Question about the homophobia thread

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

Lol why do you think we care about Jordan Peterson? Do we post quotes from outrageous trans rights activists to compare your positions to theirs? No, and if we did they would be deleted by you in a heartbeat. I can only imagine how long a wild quote about being female from Grace Lavery or Andrea Long Chu would stay up.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

It goes for all cis people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

Lol why do you think we care about Jordan Peterson? Do we post quotes from outrageous trans rights activists to compare your positions to theirs? No, and if we did they would be deleted by you in a heartbeat. I can only imagine how long a wild quote about being female from Grace Lavery or Andrea Long Chu would stay up.

People are obsessed with trans people so yeah. One did a bud light as and people wouldn’t shut up about it. Apparently trans women shouldn’t be allowed to get advertising deals.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

Lol why do you think we care about Jordan Peterson? Do we post quotes from outrageous trans rights activists to compare your positions to theirs? No, and if we did they would be deleted by you in a heartbeat. I can only imagine how long a wild quote about being female from Grace Lavery or Andrea Long Chu would stay up.

Actually, you folks go well beyond mere quotes and routinely judge all trans people by the most extreme examples. But, your post is quite revealing. I would be glad to disassociate myself from extreme views. You on the other hand, are quite happy to share the same position as Peterson.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

It goes for all cis people.

That label doesn’t apply to me. Your position is definitely noted, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

It goes for all cis people.

That label doesn’t apply to me. Your position is definitely noted, though.

So you’re trans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

It goes for all cis people.

That label doesn’t apply to me. Your position is definitely noted, though.

So you’re trans.

Nope. I’m a biological woman or a female. Whichever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

This pretty much sums it up. Well done PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

It goes for all cis people.

That label doesn’t apply to me. Your position is definitely noted, though.

So you’re trans.

Nope. I’m a biological woman or a female. Whichever.

So you’re cis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

It goes for all cis people.

That label doesn’t apply to me. Your position is definitely noted, though.

So you’re trans.

Nope. I’m a biological woman or a female. Whichever.

So you’re cis.

Nope. I’ve been clear.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

Lol why do you think we care about Jordan Peterson? Do we post quotes from outrageous trans rights activists to compare your positions to theirs? No, and if we did they would be deleted by you in a heartbeat. I can only imagine how long a wild quote about being female from Grace Lavery or Andrea Long Chu would stay up.

Actually, you folks go well beyond mere quotes and routinely judge all trans people by the most extreme examples. But, your post is quite revealing. I would be glad to disassociate myself from extreme views. You on the other hand, are quite happy to share the same position as Peterson.

You're joking right. Not identifying as "cis", a term which is based on an unscientific belief system which only gained common usage in 2015, is not an extremist viewpoint. Nor have any of the females in this thread threatened violence like Peterson (a male, surprise surprise).

But please, do explain which extremist trans rights views you would disassociate from. No where on this thread has any trans activist been able to step away from extreme viewpoints. I would be interested in hearing what those are.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

Lol why do you think we care about Jordan Peterson? Do we post quotes from outrageous trans rights activists to compare your positions to theirs? No, and if we did they would be deleted by you in a heartbeat. I can only imagine how long a wild quote about being female from Grace Lavery or Andrea Long Chu would stay up.

Actually, you folks go well beyond mere quotes and routinely judge all trans people by the most extreme examples. But, your post is quite revealing. I would be glad to disassociate myself from extreme views. You on the other hand, are quite happy to share the same position as Peterson.

You're joking right. Not identifying as "cis", a term which is based on an unscientific belief system which only gained common usage in 2015, is not an extremist viewpoint. Nor have any of the females in this thread threatened violence like Peterson (a male, surprise surprise).

But please, do explain which extremist trans rights views you would disassociate from. No where on this thread has any trans activist been able to step away from extreme viewpoints. I would be interested in hearing what those are.

Very early in this thread I questioned why trans women would want to be accepted at the all-women spa in Washington state. I thought that they would make other spa customers uncomfortable and be made to feel uncomfortable themselves. While I understood the desire of trans people to exert their rights, I think they, like everyone, should pick their battles and that one was not a good choice. I don't remember exactly what I wrote, but I also acknowledged the concern of employees and other customers that cis perverts would exploit this as an opportunity to access the spa. One other trans supporter also expressed doubts that going after the spa was a good idea.

Beyond that, frankly I don't pay much attention to trans activists so I don't know what type of extreme things they say or do. I mostly hear about them from anti-trans people. But, for instance, I have no problem criticizing the trans women who bared her breasts at the White House.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

This reminds me of when my son was little and he got upset that I called him literate after he learned to read. He thought I was name calling, but he just didn't like the way the word sounded. Cisgender isn't a bad name, nor is saying you have a gender identity. It's like saying you're bipedal.

I’m another one who doesn’t like cis, and I wish to not be called that.

I personally object to being called a Homo sapien. I'm a real man and not interested in any of this homo stuff.

A more relevant analogy would be “I personally object to being called a suppressive person, I’m not interested in any of this Scientology stuff” or “I personally object to being called a sinner, I’m not interested in any of this Christianity stuff”

Cis doesn't have negative connotations such those examples so I don't think those are good analogies. For example, cisatlantic is the same side of the Atlantic. Transatlantic is the other side of the Atlantic. There is no implication that one side is better or worse than the other.

But you folks are certainly in good company with that staunch feminist Jordan Peterson:

But both sides of the Atlantic are actual geographic locations. They don’t require adherence to any sort of belief system.

Yeah, I get it. Accepting that you are cis means accepting that there are others who are trans. You are unwilling to accept the existence of such people. This is not really about your wanting to assert your identity, but rather your desire to prevent others from asserting theirs.

It's always interesting to see how "I am worried about bathrooms and sports" always ends up with "I don't want to acknowledge your existence in any way, shape, or form".

You’re making a lot of incorrect assumptions.

I don’t like being called cis. I just ask that you don’t call me that. I don’t care at all if you or anyone else calls yourself trans. I also do not deny the existence of trans people.

I’m just asking that my wishes be respected.

How are we supposed to distinguish you from trans people?

I’m a biological woman or female. Whichever is fine.

Well whatever. I'm going to refer to you as cis. Sue me.

It’s noted that preferred labels don’t have to be respected. Is that just for biological women or for everyone?

Aside from Jeff, who would have to compare every response to the handful who object to being called cis, no one here can tell who you are. If you want people not to call you cis, you’ll need to create an identifier so we as a community can be respectful and not call you cis. Otherwise, you may get lumped in with people who identify as the gender they were assigned at birth (aka cisgender people). It’s also really unfair to expect Jeff to remember your quirks that don’t fall in line with cultural norms and generally accepted language outside of this conversation if you’re not going to log in. If you’re not concerned about it in general, I’m not sure why you’re fighting it so hard in this conversation, especially when you probably weren’t surveyed in the study that was linked and weren’t even called a cis person directly when you objected to the label.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

These two sentences contradict each other:

"Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex."

Indeed, you yourself claim to have adopted gender norms that are tied to biological males. That is consistent with the first sentence, but not the second.

No they're not. Here is an example to spell it out for you.

Gender Norm: Men (males) work and earn money. Women (females) stay home and care for the house.
This gender norm is NOT "severed" from biological sex. It exists only because of biological sex and evolutionary biology. There is no other reason. "Severing" gender norms from sex means they would cease to exist.

I agree with you on this. Personally I think we should do away with gender completely. Have male and female categories, and if you are female and want to dress like a guy have at it. Male in dresses - wonderful. You don’t need a special name. Just be yourself.

^I’m in this camp, too. Just because you like Barbie’s, the color pink, and dresses doesn’t make you a woman. You are what you are biologically (male or female), and you simply like these things…..or you don’t like those things.

Agreed. Gender should be abolished. Biological sex is what defines us as women.

So you’re gender neutral?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see some prison or crime statistical data from trans activists. Anyone care to share?

Sure. Here’s a link from UCLA Law. Trans people are victims of violent crime more than four times as often as cis people. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

Here’s one about transgender rates of violence. https://vsac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FORGE-Rates-of-Violence.pdf

Cis - when did this become acceptable? I do not use this term and find it offensive.

I find it offensive as well. Nor do I have a gender identity.

LOL. Do you have pronouns?

I have a biological sex. Female. That's it. Adult human females are called women and referred to as she/her. I'm not sure what is funny about not subscribing to supernatural faith based systems. I don't mock people like you who believe in unscientific made up religious nonsense. You should consider showing the same courtesy.

Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations. As a biological female, to you reject all characteristics associated with being a woman (or any other gender for that matter)? This would be an interesting existence.

Like 99.999% of biological females, I reject some traditions, norms, roles, and expectations associated with being a woman and embrace others. I also embrace some male norms, roles and expectations like 99.999% of biological females while rejecting others.

But let's be precise with language. Gender is a social construct that includes traditions, norms, roles, and expectations rooted in biological sex. There is no gender without biological sex. Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender. Sexual characteristics are physical characteristics which are identifiable as part of one's physical, sexed body.

All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female. I have no gender identity, nor do I accept gender identity as valid when it is unobservable and largely consists of harmful sex stereotypes. Gender ideology is just yet another system of male supremacy that harms women.

Interesting. You write that "Gender identity is the personal sense of one's own gender". Then, you also write, "All of my lived experiences and attitudes about I see myself as a woman are rooted in my sex as a biological female.". In other words, your "personal sense" of gender has been influenced by your "lived experiences" as a biological woman. This raises to obvious questions: 1) why do you assume that everyone else's "personal sense" of their gender is similar to yours? and, 2) aren't you saying that you do in fact have a gender identity, though it is one influenced by your lived experience (which is probably true of everyone for what it is worth)?

A further contradiction is your insistence that your view of yourself is rooted in your biological sex as a woman while admitting to embracing "some male norms". In other words, there are gender norms that have been linked to biological males that you have adopted while not being a biological male. That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists.

I googled gender identity to get that definition. Feel free to propose another. But based on how you and everyone else describes gender identity, no, I don't have one. I do have a self esteem and self perception and self awareness which is based on my biological sex. If people want to hold unscientific beliefs that I don't agree with like gender identity or Jesus's salvation, they have a right to do so. But they don't have a right to make be believe in it.

"That suggests that gender norms are mutable, not strictly tied to biological sex, and that individual's have some amount of freedom as to which to adhere. I'm pretty sure that puts you in pretty strong agreement with trans rights activists."

I have no problem acknowledging points of common ground with those I disagree. But let's be clear. Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex. Gender norms cannot be severed from biological sex, it is literally what defines them. If they want to make the case that gender should be abolished, I agree with that as well.

These two sentences contradict each other:

"Gender norms are mutable and individuals should have complete freedom to adhere or not. However, they not able to severed from biological sex."

Indeed, you yourself claim to have adopted gender norms that are tied to biological males. That is consistent with the first sentence, but not the second.

No they're not. Here is an example to spell it out for you.

Gender Norm: Men (males) work and earn money. Women (females) stay home and care for the house.
This gender norm is NOT "severed" from biological sex. It exists only because of biological sex and evolutionary biology. There is no other reason. "Severing" gender norms from sex means they would cease to exist.

I agree with you on this. Personally I think we should do away with gender completely. Have male and female categories, and if you are female and want to dress like a guy have at it. Male in dresses - wonderful. You don’t need a special name. Just be yourself.

^I’m in this camp, too. Just because you like Barbie’s, the color pink, and dresses doesn’t make you a woman. You are what you are biologically (male or female), and you simply like these things…..or you don’t like those things.

Agreed. Gender should be abolished. Biological sex is what defines us as women.

So you’re gender neutral?

Sure? What does gender neutral mean? Is it like unisex? Or is it more like non-binary?