What is a woman

[Loba]

1 hour ago, Yidaki said:

1) what to do about teenagers that are allowed to make irreversible decisions at such an early age, in the name of compassion. Is it really the way to go?

I think 16 is the way to go. 13 is too young and impressionable - still discovering themselves - but 16 is enough to hit right before puberty or right during - before it generally becomes an irreversible thing.  The thing is 'most' trans people are okay with it, with only a minority being upset with their decision.  We need to take into account that these years are also very precious for trans people as they come to change into bodies that don't feel like they belong to them.  Just like with most things - if most trans are happy with who they are with only a few outliers - this tells me it is more worth it to allow these teens to transition.  We need to view it from a lens of less suffering for the majority.  Most trans people that are moving in that direction as teenaged KNOW they are trans by 16 - the extra three years gives them time to figure it out - for sure - and that moving into their proper gender should be allowed and accepted at this age. 

2) what to do about the conflation of criminal offense with calling someone else a different pronoun than their chosen one . Who defines the words that are possible to say?

I think that people, like me, who are learning but open, should be given a pass as we don't know what the right pronouns are - but if you know and do it to make someone feel like less than a person, just to be an ass for no reason at all, I can see such circumstances becoming such a human just as karmic repercussion.  And you can tell.  If someone is not sure - like me - I will use "they" - but when I know, I adapt.  It takes two seconds to know a person's pronouns and doesn't kill anyone to respect them.  As for criminal offense, each situation needs to be seen with the lens of knowing nothing at all.  I simply don't know.  Never been through it.

 

[DrugsBunny]

@Yidaki Your first question is based in the misconception that they are solely responsible for making the decision. Were you under the impression that a doctor will just perform sex reassignment surgery after simply being requested by a confused teenager? No, absolutely not—this is not how it works—there is an extremely extensive process of psychotherapy and scientifically derived medical assessments intended to properly diagnose whether this will be in the person's best interest...

It is also untrue that this is irreversible. If you can change your sex, what makes you think that you couldn't change it back? A simple google search of "reversal sex surgery" will easily demonstrate that you are coming into this matter with false perceptions. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27156012/

Your second question makes it very clear that you have fallen prey to a transphobic ideology. Did you actually fall for the false narrative that you can be prosecuted for accidentally misgendering someone? This has never happened. You can only be subject to legal trouble if, for instance, you work above a trans employee, and they can prove that you are excessively and intentionally harassing them by knowingly refusing to properly address them. This never happens, but if it did it would be indicative of a bigoted person engaging in persecution towards a marginalized class of people, in which case, yes, as an employer, you could find yourself in legal trouble, and rightfully so.

Your questions have very obvious answers to them, and I reject the idea that asking questions is diametrically oppositional to having a bigoted perspective. Ever heard of the Jewish Question? *rolls eyes*

Even though your questions have been sufficiently answered, I'm don't imagine you'll allow these answers to influence your perspective in the slightest, but hey, you're welcome to prove me wrong.

[DefinitelyNotARobot]

15 hours ago, Razard86 said:

I love transsexuals' because they opened my eyes to the fact that I was missing something. If it wasn't for them my eyes would still be closed so I thank them for that. They were a key part of my world view developing. 

That's interesting to hear, what happened exactly if you don't mind elaborating?

[Danioover9000]

@Pavement

13 hours ago, Pavement said:

Maybe better question would be what does it mean to be in feminine (yin) essence ? The problem is assigning the yin/yang essence to physical gender. Another question is why can’t a human flow freely in whatever essence they want without societal pressure?Why does it matter what people want to do with their own personal lives? I don’t buy the ‘I’m concerned about them’ story.  If that were true then you would let them be and relax your judgement. 

   An even better question, is what a real man is? Or a real human being is for that matter?

    Unfortunately, these questions are mostly asked by tier 1 cognitive people, so there's a huge distortion and bias with framing these questions.

[Yidaki]

Sometimes I feel overwhelmed and confused. All this is too complex

[DrugsBunny]

@Yidaki Your questions have been sufficiently answered, but I suppose the egoic devastation of acknowledging the flaws of your perspective would be unflattering to accept. 

[Yidaki]

1 hour ago, DrugsBunny said:

@Yidaki Your questions have been sufficiently answered, but I suppose the egoic devastation of acknowledging the flaws of your perspective would be unflattering to accept. 

OK

Edited August 18, 2022 by Yidaki

[axiom]

2 hours ago, DrugsBunny said:

@Yidaki Your questions have been sufficiently answered, but I suppose the egoic devastation of acknowledging the flaws of your perspective would be unflattering to accept. 

Have you considered starting a paramilitary social movement? 

Edited August 18, 2022 by axiom

[Raptorsin7]

@axiom He's already started one. There just isn't an opportunity for violence yet.

"If you do not accept my trans-ideological world view then you are a threat to trans people everywhere. Now i'm  justified in committing violence against you because your beliefs and world view are harmful to trans people everywhere!"

Edited August 18, 2022 by Raptorsin7

[Danioover9000]

   So, are we anywhere near answer the question of what's a real woman?

[Yidaki]

37 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

   So, are we anywhere near answer the question of what's a real woman?

LOL
I actually like the standard definition "adult human female", which is of course limited and debatable, just like any definition, but at least does not appeal to vague notions or circular definitions of , for example, "whoever that feels like a woman".

HOWEVER, more important than defining it, my concern is the possibility of swinging the pendulum too much in the other direction, and in the name of compassion and not being tyrannical and respecting minorities' rights, we end up being tyrannical towards S.D. Stage Blue/Orange people  (more than 50% of global population) that are just beginning to wrap their minds around these matters.

[DrugsBunny]

4 hours ago, Raptorsin7 said:

@axiom He's already started one. There just isn't an opportunity for violence yet.

"If you do not accept my trans-ideological world view then you are a threat to trans people everywhere. Now i'm  justified in committing violence against you because your beliefs and world view are harmful to trans people everywhere!"

You really needed the benefit of additional editing and afterthought to complete this juvenile quip attempt? The transphobe community isn't sending their brightest. It's interesting you have chosen to contrive an unfounded narrative of my presupposed violent intent when there is nothing in my post history that would indicate that. 

It's as if Actualized hired a court jester for much needed comedic relief but got a bit more than it bargained for.

Keep rolling out these absolute bangers haha, your posts are gold. My personal favorite is the one where you equated homosexuality with rape and murder.

[Raptorsin7]

@DrugsBunny My posts are gold. Thank you.

Maybe in the next 15 years you can overcome your compulsions and finish a meditation retreat, then you can appreciate them.

 

 

Edited August 18, 2022 by Raptorsin7

[AtheisticNonduality]

Both definitions are self-containing and internally consistent. Both have uses. Drugs's position is more in line with compassionate freedom and development-driven ideals, whereas the other is the traditionally pre-established set of meanings that most people have been raised with. Society is moving from the latter to the former, which of course is going to cause strife and semantic issues, but "both have uses": one is about exulting the individual, allowing mental and bodily freedom, exploring an unrestrained human spirit/imagination/identity/soul / removal of socially constructed fetters, the other is about what meanings have already been laced into the mind and body since the beginnings of conditioning, the facts of practicality applied to how these terms are strictly defined, the status of holding together society with these normal limits based on essential biology.

So both sides are right.

But also both sides are wrong. Namely I think the "conservative" position of "all of it is gender dysphoria and a perverted and debilitating mental illness which frays the fabric of society and confuses children" and the "progressive" position of "all of it is reducible to society and fools infringing on the rights of humans that have a misalignment between their brain and outside body" are both flawed. I don't think freedom when it comes to the mind and body is an illness, and yet I don't believe "a woman's brain and a male's body" is verifiable/empirical at all.

You can deal with this information now however you want. For now . . . I won't inundate you with my personal viewpoint.

[Loba]

Let's try to keep homophobia out of this discussion...

[Yidaki]

@AtheisticNonduality

Thank you for the nuanced approach you just shared

[Roy]

5 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

   So, are we anywhere near answer the question of what's a real woman?

Someone who can give birth, everything else is an approximation. Though we ought to refer to people as what label they prefer out of respect.

I can't think of a more accurate, reductionist meaning that is logically consistent and excludes all the baggage of culture and gender.

[Gesundheit2]

It might help to ask the question in reverse: What is not a woman? Clearly, a chair is not a woman, a child is not a woman, a man is not a woman.

Is a transgender a woman? Well, not exactly no, and not exactly yes. So, kind of but not really. That's why they have a unique label, that is transgender.

[Danioover9000]

   I will take the bait and make an assertion in this trap. I think you are a woman, if you have nice curvy butt and chest, and be emotionally mature and healthy, can handle children tantrums and be compassionate, and passionate, like passion fruit, live a passionate life through the passages of time. This is my take, and if you are and have many differences, it won't bother me, nor will I externalize this take and push my take into your face. Just know, this is my internal, deeper framing of what a woman is.

@Gesundheit2

44 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

It might help to ask the question in reverse: What is not a woman? Clearly, a chair is not a woman, a child is not a woman, a man is not a woman.

Is a transgender a woman? Well, not exactly no, and not exactly yes. So, kind of but not really. That's why they have a unique label, that is transgender.

   That's what I've been harping on in this thread, what is a man? What are children? What are the elderly? Or what is a human being? You all are way too focused on women. Try to think outside the box.

What is a grass hopper? A grass that hops over the picket fence, because the grass is greener on the other side.

[Gesundheit2]

31 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

   That's what I've been harping on in this thread, what is a man? What are children? What are the elderly? Or what is a human being? You all are way too focused on women. Try to think outside the box.

It seems that when you say think outside the box, you just mean adopt the postmodernist philosophy and do away with all identities/distinctions because the web is so complex and intricated to understand or unravel because of the problem of self-reference and circularity.

31 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

What is a grass hopper? A grass that hops over the picket fence, because the grass is greener on the other side.

Now you're just abusing the philosophy unnecessarily ?