Now, I could easily point out how maybe using “trannies” and “transvestites” in order to trivialise the importance of identity isn’t very, uh, good? Politically correct speech or whatever, but I’d really just like it if you read this and at least questioned your position for a brief moment. I used to construct the exact same arguments, but eventually they fell apart. It’s truly a queer experience to see yourself in a stranger like this (pun not intended). In light of all this, I’m gonna drop the attitude for a while, so please, take an earnest look. Accept the possibility you may be wrong, or right. Or a bit of both. If you’re willing to do so, thanks, that’s pretty cool.
“Sorry to disappoint you, but your analogy with physics is bad.”
Firstly, ‘psychology’ was right next to it. More importantly though I would suggest that, as society gets increasingly intricate, new phenomena manifest themselves. Yeah, of course the concept of gender came to existence because we named it, right? I mean, after all, we couldn’t observe it until a theory was already in place. And there’s nothing like that in physics. Nothing at all.
Of course––I’m kidding––a big part physics is like that, especially thought experiments like most of quantum physics. And no, I’m not equating gender studies with quantum physics (as amusing as I’m sure that would be). To see if existing phenomena are truly existing phenomena, professionals conduct research and construct possible models. And the opposite is also true. If some people claim to be outside of the gender binary (an arguably new phenomena that may have always been out there), it’s worth investigating. A model was introduced, and those reporting said feelings thought it was quite adequate.
That said, notice how I worded that: “may have always”. There’s a reason for that. Because even if the appearance of a concept is preceded by many others, that does not determine its factuality. Whether it’s “always” been out there is irrelevant. Fact is, it exists. So it’s worth considering. And that’s my only problem with you, I think you’ve never given any of this the benefit of the doubt. That’s also the reason you seem to have misread the article I linked. And before you say anything, yes, I will address your critique to the study provided as well. In due time. After all, it’s not like you didn’t have any valid points, so I feel it’s only proper to properly substantiate my point of view.
“Feelings are subjective thing that cannot be measured. I see zero reasons to take feelings of every attention-seeking human into consideration. Peoples often don't understand their own feelings.”
This one is plain unfortunate. Yes feelings are subjective, that’s exactly why we TRY to measure them. It would a great leap in logic to assume that something being subjective undermines its core validity. Imagine telling your lover that you are depressed because your body does not match your mind and, in fact, no body ever will (because, yes, NB individuals can and do experience dysphoria). In the face of that, ignorantly saying something like “feelings are subjective” in response, is plain unhealthy. Now, that was an appeal to emotion, let’s try something more analytical next.
For example, since you suggested that physics actually argues against NB people, I can point out how most universal constants are mere approximations, because reality is nearly impossible to ever measure correctly. Then again most philosophies dismiss objectivity altogether, so let’s not get into that. At the same time however, I would argue that some people cover themselves with claims of objectivity and realism to get their point across. I’m not saying that’s you but introspection is never unhealthy, right?
Also, the reason you may think they’re “attention-seeking” is because… they are. And should be. No matter if you’re straight or gay, chances are you have a place in society. It’s not really like that for GBGQ individuals; ever gotten a fundamental part of your being invalidated by a random stranger? I think it happens to everyone at least once, but imagine just how shitty it would be to go through that every single day. Which leads me to my next point. You seem to have a firm belief that it’s some sort of aesthetic, and to be frank it’s surprisingly difficult to make an eloquent case against this simple-sounding claim, so do pardon me: WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT IT FUCKING SUCKS PRONOUNS ARE LAME AS SHIT WHO CARES. And yet they found themselves caring. As I pointed out in my other comment, there’s no core appeal that cannot be found elsewhere. Now, I’m gonna project here somewhat but, frankly, if I could substitute not being able to look down in the shower with some obscure Tumblr werewolf kink, I would. There’s nothing to be gained by being “different” alone, that high your 13yo self gets when he thinks he might be different only lasts for a brief while and is quickly replaced by a sea of doubts and occasional but never relenting existential dread. I can at least attest that I personally did not at all wish for this, and was actively trying to repress it. It just wasn’t up to me.
“Intersex-people still fall under binary system. As exception or as subcategory. It's still revolves around those 2 sexes. Male/Female.”
You may not have thought this through but I assume you meant to add “going by the criteria of reproductive hormones alone instead of the slim but very real possibility of varying chromosome combinations” right?
Not to mention, many NB individuals see themselves as something not quite female or male. Yeah, I’m gonna say it, a SUBCATEGORY.
“Exception cannot be a rule. Intersex people exist without a "Feeling" of it. I don't know why you compare them to non-binary pretenders who is all about talking.”
You have these kind of feelings yourself, most likely. You’ve just never been confronted with them because you’re not an extreme outlier. And don’t take me wrong, that’s a happy thing. But the reality of the situation is that you have no vetted authority or personal experience that would enable you to call someone else a pretender. If you, in response to this, suggest that you’re merely using critical thinking… I implore you to reconsider, since that leads right back to my previous sentence on the matter. Your language is misplaced and, though I feel this might be a redundant addition, reducing NB peeps to ideas like “Indian castes and transvestites” along with talks of globalisation speaks volumes about where you get your info.
Oh and I almost forgot; exceptions can easily be a rule if they happen with enough frequency. I thought I should say that, even though I’m positive you’d immediately disagree with any number being presented.
“Some don't need to fathom it.”
Whoa I already addressed this one. Maybe the whole “facts don’t care about your feelings” mentality is based on some circular logic and the same talking points are being echoed over and over again. Just maybe tho
“Care a lot? No. I just don't like trannies going in their full delusions mode. I have zero problem with trans-people who have common sense. But some even fail in something so simple as reading the manga.”
How in the fuck did you manage to write multiple sentences consisting solely of baseless ad-hominem, theres’s not even any new point being made here.
And ta-daaa, ladies and gentlemen the time has come, I present to you: the study!
I’ll get it over with:
-it’s funny how you of all people would use the word demagogy, especially after the last couple sentences you spouted. Of course, this isn’t one of the point I wanted to make, I genuinely thought it to be amusing. I’m sorry if I misrepresented your argument. Anyway.
-Surveys are a legitimate form of research so, unless you don’t believe most studies on things like unreported sexual assault or rape, I don’t know what you’re talking about. It’s the feelings thing again, isn’t it? Come up with something different already.
“Previous studies found a generational difference, highlighting a younger age in NBGQ individuals compared with binary transgender (BT)”
Unsurprising, considering that the older you are the more likely it is you’re already used to the binary model.
“reported data on NBGQ individuals whose mean age ranges from 19.9 to 32.72 years”
I’m convinced you’ll latch onto this but just what exactly is your point? Younger individuals are more open-minded and accepting of new ideas if it can explain what they’re going through? Yeah, no shit.
“NBGQ individuals were more likely to report weekly alcohol use, as well as marijuana use and smoking in the past month than BT participants”
They’re engaging in liberal drug use which isn’t specified to be in any harmful quantity? Arrest them. Problem with this quote is it doesn’t mean what you think it does or want it to mean, but instead that ummm… younger people = prominent drug use when compared to older folks? Shocker.
“in a qualitative investigation on identity development, NBGQ people begin identity exploration (in terms of identity labels and self-presentation) and disclosure later than BT people, attributing this delay to a lack of information and resources regarding non-binary gender (i.e., societal awareness, role models, supportive spaces, educational materials)”
This is the best one. You fail to see where your fault lies. Here’s a thought experiment, compare your attitude right now to the classical 50s “my son BECAME gay because x” mentality. Society did the work for you so you didn’t have to think about whether homosexuality was right or wrong but I guess you’ve found something different to be enraged about. And yes, you’re gonna get called ignorant if you’re ignorant. Pointing that fact out doesn’t erase it.
“And the most disgusting think is that it's all about politics and pushing agenda. You don't need to indulge ones believes in gender shit to treat that person. Unless it's psychological problems which are born because of the said gender.”
That’s a convenient way to avoid the problem at hand, isn’t it?
“Science should provide data and studies, and not a political course. The same degenerates decades ago said that homosexuality is an illness.”
So what you’re saying is “Science is often wrong and then like… it corrects itself… pieces of shit”? There’s so many wrong hypothesis that never even reach publication, but that’s the point isn’t it? Instances of research being wrong about something don’t just, I don’t know, delete science as a whole or something.
And, yup. To make changes in the healthcare sector it may be necessary to push changes in policy. Again, same happened with the gay rights movement, right? I mean, don’t tell me you forgot? That whole ordeal was certainly a mishmash of politics and research.
Hey, I mean, at least you’re only a part-time bigot right-
“Testosterone level indeed keep dropping in modern age, but correlation between it and the desire to dress up and taking dicks in every orifice is yet to be found, lol. Yet it does sounds funny.”
oh look its blatant & casual shaming, thats always fun
