Question about the homophobia thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw this on Twitter - a comment very applicable to this discussion:

The trans activists know they can’t win in a fair fight. They suppress, censor and deplatform because they know their position is insane and can’t be defended. If open discussion on this topic was allowed, their side would be crushed into oblivion in less than a week.

You just posted to say that you think transgender individuals suffer from mental illness. What type of open discussion can be held with you? Transgender people have existed throughout history. Almost every medical professional in the field accepts the reality of transgenderism. What evidence could possibly change your mind? Your idea of "open discussion" is simply to be allowed to deny the existence of transgender individuals.

Words matter. Are you saying that almost every medical professional in the field believes that men can become women and that women can become men or that gender dysphoria exists? The two are not the same. I do not deny the “existence” of people suffering from gender dysphoria but I do not believe men can become women and vice versa.

I agree that words matter. You are conflating different concepts and seem to believe that classifications of "men" and "women" are immutable. You are confusing "sex assigned at birth", "gender identity", and "gender expression". "Gender Dysphoria" can occur when the sex assigned at birth does not align with an individual's gender identity. You agree that this condition exists, but apparently believe that it is simply a mental health condition. Individual may decide to address gender dysphoria in a variety of ways. They may simply socially transition by changing pronouns and their name. That of course does not change the sex with which they were assigned at birth, but it does allow them to present as a different gender. Whether that means they are a man becoming a woman or vice versa is, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, really that's the wrong question. Some individuals may seek to transition legally, meaning they have their government-issued documents updated to reflect their gender. So, someone whose assigned sex at birth was male may receive a driver's license specifying that she is female. Whether that means that a man has become a woman is again, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, again, it's not the right question. Others may seek to medically transition which can involve many different types of treatment. Once again, whether those going through such treatments men becoming women or vice versa is, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, that is still not the right question. It is important to remember that not all transgender people will seek all or even any of these paths. All of these methods of addressing gender dysphoria have strong support among the medical community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Eh, that’s exactly the point isn’t it. They are telling you they can. You just choose not the believe them.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw this on Twitter - a comment very applicable to this discussion:

The trans activists know they can’t win in a fair fight. They suppress, censor and deplatform because they know their position is insane and can’t be defended. If open discussion on this topic was allowed, their side would be crushed into oblivion in less than a week.

You just posted to say that you think transgender individuals suffer from mental illness. What type of open discussion can be held with you? Transgender people have existed throughout history. Almost every medical professional in the field accepts the reality of transgenderism. What evidence could possibly change your mind? Your idea of "open discussion" is simply to be allowed to deny the existence of transgender individuals.

Words matter. Are you saying that almost every medical professional in the field believes that men can become women and that women can become men or that gender dysphoria exists? The two are not the same. I do not deny the “existence” of people suffering from gender dysphoria but I do not believe men can become women and vice versa.

I agree that words matter. You are conflating different concepts and seem to believe that classifications of "men" and "women" are immutable. You are confusing "sex assigned at birth", "gender identity", and "gender expression". "Gender Dysphoria" can occur when the sex assigned at birth does not align with an individual's gender identity. You agree that this condition exists, but apparently believe that it is simply a mental health condition. Individual may decide to address gender dysphoria in a variety of ways. They may simply socially transition by changing pronouns and their name. That of course does not change the sex with which they were assigned at birth, but it does allow them to present as a different gender. Whether that means they are a man becoming a woman or vice versa is, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, really that's the wrong question. Some individuals may seek to transition legally, meaning they have their government-issued documents updated to reflect their gender. So, someone whose assigned sex at birth was male may receive a driver's license specifying that she is female. Whether that means that a man has become a woman is again, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, again, it's not the right question. Others may seek to medically transition which can involve many different types of treatment. Once again, whether those going through such treatments men becoming women or vice versa is, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, that is still not the right question. It is important to remember that not all transgender people will seek all or even any of these paths. All of these methods of addressing gender dysphoria have strong support among the medical community.

I appreciate your thoughtful response but respectfully would disagree with you with you insofar as what you classify as the “wrong questions.” Specifically, you write that whether “a man becomes a woman” is the wrong question. No, I think it is precisely the whole ball of wax. I think that there are a great many people, liberal, conservative etc. who understand that people come at their gender/sexuality in different ways. However, when one side repeats dogmatically that “trans women are women” it causes some, if not many, to pump the proverbial brakes. Thus, it is the right question to ask since the adoption of this position leads to the invasion of spaces for biological women such as sports by biological men. I doubt many would care what pronouns people use or what names they go by if it did not impact on others. Personally, I find the whole pronoun thing silly but be true to yourself so long as it does not put others out - kind of how most view religion in this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Eh, that’s exactly the point isn’t it. They are telling you they can. You just choose not the believe them.

How could a biological male know what a biological female feels? They can’t even define what a woman is just that they are one. There is no logic to the position.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw this on Twitter - a comment very applicable to this discussion:

The trans activists know they can’t win in a fair fight. They suppress, censor and deplatform because they know their position is insane and can’t be defended. If open discussion on this topic was allowed, their side would be crushed into oblivion in less than a week.

You just posted to say that you think transgender individuals suffer from mental illness. What type of open discussion can be held with you? Transgender people have existed throughout history. Almost every medical professional in the field accepts the reality of transgenderism. What evidence could possibly change your mind? Your idea of "open discussion" is simply to be allowed to deny the existence of transgender individuals.

Words matter. Are you saying that almost every medical professional in the field believes that men can become women and that women can become men or that gender dysphoria exists? The two are not the same. I do not deny the “existence” of people suffering from gender dysphoria but I do not believe men can become women and vice versa.

I agree that words matter. You are conflating different concepts and seem to believe that classifications of "men" and "women" are immutable. You are confusing "sex assigned at birth", "gender identity", and "gender expression". "Gender Dysphoria" can occur when the sex assigned at birth does not align with an individual's gender identity. You agree that this condition exists, but apparently believe that it is simply a mental health condition. Individual may decide to address gender dysphoria in a variety of ways. They may simply socially transition by changing pronouns and their name. That of course does not change the sex with which they were assigned at birth, but it does allow them to present as a different gender. Whether that means they are a man becoming a woman or vice versa is, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, really that's the wrong question. Some individuals may seek to transition legally, meaning they have their government-issued documents updated to reflect their gender. So, someone whose assigned sex at birth was male may receive a driver's license specifying that she is female. Whether that means that a man has become a woman is again, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, again, it's not the right question. Others may seek to medically transition which can involve many different types of treatment. Once again, whether those going through such treatments men becoming women or vice versa is, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, that is still not the right question. It is important to remember that not all transgender people will seek all or even any of these paths. All of these methods of addressing gender dysphoria have strong support among the medical community.

I appreciate your thoughtful response but respectfully would disagree with you with you insofar as what you classify as the “wrong questions.” Specifically, you write that whether “a man becomes a woman” is the wrong question. No, I think it is precisely the whole ball of wax. I think that there are a great many people, liberal, conservative etc. who understand that people come at their gender/sexuality in different ways. However, when one side repeats dogmatically that “trans women are women” it causes some, if not many, to pump the proverbial brakes. Thus, it is the right question to ask since the adoption of this position leads to the invasion of spaces for biological women such as sports by biological men. I doubt many would care what pronouns people use or what names they go by if it did not impact on others. Personally, I find the whole pronoun thing silly but be true to yourself so long as it does not put others out - kind of how most view religion in this country.

Asking whether a man becomes a woman is the wrong question because it is too simplistic. It's the same reason that Ketanji Brown Jackson would not define a "woman" when asked during her confirmation hearings. Questions of bathrooms and sports are topics for others to decide. That's beyond my pay grade.

Also, I am cognizant that there are probably trans readers out there who are pulling their hair out due to my probably inept responses. Sorry to engage in this bit of "cis-splaining", but corrections and additions are welcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Was that your experience as a transgender woman?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw this on Twitter - a comment very applicable to this discussion:

The trans activists know they can’t win in a fair fight. They suppress, censor and deplatform because they know their position is insane and can’t be defended. If open discussion on this topic was allowed, their side would be crushed into oblivion in less than a week.

You just posted to say that you think transgender individuals suffer from mental illness. What type of open discussion can be held with you? Transgender people have existed throughout history. Almost every medical professional in the field accepts the reality of transgenderism. What evidence could possibly change your mind? Your idea of "open discussion" is simply to be allowed to deny the existence of transgender individuals.

Words matter. Are you saying that almost every medical professional in the field believes that men can become women and that women can become men or that gender dysphoria exists? The two are not the same. I do not deny the “existence” of people suffering from gender dysphoria but I do not believe men can become women and vice versa.

I agree that words matter. You are conflating different concepts and seem to believe that classifications of "men" and "women" are immutable. You are confusing "sex assigned at birth", "gender identity", and "gender expression". "Gender Dysphoria" can occur when the sex assigned at birth does not align with an individual's gender identity. You agree that this condition exists, but apparently believe that it is simply a mental health condition. Individual may decide to address gender dysphoria in a variety of ways. They may simply socially transition by changing pronouns and their name. That of course does not change the sex with which they were assigned at birth, but it does allow them to present as a different gender. Whether that means they are a man becoming a woman or vice versa is, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, really that's the wrong question. Some individuals may seek to transition legally, meaning they have their government-issued documents updated to reflect their gender. So, someone whose assigned sex at birth was male may receive a driver's license specifying that she is female. Whether that means that a man has become a woman is again, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, again, it's not the right question. Others may seek to medically transition which can involve many different types of treatment. Once again, whether those going through such treatments men becoming women or vice versa is, I guess, subject to interpretation. But, that is still not the right question. It is important to remember that not all transgender people will seek all or even any of these paths. All of these methods of addressing gender dysphoria have strong support among the medical community.

I appreciate your thoughtful response but respectfully would disagree with you with you insofar as what you classify as the “wrong questions.” Specifically, you write that whether “a man becomes a woman” is the wrong question. No, I think it is precisely the whole ball of wax. I think that there are a great many people, liberal, conservative etc. who understand that people come at their gender/sexuality in different ways. However, when one side repeats dogmatically that “trans women are women” it causes some, if not many, to pump the proverbial brakes. Thus, it is the right question to ask since the adoption of this position leads to the invasion of spaces for biological women such as sports by biological men. I doubt many would care what pronouns people use or what names they go by if it did not impact on others. Personally, I find the whole pronoun thing silly but be true to yourself so long as it does not put others out - kind of how most view religion in this country.

Asking whether a man becomes a woman is the wrong question because it is too simplistic. It's the same reason that Ketanji Brown Jackson would not define a "woman" when asked during her confirmation hearings. Questions of bathrooms and sports are topics for others to decide. That's beyond my pay grade.

Also, I am cognizant that there are probably trans readers out there who are pulling their hair out due to my probably inept responses. Sorry to engage in this bit of "cis-splaining", but corrections and additions are welcome.

You should never apologize for your heartfelt and thoughtful responses, though I may disagree with them. Your opinion is no less valuable because you are “cis.” With respect to Justice Jackson, I think she declined to answer because she knows such a case may come before the Court (though I am quite sure she has no problem defining a woman) dealing with the issue and as well all know, judicial nominees say nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I got tired of removing posts that I considered hateful from that thread. Of course, the authors of those posts will deny that they are hateful because they obviously believe that calling trans women men and accusing them of having mental health issues are just differences of opinion. But, I don't find such posts acceptable.

Every trans-related thread here ultimately goes the same way. It's just too much effort to try to keep the threads civil.

My kid has identified as trans. He most definitely has mental health issues, diagnosed well before. OCD and on the spectrum. What's cruel is the medical community and trans community preying on him, determined to separate him from a family who has always been his advocate.

Yes, you have been repeating this non-stop. It is very clear that you are not willing to accept your child's trans identity and prefer to view them as mentally ill and a victim of groomers. That is not a healthy attitude and, as you are seeing, the results are not good. I hope that your child will find love and support from those who truly are their advocate.

Jeff do you honestly believe that you know more about this posters situation and family, than she herself does?

Yes he does. That’s the arrogance of leftism. He also thinks he knows more than an MD, apparently

Did a MD diagnose your child as not trans?

Also, for the sake of clarification, could you clarify whether the child we are discussing is a pre-teen, a teen, or a young adult?

Yes, the MD did indeed.

The MD diagnosed your kid as “not transgender”?

There is no formal diagnosis, like you can get with cancer. That’s the problem. The psychiatrist stated that true transgenderism expresses itself so early in childhood that it can’t be hidden, and oftentimes, they find those people are gay as adults, which is just fine. The idea of being in the wrong body never presented itself in my kid until it became a ‘thing’ in the schools and on the internet. It’s very ‘popular’ with neurodivergent kids and kids with OCD, because you get an automatic support team, often from the same kids that bullied you. Very powerful. Psych. said the problem is the blind positive reinforcement kids are being given by some of the medical community and therapists. Say you are trans and you are trans. It’s one thing entertaining an idea. It’s another thing when the medical community adds drugs and surgery early on in the game. My kid showed all signs of OCD thinking to the psychiatrist when discussing transgender feelings, and could not tell why without constant reference to internet memes, sites, politics, etc. It was a “I just realized this is probably why I….”

As you will notice in this thread, transgender activists go right to name and shame of parents. They know nothing about the individual child’s background, nothing about the family, nothing about the child’s medical history. This is by design. If you can pull the child from the nuclear family and into their ‘supportive arms’, it serves a double purpose: a new member of the team and the destruction of the nuclear family. At the same time, make sure you batter the parent with ‘your child will kill themselves if you don’t affirm’, because by doing so, you can potentially get three new members, or more, in the case of a blended family! It’s not about the individual child’s needs - it’s about the movement. Even the most liberal studies show true transgenderism is between .5 and .8% of the population. We are seeing conversions now in droves.

My mother was diagnosed with Parkinson's. Did you know there is also no test for Parkinson's? You know it through a collection of symptoms and observable things.

I'm curious how your child's OCD was diagnosed, too. Probably in the same way.

Was your mother diagnosed as transgender as a cause for her Parkinsons? Curious

No one is diagnosed as trans since it's not a mental illness or a disorder. People identify as trans and you just have to believe them. Why is that so hard to comprehend?

Giving medication to, and surgery to, kids and people who just identify as something is scary stuff. If someone identifies as a blind person, should the surgeon take out their eyes?

Why is it scary?

Do you believe a surgeon should surgically blind a man because he identifies as blind?

I think it's very telling that you think trans people are maiming themselves by taking hormones or removing their breasts. I see now why you are so scared. You don't view them as a complete person if they undergo a change.

Answer the question.

That's an easy yes. But you think you somehow stumped me with your question. Because it is inconceivable to you that people can whatever the hell they want with their bodies. I also support doctor-assisted suicide, am against the death penalty though (I know, mind blown), and don't care one bit if anyone wants a boob job or a tummy tuck.

Now you? Why do you think that trans people are maiming themselves if they have gender-affirming surgery?

Is it ethical for the surgeon to deliberately blind someone when they know that person is suffering from mental illness?

You are equating transgenderism to mental illness. If you are ever wondering why people call you a bigot…

Just FYI I’m not “equating” it. I’m saying it’s an absolute fact. Just to be clear.

Wow. Proud of it too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

So a boob job is covered for trans women but not for bio women who are flat and just want bigger boobs?
Further circumcision shouldn’t be covered but breast reconstruction as a result of an illness should.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Was that your experience as a transgender woman?

Are you saying a trans woman knows what it feels like to menstruate? To go through post pardum depression? To have a miscarriage? To have hot flashes? Please explain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Was that your experience as a transgender woman?

Are you saying a trans woman knows what it feels like to menstruate? To go through post pardum depression? To have a miscarriage? To have hot flashes? Please explain.

I’m saying you have no idea what it’s like to be a transgender woman.

And FYI those experiences do not define women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Was that your experience as a transgender woman?

Are you saying a trans woman knows what it feels like to menstruate? To go through post pardum depression? To have a miscarriage? To have hot flashes? Please explain.

I’m saying you have no idea what it’s like to be a transgender woman.

And FYI those experiences do not define women.

Fair enough. I also don’t know what it is like to be a seal, a horse or any other mammal in the animal kingdom. I just threw out a few (non-exhaustive) physical things women (and only women) go through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Was that your experience as a transgender woman?

They don't *completely* define a woman but they most certainly are part of the experience of being a woman.

Are you saying a trans woman knows what it feels like to menstruate? To go through post pardum depression? To have a miscarriage? To have hot flashes? Please explain.

I’m saying you have no idea what it’s like to be a transgender woman.

And FYI those experiences do not define women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it isn’t a mental health issue, it’s considered cosmetic and therefor should not be covered by insurance

Circumcision is covered, so is breast reconstruction, so is a million other things but we cover it. Why aren’t you outraged about that?

Breast reconstruction isn’t covered for women who mistakenly believed they were trans as teens and had mastectomies.

Way to miss the point. Reconstructions aren’t medically necessary for women who had cancer either. We cover them because we know how important it is for a woman to feel like a woman.

Because there is an obvious biological component to being a woman that induces certain feelings that no biological man could ever experience or imagine.

Was that your experience as a transgender woman?

Are you saying a trans woman knows what it feels like to menstruate? To go through post pardum depression? To have a miscarriage? To have hot flashes? Please explain.

I’m saying you have no idea what it’s like to be a transgender woman.

And FYI those experiences do not define women.

And what feelings exactly do trans women have that make them women? I get that this is an incendiary question but isn’t it a logical one?