Transgender bathroom law

Priest of Swag: Finding gender and finding gender identity are as different as finding sex and sexual identity. Gender is encoded in DNA, gender identity is not (so far as we know - the same question is also asked of sexual identity) but it certainly isn't as simple as spotting a chromosome. So yes, there are people, by birth, who have a female gender identity but male genitalia, or vice versa (it's funny how almost nobody hates on tomboys XD).

admin: Gender is encoded in DNA, gender identity is not
Gender identity is conceptual. Concepts aren't steeped in reality. Your gender is your gender identity, and if your brain is telling you differently, that just means you are mental.

Gender is encoded in DNA, gender identity is not So yes, there are people, by birth, who have a female gender identity but male genitalia, or vice versa
That claim is based on conjecture. There is nothing to base gender identity on besides chromosomes, that's why it is so ridiculous when people claim to be something that they are not.


(it's funny how almost nobody hates on tomboys XD).

They consider themselves female, which means they are not stupid.

@admin Also don't you realize that the whole gender identity BS is based on stereotypes of what men and women look and act like. Hence, why transgenders are the biggest sexists in existence. Many men and women are insulted when the opposite sex pretends to be them. The whole thing is often considered offensive.

Reiterating too that only a self absorbed prick worries so much with how they are identified. These people are disgusting.

Priest of Swag: Female but not feminine. And I think that's an important distinction, because femininity/masculinity has little to do with gender identity and IS entirely based on those stereotypes that you hate. Gender identity is something else though.

If you claim anyone who thinks differently from how you see the world is mental, then I can see where you're coming from. In my view, something isn't necessarily insane just because of my worldview being different.

Priest of Swag: Do you think gay marriage advocates are that (watch the language) because they worried about being identified as "married" as opposed to being in a civil union or something?

admin: M8, I am really not getting into any argument involving homosexuality with you. Slippery slope has no place here (or any intellectual discussion for that matter) .

admin: This isn't about perspective. It is a clear matter, and if you can't figure out your own gender, then you are clearly mental.

Priest of Swag: They can figure it out, they just come to a different answer to your one.

admin: There is only one correct answer, and it is the only one not based on conjecture. There is nothing substantive besides "I don't feel like I was born in the right body."

Mental sexists they are, and it is disgusting.

Priest of Swag: There is equally little substantive about your notion that there is only one correct answer. It's based entirely on your definitions of male and female identity.

admin: All the other definitions are based on gender stereotypes. I'll say it again too, but mine is the only one actually based on something (actual god given gender)

Priest of Swag: I don't have a definition at all. I don't see why it matters in the slightest. Any attempt to define or limit gender is logically just as stupid as attempts to expand it, so I'm happy with gender identity being an indeterminate quality. I personally see sexual identity, racial identity, cultural identity etc the same way.

admin: I don't have a definition at all. I don't see why it matters in the slightest.

If you cannot even justify your argument with alternate definitions, then you have very little ground to stand on.

Any attempt to define or limit gender is logically just as stupid as attempts to expand it

That makes no sense. So you can't make a definition, but you cannot expand on the non-existent definition? What are you talking about?

I personally see sexual identity, racial identity, cultural identity etc the same way.

All identifications can only be had when certain criteria is met. I think it is just as silly when some middle aged housewife from New Jersey claims to be Indian at heart, when she has no connections whatsoever to India. Are people supposed to pretend that this crazy chick is Indian, just because she says she is?

The definition of identity from Oxford, is literally "The fact of being who or what a person or thing is "

You can identify yourself, but you cannot expect other people to identify you as being anything other than the truth. People shouldn't be expected to support the mental fantasies of idiots.

All I am waiting for you to do, is completely redefine terms in the English language to support your argument that transgenders are not lying to themselves.

Hey, did you guys know that I am Tajik?

Priest of Swag: Just like you're Baha'i, right?

Dassault Papillon: Yeah, and also like how I am a really a chick.

Priest of Swag: But that assumes that there IS a definition, which you first need to justify.
A definition is a limit by definition. If expanding gender is troublesome, logically limiting it must be troublesome also. Any definition therefore needs to stand on its own - my contention is that none does.

People can call trans people what they like, within obvious limits, but gender identity is a personal thing. I mean, call it what you want, ultimately their identifier will be personally set. My name is Lars, but if I wanted to be called Greg, I should be free to change my name to Greg. People might still call me Lars, and that's their decision, but my identity as Greg would then be set. Identity is just one of those things that works like that - no need to redefine any English words.

admin: But that assumes that there IS a definition, which you first need to justify.
Oh no, you want to head into semantics...


If expanding gender is troublesome, logically limiting it must be troublesome also.

Considering this is true, you would need to recognize how "troublesome" it is that transgenders seek to form a new definition of gender identity.

I mean, call it what you want, ultimately their identifier will be personally set.
No, this is what I am trying to get through your head.

Identity isn't decided by how one feels, but based on what is factually correct.

You might as well just call it what it is, which is "Gender Mindset." This goes back to how sexist transgenders are for trying to assign stereotypes to sex.

My name is Lars, but if I wanted to be called Greg, I should be free to change my name to Greg. People might still call me Lars, and that's their decision, but my identity as Greg would then be set.

The two cases are still very different, because names are conceptual, and gender is factual. It is the same difference as capitalism turning into socialism, and a bear turning into a rat. Concepts evolve all the time, but universal truths don't.

That is why I will never call a bear a rat. It simply wouldn't be true unless we redefined the English language of what a bear is, and what a rat is.

Priest of Swag: There isn't a new definition, they're not redefining anything. You can't redefine something undefined.

Gender identity is personal, gender is factual. I'm pretty convinced at this point that 100% of your argument comes from you not understanding the distinction between gender identity and gender.