement is to allow men and women to do what they feel they should be able to do regardless of what's socially acceptable. It is a movement to allow men and women to wear whatever kind of cloths they like, play whatever sports they want, or not play sports, and speak however they feel fit. The movement needs to address and expose the social constructions pertaining to gender roles and point out how they are merely social illusions. Those gender roles do not align with what men and women are actually physically and mentally capable of achieving and what the legal precedent is for gender roles, which is none.

    You seem very concerned about your daughters and granddaughters being in bathrooms with grown men, but do you have any grandsons that you are OK with going into a bathroom alone with grown men? Since when have unspeakably terrible things only been happening to woman and young girls by grown men. Do predators not prey on young boys also? Where's your outrage over the hordes of little boys being taken advantage of in public bathrooms? Or is your fear actually unfounded because that's not actually an issue that's taking place? Since when was it only grown men who we don't know that cannot be trusted around children or women? If a woman has a son who is to small to defend himself from an onslaught of disgusting men in a public bathroom, should she be disallowed to accompany him in the men's bathroom, or he with her in the women's bathroom? Should parents not be allowed to go into a bathroom with their child who is of a different gender? Are terribly unspeakable things actually taking place in public bathrooms, or is it just a fear that's derived from those social constructions that we call gender roles?                  

    As far as your claim about American Pediatricians issuing a statement about gender transitioning being considered child abuse, it's not true. There was a small group within the American pediatrics association that put out what can only be summed up as a politically motivated opinion piece about gender transitioning for children. The National Academy of Pediatrics put out no such statement, and their view on gender transitioning in children does not add up to anything close to child abuse. 
      https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/americas-pediatricians-gender-kids/
  • @xlJ_dolphin_473

    My point goes a little deeper than "being a choice" and for this reason it is controversial.

    The point is your "choice" is influenced by chemistry. Trans persons do not just wake up one day and then decide: "you know what, today I want to change my gender".

    Science suggests that this change happens while their brain is developing, before they are even born, although the exact mechanism and reason is not known. If this is true, then being transgender isn't a "choice", it is something you are.

    For this reason, it can theoretically be engineered out using hormone balancing drugs or some similar technology which would allow the brain of the developing fetus to conform to the individuals genetic predisposition.

    In short, instead of changing their body to meet their brain after both are developed, we change the brain to meet the body before it is developed.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation, Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root and developed into the human race, who conquered fire, built societies and developed technology .
    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • piloteer said:
     First and foremost, people can do to their bodies what they wish. They can wear what they want. They can have things removed. They can take hormones. They can look however they feel. However, a wig does not a female make. It does not matter what is physically changed, their DNA remains the same and cannot be changed. Transgender is not a sex. As a definition it is" denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex." Hence, it was what sex they feel like they should be with no change to what they actually are biologically. There is no technical gender argument because science speaks for itself. 
      When it comes to issues like men who feel like they should be women, participating in sports with those who actually are women, it is mind blowing to me that there is actually an argument about it. For all intents and purposes, a man is demanding to play women's sports. This may seem like no big deal but when if it acceptable in one sport, it should be acceptable in all and that would include sports like wrestling and boxing. This is absolutely dangerous and unacceptable. The same general thought process should go into the bathroom and locker room issue, but of course, it didn't because people are more concerned about political correctness than common sense. I have no shame telling anyone that my daughter nor my granddaughters should be in a bathroom with any man, regardless of what they look like or what they feel like. 
      Also, the National Academy of Pediatrics released a paper recently that detailed, in cases of transitioning in children, it should be considered child abuse. 
      At the end of the day, adults can do what they want to. They should be able to dress, look and feel whatever way they want to without being abused, attacked or otherwise. However, their rights should not endanger others or their rights. Female athletes are fine with people who choose to physically change their appearance, but are just asking that they not be affected negatively by said person's choices. 
    How do we apply "birth sex" in society? It is applied through a system of social constructions pertaining to ones "birth sex". Those social constructions are now called gender identity or gender roles. There is nothing in anybody's DNA that says a woman cannot physically or mentally do or achieve anything a man can do, and vice versa! But when we apply gender roles to the equation, it is no longer a question of whether a woman can do anything a man can, it is now a question of whether a woman should do anything a man can. It is now a stereotypical image of men and woman that is applied socially. These gender roles are now applied socially in a manner of what is and is not socially acceptable for a man and woman to do. There's one blatantly obvious problem with these gender roles. They're not backed by science. They're only a system of social order and socially accepted behaviors, but they do not pertain to what men and women are actually physically and mentally capable of achieving. Another blatantly obvious problem with these gender roles is that they are not written in American law. There is nothing in the law that stipulates that men and women must adhere to gender roles, or that anybody must adhere to socially accepted behaviors. All we need to adhere to is the law, and social orders and socially accepted behaviour is not a legal stature of American law.

    Whether ones "birth sex" cannot be physically changed (as of now) is of no importance whatsoever. What is of importance is whether men and women can be allowed to circumvent socially acceptable behaviors and do what it is they want and are permitted to do by law. By laws that do not view gender identity or gender roles as a legitimate legal precedent. The purpose of the transgender movement is to allow men and women to do what they feel they should be able to do regardless of what's socially acceptable. It is a movement to allow men and women to wear whatever kind of cloths they like, play whatever sports they want, or not play sports, and speak however they feel fit. The movement needs to address and expose the social constructions pertaining to gender roles and point out how they are merely social illusions. Those gender roles do not align with what men and women are actually physically and mentally capable of achieving and what the legal precedent is for gender roles, which is none.

    You seem very concerned about your daughters and granddaughters being in bathrooms with grown men, but do you have any grandsons that you are OK with going into a bathroom alone with grown men? Since when have unspeakably terrible things only been happening to woman and young girls by grown men. Do predators not prey on young boys also? Where's your outrage over the hordes of little boys being taken advantage of in public bathrooms? Or is your fear actually unfounded because that's not actually an issue that's taking place? Since when was it only grown men who we don't know that cannot be trusted around children or women? If a woman has a son who is to small to defend himself from an onslaught of disgusting men in a public bathroom, should she be disallowed to accompany him in the men's bathroom, or he with her in the women's bathroom? Should parents not be allowed to go into a bathroom with their child who is of a different gender? Are terribly unspeakable things actually taking place in public bathrooms, or is it just a fear that's derived from those social constructions that we call gender roles?                  

    As far as your claim about American Pediatricians issuing a statement about gender transitioning being considered child abuse, it's not true. There was a small group within the American pediatrics association that put out what can only be summed up as a politically motivated opinion piece about gender transitioning for children. The National Academy of Pediatrics put out no such statement, and their view on gender transitioning in children does not add up to anything close to child abuse. 
      https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/americas-pediatricians-gender-kids/
    piloteer said:
     First and foremost, people can do to their bodies what they wish. They can wear what they want. They can have things removed. They can take hormones. They can look however they feel. However, a wig does not a female make. It does not matter what is physically changed, their DNA remains the same and cannot be changed. Transgender is not a sex. As a definition it is" denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex." Hence, it was what sex they feel like they should be with no change to what they actually are biologically. There is no technical gender argument because science speaks for itself. 
      When it comes to issues like men who feel like they should be women, participating in sports with those who actually are women, it is mind blowing to me that there is actually an argument about it. For all intents and purposes, a man is demanding to play women's sports. This may seem like no big deal but when if it acceptable in one sport, it should be acceptable in all and that would include sports like wrestling and boxing. This is absolutely dangerous and unacceptable. The same general thought process should go into the bathroom and locker room issue, but of course, it didn't because people are more concerned about political correctness than common sense. I have no shame telling anyone that my daughter nor my granddaughters should be in a bathroom with any man, regardless of what they look like or what they feel like. 
      Also, the National Academy of Pediatrics released a paper recently that detailed, in cases of transitioning in children, it should be considered child abuse. 
      At the end of the day, adults can do what they want to. They should be able to dress, look and feel whatever way they want to without being abused, attacked or otherwise. However, their rights should not endanger others or their rights. Female athletes are fine with people who choose to physically change their appearance, but are just asking that they not be affected negatively by said person's choices. 
    How do we apply "birth sex" in society? It is applied through a system of social constructions pertaining to ones "birth sex". Those social constructions are now called gender identity or gender roles. There is nothing in anybody's DNA that says a woman cannot physically or mentally do or achieve anything a man can do, and vice versa! But when we apply gender roles to the equation, it is no longer a question of whether a woman can do anything a man can, it is now a question of whether a woman should do anything a man can. It is now a stereotypical image of men and woman that is applied socially. These gender roles are now applied socially in a manner of what is and is not socially acceptable for a man and woman to do. There's one blatantly obvious problem with these gender roles. They're not backed by science. They're only a system of social order and socially accepted behaviors, but they do not pertain to what men and women are actually physically and mentally capable of achieving. Another blatantly obvious problem with these gender roles is that they are not written in American law. There is nothing in the law that stipulates that men and women must adhere to gender roles, or that anybody must adhere to socially accepted behaviors. All we need to adhere to is the law, and social orders and socially accepted behaviour is not a legal stature of American law.

    Whether ones "birth sex" cannot be physically changed (as of now) is of no importance whatsoever. What is of importance is whether men and women can be allowed to circumvent socially acceptable behaviors and do what it is they want and are permitted to do by law. By laws that do not view gender identity or gender roles as a legitimate legal precedent. The purpose of the transgender movement is to allow men and women to do what they feel they should be able to do regardless of what's socially acceptable. It is a movement to allow men and women to wear whatever kind of cloths they like, play whatever sports they want, or not play sports, and speak however they feel fit. The movement needs to address and expose the social constructions pertaining to gender roles and point out how they are merely social illusions. Those gender roles do not align with what men and women are actually physically and mentally capable of achieving and what the legal precedent is for gender roles, which is none.

    You seem very concerned about your daughters and granddaughters being in bathrooms with grown men, but do you have any grandsons that you are OK with going into a bathroom alone with grown men? Since when have unspeakably terrible things only been happening to woman and young girls by grown men. Do predators not prey on young boys also? Where's your outrage over the hordes of little boys being taken advantage of in public bathrooms? Or is your fear actually unfounded because that's not actually an issue that's taking place? Since when was it only grown men who we don't know that cannot be trusted around children or women? If a woman has a son who is to small to defend himself from an onslaught of disgusting men in a public bathroom, should she be disallowed to accompany him in the men's bathroom, or he with her in the women's bathroom? Should parents not be allowed to go into a bathroom with their child who is of a different gender? Are terribly unspeakable things actually taking place in public bathrooms, or is it just a fear that's derived from those social constructions that we call gender roles?                  

    As far as your claim about American Pediatricians issuing a statement about gender transitioning being considered child abuse, it's not true. There was a small group within the American pediatrics association that put out what can only be summed up as a politically motivated opinion piece about gender transitioning for children. The National Academy of Pediatrics put out no such statement, and their view on gender transitioning in children does not add up to anything close to child abuse. 
      https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/americas-pediatricians-gender-kids/
       Birth sex is absolutely not applied using anything social. Birth sex is determined by 5 scientific factors: chromosomal sex, the presence of the Y chromosome, gonadal sex, phenotypic sex, and sex hormones. No matter how the verbage has been twisted from birth sex to birth assignment, it is still determined the same way. The exceptions are defects that occur, as with anything else. This is the physical science that is confirmed and has not been changed. This has nothing to do with the metaphysical arguments of transgender situations, although activists want society to think so. The lines have been purposely blurred. 
     And to say that men and women, for the most part, are not physically different is absurd and not scientifically backed at all. Men, in general, are more muscular than women. We are about half as strong as their upper bodies and about a third as strong as their lower bodies. Male metabolism is faster and we convert more food to fat. Men have larger hearts and lungs. Women have larger livers, and other organs. Studies have shown that only one in twenty women are as strong as the average man. Our skeletons are even different. 
     These are a few and these are, of course, averages. There are always exceptions but these represent average majority. 



     You could have saved yourself the trouble of all of the typing by using only one of your sentences:

    The purpose of the transgender movement is to allow men and women to do whatever they feel like doing regardless of acceptance. 

     You are not accepting that you are arguing metaphysical against physical and it simply isn't possible. Social norms are simply opinions and they differ throughout the world. An example of a social norm mixed with law would be the 13 countries where it is socially unacceptable to be gay, Their laws reflect that norm in the form of death sentences. Some other social norms are that are different in countries are blowing your nose in public; wearing certain clothing; having sex before marriage, etc.. Social norms are only similar in that everybody has different ones. It has nothing to do with physicality. 

     The social illusions are the ones that have been developed by those who want to force acceptance of their personal feelings on others. Again, everyone has them, none are more important than others. To each his own. The problem comes in when activists of any type try to make one group of people protected by their feelings and opinions more than another. Attempting to create laws or claim laws based solely on feelings. 
     
      Spare me the attempted guilt trip concerning the bathroom reference. In that instance I was speaking about the female situation where a male is demanding to be considered a female thus allowed in bathrooms and locker rooms. Men do not need to be in female bathrooms are locker rooms and vice versa. And it has nothing to do with any phobias whatsoever. Neither a male in a dress nor a male in cowboy boots should be in private female safe areas. And of course, there are predators of all kinds but you deal with the potential threats you can see. You can't deal with something you don't know about. 

      At the end of the day, society does not need to change anything concerning the handling of the feelings of other people. We all have them and they are all just as important to each of us. None should be considered more than another. What people cannot do is ignore the physical science by metaphysics. Keep them separate because they are. 
  • @xlJ_dolphin_473

    My point goes a little deeper than "being a choice" and for this reason it is controversial.

    The point is your "choice" is influenced by chemistry. Trans persons do not just wake up one day and then decide: "you know what, today I want to change my gender".

    Science suggests that this change happens while their brain is developing, before they are even born, although the exact mechanism and reason is not known. If this is true, then being transgender isn't a "choice", it is something you are.

    For this reason, it can theoretically be engineered out using hormone balancing drugs or some similar technology which would allow the brain of the developing fetus to conform to the individuals genetic predisposition.

    In short, instead of changing their body to meet their brain after both are developed, we change the brain to meet the body before it is developed.
    Yes, but why would you want to prevent people from being transgender?
  • @xlJ_dolphin_473

    See my first comment.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation, Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root and developed into the human race, who conquered fire, built societies and developed technology .
    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • Most common dental crowns materials

    <a href="https://www. Acerocrowns. Com/dental-crowns-material"> Dental crowns material </a>
    can be made from different types of materials, Based on their purpose. Say, For instance, If the purpose is to enhance the appearance of a smile, Then a suitable material like ceramic or porcelain will be used to make the bridge or crown look more natural in your mouth.

    Besides this, Strength is yet another crucial feature for a dental crown. Frequently, The material chosen will have both:

    • Aesthetics
    • Strength

    The most commonly used dental crowns materials are:

    • Porcelain
    • Metal alloys
    • Ceramic
    • Acrylic
    • Gold


  • @BrandyKnight

    I do not assert that any group or any peoples feelings are somehow more important than anybody else's, and there is nothing in my argument that even suggests that. I myself am not a member of the transgender community, and it would adversely affect me if they were to have more rights than I, or have their feelings thought of as more important than mine. When it comes to people's feelings regarding what's socially acceptable, the idea of social justice is not just used by left wing agitators, it's used by pretty much everybody who has an opinion on what is and socially acceptable. Obviously gender roles are a factor, and the push to keep marriage between a man and a woman shows the obvious push by many to purposely make their views on what should be socially accepted into a legally binding precedent. Not saying you do this, but all to often people say "to each his own",  but when you press them on the issue, they quickly reach a point where they say something like "well there's a point where this all just gets ridiculous". If everyone is free to do as they wish within the framework of the law, should they not be allowed to marry whomever it is that they love? If people's opinions of socially accepted behaviors is not a factor, where did the push to make gay marriage illegal come from and why did they not want everyone to feel like "to each man (or woman) his/her own"? When you argue that the lines have been purposely blurred, it is the social standards that apply to gender roles that are being blurred, not scientific evidence.  

    Do you have any scientific evidence that because traditional social gender roles stipulate that it is men who do hard labor, and women who do the less strenuous activities is why MOST women are not as strong as men? Or that most women choose not to build muscle like more men do? Does any of this scientific data prove that since a womans skeleton is different it somehow makes it impossible, or even difficult for a woman to be able to achieve anything a man can?  You even said yourself that men are "generally" more muscular than women. Since when did that mean it is impossible for women to be as muscular, or even most women cannot be a muscular if they had a similar diet and exercise routine? Regardless of all this, who says that the transgender community is trying to rewrite the scientific facts surrounding gender as opposed to just the traditionally accepted gender roles alone? What about men who want to dress in a manner that is mostly associated with women, and they'd like to have similar speech cadences as women. Obviously no government can force people who oppose that to change their minds, but they can let them know that if they threaten or harm transgender people based on there opinions of gender identity, they will be prosecuted.

    Exactly what is it about transcending gender identity, or gender roles that is impossible? Again, nobody is arguing that we should be allowed to have horns like a unicorn if we feel fit, and all of society should have to pay for it. I'm arguing that men and women should be able to dress and act and talk however they feel fit regardless of socially accepted gender roles. What about that is somehow scientifically impossible, what makes that a metaphysical argument. Regardless of gender roles, it is a sound physical argument to say that men can wear dresses in public, and women can ride skateboards and do olleys over whatever they can physically accomplish. There's nothing metaphysical about that argument, and it is physically and scientifically true. Metaphysical?!?!? What is that some sort of catch phrase to use against social justice warriors or something? 

    I would assume you would agree that the government cannot force people to accept the transgender community if they are opposed. So how can anybody expect people in the transgender community to be able to force others to accept them regardless of their personal feelings? Nobody is being forced to accept anything they do not want to accept. Now that's a metaphysical argument that disregards scientific truth. If large portions of society refuse to associate with people who are not accepting of transgender people, and they refuse to make them feel like those type of people are not welcome in there social circles, they are not doing anything that is against the law, and they do not have any kind of responsibility to make people who oppose transgenderism feel accepted, or even make them feel like they themselves are not social pariahs. I still can't get my head around that point you tried to make, how can somebody force other people how to feel, and who do you know that has had that happen to them? People can only ever choose to accept other people's feelings by their own free will, not by laws or peer pressure. 

    You didn't really make any kind of a case regarding men being allowed in the women's bathroom. All you did is assert that it is wrong no matter what. We've also forgotten to address the fact that grown men who we don't know are perfectly welcome alone in a public bathroom with little boys?!?!?! Where's the outrage over that, and how about the masses of little boys getting fiddled with in public bathrooms? It still seems to me that your fears are derived from socially accepted gender roles and identity. And it also seems like a good idea for parents to accompany their children if they still have fears. And since strange men are still lurking in public bathrooms, maybe somebody should be going in and checking on the little boys. And if it might need to be the boys mom, let it be so.

    I agree that society doesn't need to change anything regarding peoples feelings. Societies feelings are changing by themselves, and transgender people are becoming more accepted by the bulk of society everyday.      

                           
         
  • I agree with your argument, and would apply your same argument to most LGBT groups including Gays.@Happy_Killbot
  • @We_are_accountable It won't work for homosexuals, the mechanism is different.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation, Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root and developed into the human race, who conquered fire, built societies and developed technology .
    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • I am opposed to all the LGBTQ groups trying to condition our impressionable children to deny the Science of Biology, and to embrace unnatural sexual orientations, just so some people can feel more secure about themselves.

    We are living in this new age of Big Brother Political correctness, whereby if anyone dares to state the natural scientific design of our bodies, he will be demonized and labeled phobic.

    I have no problem with how people lives their lives, but when they come after my children in public schools, and into my home through commercials on family programming, I will speak out!

    It is no one's business if a person is Gay or Transgender, etc., UNTIL these groups start forcing States, public schools, commercials, to embrace their particular disorder. These issues are very controversial, and no one has the right to force our children to listen to activists stating their beliefs on sexual orientations.

    If they respect our right to teach our children the Science of Biology and raise our children with our own beliefs, we will do the same. If these groups keep their controversial sexual orientation message out of public schools, etc. etc., we will do the same.

    When I'm watching TV shows, like "TheVoice", with my children, there is no need for the show to spend five minutes lifting up the sexual orientation of a particular singer. People such as myself would never say a peep against these activist groups if they stopped trying to indoctrinate our children at every chance.@Shadowtongue
  • It would work with Homosexuality, but the activst groups have become too powerful, and will sue anyone trying to say it is a disorder. There is some reason why Gays have these unnatural attractions, but doctors are no oonger allowed to search out the reasons.@Happy_Killbot
  • @We_are_accountable No, I'm telling you the science doesn't support it the way that it does with transsexuals.

    Besides that, all of the arguments I have listed above, (hormonal cause, personal expense, higher rates of mental illness) don't apply, so there is no argument there.

    There is nothing unnatural about homosexuality, you have been informed why you are wrong so many times now we shouldn't have to repeat ourselves to counter your your bigoted fascist view.

    We have no idea what if anything causes homosexuality the way we have a general concept about what causes gender dysphoria, and it isn't a problem anyways.
    We_are_accountable
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation, Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root and developed into the human race, who conquered fire, built societies and developed technology .
    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • @xlJ_dolphin_473

    See my first comment.
    I consider it better for society to become more tolerant of transgenderism than to bow down to its outdated, conservative views. About harassment, it would be a more moderate course of action to educate people about why harassment is wrong. To try to prevent transgenderism in the first place would be an extreme course of action, which would possibly not do any good for society. We just need to become more accepting as a society. Acceptance is free. Treatment of hormone imbalance is not.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 2803 Pts
    edited February 17
    @We_are_accountable

    Who is forcing children to listen to anything? Does someone keep them at a gunpoint, forcing them to listen to someone telling them that they must change their gender? You have yet to explain how some people expressing their views in public equates to "conditioning".

    It is true that there is too much political correctness in the modern Western societies, but you are mistaken to think that you are not a part of the problem. You are the one, after all, telling TV companies what content to show, because some of the content is too inappropriate for your children. It is the same kind of political correctness: desire to silence opinions you disapprove of by means of social backlash.

    Finally, get your dictionary straight already. Biology is already a science; "science of biology" is tautology, and the more you say this sentence, the more it clear that you actually have not studied that science.

    What I see is this: there are two large groups of identity politicians, pushing through "progressive" identities on one side, and "conservative" identities on the other side. Both groups are wrapped up in irrelevant terminological juggling, failing to see people as individuals and putting hundreds unnecessary labels on them. You think the problem is only on the side of your opponents? Come on now, do a bit of self-reflection and see that you are very much alike them.
    We_are_accountable
  • @Happy_Kil@Happy_Killbot

    Doctors treated Homosexuality as a disorder back in the 70's, 80's,  UNTIL they were sued to stop!

    I have been informed? LOL, who do you think you are, God? Do you think your so called evidence is proof of anything? You are showing yourself to be of the same angry arrogant people on the Left whereby they label people Bigots and Facists if they do not agree with Big brother Left.

    You may have noticed how this Transgender disorder is playing out exactly the same as Homsexuality. The world accepted Transgenderism as a disorder UNTIL people with this disorder were accepted into the LGBT alphabet. They have now become political, and we see Transgenders going into our public schools talking to our Kindergartners, conditioning our children to belive it is a natural normal thing.

    If you call me names once more, you go on my ignore list! I've got better things to do then waste time with arrogant people trying to intimidate and demonize those with opposing opinions.
  • @MayCaesar

    Are you serious? Do you ignore the facts that Trangenders are now going into public schools, talking to our kindergartners about "safe places" etc.?

    Those children are very immpressionable and very easily conditioned to believe anything they are told by adults. They are a captive audience.

    This is forcing our children to listen to the agendas of controversial political activist groups. How would you lke to have Christian evangelists going into your child's classrooms, conditioning them to accept Christianity?

    Christians have enough respect for your rights to raise your children as you see fit. We do not try to indoctrinate them in schools.
    You keep your LGBT beliefs away from our children in school, and we will do the same.
  • @MayCaesar

    Are you serious? Do you ignore the facts that Trangenders are now going into public schools, talking to our kindergartners about "safe places" etc.?

    Those children are very immpressionable and very easily conditioned to believe anything they are told by adults. They are a captive audience.

    This is forcing our children to listen to the agendas of controversial political activist groups. How would you lke to have Christian evangelists going into your child's classrooms, conditioning them to accept Christianity?

    Christians have enough respect for your rights to raise your children as you see fit. We do not try to indoctrinate them in schools.
    You keep your LGBT beliefs away from our children in school, and we will do the same.
    You are comparing apples and oranges, not like for like.

    In your Christian example, Christians in are coming trying to convert people. That is wrong.

    In your example though the transgender people aren't coming in to covert people into becoming transgender, they're just talking about treating all people with respect and dignity regardless of sexual identity. That's fine.

    Christians do and can speak at schools advocating for religious tolerance and treating people equally regardless of their beliefs.

    When you compare like for like, it's clear that trying to ban transgender people alone would be disciminatory.
  • @We_are_accountable ;
    Look, I'm just telling you what the science say, there is evidence to suggest that gender dysphoria is caused by hormonal imbalance during pregnancy.
    https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/gender-dysphoria/
    But no such evidence to suggest that homosexuality is caused in a similar way. That's not controversial, that's not my opinion, it isn't political, it's scientific truth.

    Remember, this natal treatment which I suggest is completely hypothetical, it may not even be possible. The fact that the cause of homosexuality is much harder to determine means that it is unlikely that such a natal treatment will be available anytime soon, and there is little public support to develop such a treatment due to widespread acceptance of LGBTQ persons anyways.

    Keep reading
    \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/

    @xlJ_dolphin_473

    While I certainly do not think that we should mistreat people based on their gender identity any more than we should mistreat people because of talent of handicap, my opinion, which you are not required to agree with is based on the sunk costs associated with transgenders.

    Remember, such treatments would be natal- they would not be the decision of the individual but rather of the parents, so you must consider the options available to the parents. We can do this using game theory:


    As you can see, from the parent's perspective it is always better to choose natal treatment of gender dysphoria, even if it is accepted in society, because the only cost is the cost of the treatment, which saves the individual in the long run because they do not need hormone treatment or surgery later in life. The individual will grow up as if nothing ever was different.

    I have also provide homosexuality as a reference, which shows a much harder decision problem. In this case, the best outcome possible is abstain/acceptance, with a 0 outcome. However, choosing to abstain runs the risk of social rejection with a -50 penalty. Should the parents choose the natal treatment the results will be the same regardless.

    But there is a catch- the natal treatment option doesn't exist!

    Therefore it is better in both situations to work towards social acceptance of LGBTQ persons, until such a treatment is feasible, at which point it should be accepted. As I have stated above, there isn't enough evidence to conclude that such treatment will ever be possible for homosexuality, and based on the graphs I have provided above it isn't necessary to develop such a treatment for homosexuality.
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation, Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root and developed into the human race, who conquered fire, built societies and developed technology .
    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  • If you're opposed to one being transgender and/or opposed to the normalizing and acceptance of transgenderism in society, why is this so?

    I see no valid reason as to why one should be opposed to one being transgender. However, the terms "normal" and "acceptance" can mean different things in different contexts. For example, I have no issue in accepting a transgender as a human being. But I cannot accept that a male is a female just because he believes he is female as that is factually incorrect. In the same way, I will not accept that a human being is an elephant just because he/she believes he/she is an elephant. I will, however, respect these individuals and address them by however they want to be called.









  • @piloteer 
     In short, the transgender issue is not a birth sex issue. It is a metaphysical issue. We are male or we are female by sex. Gender, by current definition, is not based on birth sex and has nothing to do with it. The problem that I have with the argument is that activists are trying to blur the lines to make it seem like it is not based on inner feelings or mental drives. They need for it to be one in the same to show people who are not supporters that they are wrong. The thing is, they don't need scientific backing. They don't need general social acceptance to make them feel better about who they present. We are empowered when we simply exist how we want to, regardless of what other people think. All opinions are worthless as we all have them and they are not ever going to be defined as right or wrong. They don't need to be and no laws are going to make anyone accept someone else's opinions regardless. No one cares until someone tries to start shoving ideals down their throats. That never turns out well. Laws don't change minds and minds are your problem right? 
      
     I completely stand by my assertion and fact that females are physically, biologically and mentally different from males. Being different is not a negative. We each have our own strengths and weaknesses. What exactly is the problem with that? Why are people making it sound like a bad thing? It is what it is. Rhonda Rousey is unarguably an extremely, above average strong woman. She can hang with a lot of people but if she gets in the ring with a Tyson or an Ali, she is going to get killed. She would get a few good hits in by speed but she is going to be ko'd. Maybe one day I will be watching tv and see her in the ring with a heavyweight male and have to eat my words, but until that day, I am 100% comfortable with my contention. 
     
     Certain aspects of life are determined by your birth sex and should continue to be. Whether a birth sex male chooses the female gender should not have anything to do with what she is judged by when birth sex matters. And birth sex does matter in certain situations. Sports being one of them.  If rules are changed based on personal feelings and not physical reality, it becomes dangerous if not just, dare I say, unfair. And knowing that people do change their sexual preferences and their feelings change, who is there to monitor who is being honest and who just wants a physical advantage? 
     
      A sex change is called a sex change for a reason. You have to be considered a particular physical sex before it is determined that you want a different visible change. But that visible change, by knife and hormones, will still never change your birth sex. 

     And there you have it. I am fine with someone choosing their own "gender". I am fine with people dressing and feeling however they want to. It simply has nothing to do with anyone else and should stay that way. But if they do want it to have something to do with someone else, and it affects others, they should be ready for what can of worms they open. It is not about phobias or hate. In this situation it only has to do with physical science. I still do not think that males should be in locker rooms or restrooms with females or vice versa and I will not be shamed into saying otherwise. There is nothing to be ashamed about. My assertions are based on birth sex and that is what locker rooms and restrooms are based on. No apologies or excuses necessary. 
     

  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 2803 Pts
    edited February 17
    @MayCaesar

    Are you serious? Do you ignore the facts that Trangenders are now going into public schools, talking to our kindergartners about "safe places" etc.?

    Those children are very immpressionable and very easily conditioned to believe anything they are told by adults. They are a captive audience.

    This is forcing our children to listen to the agendas of controversial political activist groups. How would you lke to have Christian evangelists going into your child's classrooms, conditioning them to accept Christianity?

    Christians have enough respect for your rights to raise your children as you see fit. We do not try to indoctrinate them in schools.
    You keep your LGBT beliefs away from our children in school, and we will do the same.
    How is talking about something equal to forcing/conditioning? Whether children are impressionable or not is irrelevant.
    I am okay with evangelists preaching whatever they want in classrooms. They, in fact, do preach there sometimes, and nothing terrible seems to happen.

    Nobody forces your kid to listen to anything. You are free to home-school your kid if you absolutely want them raised in a sheltered environment, where they do not interact with anyone without your approval.

    Why should I keep my beliefs away from your children? This is a free country featuring the First Amendment. I will say whatever I please wherever I please, and if you do not like it, then you have my condolences.
  • VaulkVaulk 718 Pts
    @MichaelElpers

    Why shouldn’t we allow trans females to participate in female sports? Define female, also. Why shouldn’t we strive for more universalized bathrooms? And what do you mean by limiting free speech and do you recognize that both free speech and transgenderism can both exist in society?

    This why we shouldn't allow trans females to participate in female sports:

    https://www.attacktheback.com/transgender-mma-fighter-fallon-fox-breaks-opponents-skull/

    Look I'm not a Female sports enthusiast and I can honestly say I've NEVER watched a Women's basketball, baseball, boxing or otherwise sporting match.  The ONLY time I've ever seen Women competing on TV and managed to pay attention was the Women's league for the Olympics.  I remember watching Kerri Strug injur her ankle at the 1996 Olympics and then (In order to take the gold) had to vault again.  She shattered her ankle during that vault and still managed to stick the hell out of the landing...sending her into hall of fame legend status for the U.S. Women's Olympic team.  Every girl/young woman who wants to be an Olympian will literally aspire to be her...and if transgender Men who are taking Female Hormones are allowed to compete in the Olympics...people like Kerri Strug will forever be lost in the long line of Men who will inevitable break and then shatter her record with their physical prowess.
    "If there's no such thing as a question then what kind of questions do people ask"?

    "There's going to be a special place in Hell for people who spread lies through the veil of logical fallacies disguised as rational argument".

    "Oh, you don't like my sarcasm?  Well I don't much appreciate your stup!d".


  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 2803 Pts
    edited 6:46AM
    Vaulk said:

    This why we shouldn't allow trans females to participate in female sports:

    https://www.attacktheback.com/transgender-mma-fighter-fallon-fox-breaks-opponents-skull/

    Look I'm not a Female sports enthusiast and I can honestly say I've NEVER watched a Women's basketball, baseball, boxing or otherwise sporting match.  The ONLY time I've ever seen Women competing on TV and managed to pay attention was the Women's league for the Olympics.  I remember watching Kerri Strug injur her ankle at the 1996 Olympics and then (In order to take the gold) had to vault again.  She shattered her ankle during that vault and still managed to stick the hell out of the landing...sending her into hall of fame legend status for the U.S. Women's Olympic team.  Every girl/young woman who wants to be an Olympian will literally aspire to be her...and if transgender Men who are taking Female Hormones are allowed to compete in the Olympics...people like Kerri Strug will forever be lost in the long line of Men who will inevitable break and then shatter her record with their physical prowess.
    This is a good illustration of the problem. There is a reason we have male and female sports, or weight categories in boxing. Imagine if in boxing any person could, say, identify as someone of a different weight... In that case, someone weighting 120 kg could say, "I identify as having the weight of 60 kg", and would absolutely crush the competition there, seriously harming and possibly even killing some opponents. MMA is especially bad in this regard, as it is a very unsafe type of martial arts, where a lot of things can go wrong even in an evenly matched fight.

    While I do think trans people should have place in all sports, something other than "I identify as X and am taking hormones to back it up" must be used to determine whether the person should compete in the male or female sports. Some sort of an objective criterion independent on the individual's self-identification and transitioning procedures should be used. Or maybe a special third league, independent of the male and female leagues, should exist; granted, there will not be many competitors there, but we do have, for example, leagues for disabled in some sports, where the number of competitors is also small, and yet they are quite popular still.

    There is also an opinion that my father holds, and that I am starting to warm up to nowadays: that perhaps professional sports should become irrelevant. People should do sports to better their bodies and challenge themselves, not to beat others in some sort of a race. When I did boxing, it did not matter that I was better than someone and worse than someone else; I liked sparring with everyone. I would go easier on those weaker than me, and those stronger than me, in turn, would go easy on me. The goal was not to win, but to learn something and to have fun doing the activity we all like together.
    Competition is a good thing in general, but too much focus on beating others and too little focus on becoming a better version of yourself can often get in the way.
    Perhaps trans fighters should just fight with those who want to fight with them. They should forgo the official leagues and go independent, arranging each match individually.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch