The thing is if two men wanted to go into a woman’s shower when women were using it. One really thought he was a woman the other didn’t and both made the claim! The truth and the lie are no different the words alone matter there is nothing to check, it is a flat out contradiction in nature.
Biological Sex, Gender, & Transgenderism
Sort:
"One really thought he was a woman" - but that would be a fact while a man who claimed insincerely that he was a woman for abusive reasons would be lying. That other people have no way of ascertaining which one was being honest doesn't alter the fact that one was.
But isn't this incidental to the question posed in #1?
tbwp10 wrote:
Is biological sex an objective fact? And if so, does that make transgenderism a delusion (i.e., a false belief about external reality)?
It would seem so because species that propagate themselves sexually do so by means of separate sex cells (male/female gametes) that must fuse in order to create the fertilised cell (zygote) that has the potential to develop into a new individual.
The biological organs required to achieve that are usually distinct and found in separate individuals.
Then of course there are species that are able to propagate themselves by means of parthenogenesis which is somewhat different: At least one species of lizard has only female individuals, with no males ever being found.
stephen_33 wrote:
"One really thought he was a woman" - but that would be a fact while a man who claimed insincerely that he was a woman for abusive reasons would be lying. That other people have no way of ascertaining which one was being honest doesn't alter the fact that one was.
But isn't this incidental to the question posed in #1?
The fact both were men is the only fact, gender being a fluid term is only an opinion or a illusion biological truths don’t change even if someone alters themselves chemically or surgically.
stephen_33 wrote:
"One really thought he was a woman" - but that would be a fact while a man who claimed insincerely that he was a woman for abusive reasons would be lying. That other people have no way of ascertaining which one was being honest doesn't alter the fact that one was.
But isn't this incidental to the question posed in #1?
You can be sincerely wrong.
"You can be sincerely wrong" - undoubtedly but I was alluding to the sense most people have of being male or female, something we experience psychologically and which for a small percentage of the human race is at variance with their physical sexual biology.
You can take the position that a person's physical biology defines sex and that's that but I've listened to many people who identify as transgender and they consistently strike me as sincere, thoughtful and intelligent, not in any way self-delusional.
Two men say:
You take two men who both say the same thing, one sincere other not, it is still two men with different motives.
(I heard Matt Walsh point this out)
Man and woman askes:
Biology is what it is, if a man goes to the doctor and asks why he cannot get pregnant, do you think that if the doctor would run a series of tests, he would be doing that in good faith charging him? Would he truly be making money off that guy just so the doctor could try and figure out by running tests to understand what is wrong with that man?
Yet if a woman asked the same thing, he would look, even if he found out there is an issue so it could be fixed, or there was nothing he could do. A woman's body is designed differently from a man's. With a woman, something could be wrong! That could happen with a woman, not a man asking the same thing. A man asking that question should know, regardless if he is sincere, thoughtful, and intelligent, in every way he is self-delusional.
It doesn't matter if they are intelligent, thoughtful, sincere, with body parts removed, and dressed up to look like a very petty girl/woman, being born male is still being born male it doesn't change with one's mood or desires to be something else.
You're missing the essential point - being born with a particular set of organs means that most people do identify with the relevant sex but some do not. That suggests that our sense of which sex we identify with psychologically is somewhat fluid.
Since none of us are able to climb into the mind of a transgender person it's extremely difficult to understand how it feels.
stephen_33 wrote:
You're missing the essential point - being born with a particular set of organs means that most people do identify with the relevant sex but some do not. That suggests that our sense of which sex we identify with psychologically is somewhat fluid.
Since none of us are able to climb into the mind of a transgender person it's extremely difficult to understand how it feels.
You are redefining sex by what someone wants to be, I identify to be a billionaire doesn't make any bank give me all the money I want to say I have, you are stepping away from reality and giving a fluid definition that can change on a dime priority over biological realities. A dangerous thing considering women are placed in danger and raped due to access once denied men.
stephen_33 wrote:
"You can be sincerely wrong" - undoubtedly but I was alluding to the sense most people have of being male or female, something we experience psychologically and which for a small percentage of the human race is at variance with their physical sexual biology.
You can take the position that a person's physical biology defines sex and that's that but I've listened to many people who identify as transgender and they consistently strike me as sincere, thoughtful and intelligent, not in any way self-delusional.
Delusion = false belief about external reality
I think @TruthMuse's point is that one can be genuine, thoughtful, sincere, but still objectively wrong (deluded).
stephen_33 wrote:
You're missing the essential point - being born with a particular set of organs means that most people do identify with the relevant sex but some do not. That suggests that our sense of which sex we identify with psychologically is somewhat fluid. It seems to me that you are parsing your words and dancing around a clear statement.
Can you just come out and say "Regardless of what you think, if you are born a man, you are a man and if you are born a woman, you are a woman". If not, can you just clearly state "If you were born a man but now believe you are a woman, then you actually are a woman".
Can you just make one of those two simple, clear statements so we know what you are actually trying to say? After that we can all tire each other with pointless, irrelevant conversation about hermaphrodites. Every thread such as this eventually has to fall into that puddle of dumbness.
Since none of us are able to climb into the mind of a transgender person it's extremely difficult to understand how it feels.
We really need a transgender person here to explain what it is to have a sense of being one sex, while having been born with the sexual organs of the opposite sex.
I don't understand it so there's not much point in me arguing their case.
So your answer is "No, I won't make a clear statement of what I believe as requested in post 12"?
stephen_33 wrote:
We really need a transgender person here to explain what it is to have a sense of being one sex, while having been born with the sexual organs of the opposite sex.
I don't understand it so there's not much point in me arguing their case. You are actually the only one who understands what you believe. That is the only information I am asking for.
I think @stephen_33 is just wanting to be sensitive to the feelings of a transgender person, which he's right, we should be sensitive to that. I'm sure no one here wants to degrade or disrespect another human being. I'm also sure Stephen's correct about none of us truly understanding, or being able to comprehend the feelings of such a person.
My OP question was about the objectivity of it. And from what I can tell it seems all of us (including Stephen) agree that objectively, if a person "feels" like a female but is biologically a male, then that person's feelings are objectively incorrect.
That raises the question of what 'feeling like a male or female' actually means?
I was born with earlobes but I don't have a sense of 'earlobedness', so why does a person have a sense of being this or that sex, or neither?
Kjvav wrote:
So your answer is "No, I won't make a clear statement of what I believe as requested in post 12"?
A person born with male sex organs is a person born with male sex organs and the same is correspondingly the case for females.
Beyond that I think we have no notion of what it is to feel male or feel female. It's very easy to confuse the body parts with which a person is born with the sense they have of their own identity as male or female (or neither).
stephen_33 wrote:
Kjvav wrote:
So your answer is "No, I won't make a clear statement of what I believe as requested in post 12"?
A person born with male sex organs is a person born with male sex organs and the same is correspondingly the case for females.
Beyond that I think we have no notion of what it is to feel male or feel female. It's very easy to confuse the body parts with which a person is born with the sense they have of their own identity as male or female (or neither).
You are doing what here, elevating feeling above reality, biologically if the "feelings" were not a part of the discussion there wouldn't be a discussion, we see what is there and that would be that. Today, many people deny the reality of truth, what is true for you may not be true for me and this is what that type of thinking allows and even promotes this even violently. The trouble is even the statement what is true for you is not true for me is a contradiction on its face, it is an absolute statement covering everyone saying there is no absolute statement covering everyone.
Sometimes when people lose a limb they have a phantom limb feeling that the limb is still there. But it's not.
(They feel pain in a limb that doesn't exist. The feelings themselves are real, but the conclusions they lead to are not. The feelings are real enough, but still objectively wrong)
Can everyone at least agree on that much?
Is biological sex an objective fact? And if so, does that make transgenderism a delusion (i.e., a false belief about external reality)?