matticus
Guru
That said, I will admit to having always considered myself a card-carrying leftie. Then this happened...
Excellent! (and perfectly sums up many of the "discussions" i had in the early days of NACA ... )
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Excellent! (and perfectly sums up many of the "discussions" i had in the early days of NACA ... )
monkers
Legendary Member
You want a law against the wearing of high heels to further women's rights? This is an example of your appeal to false logic.
People identify their height in dating profiles, as 'on the shorter side', 'average height', 'tall' or whatever. The trouble is that people like you use height perception as a measure of whether a person is telling truth about what is in their knickers.
How height interplays with how they choose to identify is a real thing. Do you go up to every person with a syndrome you meet to tell them, 'you are a dwarf', 'you are freakily tall', 'you have Downs Syndrome therefore your chromosomes are wrong'. This is your approach to attack the identities of a small marginalised group.
Age is also a relative thing. A medical practitioner will tell you that age is a function of how many heart beats you've used up and how well you've looked after your heart.
In the 1800s the life expectancy of a coal miner was 36. In that age, a coalminer wouldn't get the vote until the age of 30. They may only have got one vote in their lifetime, perhaps two. When the pits closed, miners were upset about the loss of that identity because that was important to them. Do you travel to ex-mining towns to tell those families, 'get over it, you are not miners'. Or is it once a miner always a miner?
Leave people alone, and get out of their business.
Last edited:
monkers
Legendary Member
Yes when you are that person's doctor / radiographer etc and it is medically relevant. A person's sex / genitals / gametes / hormones / chromosomes / DNA is not relevant to you when you are taking a pee in private in one cubicle and another person is taking a pee in private in the next cubicle. It does not impact your own sex when you meet somebody who is not of the same sex, even if they are wearing the same dress as you.
In fact what you are advocating is a system of law where we do not just punish wrongdoers, but anyone who has a characteristic that frightens another. Let's lock up all tall people, people with burly arms, or gnarly hands, people with a prominent adam's apple, people with facial tattoos, people with piercings, people with small hands with a bushy beard, black people, Essex girls, traveller people; oh heck you finish the list.
It's all about prejudice justified by perception.
AuroraSaab
Squire
A person arranging to meet a 5' 11" man/woman and finding they are 5' 8" is hardly the same as a person arranging to meet a person of one sex and them rocking up to find out they are the other sex.
Your other lengthy ramblings about miners and whatever are just more disingenuous side tracking. Sex is relevant in many circumstances, not just medical ones. It's far more relevant than tattoos, county of birth, or arm hair. It's baffling that you continue to make these ridiculously hyperbolic statements as though they are some sort of argument.
Your other lengthy ramblings about miners and whatever are just more disingenuous side tracking. Sex is relevant in many circumstances, not just medical ones. It's far more relevant than tattoos, county of birth, or arm hair. It's baffling that you continue to make these ridiculously hyperbolic statements as though they are some sort of argument.
monkers
Legendary Member
It isn't sidetracking. It is key to the understanding that identity is important to all of us. When you apply your thinking to the group of Turner syndrome you think it 'beyond cruel' to identify them in a certain way. People with Turner Syndrome have a single X chromosome. That leaves them in the same position chromosomally as an xy male but without the y, yet they are deemed women. They also tend to be below average height -I'm remembering your comments about height.
To me it doesn't matter how people identify, it just matters that their identity is their business. For you it's an obsessive interest in differentiating.
You ask people to follow the science, pointing chromosomes etc as you do. But we don't all fit into your narrow definitions. I have no idea what my chromosomes are. I can have an identity without that knowledge. Do I care what my chromosomes are? Absolutely not. But I do care that you favour of dragging groups of people through a court to further your unwillingness to accommodate others. To me that is pure prejudice.
AuroraSaab
Squire
No it isn't. That's your opinion. Others feel the same about their religion, or about their belief in astrology, or in fate. Identity/religion/metaphysical beliefs are personal beliefs. They don't overrule material reality and shouldn't impinge on others. You think personal identity should trump everything. It doesn't.
Because they are women. Turner's is a dsd which affects only women.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/turner-syndrome/symptoms-causes/syc-20360782
Because chromosomes aren't in themselves sex.
Mostly it is. Sometimes it's other people's business because their sex is relevant. You seek to pretend it isn't.
C R
Über Member
I phrased that wrong, DSD and intersex are umbrella terms that cover cases where "phenotypic sex" is a mix of sexes. There are several manifestations of intersex phenotypes which have several different causes.
monkers
Legendary Member
Yes our opinions are very different. I don't judge people by appearances or stereotypes or anything else up until the point they cause actual harm to others. You demand the right to do so on some pretended bases.
Fortunately the law mostly agrees with me, and I mostly agree with it. We got to that place when we used to have democracy. These days that is damaged, but that's no excuse to damage it further.
classic33
Me
monkers
Legendary Member
It's never once been relevant to me.
winjim
Welcome yourself into the new modern crisis
That said, I will admit to having always considered myself a card-carrying leftie. Then this happened...
(credit: evolutionary biologist Colin Wright)
Colin Wright lol.
You asked for gossip to get to know people better but honestly by now I reckon I could write your script for you.
Last edited:
AuroraSaab
Squire
You had to back 60 years to find a book that says what? That it's a female condition. It has an equivalent in males, but not everyone accepts it as an entity in it's own right. Literally the first lines of your link:
Not exactly a slam dunk. Things have moved on a bit in genetics since the year when Jim Reeves was top of the charts.
Last edited:
AuroraSaab
Squire
'It doesn't matter to me so it shouldn't matter to anyone' is a poor argument.
Sex obviously matters very much in certain circumstances. It's both disingenuous and laughable to pretend otherwise.
