If gender is in the mind and not the body, what do you think of species dysphoria?

I understand transgender people, I know we all start as women, things happen during development. I get how misidentifications happen within your own species. The development potential is there naturally.

I'm not so sure it is there for people who identify as werewolf or bird.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

I applaud your addition to the conversation. It is a sure sign of degradation of any society what it starts placing a higher value on what sex you are, what kind of sex you have, and are you happy with what is between your legs because we can change that if you like. To a society as a whole there are far more important issues to be dealt with like clean air and water, enough decent jobs for the growing population , and a secure and sustainable food supply for all of those within the system. I would much rather be remembered for what I did during my time on the planet for those who followed me than for who, or how I achieved my own selfish pleasures with.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Democrats think that gay people are all about their genitals.

Conservative gays have the same priorities as conservative straights--gun rights, economic conservatism, frugality, low taxes, economic freedom, etc. They are much, much, much more than their sexual organs and tend to resent being pigeonholed (pardon the expression) by the left as only being about their sex. Same with conservative women--they are much, much, more than just a uterus but that's all the left can go on about--females as defined by their sexual organs.

This is a complete inversion of the facts of the case.

It is bigotry and prejudice, not the leftist response to it, that reduces people to their genitals, their skin colour, their religion, ethnicity, etc. And such bigotry and prejudice comes — as anyone with eyes and ears can verify for themselves — overwhelmingly from people who define themselves as conservative.

If men and women of the left sometimes appears to focus too strongly on attributes such as sexuality and skin colour, it is because they have to, in order to combat conservative stereotyping in these areas. Millennia of prejudice are not easily overcome.

I agree with you that affirmative action is unfair in principle (though not necessarily in practice), and that the privileging of the underprivileged is often taken too far — in rhetoric at least, if not in action. But a visceral reaction against sexual difference seems to have brought you to believe that people with 'gender' identity problems, either physical or mental, should just put up and shut up.

That is not just conservative. It's reactionary, almost Fascist.

Just so that you know where I am coming from: I am an enormously privileged middle-aged male heterosexual whose path through life has been a relatively easy one. Fortune has been kind to me. I don't feel either guilty or insecure about this, so in political terms I lean neither to the left nor the right. But I am keenly aware of my good fortune, and I realize that the world must be a very different place to those who do not share it. This being so, I try not to be too quick to judge others, or to decide that I know everything I need to know about a situation or a person.

You are an ATS member whose stout common sense and empirical outlook I greatly admire. This thread seems to have struck a sensitive spot in you, though, and your response is far below your usual standard. The position you have chosen to assume lacks humility, compassion and, ultimately, humanity. I urge you to revise it.

a reply to: NavyDoc

The law, the state, the government should be neutral and treat all citizens the same. There should be no protected classes and no citizen should be held higher or lower to the law than the other.

Should government treat criminals the same as it treats law-abiding citizens?

Should those who have been victimized for generations not receive special protection under the law?

Should heads of state not be immune to prosecution for acts committed while in office?

Principles are helpful and useful until we try to turn them into prescriptions. Just as there is a difference between justice and the law, there is a difference between political theory and practical politics.

a reply to: NavyDoc

This is the 3rd time I've asked this question....You claim to be a Navy Doc, an O-5 or O-6 if I recall correctly, so your opinion is somewhat important.

Are you okay with transgendered people serving in the US military?

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: NavyDoc

Democrats think that gay people are all about their genitals.

Conservative gays have the same priorities as conservative straights--gun rights, economic conservatism, frugality, low taxes, economic freedom, etc. They are much, much, much more than their sexual organs and tend to resent being pigeonholed (pardon the expression) by the left as only being about their sex. Same with conservative women--they are much, much, more than just a uterus but that's all the left can go on about--females as defined by their sexual organs.

This is a complete inversion of the facts of the case.

It is bigotry and prejudice, not the leftist response to it, that reduces people to their genitals, their skin colour, their religion, ethnicity, etc. And such bigotry and prejudice comes — as anyone with eyes and ears can verify for themselves — overwhelmingly from people who define themselves as conservative.

If men and women of the left sometimes appears to focus too strongly on attributes such as sexuality and skin colour, it is because they have to, in order to combat conservative stereotyping in these areas. Millennia of prejudice are not easily overcome.

I agree with you that affirmative action is unfair in principle (though not necessarily in practice), and that the privileging of the underprivileged is often taken too far — in rhetoric at least, if not in action. But a visceral reaction against sexual difference seems to have brought you to believe that people with 'gender' identity problems, either physical or mental, should just put up and shut up.

That is not just conservative. It's reactionary, almost Fascist.

Just so that you know where I am coming from: I am an enormously privileged middle-aged male heterosexual whose path through life has been a relatively easy one. Fortune has been kind to me. I don't feel either guilty or insecure about this, so in political terms I lean neither to the left nor the right. But I am keenly aware of my good fortune, and I realize that the world must be a very different place to those who do not share it. This being so, I try not to be too quick to judge others, or to decide that I know everything I need to know about a situation or a person.

You are an ATS member whose stout common sense and empirical outlook I greatly admire. This thread seems to have struck a sensitive spot in you, though, and your response is far below your usual standard. The position you have chosen to assume lacks humility, compassion and, ultimately, humanity. I urge you to revise it.

My position lacks none of those things. My position is simple and basic and reasonable. The state should treat everyone equally under the law. The same law that applies to a white person should apply to a black person. The same law that applues to a sharecropper should apply to a congressman. The law should be blind to color, social status, and gender. The law should give special consideration to no citizen above another citizen, regardless of perceived past abuses it excuses.

originally posted by: NavyDoc
The law should give special consideration to no citizen above another citizen, regardless of perceived past abuses it excuses.

So, you would abolish the Disability Act.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc
The law should give special consideration to no citizen above another citizen, regardless of perceived past abuses it excuses.

So, you would abolish the Disability Act.

So you like the cotrage industry of lawyers who wander around suing for rails 1" out of regulations? Shutting down mom and pop stores if they can't afford to remodel their bathrooms?

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc
The law should give special consideration to no citizen above another citizen, regardless of perceived past abuses it excuses.

So, you would abolish the Disability Act.

So you like the cotrage industry of lawyers who wander around suing for rails 1" out of regulations? Shutting down mom and pop stores if they can't afford to remodel their bathrooms?

OK, got my answer.

From a military doctor.

You would abolish the disability act.

dp

dp

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc
The law should give special consideration to no citizen above another citizen, regardless of perceived past abuses it excuses.

So, you would abolish the Disability Act.

So you like the cotrage industry of lawyers who wander around suing for rails 1" out of regulations? Shutting down mom and pop stores if they can't afford to remodel their bathrooms?

OK, got my answer.

From a military doctor.

You would abolish the disability act.

Didn't say that. You were just trying to build another stupid strawman.


Okay, 2 can play--I got my answer, you want lawyers to go around destroying mom and pop stores on technical violations. Glad you love lawyers so much.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc
The law should give special consideration to no citizen above another citizen, regardless of perceived past abuses it excuses.

So, you would abolish the Disability Act.

So you like the cotrage industry of lawyers who wander around suing for rails 1" out of regulations? Shutting down mom and pop stores if they can't afford to remodel their bathrooms?

OK, got my answer.

From a military doctor.

You would abolish the disability act.

Didn't say that. You were just trying to build another stupid strawman.


Okay, 2 can play--I got my answer, you want lawyers to go around destroying mom and pop stores on technical violations. Glad you love lawyers so much.

Direct question.

Yes or No.

Either you support the Disability Act or you don't.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc
The law should give special consideration to no citizen above another citizen, regardless of perceived past abuses it excuses.

So, you would abolish the Disability Act.

So you like the cotrage industry of lawyers who wander around suing for rails 1" out of regulations? Shutting down mom and pop stores if they can't afford to remodel their bathrooms?

OK, got my answer.

From a military doctor.

You would abolish the disability act.

Didn't say that. You were just trying to build another stupid strawman.


Okay, 2 can play--I got my answer, you want lawyers to go around destroying mom and pop stores on technical violations. Glad you love lawyers so much.

Direct question.

Yes or No.

Either you support the Disability Act or you don't.

I'm not going to play your strawman building game. Direct question--do you want to destroy mom and pop stores? Yes or no?

This gender identification balderdash really annoys me.

Gender is not in the mind. You can dress as a woman or a man, you can wear makeup or get masculine tattoos, you can have your bits and pieces removed, or added surgically, you can even choose to live as the opposite sex, but you will ALWAYS be the sex you were born as.

It's called Reality, get over it.

It won't be a popular opinion, but this is a mental condition, and not the result of being born the "wrong sex".

As far as these loons that think they have the brain of some animal or other, it's the same issue: Rejection of reality.
When a schizophrenic is hearing voices or hallucinating, should we alter our perceptions in order to align with theirs? Wouldn't that make life more enjoyable for them?
It's the same concept as calling a man a woman, or a woman a cheetah, if you actually think about it.

We used to treat people with this issue, and now it appears that it's all the rage to cater to them instead.

NavyDoc:

that is what we are fighting for though, Equality. using "Liberal" "Progressive" ""republican" etc are just distractions and boxes to place people, saying that the left are only about their genitals just distracts from everything and adds a dividing factor where people can go "Yay left" or "yay right".


Denying people services based on our sexuality is not "equal under the law" not allowing people to use the restroom of their sex is not 'equal under the law' not letting people adopt, get married.. shall i continue? non of that is "equal under law"

a reply to: ProfessorChaos

Not a mental condition, and do you have Proof?

a reply to: NavyDoc

That is pathetic, no logic there. The Disability Act does not equal destroying mom and pop stores, besides Wal-Mart has already done that.

Direct question for the 4th time:

Do you support transgender people serving in the US military?

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: NavyDoc

That is pathetic, no logic there. The Disability Act does not equal destroying mom and pop stores, besides Wal-Mart has already done that.

Direct question for the 4th time:

Do you support transgender people serving in the US military?

Why do you act like I owe you any sort of answer to anything? Who the duck are you to go around making demands? I don't respond to rude assholes. Deal with it.

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: ProfessorChaos

Not a mental condition, and do you have Proof?

It is the rejection of reality, which is a mental condition. If you're born as a male, then you're a man, no matter how pretty you think you look in a dress.