Religious parents ...boy wearing dress

12467

Comments

  • Alex99
    Alex99 Posts: 1,407
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:

    People believe a whole range of things, some rational, some not. Whilst we respect the rights of people to believe whatever they want to, we are usually not compelled to respect the belief itself, although we may choose to. I don't know where gender identity sits. If I say "OK, I feel female, I'm now female." What kind of claim is that? Is it scientifically testable, or is it just some other kind of claim?

    What difference does it make? To you?

    It makes a difference to me because I am indirectly affected by this issue now, and perhaps could be directly affected by this in future. As I said at the start, I'm just trying to get me head around it.

    Don't you think it's important to understand these issues?
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Alex99 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:

    People believe a whole range of things, some rational, some not. Whilst we respect the rights of people to believe whatever they want to, we are usually not compelled to respect the belief itself, although we may choose to. I don't know where gender identity sits. If I say "OK, I feel female, I'm now female." What kind of claim is that? Is it scientifically testable, or is it just some other kind of claim?

    What difference does it make? To you?

    It makes a difference to me because I am indirectly affected by this issue now, and perhaps could be directly affected by this in future. As I said at the start, I'm just trying to get me head around it.

    Don't you think it's important to understand these issues?

    Yes, i do, but from the context of just respecting people's identities.

    I mean, from where I sit we all have issues about ourselves; insecurities, whatever.

    Some people are unlucky in that they have worse issues than others. I've seen one or two go through the gender change and they really go through the mill.

    I just think it's mean spirited of people to actively looking for a confrontation on it on the basis that 'their rights are affected too'. I mean, it's a bit like me complaining to victim families of 9/11 that I resent having to be treated like a terrorist during airport security; it's just inappropriate.
    _
  • Alex99
    Alex99 Posts: 1,407
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:

    People believe a whole range of things, some rational, some not. Whilst we respect the rights of people to believe whatever they want to, we are usually not compelled to respect the belief itself, although we may choose to. I don't know where gender identity sits. If I say "OK, I feel female, I'm now female." What kind of claim is that? Is it scientifically testable, or is it just some other kind of claim?

    What difference does it make? To you?

    It makes a difference to me because I am indirectly affected by this issue now, and perhaps could be directly affected by this in future. As I said at the start, I'm just trying to get me head around it.

    Don't you think it's important to understand these issues?

    Yes, i do, but from the context of just respecting people's identities.

    I mean, from where I sit we all have issues about ourselves; insecurities, whatever.

    Some people are unlucky in that they have worse issues than others. I've seen one or two go through the gender change and they really go through the mill.

    I just think it's mean spirited of people to actively looking for a confrontation on it on the basis that 'their rights are affected too'. I mean, it's a bit like me complaining to victim families of 9/11 that I resent having to be treated like a terrorist during airport security; it's just inappropriate.

    Are there any self-defined identities that you wouldn't respect? Are you 100% sure that respecting a person's self-defined identity is always the best thing to do?
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    What reason would there be to think otherwise?
    _
  • Alex99
    Alex99 Posts: 1,407
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    What reason would there be to think otherwise?

    I can think of some. But are you going to answer the question?
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Well let's hear 'em.
    _
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:

    People believe a whole range of things, some rational, some not. Whilst we respect the rights of people to believe whatever they want to, we are usually not compelled to respect the belief itself, although we may choose to. I don't know where gender identity sits. If I say "OK, I feel female, I'm now female." What kind of claim is that? Is it scientifically testable, or is it just some other kind of claim?

    What difference does it make? To you?

    The only difference it makes is when we unintentionally address the person incorrectly - and they take offence - or offence is taken on their behalf (eg the school rules were suggested to treat calling the child by the incorrect pronoun as bullying and punished accordingly.)

    Well there's 2 things here.

    1) if you're going to not be the usual when it comes to pronouns, you need to be able to give people some slack. I indeed have fallen foul of this; gender of a classmate would change from week to week and I would forget and get it wrong, and s/he didn't cut me all that much slack. That was irritating, but then, I figured, their isuses are probably worse than me being called out for using the wrong pronoun. A bit annoying? Yes. But fine.

    2) to deliberately call someone who's going through gender changes, whether physical or otherwise, the wrong pronoun is probably a type of bullying. As I said earlier, it's up to the individual to decide what pronoun they respond to.

    Which is just expanding on what I said ...

    I can recall calling people "a girl" as an insult ... :) not that I think they were having gender issues at the time.

    I didn't like what many people were calling me at school (as we always used nicknames) - I just ignored them - it annoyed them more than it annoyed me. Ok, it wasn't gender based - although I'm sure I got called "a girl" a few times too...
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,336
    Alex99 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:

    People believe a whole range of things, some rational, some not. Whilst we respect the rights of people to believe whatever they want to, we are usually not compelled to respect the belief itself, although we may choose to. I don't know where gender identity sits. If I say "OK, I feel female, I'm now female." What kind of claim is that? Is it scientifically testable, or is it just some other kind of claim?

    What difference does it make? To you?

    It makes a difference to me because I am indirectly affected by this issue now, and perhaps could be directly affected by this in future. As I said at the start, I'm just trying to get me head around it.

    Don't you think it's important to understand these issues?

    Yes, i do, but from the context of just respecting people's identities.

    I mean, from where I sit we all have issues about ourselves; insecurities, whatever.

    Some people are unlucky in that they have worse issues than others. I've seen one or two go through the gender change and they really go through the mill.

    I just think it's mean spirited of people to actively looking for a confrontation on it on the basis that 'their rights are affected too'. I mean, it's a bit like me complaining to victim families of 9/11 that I resent having to be treated like a terrorist during airport security; it's just inappropriate.

    Are there any self-defined identities that you wouldn't respect? Are you 100% sure that respecting a person's self-defined identity is always the best thing to do?

    Of course not but in the absence of any other information it's a good place to start. Why the need for an absolutist approach?
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Alex99
    Alex99 Posts: 1,407
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Well let's hear 'em.

    This has descended into farce.
  • Alex99
    Alex99 Posts: 1,407
    rjsterry wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:

    People believe a whole range of things, some rational, some not. Whilst we respect the rights of people to believe whatever they want to, we are usually not compelled to respect the belief itself, although we may choose to. I don't know where gender identity sits. If I say "OK, I feel female, I'm now female." What kind of claim is that? Is it scientifically testable, or is it just some other kind of claim?

    What difference does it make? To you?

    It makes a difference to me because I am indirectly affected by this issue now, and perhaps could be directly affected by this in future. As I said at the start, I'm just trying to get me head around it.

    Don't you think it's important to understand these issues?

    Yes, i do, but from the context of just respecting people's identities.

    I mean, from where I sit we all have issues about ourselves; insecurities, whatever.

    Some people are unlucky in that they have worse issues than others. I've seen one or two go through the gender change and they really go through the mill.

    I just think it's mean spirited of people to actively looking for a confrontation on it on the basis that 'their rights are affected too'. I mean, it's a bit like me complaining to victim families of 9/11 that I resent having to be treated like a terrorist during airport security; it's just inappropriate.

    Are there any self-defined identities that you wouldn't respect? Are you 100% sure that respecting a person's self-defined identity is always the best thing to do?

    Of course not but in the absence of any other information it's a good place to start. Why the need for an absolutist approach?

    I'm not advocating any particular approach, least of all an absolutist one.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,336
    Fair enough. It was the "100% sure... always" that I misinterpreted.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Alex99
    Alex99 Posts: 1,407
    rjsterry wrote:
    Fair enough. It was the "100% sure... always" that I misinterpreted.

    Nah, I was just asking Rick is he was 100% sure about the correct approach being to always respect peoples identities. He declined to reply.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Alex99 wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Fair enough. It was the "100% sure... always" that I misinterpreted.

    Nah, I was just asking Rick is he was 100% sure about the correct approach being to always respect peoples identities. He declined to reply.

    If in doubt, sure, why not?
    _
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,157
    Alex99 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Well let's hear 'em.

    This has descended into farce.
    What do you expect when the basis is a farcical news story.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Alex99 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Well let's hear 'em.

    This has descended into farce.

    I'm sure you've thought of some fantastic instance where respecting someone's own identity is abhorrent or something, and you're desperate to skewer me on it because I haven't thought of it.

    Is that what you're gunning for?
    _
  • Alex99
    Alex99 Posts: 1,407
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Fair enough. It was the "100% sure... always" that I misinterpreted.

    Nah, I was just asking Rick is he was 100% sure about the correct approach being to always respect peoples identities. He declined to reply.

    If in doubt, sure, why not?

    I'm not trying to skewer you Rick. It's a difficult subject and it's hard for me to lay out clearly what I'm worried about. It's also a subject where you seem to get 'jumped on' for raising a question.

    So, to answer your question "why not?" Because it could be harmful to reinforce that persons identity, if the identity has the potential to do them harm.

    Here is an example of something that I think might be similar. You decide if it's fantastic. You'll have to believe me when I say that I'm genuinely interested to know if this analogy is weak.

    If someone suffering from Anorexia tells you that they feel very fat, even though they are terribly underweight. What would you say? I respect your view, therefore, yes, I will fall in line and agree that you are fat. Or, would you say, I believe that you genuinely feel that you are fat, but you really aren't fat. I'm concerned that trans-gender and trans-sexual is similar to this.

    This is just one example. There are quite a lot of strongly held beliefs or ways that a person can self-identify, that are not good for the individual. Another example is body identity disorder where the person feels that one or more part of their body is alien and usually, the person wants to amputate the body part.

    Where we are dealing with a persons perception of themselves and their bodies, I have a concern that it is dangerous to agree with them in a blanket fashion.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,336
    Alex99 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Alex99 wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Fair enough. It was the "100% sure... always" that I misinterpreted.

    Nah, I was just asking Rick is he was 100% sure about the correct approach being to always respect peoples identities. He declined to reply.

    If in doubt, sure, why not?

    I'm not trying to skewer you Rick. It's a difficult subject and it's hard for me to lay out clearly what I'm worried about. It's also a subject where you seem to get 'jumped on' for raising a question.

    So, to answer your question "why not?" Because it could be harmful to reinforce that persons identity, if the identity has the potential to do them harm.

    Here is an example of something that I think might be similar. You decide if it's fantastic. You'll have to believe me when I say that I'm genuinely interested to know if this analogy is weak.

    If someone suffering from Anorexia tells you that they feel very fat, even though they are terribly underweight. What would you say? I respect your view, therefore, yes, I will fall in line and agree that you are fat. Or, would you say, I believe that you genuinely feel that you are fat, but you really aren't fat. I'm concerned that trans-gender and trans-sexual is similar to this.

    This is just one example. There are quite a lot of strongly held beliefs or ways that a person can self-identify, that are not good for the individual. Another example is body identity disorder where the person feels that one or more part of their body is alien and usually, the person wants to amputate the body part.

    Where we are dealing with a persons perception of themselves and their bodies, I have a concern that it is dangerous to agree with them in a blanket fashion.
    I think you raise a valid point. Identifying as a different gender is not per se physically harmful, but that may lead to gender reassignment surgery, which is a greyer area - on the face of it surgery could be considered physically harmful but the mental health benefits may far outweigh this as in your second example. Actually all surgery and medical treatment has some balance of harm versus benefits. The difference with anorexia is that it is fundamentally a mental illness and in your scenario, respecting their view of themselves would be harmful to their mental health as well as to their physical health.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Yeah, but an anorexic person isn't going "please could you call me fat in future?" are they?

    I mean, jeez.

    Anorexia is an illness; wouldn't be so quick to equate that to gender fluidity.
    _
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,336
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Yeah, but an anorexic person isn't going "please could you call me fat in future?" are they?

    I mean, jeez.

    Anorexia is an illness; wouldn't be so quick to equate that to gender fluidity.
    Yes the anorexia example isn't really a question of identity, but the other example possibly is.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Well yes but again, in what normal situation will someone be saying "can you not acknowledge my arm that exists, I want to amputate it"?

    We're talking about pronouns aren't we?
    _
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,336
    I think Alex99 respecting someone's chosen identity in a more general sense. Pronouns are just a matter of basic courtesy and manners as far as I can see.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    rjsterry wrote:
    I think Alex99 respecting someone's chosen identity in a more general sense. Pronouns are just a matter of basic courtesy and manners as far as I can see.

    Agreed; but I think there are a lot of people out there (because they tell me) who feel being made to use a pronoun that's different to the one they expect is somehow an affront to their rights.
    _
  • mfin
    mfin Posts: 6,729
    Hmm, complex this bit that's currently batting back and forth, it would be far easier to understand if you chucked some religion in or maybe even prayed for the right answer...

    Just flip to the back of the bible* and look up the sections on trans-sexuals and gender re-assignment, I think they are both in the book of Predjudices.

    (Ironic there's nothing in there too, but it did briefly mention laying with another man, so that's bound to be permission enough to be uppity about anything relating to gender or sex).

    *other fiction available
  • Alex99
    Alex99 Posts: 1,407
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    I think Alex99 respecting someone's chosen identity in a more general sense. Pronouns are just a matter of basic courtesy and manners as far as I can see.

    Agreed; but I think there are a lot of people out there (because they tell me) who feel being made to use a pronoun that's different to the one they expect is somehow an affront to their rights.

    The pronouns are a red herring. In the main, it isn't that people can't be bothered to be polite, or are just mean. The real issue is being expected, and even forced to act as though something is true and good, when it might not be.

    With Anorexia, we believe the physical reality. Whether a person asks to be called fat, or not isn't an important feature of this analogy. Also, that Anorexia is classed as a mental illness seems like a superficial objection.

    That said, there probably are some people that just can't be bothered to be polite if it's a minor inconvenience.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,336
    Alex99 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    I think Alex99 respecting someone's chosen identity in a more general sense. Pronouns are just a matter of basic courtesy and manners as far as I can see.

    Agreed; but I think there are a lot of people out there (because they tell me) who feel being made to use a pronoun that's different to the one they expect is somehow an affront to their rights.

    The pronouns are a red herring. In the main, it isn't that people can't be bothered to be polite, or are just mean. The real issue is being expected, and even forced to act as though something is true and good, when it might not be.

    With Anorexia, we believe the physical reality. Whether a person asks to be called fat, or not isn't an important feature of this analogy. Also, that Anorexia is classed as a mental illness seems like a superficial objection.

    That said, there probably are some people that just can't be bothered to be polite if it's a minor inconvenience.

    I don't think I have ever heard of an anorexia sufferer insisting that others refer to them as fat/overweight. They might believe it to be the case themselves, but from my limited understanding it's not a case of the perception of being overweight being a defining part of their identity in a way that someone's gender is (at least for most people).
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    Thread has moved on but mfin definitely trying to drag it back to slagging off religion.

    I hope Rick, RJSterry and Alex keep up the interesting debate because IMHO it's more interesting to discuss the topic of gender issues than descending into the usual religious debate. That's been done to death years ago on this forum and others.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    So Rachel Dolezal reckoned she is black, her white parents beg to differ...
    I assume some on here would accept her as being black although biology says differently.
  • mfin
    mfin Posts: 6,729
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    Thread has moved on but mfin definitely trying to drag it back to slagging off religion.

    I hope Rick, RJSterry and Alex keep up the interesting debate because IMHO it's more interesting to discuss the topic of gender issues than descending into the usual religious debate. That's been done to death years ago on this forum and others.

    Well, actually I was also pointing out that now the argument had moved on a bit and was free of religion yet complex, it illustrates how religion confuses things with the pre-dispositions and prejudices it brings out in people. Most topics like this are much easier to bounce back and forth without religion.

    So, I agree the whole subject is much more interesting with religion out of the way.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Ballysmate wrote:
    So Rachel Dolezal reckoned she is black, her white parents beg to differ...
    I assume some on here would accept her as being black although biology says differently.

    So, some related food for thought.

    Not a rhetorical question, but why do you think the distinction is black & white rather than the actual colour of their skin?

    Because it's more of a social construct than a biological one. That's why it's binary; it makes it a useful way to identify oneself by 'othering'.

    We're all more or less mongrels, so why is there a distinction at all?
    _
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Ballysmate wrote:
    So Rachel Dolezal reckoned she is black, her white parents beg to differ...
    I assume some on here would accept her as being black although biology says differently.

    So, some related food for thought.

    Not a rhetorical question, but why do you think the distinction is black & white rather than the actual colour of their skin?

    Because it's more of a social construct than a biological one. That's why it's binary; it makes it a useful way to identify oneself by 'othering'.

    We're all more or less mongrels, so why is there a distinction at all?

    Are you saying you respect her right to claim (identify) as African American?

Categories