Gender pronouns in the workplace

  • Thread starter Thread starter VintageRose
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Paul71 said:
40.png
Alex337:
That’s because she is a woman.
Click to expand...
I don’t subscribe to neo-Gnosticism, so I will politely disagree with that assessment.
Click to expand...
Cool, why? She is treated like a woman, she is legally recognised as a woman, and if you met her I doubt you could tell.
 
Yes, bodies can be flawed. We determine they are flawed based off normal, healthy, fully functioning bodies. Eyesight that is 20-60 is flawed because normal good eyesight is 20-20. A body with 6 fingers on one hand is flawed because normal healthy bodies have five fingers per hand. Someone who suffers from multiple sclerosis has a flawed body because they have a genetic code that has deviated from how it should all be, how normal people’s genome is sequenced.

A man or woman suffering from gender disphoria does have a flaw. It’s a mental flaw and they suffer from a form of mental illness. The body, except for purposes unrelated to their disphoria, is not flawed . It is functioning exactly how it should be. It has all the parts it is supposed to have. It is a perfectly healthy human body. It is either male are female. This makes them male or female. It is coded into the very DNA. If there is a incongruence between the body and the mind, it is the mind that has the flaw. It is physically and metaphysically impossible on this earth that an individual has a wrong body.

Their body makes them male or female. To claim otherwise is to invent a whole stream of pseudoscience to support an ideological position that sex is fluid. You might equally claim that a woman who believes she is a cat really is a cat. Or a man who believes he is a baby really is a baby. It is nonsense.

Lastly I apologize for the repeated incomplete posts. I am posting from my phone and it keeps going haywire and selecting 8 different buttons at once on its own.
 
Last edited:
What is interesting about transgender ideology is that they want to have their cake and eat it to. So the whole premise is that gender is a social construct not tied to sex. So a man can be in a woman’s body or a woman in a man’s body. But then they claim is that to trully be a woman, a man must have a woman’s body, or at least look like a woman. And to look like a woman he must have long hair, wear makeup and wear dresses and heels. He has to enjoy shopping and brunch. Basically everything superficially “feminine”. And yet at the at the same time femininity isn’t supposed to be defined by such superficial drivel.

So on the one hand gender isnt specific and isn’t tied to sex while on the other it reduces gender to gender specific stereotypes.

And to support all this they have to invent new concepts out of whole cloth, like “assigned at birth”. Which implies that one’s biological sex is actually imposed from an outside source unjustly, and as such we should have the power to assign what we are ourselves. Because if it is not unjustly asigned by the doctor but is instead an objective reality then they have no leg to stand on.

I was going to continue to elaborate but my phone doing its own thing has caused me to take 30min to type a few sentences and it is driving me crazy so I will cut it short. In summary the only way for the transgender claim to make logical sense is to turn normal reasoning on its head by claiming the conclusion is a fact and then redefining terms and evidence to support the conclusion. Yet by doing this they contradict themselves.
 
Last edited:
FirstFiveEighth said:
What is interesting about transgender ideology is that they want to have their cake and eat it to. So the whole premise is that gender is a social construct not tied to sex. So a man can be in a woman’s body or a woman in a man’s body. B
Click to expand...
That’s because dysphoria can be both social and physical. Physical dysphoria is being uncomfortable with one’s body, social dysphoria is being uncomfortable with being treated as the wrong gender. The two are often linked but not always.
 
Alex337 said:
To be clear; I don’t think children should pursue medical alterations until they’re adults. But in some cases hormone blockers seem necessary as the child is in crisis and puberty risks exacerbating the problem and potentially leading to self harm.
Click to expand...
Clinical mental health doesn’t work this way. Self-harm, specifically, isn’t addressed by responding to blackmail: “I must change my gender or I will self-harm.”

Self-harm is a mechanism for trying to redirect the pain of other psychosocial stressors such as physical and sexual abuse, substance abuse in the self and/or family, or any variety of PTSD triggers. These are the underlying issues that need to be addressed through any number of talk therapy modalities.

“A crisis in puberty” is in many ways quite normal. I think that most of us tried on a dozen different identities before settling into who we are, rather than settling into one before our minds were completely made up and demanding medical assistance for it.
 
It’s not blackmail. If someone is at risk they need assistance. Sometimes that will involve medical intervention, sometimes talk therapy will be enough.
 
That would be the gender dysphoria which is exacerbated by puberty, thus the blockers for the extreme cases
 
As discussed above, they’re not developed enough to make that decision. Having a psychiatrist sign off on that decision doesn’t change that fact.
 
blackforest said:
As discussed above, they’re not developed enough to make that decision. Having a psychiatrist sign off on that decision doesn’t change that fact.
Click to expand...
Actually it kind of does. It’s an adult making a health care decision for a minor. And one that can be reversed.
 
That’s what we’re arguing. They shouldn’t. The minor doesn’t have the capacity to make a fully informed decision, so adults shouldn’t be making it for them. And actually, once the hormone treatments follow the puberty blockers, starting as young as age 13, there are some irreversible changes that can affect, among other things, fertility.
 
Last edited:
Hormone treatment beyond blockers is illegal below age 16 in Australia, the UK and last I checked the US. At which age they are entitled to their own medical decisions.

Adults need to make medical decisions for minors. Sometimes children require medicine and are but able to legally consent.
 
Alex337 said:
Hormone treatment beyond blockers is illegal below age 16 in Australia, the UK and last I checked the US. At which age they are entitled to their own medical decisions.
Click to expand...
It’s in that article that I shared and you never read 😉
While the Endocrine Society’s guidelines suggest 16, more and more children are starting hormones at 13 or 14 once their doctors, therapists and families have agreed that they are mentally and emotionally prepared.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I did read it. And it’s still illegal, so yes; doing illegal things that ignore how the medical professionals, in this case the endocrinologists which I have mentioned before, say something should be used is bad.
 
Last edited:
On my phone atm, and I specialise in Aus and UK laws as those are the places I live. If US law is shoddy, maybe fix it?
 
You said it was illegal in the U.S. I’d never heard that and just wanted clarification.

These doctors may be going against some sort of medical protocol by performing hormone treatments on kids younger than 16, but they do that any way with off-label hormone blockers. In either case, I’m not sure about any laws being violated.

All is well. Good night! (Afternoon there, whatever) .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top