"First of all, that ignores all of my primary rebuttals to your post."
because its pretty hard to make certain arguments in this context when we can't even agree on something as basic as whether humans can be classified into male and female
I remember when I first watched this video a year or two back, I honestly couldn't believe that someone could be so bold to make such a blatantly stupid claim... but now its actually becoming a dominant ideology, its really is absolutely amazing and now I'm starting understand why that person felt so assured in making that proposition
anyway "are considered within the law under the "Bona Fide Occupational Qualification" provisions of anti-discrimination laws, which essentially state that if a certain quality is fundamental to a position, the employer may discriminate based upon that quality."
how can that apply here when this ideology is claiming that trans women literally are women?
I would have posted this rebuttal before but as I've said we don't even agree on the fundamentals here so...
"Second, a resounding "Who cares?"."
"Stupid people sue for stupid reasons literally every day."
I strongly suggest you stop having dishonest "debates" on topics with which you obviously won't change your mind on. Either you have a legitimate comprehension problem when it comes to other ways of thinking (that would explain why you make so many logical fallacies in your arguments as a way to connect the dots) or maybe due to the anonymity and unaccountability the internet gives you, you have grown a disconnect with your online and irl personas so you don't care about the truth of the matter or learning anything anymore and have since become comfortable in this state. So because of this you instead focus your energy on espousing factually and politically incorrect propositions, moving goalposts, misdirecting a convo you started, blatantly being duplicitous on your positions, etc. (to the point where it's satirical) just for your own personal satisfaction. I honestly don't know what satisfaction you would get out of this though, maybe you want someone to hear you or maybe you just want someone to get frustrated with your underhanded way of debating. Or it could be something else ENTIRELY, idk I don't know you, I can only go by what you've shown.
Either way, if you really want to know the experiences and issues of trans individuals and what they go through, go to your nearest LGBT center and just listen to them speak. Since you aren't on the internet and among a queer environment it'll be harder for you to do as you do here and you'll learn something and hopefully change your opinion.
Just a tip.
" Either you have a legitimate comprehension problem when it comes to other ways of thinking"
I do when I can see glaring issues with them yes, as I would expect of anyone, funny enough, but when it comes to certain issues you become a demon if you don't just shut your brain off and accept what others tell you to think
"(that would explain why you make so many logical fallacies in your arguments as a way to connect the dots"
"you have grown a disconnect with your online and irl personas so you don't care about the truth of the matter or learning anything anymore and have since become comfortable in this state."
first off this is absolutely incorrect, my opinions are consistent all the way through because I try as much as possible to root my ideas in actual reality
a very short time ago, the "truth" of the matter that was being debated was whether biology was being ignored when it comes to this concept... that has pretty much been conceded
now that this was conceded I'm just pointing out how I personally believe its untenable
regardless of that can you tell me what truth I am not accepting from your view?
the only thing so far that I have not accepted is that I have to completely disregard the physical reality of biology in ascertaining whether someone is a man or a woman
"moving goalposts, misdirecting a convo you started, blatantly being duplicitous on your positions, etc."
my position from the very beginning has been that this idea is flawed because it refuses to acknowledge biology and I have been consistent about that all the way through
whereas as I mentioned previously my opponents have flipped flopped collectively back and forth between stating that it does not dismiss with biology to later stating that it does dismiss biology depending entirely on "identity" a position you also have
"As previously stated, contextualizing and expanding on biology is not dismissing biology.
It appears we are at am impasse as you are incapable of acknowledging that exceedingly obvious fact."
">because I actually think biology which means the physical reality of the structure of bodies plays a role in whether a person is male or female, i don't think that simply because exceptions exist then that means that categories must be discarded with
1.) Even if it did mean that, why would that matter? We don't have categories for a lot of things.
2.) And it doesn't mean that. It just means the categories are more flexible. "
"I'll gladly call you a woman. I personally don't care even if you were lying, because some random person's gender doesn't affect me. "
"Who gives a shit about the distinction?
If someone identifies as a man, call them a man.
If someone identifies as a woman, call them a woman."
"You can be trans and not transition. "
I gleaned these quotes from just 2 pages, I suppose I could look for more if you wanted more
"if you really want to know the experiences and issues of trans individuals and what they go through"
that's not the issue here, which is why I've never focused on that
the issue here is whether this idea can actually work in the real world and I'll assert that it cannot without acknowledging biology
and by work I don't mean people should be stopped from transitioning, I mean when it comes to them actually being perceived as the other gender or "non-binary"... now how someone can be "non-binary" when they either have testosterone or estrogen pushing their bodies in one direction or another is beyond me... but whatever, not my problem
this is probably why you think I'm not being consistent - because you haven't actually read what I've said to understand what my issue with this is or you just don't care about whether its an idea that has a solid foundation or not
"I strongly suggest you stop having dishonest "debates" on topics with which you obviously won't change your mind on."
btw if you are debating enitrely to change the other persons' mind then you're a waste of time
the purpose of a debate is to try to evaluate what the truth of something is, if you are going into debates with the assumption that you are right and you have to change the other person's mind then what's the point?
Last edited by o_O.Q - on 04 September 2019