|
|
Kitzyma
|
 |
Likes it here |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 228
|
|
|
"The Gay Deceiver wrote on Tue, 27 October 2015 14:48"
Perhaps one of our Members here who is totally down with this whole thing could look into it and give a "Fetal Gender Assignment 101" primer.
--
As suggested, here is my attempt at a basic outline of fœtal development, mainly with respect to differences between genders.
To the best of my knowledge, the information is up to date. However, science is a collection of stories created to be compatible with one another and with current information. According to scientific method, new information is gathered to test those stories, and when the old stories are no longer compatible, new stories are created.
In trying to keep things to the basics, I may accidentally have missed out important information or oversimplified to the point of inaccuracy. Also, I've tried to ensure that what is stated here is generally accepted. Anyway if anyone sees a mistake or thinks that clarification is needed, please let me know and I'll edit it. In order to stop the thread getting too messy, it would be better to let me know by email what needs fixing.
There are differences between human males and females, though the differences are not as great as in some non-primate species. The primary difference is in the Karyotype, which basically means what the chromosomes look like in the nucleus of the cell. (Females have two X chromosomes and males have an X chromosome plus a Y chromosome) .
Sex-dichotomous differences refer to characteristics of one sex only (e.g. ovaries, uterus).
Sex-dimorphic differences are those of degree (e.g. height, muscles). These are mainly statistical, with overlap between males & females.
Even the sex-dichotomous differences are not absolute in the human population, and there are individuals who are exceptions (e.g., males with a uterus, or females with an XY karyotype), or who exhibit biological and/or behavioral characteristics of both sexes.
Some key stages in developmental of the fœtus
Gestational Age (weeks) & key developments
Week 5
Primitive heart tube forming
Formation of what will develop into spinal cord
Gonadal ridges form - will become testes or ovaries (depending on XY or XX genes)
Week 6
pits form which will become ears
Arm buds & tail visible
Grooves seen which will become structures of face and neck
passageways that will become rectal & urinary tracts become separated
Week 7
Start of development of eyes & nose
Arm & leg buds become flat paddles
cells that will form brain cortex start differentiating
Under the influence of a particular protein, testes begin to develop differently from ovaries.
Week 8
Brain continues to develop
Hands & feet have digits
Development of external sex organs starts (they look the same in males & females)
Week 9
All essential organs have at least begun to be formed
Male & female external sex organs begin to develop differently
(Development of male genitalia determined by dihydrotestosterone, not testosterone))
Weeks 10-12
External genitals well differentiated
Relative finger lengths depend on level of testosterone
Weeks 13-16
From week 13 sex prediction by ultrasound is almost 100% accurate
By week 15 main development of external genitalia completed
Muscle tissue and bones now developed and bones become harder
Weeks 13-20
Levels of fœtal testosterone (13 - 20 weeks) influence sexually dimorphic grey matter in brain as well as affecting behaviour (in boys aged 8-11, i.e. before the big rise in testosterone at puberty).
Week 21
Nails on fingers & toes
Eyebrows & eyelashes appear
Fœtus can be felt moving
Week 26
nervous system can control some bodily functions
Brain develops rapidly.
Week 31
Connections for mediating sensory input appear in brain
Bones developed but still soft & pliable
Notes:
1) Brain development is influenced by hormones from mother (e.g. Thyroid hormones, stress hormones) as well as hormones from fœtal organs such as gonads. NB even females (i.e. the mother) can produce some testosterone or testosterone-type hormones.
2) Effects of the hormones depend not just on the amounts of hormones but on how sensitive the fœtal cells are to those hormones. Several factors (e.g. expression of certain genes, not directly related to XX or XY) can affect that sensitivity.
3) One type of testosterone, dihydrotestosterone (DHT), is essential for development of external genitalia in the fœtus. A genetic condition prevents DHT from being formed by some male fœtuses, so they are born with underdeveloped male genitalia and prostate. These individuals are often raised as girls due to their lack of conspicuous male genitalia. However, DHT is not essential for developments at puberty and the boys then develop virtually normally, e.g. the penis grows and their musculature develops like that of other male adults. After puberty, men with this condition have a large deficiency of pubic and body hair, and no incidence of male pattern baldness.
4) Many things can interfere with the complex process of development - e.g. various chemicals taken deliberately or accidentally by the mother.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andichan
|
 |
Getting started |
Location: Hillmorton UK
Registered: December 2014
Messages: 26
|
|
|
One might've thought that having gone to so much trouble to look the business, speech therapy would have been on the agenda. He, or should that read she, didn't even make any attempt to sound remotely fem.
Andy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
"Quote:"Andichan wrote on Wed, 28 October 2015 09:23One might've thought that having gone to so much trouble to look the business, speech therapy would have been on the agenda. He, or should that read she, didn't even make any attempt to sound remotely fem.
--
Jenner is most assuredly incongruous, but so are many folk. Examples include Ann Widdecombe, Fanny Cradock, Katie Price, some for odd speech, some for odd looks, some for being odd, some for being, well, just for being.
So, I find Jenner to be incongruous. I dislike her voice. I'm not keen on Virginia Wade's voice either.
If I return to the headline at the start of this thread, I neither feel negative nor positive in this instance. I find it interesting, but not enough to go and gawp, nor to worry
[Updated on: Wed, 28 October 2015 16:42]
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
Quote:Kitzyma wrote on Mon, 26 October 2015 00:31I agree that it's better to allow people to be offended than to prevent someone from saying something that will offend those people.
Not only is it important to keep to the principle of freedom of speech, but there are also other reasons. e.g. If they don't express there beliefs, how can you argue against them, and if they are forced to suppress what they say, the frustration may lead them to expressing themselves in a different, perhaps violent, way.
The thing that makes me feel most uncomfortable about the Jenner case is the adulation that seems fueled more by political correctness than anything else. BTW - did anyone watch the recent South Park episode in which they really took the piss out of that?
--
Not, I think one of South Park's better episodes. I tracked it down online and watched it and was left bemused.
I'm not concerned much about Jenner. I never knew who Bruce was and I have no idea who Caitlin is. I prefer to confine myself to people who are not celebrities. Jenner is real enough to those who love her, and to those who hate her. But she is simply someone on a screen to me. Brave? Possibly. Stunning? I doubt it.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisR
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: Western US
Registered: October 2014
Messages: 136
|
|
|
I'm weary of being told that I must accept "this" or "that" lest I be branded forever as prejudiced. There are things I like and things I don't, things that work for me and things that don't, people I respect and those I disrespect. Welcome to life.
There's a 10-yo kid I know who seems a decent boy, but has the absolute most limp-wristed handshake I've ever received. If he doesn't learn somewhere to improve it, his future in business is pretty much shot. Not that he's in the least bit un-manly -- he's 10, for crying out loud -- but a firm handshake is a part of the business world and expected equally of men and women. Prejudicial? Of course it is. Wrong? I don't think so.
We have all developed some sort of default responses to stimuli, and whether it's appearance, voice, clothing, color, accent, etc. etc, please don't tell me that my selection is immediately wrong. You don't know my reasoning and I'm not required to tell you. Consciously or unconsciously, I decide what I decide, period.
So the next time Michael Jordan hits me up for a ride in my '65 VW Bug and I decline, please don't blame me for doing it because he's black!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kitzyma
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 228
|
|
|
Quote:ChrisR wrote on Wed, 28 October 2015 22:19
We have all developed some sort of default responses to stimuli, and whether it's appearance, voice, clothing, color, accent, etc. etc, please don't tell me that my selection is immediately wrong. You don't know my reasoning and I'm not required to tell you. Consciously or unconsciously, I decide what I decide, period.
--
It's a pity everyone doesn't share that view, because then we could keep those filthy perverted queers out of our village. They're almost as bad as Americans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: Earth
Registered: April 2013
Messages: 279
|
|
|
ChrisR has a point. What bugs me is the idea that there are those out there who feel that we have to automatically be extremely excited that they are a certain way. It's not enough that we simply allow them to be that way. If we do not jump up and down with joy over their announcement, then suddenly (to hear some tell it) we are supposedly hateful, ignorant, and phobic.
Personally, I am weirded out by the idea of gender reassignment. I like my body parts right where they are, and I can't imagine changing that out of necessity, much less wanting to. Yes, I realize that, for some unknown reason, there are those who don't like the gender they got at birth and who wish to take advantage of what the medical field has to offer to bring their physical body's gender as close to their mental image of their gender as possible. Well, all right. You have the right to do with your body as you wish.
However, at the same time I have the right to be grossed out by by it. You want me to recognize that this isn't a choice on your part, and I do; I'm not trying to stop you, nor am I shoving my viewpoint in your face. All I'm asking for in return is the same courtesy from you that you're so quick to demand from me. If being transgendered isn't a choice that can't be changed, then my feelings about being transgendered isn't a choice either, and can't be changed any more than someone who's transgendered can suddenly turn around and be happy with the gender they were born with. Please do not expect me to throw you a party just because you decided you shouldn't be the gender your body's genitalia says you are. (To run with one of ChrisR's comments, if I can't tell you that your selection is wrong, then you can't tell me mine is, either. The respect has to go both ways.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kitzyma
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 228
|
|
|
"Mark wrote on Fri, 30 October 2015 11:54"ChrisR has a point. What bugs me is the idea that there are those out there who feel that we have to automatically be extremely excited that they are a certain way. It's not enough that we simply allow them to be that way. If we do not jump up and down with joy over their announcement, then suddenly (to hear some tell it) we are supposedly hateful, ignorant, and phobic.
Personally, I am weirded out by the idea of gender reassignment. I like my body parts right where they are, and I can't imagine changing that out of necessity, much less wanting to. Yes, I realize that, for some unknown reason, there are those who don't like the gender they got at birth and who wish to take advantage of what the medical field has to offer to bring their physical body's gender as close to their mental image of their gender as possible. Well, all right. You have the right to do with your body as you wish.
However, at the same time I have the right to be grossed out by by it. You want me to recognize that this isn't a choice on your part, and I do; I'm not trying to stop you, nor am I shoving my viewpoint in your face. All I'm asking for in return is the same courtesy from you that you're so quick to demand from me. If being transgendered isn't a choice that can't be changed, then my feelings about being transgendered isn't a choice either, and can't be changed any more than someone who's transgendered can suddenly turn around and be happy with the gender they were born with. Please do not expect me to throw you a party just because you decided you shouldn't be the gender your body's genitalia says you are. (To run with one of ChrisR's comments, if I can't tell you that your selection is wrong, then you can't tell me mine is, either. The respect has to go both ways.)
--
You do realise, don't you, that what you wrote is pretty well verbatim what straight people said (and some still say) about gay people? Just transpose the word and concept of 'transgender' with 'homosexual'.
Maybe you'd be okay with that being said about your sexuality, but it would piss me off.
"It's not enough we simply allow them to be that way..."
What right do you (or anyone else) have to allow it or disallow it?
"If we do not jump up and down with joy over their announcement, then suddenly (to hear some tell it) we are supposedly hateful, ignorant, and phobic."
And people said that, too, when anyone in the news came out as gay. "I can tolerate what they are as long as they don't flaunt it. But why do they make such a big announcement of it with these so-called Pride marches?"
"Personally, I am weirded out by the idea of gender reassignment. I like my body parts right where they are, and I can't imagine changing that out of necessity, much less wanting to."
Personally, I am wierded out by the idea of men having sex with men. I like my penis in a vagina, and I can't imagine sticking it in a shit hole, much less wanting to.
"Yes, I realize that, for some unknown reason, there are those who don't like the gender they got at birth..."
Yes, I realize that, for some unknown reason, there are men who don't like to be normal and fuck women...
"You have the right to do with your body as you wish."
I'm sure that they really appreciate that acknowledgement of their rights, especially as it comes from an obvious bigot, but they really don't need that statement of a simple truth from anyone.
"However, at the same time I have the right to be grossed out by by it."
Just as people have the right to be grossed out by homosexuals and I have a right to be grossed out by bigots.
"You want me to recognize that this isn't a choice on your part, and I do; I'm not trying to stop you, nor am I shoving my viewpoint in your face."
Just the same sort of thing that anti-gay people said about said about homosexuals. Also, it says something about the psychology that the words 'you' and 'your' are used instead of 'them' and 'their', at the same time as claiming not to be shoving this viewpoint on 'them'. No doubt it was a non-intentional Freudian slip.
"If being transgendered isn't a choice that can't be changed, then my feelings about being transgendered isn't a choice either, and can't be changed any more than someone who's transgendered can suddenly turn around and be happy with the gender they were born with."
Let's see, you're claiming an equivalence - i.e. that you were born with prejudice in the same way that transgendered people are born with a female-type brain in a male-type body? Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but research has shown that all prejudice, and even most disgust, is learned after birth.
Even the other beacon of prejudice, ChrisR, acknowledged that such feelings developed, not something present at birth. i.e. He said, "We have all developed some sort of default responses to stimuli, and whether it's appearance, voice, clothing, color, accent, etc. etc,"
Gender identity cannot be changed in the same way that prejudice and bigotry can (hopefully, at least sometimes) be changed. No sane person could think that anyone could give the same respect (or even any respect) to bigoted and ill-informed opinions as they could give to someone struggling with gender identity issues.
Your whole diatribe is filled with phrases like, "those who don't like the gender", "You want me to recognize that this isn't a choice ", "If being transgendered isn't a choice", "just because you decided you shouldn't be the gender", etc. Those phrases totally negate the apparent admission (that it isn't a choice) when you wrote "and I do", one tiny bit of text. It also indicates that, deep down, you really do think it's a choice.
How many times have gay people heard exactly the same sort of thing? How many young gay men have been sent to be tortured by electric shock therapy, etc. by straight people who thought being gay was a choice that could be turned around and 'cured'?
"Please do not expect me to throw you a party just because you decided you shouldn't be the gender your body's genitalia says you are"
Has anyone asked you to throw a party or celebrate in any way? Maybe the media have gone overboard about one or two transgender 'celebs', just as they used to do about 'celebs' who came out (or were outed) as gay. However, that is as much the fault of the media as the 'celeb', and the vast majority of transgendered people, like the vast majority of gay people, just want to get on quietly with their lives.
Finally, have you bothered to inform yourself on the biology and psychology of gender issues? Have you looked at scientific research? Or are you just so bigoted and close-minded that you believe your uninformed opinions and feelings are worth any consideration by others? Why should transgendered people (or anyone else) be interested in prejudice born of ignorance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am finding it strange that people who should in theory understand the struggles that those deemed 'different' face can be so judgmental. If Bruce Jenner had stood up and announced he was gay would we be arguing over his looks and whether he was attractive enough to be allowed to be an out gay man?
The woman of the year award was from some glossy womans magazine, the choice of winner would be designed to garner as much press coverage as possible, mission accomplished. If it hadn't been Caitlyn it would be an actress with a film to promote who was willing to turn up to the ceremony. It's not a Nobel prize. I went to watch the acceptance speech video and my one thought was 'good for them' I didn't feel embarrassment I felt respect that they had the guts to go up there knowing the world was looking and judging and delivering a pretty nice speech on acceptance.
It's been a good long while since Bruce was a sportsman (in fact I didn't realize he was until I looked into it after hearing him described as an Olympian). He's part of the biggest reality show in the world so he doesn't have the luxury of going away and perfecting things before emerging as Caitlyn, the press demands instant and constant updates from its stars, you put out or you lose out so I dare say there was no time for vocal coaching before the big reveal. Really though, should it be necessary? As has been said in this thread there are many voices out there which don't fit the feminine norm, I worked with a woman who until I met her when we'd just spoken on the phone I thought was an American man when in fact she was from New Zealand. I'm often mistaken for my mother on the phone, should she 'fem' up her voice or should I act more butch?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13771
|
|
|
Quote:samsone wrote on Fri, 30 October 2015 19:12I am finding it strange that people who should in theory understand the struggles that those deemed 'different' face can be so judgmental. If Bruce Jenner had stood up and announced he was gay would we be arguing over his looks and whether he was attractive enough to be allowed to be an out gay man?
--
Bias is not the preserve of the heterosexual. We may not be heterosexual, but we all have a bias. I am biased against Nigerians because one broke my nose when I was eight, and I have never had a good experience with one since. That does not mean that all Nigerians are bad people, just that I have had poor experiences, perhaps created by my broken nose experience.
Even so, I have often found it strange that those who are themselves part of a persecuted minority will persecute other minorities.
I don't mind that people have a bias. What I mind is that they express their bias. I mind even more when one attempts to evangelise their bias. So let us now move on. Perhaps I should have made this a separate post, since I m not criticising Samsone at all, as I hope all can see.
I realise that cuts both ways. If you don't want to hear about things that are not part of your world, or that you do not wish to be part of your world, then you can substitute "Opinions about [insert topic here]" for "Penis"
Even so, I'd like folk to think:
- Is this an opinion you own or one you have learned?
- When and how did you form this opinion?
- Do you have personal experience of anyone in this situation?
- Are you in this situation yourself?
- Are you a part of a persecuted minority (include Jews, Muslims, Homosexuals, Bisexuals, Black folk, any minority where you live)
- Do you hurt anyone by expressing this opinion? Is that a good thing to do?
- Do you hurt yourself by expressing this opinion?
There are loads of other things to think about. I don't care whether you like the [insert topic here] or not. But is your behaviour until just now that of someone you woudl like to know and be associated with?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisR
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: Western US
Registered: October 2014
Messages: 136
|
|
|
"Kitzyma wrote on Wed, 28 October 2015 23:24"
It's a pity everyone doesn't share that view, because then we could keep those filthy perverted queers out of our village. They're almost as bad as Americans.
--
Let's be fair now. Americans are in a category all our own. Hell - I'm even a Texan, so take that, y'all.
Were you and I to sit down, say, and "rank" the list of "Total Inspiration" photos, I suspect that we would have different sequences. If we were at a restaurant, we'd likely be eating different meals. And I might be drinking a Lone Star (God forbid!) and you a Foster's. None of these is prejudice - just preference.
Fact is that all folks are different, And I prefer not to be judged by somebody else who has a preconceived notion -- a prejudice, if you will -- over why I choose what I do. I suspect that neither do you, but that may just be my own prejudice.
[Updated on: Fri, 30 October 2015 20:35] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: Earth
Registered: April 2013
Messages: 279
|
|
|
"You do realise, don't you, that what you wrote is pretty well verbatim what straight people said (and some still say) about gay people?"
Yes, I did. Interesting, isn't it?
"You have the right to do with your body as you wish."
"I'm sure that they really appreciate that acknowledgement of their rights, especially as it comes from an obvious bigot, but they really don't need that statement of a simple truth from anyone."
I wasn't aware I needed permission myself for holding such a viewpoint, especially since I'm such an "obvious bigot" that you didn't even know that I held such a viewpoint until just a little while ago.
"...words 'you' and 'your' are used instead of 'them' and 'their', at the same time as claiming not to be shoving this viewpoint on 'them'. No doubt it was a non-intentional Freudian slip."
Or is it?
In all seriousness, I was directing the comment towards transgendered. I am allowed to do that, aren't I? Or is talking directly to a group of people within a larger general comment yet another sign that I'm supposed to be a bigot?
"Let's see, you're claiming an equivalence - i.e. that you were born with prejudice in the same way that transgendered people are born with a female-type brain in a male-type body? Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but research has shown that all prejudice, and even most disgust, is learned after birth."
(snip)
"It also indicates that, deep down, you really do think it's a choice."
The argument that I was trying to make is, in part, actually based on those in gay community who maintain that being gay is based on how they feel in a sexual way towards others, and not on choice, and therefor cannot be changed. If that's true, and feelings cannot be changed, then I'm just as "set" as any transgendered/gay person. (I only said that I was weided out and bothered by the idea that some people do have a tendency to shove their own viewpoints into other people's faces; I never indicated that I thought anyone was in any way, shape or form bound to agree with me on that. If you're reading something sinister into that, then I'm sorry, for that was never my intent.) Sometimes, how you feel is in part how your brain initially develops, shocking as that may sound to some people (and for the record, I've got several family members who hold college degrees in the Behavioral Sciences field, and this comes from them, not me) and saying that all feelings are learned and can automatically be changed (if at all) is most certainly not supported by current evidence.
"Has anyone asked you to throw a party or celebrate in any way?"
Sometimes it sure feels like that. Yes, maybe it's the media's fault for blowing a small handful of cases out of proportion and giving a platform for the few "bad apples" of the group who try to beat/sue everyone else into submission. But don't you think that we'd be better served by trying to get some more positive stories out there from people who don't expect us to throw a party or celebrate just because they're transgendered (or gay, etc.), instead of simply sitting around blaming the media for every notion people have that we feel is bad?
"Finally, have you bothered to inform yourself on the biology and psychology of gender issues? Have you looked at scientific research? Or are you just so bigoted and close-minded that you believe your uninformed opinions and feelings are worth any consideration by others? Why should transgendered people (or anyone else) be interested in prejudice born of ignorance?"
Have I ever said that I hadn't read up on the biology and psychology of gender issues? Apparently, you feel that knowing and acknowledging that there's a biological cause is suddenly going to change the fact that I still feel weirded out by it and would personally never go that route myself (and since I have read up on it - by the way, thanks so much for checking on what I have and haven't informed myself on before making your comments; that makes me feel so much better! - does that change whether or not people will feel my informed opinions and feelings are worth any consideration, any more than yours are?)
I have never once even said that transgendered individuals are bad or that they cannot go through gender reassignment (or as much as they can financially afford to), much less tried to make it illegal or anything like that - I only maintain that that I'd never do that myself, and that I feel that I have just as much a right to that course of action (even if it is incredibly stupid or ill-informed) as the transgendered community does. I'm not stopping anyone from expressing that they're transgendered or from saying that they disagree with me, nor am I attempting to say that they should be stopped. I just want that same right. If that means I'm an uninformed bigot, well, at least you know that up front about me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kitzyma
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 228
|
|
|
Quote:ChrisR wrote on Fri, 30 October 2015 20:28
Quote:Kitzyma wrote on Wed, 28 October 2015 23:24
It's a pity everyone doesn't share that view, because then we could keep those filthy perverted queers out of our village. They're almost as bad as Americans.
--
Let's be fair now. Americans are in a category all our own. Hell - I'm even a Texan, so take that, y'all.
Were you and I to sit down, say, and "rank" the list of "Total Inspiration" photos, I suspect that we would have different sequences. If we were at a restaurant, we'd likely be eating different meals. And I might be drinking a Lone Star (God forbid!) and you a Foster's. None of these is prejudice - just preference.
--
Preference for photos of cute guys or types of beer is more of a matter of 'just taste' than judging and denigrating a whole class of people. No one has denigrated the choice of photos to post, though to my taste many of them seem way too young to be of interest to a normal adult, and make me wonder about the poster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisR
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: Western US
Registered: October 2014
Messages: 136
|
|
|
"Kitzyma wrote on Fri, 30 October 2015 22:35"
... to be of interest to a normal adult, and make me wonder about the poster.
--
Haven't enjoyed a good laugh like this in quite a while.
A normal adult? Now you subscribe to a view that there is objectively such a thing? And you wonder about a poster who does not share your views, absent any other known characteristics?
Where's that doggoned Dictionary of Prejudice when I need it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kitzyma
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 228
|
|
|
"I wasn't aware I needed permission myself for holding such a viewpoint, especially since I'm such an "obvious bigot" that you didn't even know that I held such a viewpoint until just a little while ago."
Note how you twist my comment about people not needing to be allowed to do what they want with their own bodies into your right to say what you like. Of course, as I'm sure I wrote somewhere in this or the related thread, you don't need permission for holding a viewpoint or for expressing it. Just as I don't need permission to express my view that your post showed extreme bigotry.
"In all seriousness, I was directing the comment towards transgendered. I am allowed to do that, aren't I? Or is talking directly to a group of people within a larger general comment yet another sign that I'm supposed to be a bigot?"
So you used 'you' because you actually thought some transgendered people might be reading your post? And, thinking that, you said still such uninformed things that would likely be hurtful to such a person.
"The argument that I was trying to make is, in part, actually based on those in gay community who maintain that being gay is based on how they feel in a sexual way towards others, and not on choice, and therefor cannot be changed."
Actually, I'm not convinced that there is such a single entity as the 'gay community'. The gay communities I know are probably very different from those you know. Anyway, just because some in a gay community have a particular view doesn't mean it is a view shared by the majority, nor does it make it factually correct. If this forum is considered to be a gay community, then certainly there are few views we seem to share.
As for the factual correctness of the premise "being gay is based on how they feel in a sexual way towards others, and not on choice, and therefor cannot be changed" - first it uses the word 'feelings' for lots of different types of feelings. Second, it misses out a key stage that comes chronologically before how gay people feel - i.e. WHY they (we) feel that way. We feel that way at least in part, because our brains were wired that way when we were born. We were hard wired to have a tendency to feel attraction for other males.
The feeling of attraction toward other males is not at all the sort of feeling that gives rise to prejudice against a type of person, and such prejudices are not hard wired at birth.
"saying that all feelings are learned and can automatically be changed (if at all) is most certainly not supported by current evidence."
You cunningly or carelessly twist not only the use of the word 'feelings' but also the logic of your own words. i.e. "saying that ALL feelings are learned and can automatically be changed". I never said that ALL feelings can be changed. Being gay or transgendered is not just a 'feeling' like preferring one type of beer to another or even disliking a particular set of people. There is research that shows prejudices can be learned. If there is good research to show that someone can learn to be gay, please let me know.
"But don't you think that we'd be better served by trying to get some more positive stories out there from people who don't expect us to throw a party or celebrate just because they're transgendered (or gay, etc.),"
Yet if they start putting out stories, even positive ones, they will be publicising their transgendered nature. You could then ask: why would they put any story out there at all unless they wanted to make a big thing or celebration of it. Surely, the sort of transgender person you wouldn't disapprove of so much would be the type who are in the majority and who don't put out any stories at all.
"Have I ever said that I hadn't read up on the biology and psychology of gender issues?"
If you didn't say it specifically, your posts certainly indicate that either you hadn't read up on it or that you hadn't understood what you'd read.
"Apparently, you feel that knowing and acknowledging that there's a biological cause is suddenly going to change the fact that I still feel weirded out by it"
Actually I don't feel that. If you feel weirded out then that's how you feel. However, knowing that people can't help how they biologically are, you should know that there is no logical justification for denigrating them, and yet you still (apparently proudly) proclaim your prejudice to everyone.
Of course, I'm not a saint and I have biases and prejudices. However, I don't feel proud of them. I try not to act on them and I try to change them. I certainly don't show them in public posts, just because I feel I have a right to express myself. There seems a tendency nowadays, especially in the USA, to assert one's own rights over those of others. e.g. The right to religious belief of one person is put forward as more important than equality of gay people. It's one thing to have the right to free speech and another thing to actually use that right to to harm others (and here I'm not referring to your posts but to the general principle).
"thanks so much for checking on what I have and haven't informed myself on before making your comments; that makes me feel so much better!"
If you had the information, then you showed no indication of understanding its significance. Just like whoever wrote the headline (quoted in a recent thread) about HIV not causing AIDS . They had the information but either didn't understand it or deliberately twisted it.
"does that change whether or not people will feel my informed opinions and feelings are worth any consideration, any more than yours are?"
There's no point in addressing that question to me. It's up to the readers to decide which opinions, informed or otherwise, are worthy of consideration. They can read what you wrote and my arguments against what you wrote. They can see who tries to put forward observation and logic and who just promotes their own right to express the fact that they are weirded out. I'm guessing that most people will take an intermediate view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kitzyma
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 228
|
|
|
Quote:ChrisR wrote on Fri, 30 October 2015 22:53
Quote:Kitzyma wrote on Fri, 30 October 2015 22:35
... to be of interest to a normal adult, and make me wonder about the poster.
--
Haven't enjoyed a good laugh like this in quite a while.
A normal adult? Now you subscribe to a view that there is objectively such a thing? And you wonder about a poster who does not share your views, absent any other known characteristics?
Where's that doggoned Dictionary of Prejudice when I need it?
--
Actually, I don't believe that there is anything truly objective in human experience. But that's a topic for another thread.
By normal, I was using a euphemism for 'not borderline paedophile'. Clearly, my hope that people would understand that without me having to be specific proved to be in vain. Notice that I use the word 'borderline'. Where the borderline might lie is also best for another thread.
As for other characteristics that might make me wonder about such things, who was it that, despite the site specialising in teen romance, wanted specific ages to be put in story descriptions?
Is it considered prejudiced nowadays to consider paedophiles as abnormal?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abnormal:
adjective
1. not normal, average, typical, or usual; deviating from a standard.
2. extremely or excessively large.
Pedophiles are abnormal. Homosexuals are abnormal. Homosexual pedophiles are abnormal. I'm sick of people saying otherwise. I'm gay, and that makes me abnormal. I'm fine with that. There's nothing 'wrong' with being abnormal. Playing Dungeons and Dragons in the late seventies and early eighties was abnormal. It wasn't 'normal' in that the largest portion of the population wasn't doing it. Liking disco is abnormal. Rollerskating is abnormal. Rollerskating to disco music is abnormal. I've done it. Putting hot sauce on ham and beans is abnormal. I love it. Electro-stim is abnormal, but I like it and will keep doing it. Building model cars at almost fifty is abnormal. I like it and will continue to do it. I'm abnormal in a lot of respects. I don't care what someone else is into, so long as they don't hurt someone else, I don't care what they like or are attracted to. Unless that other is an adult and likes being hurt. BDSM is abnormal, too, and I'm not into it, but if you are, go for it, so long as it's with someone else who's into it.
Luring young boys into your home dressed as a clown and then raping and killing them is abnormal... and wrong. Killing and then eating people is abnormal, and wrong. Keeping body parts of the people you've killed in your fridge is abnormal and wrong. And just plain sick.
Being gay is abnormal. Some say it is wrong to act on it and have sexual relations with someone of the same sex. They can think that. Fine. So long as the other person is willing, it's none of their business. Other than to briefly proselytize, they should leave me alone.
Pedophiles are abnormal, and let's not be generalistic about pedophilia...(From Wikipedia)
Chronophilia: In research environments, specific terms are used for the differing chronophilias: for instance, ephebophilia is used to refer to the sexual preference for mid-to-late adolescents (15-19),[1] hebephilia.[2] to refer to the sexual preference for earlier pubescent (12-14) individuals, and pedophilia to refer to the sexual preference for prepubescent (11 and under) children.[3] However, the term pedophilia is commonly used by the general public to refer to any sexual interest in minors below the legal age of consent, regardless of their level of physical or mental development.[4] This could be due to the fact the media is unaware of other terms.
My own note: Pedophile is used to garner more headline sales and interest, and to prevent confusion or intelligence in the general public. "Lump the perverts all together and keep the proles ignorant!"
And yes, you are a kind of 'pedophile' even if you are attracted to a 19 year old boy or girl and are older than about 25 or so. It's abnormal, so take that all you guys drooling over those 18-19 year-old girls in those adverts. You're perverts too. LOL
(Who's really sick are the parents who enter their little girls into these 'beauty pageants'. Dressing up a little girl of six and seven in skimpy bathing suits and primping them with makeup is just sick. It is abnormal and wrong.)
It is abnormal to find anyone less than about ten or so years younger than you attractive in that it is not 'normative'. Most people don't. I don't think it is 'wrong'. I think it is wrong to do anything about it if you are attracted to any non-adult. Kids aren't sexual. I don't care what Kinsey and others say. Kids don't care about sex, aren't attracted to other kids or adults, and shouldn't be made to be aware of sex or sexuality. Where that magical line is between kid/teen and adult, I have no good idea. I know it varies from person to person, no doubt. I don't think it is 'normal' for a 12 year old to be thinking about sex, but I know guys who were and weren't 'groomed' or 'molested', they just became aware and conscious of sex and such at younger ages than 'normal'. They were abnormal. Were they 'wrong'? I don't think so.
And frankly, to be concerned about the images of youths being posted on a site that centers around youth stories and support is rather odd in itself.
My own tastes are homosexual ehebophilic. I'm attracted to mid- and late-teen boys and college and young twenties guys. Twinks. I don't know why. I often feel guilty and a bit of self-disgust, but I can't control what I'm attracted to. I look at is as the same way I want and love the mid-eighties Porshe 928. Or the new Mustang or Challenger. They're hot, sexy, and way out of my reach. I'll never have one or get to drive one. I could steal one, but that would be wrong and I'd go to jail... and I'd feel really badly taking away someone's property. Life's a bitch. I can look, but I can't touch. I have to make do with 1990s or early 2000s models I can afford, and hope they don't crap out on me. But the upkeep isn't as expensive.
Prejudice
noun
1. an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.
2. any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.
3. unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of a hostile nature, regarding an ethnic, racial, social, or religious group.
So you have both "unfavorable" and "either favorable or unfavorable" as the definitions. I'd say it depends on who/whom you ask. My own definition of 'prejudice' as I've always understood it, is "To pre-judge without facts. To have an opinion or feeling not based on fact or reason, but formed by one's own experiences and the opinions of others. Often baseless in fact or experience and simply an ignorant idea or assumption. To form an opinion or come to a decision based on false facts or no facts at all."
I don't know how your opinion falls, either prejudiced or not. I think only the person whose opinion it is can really decide that - if they are willing to do so honestly with themselves.
Myself, I don't care what Jenner does with his body. I do, a bit, as I once found him very attractive. But in the end, it doesn't affect me, and it doesn't change anything about my own life at all. I can't consider him a real woman as he's not, as far as my definition of a real woman goes. He's (she) a transgender male who is now a woman. If that's what she wants, fine. I find it silly to name her as 'woman of the year' and a publicity stunt.
I asked the women at work what they thought, and not a one considered her a 'real woman' and one in twenty-two thinks the award is fitting. The youngest found the award fitting, btw.
No one thought of their opinions as prejudiced. Seven of the 22 women thought it was wrong to do such a thing to one's self - hardline Christians. One of them said it should not be an acceptable medical procedure, and not only was Jenner going to hell, but so were the doctors and nurses who helped.
I don't find what he did wrong at all. I don't see any reason to name him 'woman of the year' at all. I'm trying to remember to refer to him as her. She can be whoever she wants to be, it's up to her. But I cannot call her beautiful. The retouched photos I've seen make her look stunning, but without all that artwork she's rather 'rugged' looking. I'll call her her, but not stunning. Courageous and/or brave, okay. It took guts.
Is she 'wrong' and going to hell? According to the rigid Christians, yes. But so am I. Pot - kettle - black. I guess one day she and I can talk it over neck-deep in burning brimstone between our appointments of being flayed to the bone and rended limb from limb.
Or... maybe over a nice cup of tea?
[Updated on: Sat, 31 October 2015 05:01]
raysstories.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: Earth
Registered: April 2013
Messages: 279
|
|
|
Courtesy of Dictionary.com, the definition of "bigot":
"A person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion."
Now, to make things clear (in case I haven't before), I have no objections if someone wishes to be transgendered, regardless of whether that wish comes from genetics/biology, choice, environment, some combination of those, or something else altogether. If someone wishes to acknowledge that they are transgendered (regardless of how much formal medical treatment, if any, they've gone through), that's also their right. I have never made any attempt to stop them or tell them they need to stop. nor have I ever said that I think they're less than human or knowingly made any other similar comments with the intent to demean or dehumanize transgendered individuals. Oddly, having such a viewpoint seems to make me "utterly" (Dictionary.com's word, not mine) intolerant in the eyes of some; by my definition, being "utterly" intolerant means that you make every effort to stop a particular action from occurring or viewpoint from being expressed (think Westboro Baptist Church, for those who follow LGBT news in the U.S.), and show me one place where I've tried to do that on the issue of transgenderism (is that, admittedly, even a word?).
I know that some here very likely operate on what I call the "Thumper Principle," named after one of the characters from the movie "Bambi." Thumper, one of the characters in the movie, learned from his parents that if you can't say something nice, you shouldn't say anything at all, and some might feel that saying anything other than gloriously wonderful things about the topic of transgenderism would certainly fall under the Thumper Principle.
However, at the same time, a question was asked, and I honestly answered. If the simple fact that I'm weirded out by the idea of myself (and myself alone) becoming transgendered is a deal-breaker for some folks around here, even if I'm not acting against those who are transgendered (and if you think that I am deliberately acting against them, let me know, and I'll introduce you to a couple of transgendered individuals I know on-line, and you can ask them for yourself as to how I've treated them), aren't you glad you at least know about my viewpoint on the subject?
Yes, transgendered individuals have the right to be transgendered. They have the right to say they're transgendered. But at the same time, by extension that gives those who feel differently the right to say so as well, no matter how informed or uninformed that opposing viewpoint might be. Freedom of speech is a two-edged sword. Does that suck sometimes? Sure, but that's price one pays for speaking up, especially on controversial issues. If anybody here expects everybody to agree with you all the time (or to at least shut up every time they don't), you become the very thing you say you deplore - a prejudiced bigot. At least by allowing people to speak up, you give yourself the opportunity to decide if they're the kind of person you wish to associate with.
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Re: Is it ok to feel negative about something "different" or is it Prejudice? 
