Check out this guy's transition from M to F

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Consept said:

Whats you argument against it?

That identity is a made up thing. It's a fabrication. It's not existencial. Your existencial identity is just "I am" which is neither male or female. 

Edited 19 hours ago by Salvijus

[Something Funny]

@Salvijus he got a body that he enjoys?

It's hypocritical to pretend that appearance doesn't matter. Obviously it does.

It affects how people treat you, how you feel about yourself, whether you can get a partner, whether you will be allowed to enter a female bathroom, whether you will be beaten up on the street for looking weird, whether you can get a job...

 

 

[Something Funny]

5 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

That identity is a made up thing. It's a fabrication. It's not existencial. Your existencial identity is just "I am" which is neither male or female. 

Give me your bank account details then, please

[Consept]

14 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

That identity is a made up thing. It's a fabrication. It's not existencial. Your existencial identity is just "I am" which is neither male or female. 

Thats fine but you can have that argument for any distinction or identity, there is no race, there is no gender, there is no age etc etc.

The issue is that if you're denied rights for being trans or for being a woman or man, or black or chinese etc. Your point is valid in a non-dual, spiritual realm and I agree, however we do have to live in this physical realm where distinctions do become important when people are treated unfairly because of a particular distinction. Therefore I would make the argument that any distinction is as important as any other distinction within the this societal context. 

Also the fact you bring this up specifically with trans and maybe not as much with other identities would suggest some kind of prejudice, this may not be the case but im just pointing it out. Even if you did bring it up for other identities it doesnt really lead to a productive dialogue, basically dont be that guy 

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Consept said:

Thats fine but you can have that argument for any distinction or identity, there is no race, there is no gender, there is no age etc etc.

The issue is that if you're denied rights for being trans or for being a woman or man, or black or chinese etc. Your point is valid in a non-dual, spiritual realm and I agree, however we do have to live in this physical realm where distinctions do become important when people are treated unfairly because of a particular distinction. Therefore I would make the argument that any distinction is as important as any other distinction within the this societal context. 

Also the fact you bring this up specifically with trans and maybe not as much with other identities would suggest some kind of prejudice, this may not be the case but im just pointing it out. Even if you did bring it up for other identities it doesnt really lead to a productive dialogue, basically dont be that guy 

Yea but where do you draw the line? What's stopping you from identifying as a banana with that logic? 

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Something Funny said:

@Salvijus he got a body that he enjoys?

It's hypocritical to pretend that appearance doesn't matter. Obviously it does.

It affects how people treat you, how you feel about yourself, whether you can get a partner, whether you will be allowed to enter a female bathroom, whether you will be beaten up on the street for looking weird, whether you can get a job...

But does the change in appearance count as a change in identity? 

Edited 18 hours ago by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Something Funny said:

Give me your bank account details then, please

Not sure what you were trying to say here. 

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Consept said:

Thats fine but you can have that argument for any distinction or identity, there is no race, there is no gender, there is no age etc etc.

The issue is that if you're denied rights for being trans or for being a woman or man, or black or chinese etc. Your point is valid in a non-dual, spiritual realm and I agree, however we do have to live in this physical realm where distinctions do become important when people are treated unfairly because of a particular distinction. Therefore I would make the argument that any distinction is as important as any other distinction within the this societal context. 

Also the fact you bring this up specifically with trans and maybe not as much with other identities would suggest some kind of prejudice, this may not be the case but im just pointing it out. Even if you did bring it up for other identities it doesnt really lead to a productive dialogue, basically dont be that guy 

To add to what I wrote earlier, if identity is an important distinction for social context, then on what basis should be determine our identity? On the basis of race? Nationality? Gender. Okay cool. I agree that those are important distinction for social context. But what is a transgender? Makes makes somebody a transgenderer? 

Edited 18 hours ago by Salvijus

[Something Funny]

6 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

But does the change in appearance count as a change in identity? 

For her - yes.

Who cares what counts as a change in identity for you?

5 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

Not sure what you were trying to say here. 

That you talk big but your actions don't reflect it.

 

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Something Funny said:

For her - yes.

So if I were to put a tree costume. That would change my appearance. Would that mean I have become a tree? 

Edited 18 hours ago by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Something Funny said:

That you talk big but your actions don't reflect it.

Let's be less snarky and more clear pls. 

[Something Funny]

2 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

So if I were to put a tree costume. That would change my appearance. Would that mean I have become a tree? 

I mean... tree or not, you seem to reserve an ability to define your identity. You've just defined yourself in this thread.

What makes you say that she has no right to do the same?

Maybe then you don't either. Maybe only other people should be allowed to define it for you?

Maybe I want to define you as a weird forum transphobe. Should this be your new identity?

[Something Funny]

4 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

Let's be less snarky and more clear pls. 

Well if you are not attached to petty human identities, why are you attached to your money? Just give them to me. You don't need them, you just are. I will leave you some for bread and water, don't worry. That wil be enough for you to "just be".

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Something Funny said:

I mean... tree or not, you seem to reserve an ability to define your identity. You've just defined yourself in this thread.

What makes you say that she has no right to do the same?

Maybe then you don't either. Maybe only other people should be allowed to define it for you?

Maybe I want to define you as a weird forum transphobe. Should this be your new identity?

Because identity is a fabrication, we can identify as anything. I can identify as a moon if I want to and it will be correct. Other people can also identify me whichever way they like. Why? Because it's all made up. Now the question is. Because identity serves a practical purpose in society. We have to draw a boundary somewhere of what is practical and what is not. Me identifying as a tree is technically possible by the same logic that a guy can say to be a woman. But if I start asking that a government give me the same rights that trees have, it will become ridiculous. See? 

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Something Funny said:

Well if you are not attached to petty human identities, why are you attached to your money? Just give them to me. You don't need them, you just are. I will leave you some for bread and water, don't worry. That wil be enough for you to "just be".

And if I was not attached to my identity, would that automatically mean my logic in previous comments was right? 

Edited 18 hours ago by Salvijus

[Something Funny]

4 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

But if I start asking that a government give me the same rights that trees have, it will become ridiculous. See? 

He/she is not identifying as a tree though? This is just false equivalency.

What is so super unpractical about re-assigning a person from one ALREADY EXSTING imaginary category to another ALREADY EXISTING imaginary category?

You've said yourself that they are imaginary so what is such a big hurdle? What special right do you think they will receive that are so unpractical? Considering how they are just the right that people already have. They not asking for a right to plant himself in someone's backyard and be a tree.

You are contradicting yourself. If identity is imaginary, then what's the issue? How is them identifying as a woman any more ridiculous than them identifying as a guy?

The answer is once again: you talk big, but your words are empty. Because you can only hold that contradictory position if you are still super attached to traditional gender identity.

[Something Funny]

@Salvijus read my last comment.

[Salvijus]

1 hour ago, Something Funny said:

He/she is not identifying as a tree though? This is just false equivalency.

What is so super unpractical about re-assigning a person from one ALREADY EXSTING imaginary category to another ALREADY EXISTING imaginary category?

You've said yourself that they are imaginary so what is such a big hurdle? What special right do you think they will receive that are so unpractical? Considering how they are just the right that people already have. They not asking for a right to plant himself in someone's backyard and be a tree.

You are contradicting yourself. If identity is imaginary, then what's the issue? How is them identifying as a woman any more ridiculous than them identifying as a guy?

Its practicality is a debatable matter I would say. It seems unpractical in sports. It seems unpractical in sensitive areas like nude beach and toilets, unpractical in prison, unpractical when we need to identify people for certain types of jobs to do etc. 

Edited 17 hours ago by Salvijus

[Something Funny]

1 minute ago, Salvijus said:

Its practicality is a debatable matter I would say. It seems unpractical in sports. It seems unpractical in sensitive areas like nude beach and toilets etc. 

How is it unpractical on the nude beach, lol?

For toilets - it's really not. Nothing stops anyone from entering women's toilet and murdering everyone there. It's not some secure restricted area. This idea that some guy will pretend to be a woman and will go there to harass people so trans people should be banned is ridiculous. That guy can already do that. He doesn't need to dress as a woman for it. 

For sports - yes it can be problematic.

But you are here attacking the whole validity of idea of being trans not some minute points.

[Salvijus]

Also unpractical in prison, unpractical when we need to identify people for certain types of jobs to do etc. 

1 hour ago, Something Funny said:

But you are here attacking the whole validity of idea of being trans not some minute points.

Let me rephrase it then, transgenderism is as valid as me identifying as a tree.