(cache) TheMagicPinがHe makes senseについて記入したコメント

Rules		Description
1. No Politics		Political videos (including ones related to current political figures) should be submitted to r/politics, r/worldpolitics, etc.
2. No Personal Information		Such as names, Facebook pages, phone numbers, addresses, etc. This is grounds for an immediate (and likely permanent) ban, so consider this a warning.
3. No Witch-Hunting		Or incitement to witch hunt. This means no demanding "Reddit justice" in any way in post titles or comments.
4. No Videos of Police Brutality or Police Harassment		Consider submitting those to a different subreddit, like /r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut or elsewhere.
5. Submit Direct Link to Video		No web pages that only embed Youtube or Vimeo videos. No URL shorteners. No links to playlists or to channel pages.
6. No Porn or Gore		There are many other subreddits for such content.
7. No Solicitation of Votes or Views. No Asking for Votes or Sharing Submission Links On or Off-Site (Facebook, Twitter, etc.)		Violations can lead to permanent ban of accounts and video channel.
8. No Hate Speech		You are free to offer your opinion respectfully, but comments intended to demean a group, acontextual expressions of bigotry, and the pejorative use of slurs is disallowed.
9. No Videos of Real-Life, Malicious Physical Abuse of People or Animals		This includes raw videos of fights.

816

817

818

He makes sense (youtube.com)

malakistiri が 11時間前投稿

トップ新着論争中古い順 Q&A

あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]TheMagicPin 416ポイント417ポイント418ポイント 10時間前* (168子コメント)

[–]Copgra 63ポイント64ポイント65ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Kordsmeier 23ポイント24ポイント25ポイント 1時間前 (15子コメント)

[–]Jordoom 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Kordsmeier 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]mctuking -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 44分前 (6子コメント)

This is how so many catholics really are and why I do feel a sense of hatred toward r/atheism and the things they say about religion and Christians, while grouping Catholics into that.

Atheist here. I think is /r/atheism is a cesspool of teenagers wanting to feel superior. However this video exactly shows what I think is wrong with religion. He does seem very caring and full of compassion. He's smiling and friendly. He keeps insisting it's a message of love (which frankly doesn't make it so). In a world without religion he wouldn't give a fuck about what made people happy. "Walking with them" or listening to them would not result in him making the title Bruce Jenner, but Caitlyn Jenner. Do you find it weird and silly? Fine. But if you're showing true compassion you do whatever makes people happy when it doesn't cost you anything. It seems he thinks he knows what's better for Caitlyn, than she does herself. How is that listening to people? It's not. It's extremely arrogant and condescending. No amount of soft words and white-teeth smiles can cover that up.

[–]Kordsmeier 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 26分前 (1子コメント)

We are in agreement of r/atheism, of course not everyone is that way but it's obvious what the active majority is.

I think he should also refer to her as Caitlyn. I do think there's something psychologically different about her than the average human. While genetically she's male, mentally she's 'female' by how she has interpreted the gender within our society, we know this because she's said that. There could be some biochemical phenomenon occurring within her or not, I don't know. I do know that it isn't relative to the average person. I think that the priest is informed and validates his opinion and there is something to it. More data is needed, as everything goes in science though. Maybe he should have stated 'this could be the case,' or 'some evidence points to a solvable psychological disorder,' but he didn't. Hard to say what is or isn't happening here, but it's purpose really lies with the simple message at the end, which hopefully everyone walks away with. Religious or not, we should be there for each other more than we are and to be open about what we're feeling in ourselves to people we trust or love. It can save, seriously, a lifetime of potential grief and problems for many people.

[–]mctuking -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 10分前 (0子コメント)

[–]encouragethestorm -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 33分前* (3子コメント)

In a world without religion he wouldn't give a fuck about what made people happy.

But if you're showing true compassion you do whatever makes people happy when it doesn't cost you anything.

I don't think that's the case though. There are so many instances in which showing true compassion oftentimes means denying people what they want—when a parent disciplines their kid, for instance, the kid might throw a fit and be displeased, but the parent knows that the eventual goal of being well-adjusted is worth the kid's temporary displeasure. Acts of true compassion can often be things that make people very uncomfortable, like telling a friend, "you were a real asshole at the party last night."

The fact is that we make judgments all the time about what is right or wrong and ask other people to comply with those judgments against what they claim makes them happy. This does not make someone extremely arrogant or condescending, particularly when those judgments are backed up by knowledge: the parent knows that discipline leads to results, you knew that people made comments about your friend at the party, and this priest has a very logical argument and consequently a well-justified conclusion that arguably constitutes "knowledge." The priest is not arrogant or condescending for taking his logical argument and trying to convince people, through calm and reasoned discourse, of the validity of the argument and the rightness of his conclusions. He could still be wrong, but he's not arrogant.

[–]mctuking -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 18分前 (2子コメント)

the parent knows that the eventual goal of being well-adjusted is worth the kid's temporary displeasure.

I was not talking about temporary happiness. Of course denying someone temporary happiness can be the right thing to do. That's so obvious I didn't know it needed emphasizing. I'm talking about what makes people happy in their lives as a whole.

What Caitlyn has gone through is not a temporary tantrum. Consistently for decades felt a certain way and has finally come out and is happier for it. This priest is saying she's wrong. Going for a walk with him would have been a much better solution. That is extremely arrogant. Messages like that does hurt a lot of people in a group that has suicide rates through the roof. You have to be very, very sure you know what the hell you're talking about before you open your mouth. He has no proper training in the area.

[–]encouragethestorm -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 12分前* (1子コメント)

Going for a walk with him would have been a much better solution

"Going for a walk" means listening to their stories, attempting to understand where they're coming from, and giving as much support and love as one can. I think this goes back to Catholicism's theological anthropology, its idea of what the human being is and what he or she most deeply needs: Catholicism insists that the #1 thing that people need is love, and that knowing oneself loved goes a long way to solving many of the doubts, fears and concerns that plague people on an everyday basis. I therefore do not believe the priest is incorrect when he says that a demonstration of love is perhaps an effective solution to psychological distress.

This priest is saying she's wrong.

I don't think the priest means to belittle any of Caitlyn's feelings or suggest that she is not now happy, but he is saying that those feelings were the products of a misguided system that took arbitrary things—gender stereotypes—and established them as objective and universal standards.

[–]mctuking 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1分前 (0子コメント)

[–]Spyger -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 1時間前 (5子コメント)

[–]Kordsmeier 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]patron_vectras 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 58分前 (1子コメント)

[–]Spyger -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 44分前 (0子コメント)

[–]trolo-joe 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Spyger -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 41分前 (0子コメント)

[+]rrrx スコアが基準値未満のコメント-14ポイント-13ポイント-12ポイント 4時間前 (108子コメント)

legitimate arguments

Which were those?

I got nothing out of this video, to be honest. The "legitimate arguments" he makes weren't in any sense novel; they've been articulated in various forms for many decades. It's fine if you feel inclined to listen to them for, I don't know, philosophical reasons, but they aren't scientific, and they don't have any scientific weight.

The doctor he cited is not well-respected in the medical community on this issue, to but it mildly. He is a devout Catholic who has described himself as "culturally conservative," opposes gay marriage, and in fact uses much of the same bad, misrepresented evidence and faulty logic you hear in this video to argue that homosexuality is also deviant and should be regarded the same way as transgenderism. He supports straight camps, and thinks that gay people can (and should) be turned straight.

Reddit would not entertain this sort of crap if it were applied to homosexuality -- and it often is. If an affable reverend with dreamy eyes and a soft voice cited McHugh to argue that straight camps are a good idea -- that gay people are really straight, and they're just confused -- would it be upvoted? This is offensive, pseudoscientific, condescending bullshit, and it doesn't matter whether or not the guy spewing it seems like he'd be great to drink a beer with.

Here's what actual doctors and scientists say:

An established body of medical research demonstrates the effectiveness and medical necessity of mental health care, hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery as forms of therapeutic treatment for many people diagnosed with GID

-- The American Medical Association

[+][削除されました] 4時間前 (1子コメント)

[deleted]

[–]rrrx -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Which_Effect 22ポイント23ポイント24ポイント 4時間前* (5子コメント)

[–]rrrx 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

What about comparing Gender Dysphoria to Anorexia or "Body Integrity Identity Disorder" is unscientific?

There's nothing unscientific about comparing the two. But the way he draws those comparisons, and the conclusions he comes to from them, are completely unscientific. There are similarities between gender dysphoria and body dysmorphic disorder, mostly that they are both rooted in an individual's displeasure with his or her body. The difference, as has been shown in a quite a few studies, is the root of that displeasure.

See, for example this study published in the Journal of Sexual Medicine. I don't have a link that isn't behind a paywall, but their conclusions are summarized in the abstract (emphasis mine):

GID and eating disorders are characterized by a severe body uneasiness, which represents the core of distress in both conditions. Different dimensions of body uneasiness seem to be involved in GID subsamples, depending on reassignment stage and genotypic sex. In eating disorder subjects body uneasiness is primarily linked to general psychopathology, whereas in GID such a relationship is lacking.

Asking these sorts of questions is good science. Asking them and then supplying bad answers to advance an agenda is just bad logic.

[–]AgileSock 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 56分前* (0子コメント)

[–]EpicEuonym -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 4時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]ThatStereotype18 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]EpicEuonym 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Tigahh 38ポイント39ポイント40ポイント 4時間前 (54子コメント)

[+]rrrx スコアが基準値未満のコメント-9ポイント-8ポイント-7ポイント 4時間前* (17子コメント)

That doesn't change the fact that what he's saying makes sense.

The fact that the AMA says it doesn't make sense doesn't change the fact that it makes sense? Nor does the fact that the overwhelming consensus of doctors and scientists who have studied GID is that transgender individuals aren't simply confused cisgendered individuals?

If your standard for making sense is whether or not something sounds good to you, I would encourage you to reevaluate how you make that determination. There is lots and lots and lots of scientific evidence that he is wrong. His position is essentially the same one staked out by climate change skeptics; the available science says he is wrong, but his words say he is right (even if they have nothing backing them up). That shouldn't be a hard decision.

This is just bigotry, and frankly it's embarrassing how blithely and ignorantly people are willing to tolerate it just as gay rights have taken such a big win.

sexuality isn't changing biologically who you are as a person.

Sex is biological. Gender is socially-constructed. For a more complete explanation, read, for example, West & Zimmerman's edifying 1987 article "Doing Gender" [PDF].

[–]Aaron215 34ポイント35ポイント36ポイント 4時間前 (10子コメント)

[–]stevesy17 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]Frodor 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 1時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]stevesy17 -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 1時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]Frodor 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 39分前 (1子コメント)

[–]stevesy17 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 32分前 (0子コメント)

[+]rrrx スコアが基準値未満のコメント-12ポイント-11ポイント-10ポイント 4時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]jlb44 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 2時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]stevesy17 -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 1時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]novaKnine 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Hurrah_for_Karamazov -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 4時間前 (5子コメント)

[–]rainbowbucket 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 3時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]Hurrah_for_Karamazov 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 3時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]rainbowbucket -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 3時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]Hurrah_for_Karamazov 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

First of all, it seems like you think science and philosophy are mutually exclusive, which is not the case.

I do not think that.

In fact, science is a subset of philosophy.

I agree.

Secondly, you use the word "biologically" in your argument, which you hopefully realize means that you're acknowledging that it's scientific.

Sure.

Thirdly, this is not about whether someone is male or female(i.e. sex) it's about whether they identify as a man or a woman(i.e. gender), and as someone so into philosophy as yourself should know, gender is a social construct.

Sure. Then what science are they doing exactly with regard to this issue?

Fourthly, the parts of the brain have shapes.

Ah, there's the direction you're going in.

In one of them, almost always, males have one shape and females, the other. The case where they don't have the shape most of their sex shares? When they are a transgender person.

If by transgender, you mean that a person has a brain more similar to someone of the opposite sex, sure. I don't think anyone would disagree with this.

But what's this have to do with the issue? What's at issue is whether it makes sense for that person to call himself male or female. Or whether it's appropriate to say, "Oh, you have the wrong brain in that it doesn't match the rest of your body; there's something wrong with you." Or if it's right to say, "Oh, no, his brain is who he really is; so his body doesn't match his brain; there's nothing wrong with him; they're just something wrong with his body."

Science has nothing to say about this.

[–]SucculentStanley 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]EatMyBiscuits -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]ThatStereotype18 -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 3時間前* (5子コメント)

Well, you're 2/3 right (in this one specific instance), but you are still wrongly conflating biological sex with gender.

sex ≠ gender ≠ sexuality

This. Please don't confuse gender and someone's biological sex.

Definitions:

Sex: either the male or female division of a species, especially as differentiated with reference to the reproductive functions.
Gender: either the male or female division of a species, especially as differentiated by social and cultural roles and behavior

Edit: To expand on why it's necessary to make the distinction, gender isn't something that is decided biologically. I realize that Tiggah's point has less to do with gender/sex than I originally interpretted. However, I still disagree that what the pastor says "makes sense." It doesn't. It sounds like it does, and it tries to use pseudo-logic and an inflated sense of altruism to appear like something that makes sense. But it has no scientific backing. To reiterate what u/rrrx posted (although a bit over-zealous with the bigot accusations I believe):

An established body of medical research demonstrates the effectiveness and medical necessity of mental health care, hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery as forms of therapeutic treatment for many people diagnosed with GID

-- The American Medical Association

[–]OrderOfTheStone 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 2時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]ThatStereotype18 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (1子コメント)

Well, I'm not transgender myself, so I'm not sure if I can clarify as well as someone who actually was could (maybe you can find that elsewhere in this thread.)

But from what I understand, not all transgender people feel the need to undertake a sex reassignment, but those who do do so because their desire to be gender that they identify with also gives them the desire to have a body that is phsyically closer to that gender.

You have to understand that a person's gender identity is a social construct that portrays their own subjective sense of self, and how that self can find acceptance in the societal view of either a man or a woman. Transgender people typically don't want to be something inbetween or different than a man or woman, so they typically can't take on another role other than what aligns with the group that they identify with.

[–]OrderOfTheStone 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 45分前 (0子コメント)

[–]nc863id 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]ThatStereotype18 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Semantiks -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 2時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]thehollownike 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Tigahh 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Deckard_Didnt_Die -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 1時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Tigahh 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 54分前 (2子コメント)

[–]Deckard_Didnt_Die 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 38分前 (1子コメント)

[–]Tigahh 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 26分前 (0子コメント)

[–]Zset -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 3時間前 (21子コメント)

[–]Fubarp 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 2時間前 (14子コメント)

[–]nspectre 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 2時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]Zset 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Fubarp 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (4子コメント)

Yes but that's gender identification not genetic identification.. Or sex...

Genetics don't bring out a different shade of human or whatever you wish to call it. Their brain may think differently or view themselves differently but they themselves will always be whatever their genetic makeup is. This is just the facts we must all accept. Genetics don't lie..

You can associate yourself as being the opposite sex, there's nothing in my mind wrong with that. But you can't say you aren't a male if you are asked what your sex is. Like if you go to the doctor.. you can't lie and say I'm a female.. when you are genetically male because that's just physically impossible. They will know.. plus you wouldn't lie to your doctor anyways.. or I at least hope you don't.

In the end Genes are black and white there is no grey zone

[–]Zset -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 2時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Fubarp 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]Zset 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (1子コメント)

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]Zset -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 2時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]Fubarp 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 2時間前 (5子コメント)

[–]Zset -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 2時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]Semen-Thrower 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 2時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Zset -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 2時間前 (2子コメント)

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]martylike2rock 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 2時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Zset -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 2時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]martylike2rock 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 2時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Zset -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]BigAn7h -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]ghost_of_lucretius 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント 4時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]Xander707 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]rainbowbucket 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 3時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]ghost_of_lucretius -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]rainbowbucket 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]rrrx -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

I really wish that people understood what ad hominem actually meant.

I'm not arguing that either the man in this video or McHugh are wrong because of McHugh's views. That would be an ad hominem attack. I'm arguing that McHugh has no credibility to speak on this issue to begin with, since he uses the same arguments to support an analogous practice which has been completely savaged by the medical and scientific communities -- gay conversion therapy. Then, I'm arguing that those arguments are also wrong, since the medical and scientific evidence says they are. Which it does, as evidenced (in part) by the AMA's rather unequivocal position statement affirming that G(I)D is real and that it can and in some cases must be treated with methods including gender reassignment surgery.

A person's credibility is relevant to what they have to say. Nobody would call it an ad hom attack if you suggested that perhaps a KKK member's arguments about race relations shouldn't be taken seriously.

[–]ghost_of_lucretius -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]NSPQR 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 3時間前* (1子コメント)

You bring up some valid points. But I feel you put too much weight on the validity of scientific fact - at least to the degree of addressing these sorts issues. Society's respect for science is paramount; and all other viewpoints are just opinions until proven clearly and conclusively. We'll accept an idea if it's a scientific truth - if it's come from a lab result, we'll take it on trust. But it seems that anything else is to remain in an area of relativity.

Unfortunately this is really problematic as there are some very important issues out there, that lie for the most part, outside the realm of science and can't ever be settled with a formula or experiment. You're always going to struggle to mount a scientific argument when trying to make progress with these sorts of issues.

By their very nature, these topics lead to doubt and disagreement and it can seem that nothing solid can ever be said about them. But, if a question can't be answered definitively with 100% scientific accuracy, that shouldn't be a reason not to try and address it. There is such a thing as a good and bad argument outside of science. One can speak of better or worse answers to big questions. It's not about imposing conclusions on anyone else but rather, making sound arguments that proceed logically and with reason. Rational, democratic discourse depends on people engaging with one another, trying to figure out ideas, and not running away from complex issues by dogmatically shutting any argument down which arises from original thought.

Edit: Spelling

[–]stevesy17 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]griffster998 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]DontThrowMeYaWeh 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Googoo123450 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 31分前 (0子コメント)

[–]NeuroticChameleon -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Hurrah_for_Karamazov -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 4時間前 (14子コメント)

[–]rrrx 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 3時間前 (13子コメント)

[–]Hurrah_for_Karamazov 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 3時間前 (12子コメント)

[–]rrrx -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 3時間前 (11子コメント)

[–]Hurrah_for_Karamazov -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 3時間前 (10子コメント)

[–]rrrx 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 3時間前 (9子コメント)

[–]fuhko 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前* (0子コメント)

The biological difference between humans and dogs is as absolutely certain as it is that one and one is two.

Species as a catagory are not as fixed as they would initially appear. Lions and tigers can mate and produce (sterile) offspring. Are they a single species?

Likewise, wolves and coyotes can interbreed. Perhaps as they grow more and more genetically dissimilar, wolves and coyotes will become unable to interbreed and reach the point of a lion and tiger, where they become "different species".

But is there a single point where we can say two different species exist? No, it's a gradual procees of change. One group shades into another.

And so it can be argued that species is really just a convient construct humans have made to understand organisms. Speciation can be construed not as the emergence of one species from another but as groups of living things gaining more and more difficulties interbreeding as they accumulate genetic differences.

This becomes especially apparent when we get into bacteria, which reproduce completely asexually and can swap genes.

[–]Hurrah_for_Karamazov -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 3時間前 (7子コメント)

[–]rrrx -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 2時間前 (6子コメント)

But why can't I just say that a dog is just a hairy, four-legged human with different genetics?

Because genetics defines a species. Genetics also defines sex; a biologically male individual who identifies as a woman is still biologically male. Genetics does not, however, define gender.

I still don't see that you've made any sort of point. Your arguments here are insubstantial and one-size-fits-all; they could be rebranded to pretend as a rebuttal to virtually any scientific conclusion. They don't respond to data, which is clearly why you're trying to use them; you can't respond to the data, since it clearly refutes your preconceptions. You don't have any evidence or arguments that are equally valid, so you're instead just trying (but failing) to diminish the validity of the evidence that does exist.

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]PepeAndMrDuck 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 4時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]rrrx 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]xgatto 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]rrrx 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (1子コメント)

Gender identity is not about the things that you do. There are transgendered men (biological women) who are sexually attracted to men, and who still like things that are stereotypically associated with women. There are transgendered women (biological men) who are sexually attracted to women, and who still like things that are stereotypically associated with men. Gender identity is about how you conceive of yourself. It's can be difficult as a cisgendered person to understand what exactly that has to do with your gender, since you don't sense any discord between your biology and your identity and therefore don't realize how important that is to how you think of yourself.

If you woke up tomorrow in a woman's body and people treated you like you were a woman, wouldn't it bother you, even if you kept doing the things you've always done?

[–]xgatto 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

Yeah im having a hard time trying to grasp it.

In your last example I kinda understood but it doesnt add up to your first comment. If I woke up as a woman tomorrow (which would be a fun morning) I would still feel like im in the wrong sex, which you said in your previous comment.

People with GD don't think that they are biologically the opposite sex. They identify with the opposite gender.

Which is making me really hard to understand, if gender is the state of mind of which you conveive yourself, not the things you do, then aren't we refering to sex? Like, I woke up as a woman but I conceive myself as a man, therefore I should obviously have a dickn'balls?

If it's not related to the things I DO or LIKE then why is it a social construct like you also said?

If it's how I conceive myself, then how is it not my PERCEPTION that is not adding up to reality?

[–]VROF -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 3時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]NiceneCreedillBeBack 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 3時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]VROF 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]NiceneCreedillBeBack 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]knockturnal -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 3時間前* (5子コメント)

[–]rrrx 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 3時間前 (4子コメント)

Well for one thing, transgenderism which we would identify as GD is a fixture across time and culture. There's an interesting (if not terribly recent, dating to 1999) text called Female Desires: Same-Sex Relations and Transgender Practices across Cultures that highlights some of this. The argument that gender roles are the root cause of GD is fundamentally deficient, since if that were true you wouldn't expect to find GD in cultures with wildly different gender roles, or in time periods where gender roles were different -- and you do. If GD were a temporally recent or culturally isolated phenomenon, I would think those arguments might have something to them. But that just isn't the case.

As to a biological cause of GD, the science is not remotely settled, in the same way the science of what causes homosexuality is not remotely settled.

[–]knockturnal 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 3時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]rrrx -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 2時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]knockturnal 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]americancontrol -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

The argument that gender roles are the root cause of GD is fundamentally deficient, since if that were true you wouldn't expect to find GD in cultures with wildly different gender roles, or in time periods where gender roles were different -- and you do.

This has literally no basis in reality. It is completely irrelevant what each individual culture's arbitrarily defined gender roles are. If culture A subscribes to the idea that only men should brush their teeth and only women should floss(or whichever stupid analogy you want to come up with), invariably some % of the males will decide "I really only like flossing (and x/y/z other things), I don't really feel like a man." What the gender roles are don't matter at all. The problem is that the gender roles create stereotypes that cause some people to feel incompatible with their gender when they don't fit those stereotypes.

[–]nagermals -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]ToniChew -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[+][削除されました] 9時間前 (24子コメント)

[deleted]

[–]stuck_with_mysql 27ポイント28ポイント29ポイント 8時間前 (23子コメント)

[–]lookielue 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 8時間前 (5子コメント)

[–]UHAVESHITTYTASTE 29ポイント30ポイント31ポイント 7時間前* (4子コメント)

Hopefully I don't need to point out how close that argument is to arguments against homosexuality which have been repeatedly and thoroughly disproven.

I think you should.
Because they arent the same thing, one being disproven doesnt disprove the other.
studies for homosexuality dont disprove transgenderism
Just for the sake of it

Edit: or downvote for noticing the broken logic. 1 doesnt equate 2

Because as in the video as the reverand mentioned after getting the change, people felt satisfaction but also felt wrong still which is why one doctor stopped doing the sugery.
The only problem you would have with being gay is "do i accept being gay" and then your done, you can be gay.

Meanwhile being transgendered is you accept it, you made the change, and there is still something wrong with people on how they feel.

Both groups feel discrimination but I feel thats where the argument begins to fade.
Im not calling this a disease but there is a definite mental thing going on here if even after the switch people still feel wrong
So yes please do point out how close the arguments are for against either of them. Once you get over the fact both feel they are discriminated against, your idea of them being similar falls apart. 1 does not equal 2

[+][削除されました] 6時間前 (1子コメント)

[deleted]

[–]rainbowbucket -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[+]lookielue スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント 6時間前 (1子コメント)

You are quite correct that the two are different. Where his argument aligns is in his proposed "solution" if you can call it that. That a transgendered essentially needs to 'get over' feeling like the opposite sex and accept their condition.

Note that inspite of his claims that social norms are arbitrary he does not encourage others to be more accepting of men in drag or butch women. The burden lies fully on the transexual to overcome their condition, everyone else should be strong until then.

I'm not saying he doesn't have valid points. His points about gender reassignment are quite valid (because it is a flawed procedure and doesn't actually change the person genetically), but the core claim that, to use his initial allegory, transexuals need to stop playing make believe is, to me, profoundly offensive.

[–]UHAVESHITTYTASTE 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 6時間前 (0子コメント)

[+][削除されました] 8時間前 (7子コメント)

[deleted]

[–]stuck_with_mysql 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント 8時間前 (2子コメント)

[+][削除されました] 8時間前 (1子コメント)

[deleted]

[–]stuck_with_mysql 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 7時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]rileyk 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 7時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]lillullaby 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 8時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]lookielue 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 7時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]GoogleOpenLetter -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 8時間前 (8子コメント)

[–]UHAVESHITTYTASTE 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 7時間前 (7子コメント)

[–]lookielue -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 7時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]UHAVESHITTYTASTE 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 7時間前* (3子コメント)

[–]QualityGiraffe -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 6時間前 (2子コメント)

[+][削除されました] 6時間前 (1子コメント)

[deleted]

[–]QualityGiraffe 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 6時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]tits-mchenry 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 6時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]lookielue -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 6時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]spaci999 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 37分前 (2子コメント)

[–]cmoncoop 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 7分前 (0子コメント)

[–]TheMagicPin -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 30分前 (0子コメント)

[–]Deckard_Didnt_Die -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Otiac 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 3時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]incharge21 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 46分前 (0子コメント)

[–]archpope 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 20分前 (0子コメント)

[+]mrtest001 スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]nath1234 -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]REVfoREVer 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]kauneus -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 1時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]IcingNine 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]I_Plunder_Booty -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 1時間前* (3子コメント)

You say this because he is a priest. I don't like trans people and am horrified how the media enables then and treats them like heroes. There's countless young liberals on reddit who share the view that the liberal media portrays of the transgendered. Everyone now and then some trans glorification spills over into the main subreddits and I'll stumble upon it. I'll refute their facts, submit my own arguments, (all of which are shared by the priest)...and I get the same reaction as if I typed out DIE TRANNY SCUM over and over again with capital letters. Weather well reasoned arguments, with citations to unbiased sources including medical journals, census data, etc... it doesn't matter, if you're posting your opinions on reddit as an anonymous user you might as well be Hitler.

After a while you start to think why bother? So you spew hate filled vitriol because either way it shuts down the tranny poison spilling into the mainstream one leak at a time. There's so many impressionable children on this site that the trannies keep attempting to groom into the next generation of degenerates and it's sickening. It's akin to drug addicts trying to get others into their shit lifestyle so they aren't alone and they don't care how many lives they ruin in the process.

Notice a difference between the tone of the last 2 paragraphs? Bet you didn't, since I was already the enemy after the second sentence and that's the kind of reaction that right vs. left politics has fostered in all of us in the last 2 decades.

[–]TheMagicPin -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 1時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]I_Plunder_Booty 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 38分前 (1子コメント)

[–]TheMagicPin 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 32分前 (0子コメント)

[+]KittenKingSwift スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6ポイント-5ポイント-4ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

π Rendered by PID 16452 on app-123 at 2015-06-30 06:35:42.413725+00:00 running b31b74f country code: JP.

videos

Introducing the Official Twitter account of r/Videos. Click Here and follow! Tweet us something beyond mind-blowing.

Rules

調停者