Christofascists seeking to seize our country

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Everything taught in school but math is some combination of social construct and inherent. That doesn't mean school doesn't need to teach these things to children to prepare them for the work force.

That's but one purpose of a school, though. There's also a socialization component, you know, so you can function in society with other people, not to mention social studies and health class aren't solely (or even primarily) intended to prepare you for the workforce.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

We’ve made great progress in the last 50 years moving away from traditional notions of masculinity and femininity. The goal was to erase the outdated notions of gender altogether and just let people be who they choose. If people want to wear dresses and makeup, let them. If they want to do wear their hair short and do combat sports, let them. If they want play with guns or play with dolls, be aggressive or compliant, wear makeup or shave their hair - let them choose without labelling any of those choices masculine or feminine.

So reifying those preferences by making gender a core identity is a step back. It imposes arbitrary categories on a spectrum of behaviour. It reinforces the association of dolls and dresses with girls, and guns and trucks with boys.

Biological sex is innate and (in almost all cases) binary. Gender isn’t. It’s a made-up concept that scrunches up a whole spectrum of human behaviour into two categories based on cultural expectations. We should be moving past it rather than reinforcing it.

OK, but nobody you’re trying to argue with is suggesting that we should reinforce gender norms so who are you talking to?

[SutterBrother]

Originally Posted by Matata

The theory of gender identity was developed by John money, a sex degenerate who forced little boys to have sex on camera, one of these boys would go on to kill himself in his thirties and the other died of drug overdose in their 30s. From its Inception gender identity has been a vehicle for sexual degenerates to instill their degeneracy into children, and you can always rely on people like that being on the front lines pushing this thing ahead. The number of kids with gender confusion is growing exponentially and a huge portion of those kids are will eventually kill themselves, looking at the statistics, tens of thousands of kids have been set up to kill themselves due to the propagation of gender theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money.

I love you man, but you need to check the batteries in your carbon monoxide detector.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

That's but one purpose of a school, though. There's also a socialization component, you know, so you can function in society with other people, not to mention social studies and health class aren't solely (or even primarily) intended to prepare you for the workforce.

I agree with you, but I like to emphasize the utilitarian nature of school.
It is after all, the most important foundation to a strong ecomony.
Learning about gender, consent, and other aspects of social life are also important for being prepared for the workforce.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

OK, but nobody you’re trying to argue with is suggesting that we should reinforce gender norms so who are you talking to?

Gender affirmation reinforces gender norms.

A 12 year old natal boy today who wants to wear dresses and paint their nails, and does not align with conventional boy behaviour, will likely be encouraged to regard themselves as transgendered - someone who is female in gender rather than male. The only reason to associate dresses and painted nails with female is because of traditional gender roles - which are mostly arbitrary and outdated. So let’s instead encourage that natal boy to think of themself as human, without needing the label ‘female.’

The less we associate behaviours and appearance with gender, the less dislocation people who don’t fit traditional norms will feel. So let’s just stop gendering people, full-stop.

[PepsiFree]

I appreciate the funny jabs at Matata’s mental state, but could do with people reporting that post instead.

This is not the first time Matata has labelled segments of the wider LGBTQ community as sexual degenerates and child abusers and it’s pretty hurtful, disgusting stuff to read.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

We’ve made great progress in the last 50 years moving away from traditional definitions of masculinity and femininity. The goal was to erase the outdated notions of gender altogether and just let people be who they choose. If people want to wear dresses and makeup, let them. If they want to do wear their hair short and do combat sports, let them. If they want play with guns or play with dolls, be aggressive or compliant, wear makeup or shave their hair - let them choose without labelling any of those choices masculine or feminine.

So reifying those preferences by making gender a core identity is a step back. It imposes arbitrary categories on a spectrum of behaviour. It reinforces the association of dolls and dresses with girls, and guns and trucks with boys.

Biological sex is innate and (in almost all cases) binary. Gender isn’t. It’s a made-up concept that scrunches up a whole spectrum of human behaviour into two categories based on cultural expectations. We should be moving past it rather than reinforcing it.

This aspect of what Cliff is saying I think I agree with. Disclaimer: I don't feel super informed on this topic, and am very open to being wrong/learning here.

As soon as the letters started being added to LGBT, it doubled down on the idea that people need to be put into buckets, and we just created more buckets. But the more buckets we created, the more people that were left feeling like they didn't fit a bucket (which can be a lonely/lost feeling). I know there's the "+", but I think I agree with the spirit of what Cliff is saying: Can't we just let people be who they want to be and act how they prefer to act without judgement or trying to categorize them?

Everyone is an individual, and in more ways than just gender or sexual orientation. I think trying to label people is harmful. People have long sought to come to conclusions about people based on race, appearance or nationality. I don't see that as positive. I think it's good for everyone to learn that they operate in a deeply ingrained social construct of what it means to be male or female, and to challenge themselves to escape that, but I don't think more/new buckets is necessarily the answer.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Gender affirmation reinforces gender norms.

A 12 year old natal boy today who wants to wear dresses and paint their nails, and does not align with conventional boy behaviour, will likely be encouraged to regard themselves as transgendered - someone who is female in gender rather than male. The only reason to associate dresses and painted nails with female is because of traditional gender roles - which are mostly arbitrary and outdated. So let’s instead encourage that natal boy to think of themself as human, without needing the label ‘female.’

The less we associate behaviours and appearance with gender, the less dislocation people who don’t fit traditional norms will feel. So let’s just stop gendering people, full-stop.

No they won’t. Why lie?

Gender expression is up to the individual, they wouldn’t be “encouraged” to regard themselves as any way other that how they prefer to regard themselves. Giving people a wide range of labels that can help describe how they’re feeling or how they want to express themselves, all of which they can choose to utilize or disregard completely, reinforces no norms at all.

Again, who are you pretending to argue with?

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I agree with you, but I like to emphasize the utilitarian nature of school.
It is after all, the most important foundation to a strong ecomony.
Learning about gender, consent, and other aspects of social life are also important for being prepared for the workforce.

I actually mis-read your post and missed the second "doesn't" (a double negative, tsk tsk) so I read it as 'That doesn't mean school needs to teach these things to children to prepare them for the work force.' My bad.

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

This aspect of what Cliff is saying I think I agree with. Disclaimer: I don't feel super informed on this topic, and am very open to being wrong/learning here.

As soon as the letters started being added to LGBT, it doubled down on the idea that people need to be put into buckets, and we just created more buckets. But the more buckets we created, the more people that were left feeling like they didn't fit a bucket (which can be a lonely/lost feeling). I know there's the "+", but I think I agree with the spirit of what Cliff is saying: Can't we just let people be who they want to be and act how they prefer to act without judgement or trying to categorize them?

Everyone is an individual, and in more ways than just gender or sexual orientation. I think trying to label people is harmful. People have long sought to come to conclusions about people based on race, appearance or nationality. I don't see that as positive. I think it's good for everyone to learn that they operate in a deeply ingrained social construct of what it means to be male or female, and to challenge themselves to escape that, but I don't think more/new buckets is necessarily the answer.

That's kind of what I got out of what Cliff was saying too; the very concept of 'transitioning' genders is itself a reinforcement of gender norms, that if we actually stopped grouping behaviors into gender-specific buckets, then transitioning from a man to a woman wouldn't / shouldn't result in any material changes because you'd just do what you wanted to anyway. A boy can play with dolls and wear make-up, a girl can play with Tonka trucks, and vice versa, because those are no longer behaviors or interests ascribed to a specific gender. There would be nothing to transition to because your gender wouldn't define your behaviors, interests, how masculine or feminine your behavior/personality is, etc. Instead of discarding gender as an outdated concept that forces people into these buckets based on arbitrary assignment of these behavior and personality traits, it's reinforcing it. (Transitioning sex is a whole different thing.)

Did I get that right, Cliff?

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

A 12 year old natal boy today who wants to wear dresses and paint their nails, and does not align with conventional boy behaviour, will likely be encouraged to regard themselves as transgendered - .

That isn't true. There will be a lot more pressure on that boy to dress up in boy clothes versus getting pressured to identify as trans.

People aren't shouting at drag queens that they are actually trans because they perform in women's clothing.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Everyone is an individual, and in more ways than just gender or sexual orientation. I think trying to label people is harmful. People have long sought to come to conclusions about people based on race, appearance or nationality. I don't see that as positive. I think it's good for everyone to learn that they operate in a deeply ingrained social construct of what it means to be male or female, and to challenge themselves to escape that, but I don't think more/new buckets is necessarily the answer.

Then stop labelling people and just treat them like people? This doesn’t seem to require some large social movement.

The labels (or definitions, or categories) are helpful in finding words to describe what is already there or what someone is feeling. They also have the benefit of pre-built communities where people share similar experiences and similar feelings as you do.

I don’t see myself as existing in a bucket, but if you see me as a letter and think I should conform to everything that letter bucket entails, that’s on you, right? It has nothing to do with me. Why do I have to forgo identifying a certain kind of way because you can’t see past that identity and just see me as a person?

I don’t know, I guess I find something kind of funny about it. LGBTQ people take the labels back and find use in them helping to understand how they feel and form community, turning the labels into a benefit, and then people who originally created the labels to demean and segregate those people say “oh, well actually it’s probably best you don’t have any labels at all because we’re all beautiful individuals.”

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I actually mis-read your post and missed the second "doesn't" (a double negative, tsk tsk) so I read it as 'That doesn't mean school needs to teach these things to children to prepare them for the work force.' My bad.

That's kind of what I got out of what Cliff was saying too; the very concept of 'transitioning' genders is itself a reinforcement of gender norms, that if we actually stopped grouping behaviors into gender-specific buckets, then transitioning from a man to a woman wouldn't / shouldn't result in any material changes because you'd just do what you wanted to anyway. A boy can play with dolls and wear make-up, a girl can play with Tonka trucks, and vice versa, because those are no longer behaviors or interests ascribed to a specific gender. There would be nothing to transition to because your gender wouldn't define your behaviors, interests, how masculine or feminine your behavior/personality is, etc. Instead of discarding gender as an outdated concept that forces people into these buckets based on arbitrary assignment of these behavior and personality traits, it's reinforcing it. (Transitioning sex is a whole different thing.)

Did I get that right, Cliff?

Transitioning sex is not a whole different thing, it falls within gender transition. Gender transition is changing one’s physical appearance or sex to match their gender identity, which can be either permanent or temporary.

There is no transition that occurs because girls want to play with trucks and very often gender expression is not tied to any formal gender “transition” at all.

[TorqueDog]

Sex and gender are not the same thing. Transitioning your gender does not require one to transition their sex. Further, what I said was in the context of the idea that not having behaviors ascribed to gender buckets means there is not really any difference between the two genders anymore and wanted to point out that obviously transitioning sex would be different because there are absolutely material changes that one would undergo.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I don’t know, I guess I find something kind of funny about it. LGBTQ people take the labels back and find use in them helping to understand how they feel and form community, turning the labels into a benefit, and then people who originally created the labels to demean and segregate those people say “oh, well actually it’s probably best you don’t have any labels at all because we’re all beautiful individuals.”

Cliff, what the hell, man? You did all this?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Cliff, what the hell, man? You did all this?

I think it’s fairly clear that I mean people outside of those communities, but thanks for jumping on that.

[Jason14h]

That’s what he was doing when he took his Cgypuck break !

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I think it’s fairly clear that I mean people outside of those communities, but thanks for jumping on that.

I think a lot of people post things that are fairly clear to them that you are quick to interpret in the least charitable way possible, so I'm just playfully returning the favour, albeit tongue-in-cheek.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Then stop labelling people and just treat them like people? This doesn’t seem to require some large social movement.

Are you saying I label people? I don't even know the labels, my whole point was that I don't love labelling people at all, gender or otherwise.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The labels (or definitions, or categories) are helpful in finding words to describe what is already there or what someone is feeling. They also have the benefit of pre-built communities where people share similar experiences and similar feelings as you do.

This part makes sense, especially when they are communities/groups currently targeted by others. Just like immigrants will often form communities in their new country to spend time with people that have similar experiences/shared struggles.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I don’t see myself as existing in a bucket, but if you see me as a letter and think I should conform to everything that letter bucket entails, that’s on you, right?

Absolutely, but my perception of the conversation is that so much revolves around the letters. Look at how often we are adding letters to LGBT.....+. Social media posts supporting those communities are always inclusive of all of those letters. To me, the buckets are being made prominent, which may lead to people trying to become more open minded to focus on what the buckets are, rather than the more important message of accepting the unique spot on the gradient of gender that every single individual exists on.

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I don’t know, I guess I find something kind of funny about it. LGBTQ people take the labels back and find use in them helping to understand how they feel and form community, turning the labels into a benefit, and then people who originally created the labels to demean and segregate those people say “oh, well actually it’s probably best you don’t have any labels at all because we’re all beautiful individuals.”

I can't tell if this post implies I am one of the people that used the labels to segregate/demean people, and am now taking it back. As someone that's been supportive of people's ability to be who they truly are my whole life, it's quite the opposite. I have a nephew who likes to wear nail polish, but gets grief from his extended family for it. I don't want this little kid to have to make a decision on what letter of the rainbow he should be assigned to and try educate his family, I want people to compliment him on his awesome looking nail jobs.

There seems to be this big perceived step right now for people to say "Hey world, I'm one of the LGBT.....+ buckets". Isn't that kind of messed up? It's an implied step from "normal" to "not normal". But no one is normal, regardless of gender. Or everyone is normal, depending on how you want to frame it lol. That announcement shouldn't be a thing.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

I have a nephew who likes to wear nail polish, but gets grief from his extended family for it. I don't want this little kid to have to make a decision on what letter of the rainbow he should be assigned to and try educate his family, I want people to compliment him on his awesome looking nail jobs.

Your nephew doesn't need to ascribe to any of the letters or educate anyone about gender if he doesn't want to. The responsibility lies with the extended family members who are uncomfortable with him wearing nail polish to stop being dicks and hopefully educate themselves and stop commenting on his choices that do no affect them in any way.

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

There seems to be this big perceived step right now for people to say "Hey world, I'm one of the LGBT.....+ buckets". Isn't that kind of messed up? It's an implied step from "normal" to "not normal". But no one is normal, regardless of gender. Or everyone is normal, depending on how you want to frame it lol. That announcement shouldn't be a thing.

It isn't about going from normal to not normal. It is about finding a community of like minded peers that they can identify and feel safe with.

Even in an ideal world where there isn't an active group of politically motivated people working to to take away LGBTQ rights, what is the harm with announcing your gender/sexual identity?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Sex and gender are not the same thing.

Correct. Where did I say they were?

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Transitioning your gender does not require one to transition their sex.

As I said, it does not require changing sex characteristics, but that does fall within gender transition. It is not an entirely different thing as you describe it. You should research gender transition if you're going to keep using the term.

Transitioning is the process of living according to your gender identity. From how you dress, to how you'd like to be addressed, to hormone therapy and other medical procedures.

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Further, what I said was in the context of the idea that not having behaviors ascribed to gender buckets means there is not really any difference between the two genders anymore and wanted to point out that obviously transitioning sex would be different because there are absolutely material changes that one would undergo.

OK, but you're only half getting it here. If gender ceases to exist and therefore there would be no gender norms or gender buckets or no difference between genders and the only definable difference would be in sex, why would anyone "transition sex"?

Further, there are already people whose gender identity follows neither male or female gender stereotypes, do not identify as transgender, do not express gender in any binary fashion, and undergo no substantive "gender transition."

Like, it's all hunky dory to suggest that if we just eliminated gender there would be no need for "gender transition" or any labels regarding gender. But we haven't. And allowing and giving words to a multitude of gender identities and gender expressions so that people stop saying things like "the two genders" is a step toward what you're describing, not a reinforcement of gender norms like Cliff is suggesting.

It's absurd to think that trying to blow the concept of "two genders" out of the water is actually reinforcing gender. Come on.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

There seems to be this big perceived step right now for people to say "Hey world, I'm one of the LGBT.....+ buckets". Isn't that kind of messed up? It's an implied step from "normal" to "not normal". But no one is normal, regardless of gender. Or everyone is normal, depending on how you want to frame it lol. That announcement shouldn't be a thing.

The reason those classifications exist is to help provide clarity around the nuance of how people identify. It's there to prevent people just lumping everyone who falls into those categories as "gay," as has been western culture for decades past. And each of these identities has a distinct feature.

Two-spirit, for example, is hugely central to indigenous cultures. It has deep cultural and belief connections to who you are as a person. That label exists for good reason, especially as a cultural frame of reference.

Also, I think you were asking on a higher level why these labels? That's also just for humans in general. People organize based on labels, it's what we naturally do. Nationality, ethnicity, language speakers, favorite sports and favorite sports teams, level of fitness, level of skill, professions, and yes, even gender-based identities.