? concerning transgender people

[TheLight]

spemanig said:
To drive home this idea of not being an inconsiderate asshole on the principal of insignificant semantics, I'd like to bring up an example of equal consequence.

There once was a young girl. She was born with the name Destiny. However, she preferred a different name. Growing up, people began referring to her by this different name. This nick name. This nick name wasn't her born name, but she asked everyone she knew to call her by this other name, because she did not identify with her birth name, Destiny. Even her birth parents would call her by this nick name. Anyone calling her Destiny at this point were just needlessly and knowingly being jerks. She wasn't hurting anybody asking to be called this other name.

When she turned 18, she made a decision. She identified so strongly with this other name, that it felt like more than a nickname to her. It defined her. It was the true her. It was her identity. Destiny was not her name anymore, not to her. So shortly after she turned 18, Miley Cyrus finally made her new name official.

se·man·tics

səˈman(t)iks/

noun

 

1. the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. There are a number of branches and subbranches of semantics, including formal semantics, which studies the logical aspects of meaning, such as sense, reference, implication, and logical form, lexical semantics, which studies word meanings and word relations, andconceptual semantics, which studies the cognitive structure of meaning.

   • the meaning of a word, phrase, sentence, or text.

     plural noun: semantics

   If the meaning of words is insignificant than I am not sure why anything you wrote above should be important.  Now forget what I just typed,if your biological gender means so little that you would change it why would gender mean anything at all?  Why is gender significant at all that you should be concerned by it. I see no reason at all why your gender should define who you are as a person in the least.  If you say because of feelings, you then have to argue why feelings are more important than reality. If you air on the side of feelings how can have a logcal argument people have all kinds of feelings people could feel that murder is right. How would you then argue logically why I should care about your feelings, If I am in my own mind everything could just be an illusion how would I know if I can't trust logic and my physical senses above my feelings than right and wrong mean nothing so you would be nothing everything would mean nothing. My feelings are nothing they are but a tool to exersise to help me feel good about doing good and bad when I do bad. Now if you don't believe in right and wrong you belive in nothing.  You would have no tools to convinvince me you are trying to convince others based on feelings when they differ between people and can easily change.  If you try to say you should change feelings based on feelings, that is utter nonsense you have no logical reason to convince anyone that your feelings or anyones are important.  Now if you are replying to me to feel good because you think you have something to say.  Just know that I feel you are unimportant and I now feel bored, so it will be intresting for you to try to reply to no one for I am unimportant everything is meaningless.  So I am not going to read your reply because it is pointless arguing without logic and everything is meaningless unless. Unless what?