Caitlyn Jenner

[BabyPeterzz]

The difference between "some" and "every" is not semantics, but whatever dude.

Sure it is. You are using the literal distinction between "some" and "everyone". I'll assume you know that "everyone" is used in passing and not in the literal sense all the time in common conversation and more often than not should not be taken literally. It's a simple issue of semantics, or perhaps connotation more so. Why you are hung up on this is strange and comes off as defensive.

But more to the point, where did I state that EVERYONE has experienced this? You said that, not me.

Guess what? You and your kids have all shared a locker room with a transgendered person at some point. And it will happen again and again and there's nothing you can do about it.

I am not disputing that it is likely more common than most people think. But actually some informal polls among my family and friends would indicate it is far less common than they all think. But I still dispute the unqualified claim that EVERYONE has been in a locker room with such an individual. All absolutes are the work of the devil!

Piss farther, dude.

 

[LogGrad98]

Sure it is. You are using the literal distinction between "some" and "everyone". I'll assume you know that "everyone" is used in passing and not in the literal sense all the time in common conversation and more often than not should not be taken literally. It's a simple issue of semantics, or perhaps connotation more so. Why you are hung up on this is strange and comes off as defensive.

But more to the point, where did I state that EVERYONE has experienced this? You said that, not me.





Piss farther, dude.

So now all does not equal every? OK. gotcha. All sparrows are birds but every sparrow is not a bird. I suppose it makes sense if you don't care about logic or defitions or anything.

For what it's worth I was disputing the claim that it is so common that "all" locker rooms (your word) have transsexual individuals in them with the frequency required for all of us to have been in a locker room with such an individual. I Fully acknowledgeit is more common than we probably think. I dispute that it is THAT common.

 

[BabyPeterzz]

So now all does not equal every? OK. gotcha. All sparrows are birds but every sparrow is not a bird. I suppose it makes sense if you don't care about logic or defitions or anything.

For what it's worth I was disputing the claim that it is so common that "all" locker rooms (your word) have transsexual individuals in them with the frequency required for all of us to have been in a locker room with such an individual. I Fully acknowledgeit is more common than we probably think. I dispute that it is THAT common.

If you read it again I used "all" in reference to "you and your kids". I used it improperly so I can see how it may be confusing. But again, the preoccupation with my use of language seems like deflection. No one is arguing that your proximity to trans individuals is THAT common. I made the assertion that Hantlers, not even you which makes this even more hilarious, has at one point in time shared a locker room with a trans person. It's not THAT common, but it happens, will always happen and there's nothing you can do about it. Thats it!

 

[Stoked]

what do you think it means "to relate" to something?

I think it is fairly clear that "to relate" in this sense is being used to mean being able to understand Caitlyn's motivations for why she (I'm assuming that's how she wants to be referred to) is transitioning to a female gender role or more.

But either way I do not wish to get bogged down in a useless semantics debate as Log and Baby are.

I'm taking what Joe (I think) said differently than you and so what? That shouldn't surprise either of us haha.

 

[DutchJazzer]

So now all does not equal every? OK. gotcha. All sparrows are birds but every sparrow is not a bird. I suppose it makes sense if you don't care about logic or defitions or anything.

For what it's worth I was disputing the claim that it is so common that "all" locker rooms (your word) have transsexual individuals in them with the frequency required for all of us to have been in a locker room with such an individual. I Fully acknowledgeit is more common than we probably think. I dispute that it is THAT common.

inst that the problem. people changing definitions left and right.

1.the world "literally" got litterally changed. so you can say "i literally ate a horse" without actually literally eating a horse
2.marriage definition is changed! so gays can get married but not polygamist and zoophiliacs
3.when live begins is changed! so you can do abortions
4.what a basic right is is changed! so you can get healthcare provided by others. yeah right a right is not something that others have to supply
5.Gender is changed! so we can have 3rd genders, genderless and self mutilators(enum i mean transgenders)
5.even the defintion in the constitutions are changed.
6.obama even changed the definition of "3 branches of government to phone pen and his own ego


aka people dont care about definitions bro. so whatever bro define any word any damm way you please

its all words on some peace of paper

we live in a world where if you dont like a definition or a word. just cry like a big baby so it will get changed. or jsut do it on your own
and btw only #blacklivesmatter.

 

[NAOS]

I think it is fairly clear that "to relate" in this sense is being used to mean being able to understand Caitlyn's motivations for why she (I'm assuming that's how she wants to be referred to) is transitioning to a female gender role or more.

But either way I do not wish to get bogged down in a useless semantics debate as Log and Baby are.

I'm taking what Joe (I think) said differently than you and so what? That shouldn't surprise either of us haha.

I just find it hard to believe that people can't grasp the idea of someone who feels displaced in their own body. That notion is at the basis of so many cultural things -- from science fiction, to religious ideas about possession and spirit, etc.

In other words, if we give two ****s about exploring the realm of psychic possibilities, then I think we can all imagine something of what it feels like to have a sense of being in the wrong body. The problem people have getting there is effort. The main "relation" most of you are having to this is one I'd describe as 'stubborn', or 'lazy', or 'with juvenile morality.' Something like that. You are relating to it, though.

BTW, I did not take a shot a libertarianism, in general. If I took a shot at something, it was how Republicans try to dress themselves as libertarians. I can't decide whether it's more funny than it is irritating. I'll get back to you about that.....

 

[LogGrad98]

Guess what? You and your kids have all shared a locker room with a transgendered person at some point. And it will happen again and again and there's nothing you can do about it.

If you read it again I used "all" in reference to "you and your kids". I used it improperly so I can see how it may be confusing. But again, the preoccupation with my use of language seems like deflection. No one is arguing that your proximity to trans individuals is THAT common. I made the assertion that Hantlers, not even you which makes this even more hilarious, has at one point in time shared a locker room with a trans person. It's not THAT common, but it happens, will always happen and there's nothing you can do about it. Thats it!

My bad. This was in response to one poster. I find it interesting you can know his family well enough to make that claim. If not then it was just an effort to incite and not any kind of legitimate argument for anything. Sorry I pissed all over your troll job. Carry on.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

So did he chromosomes magically become XX?

You're missing Dalamon's point. Sex refers to biological differences; chromosomes, hormonal profiles, internal and external sex organs, etc. Gender refers to social roles, usually culturally learned, or personal identification of one's own gender based on an internal awareness (gender identity).

Thus, Jenner's sex is male (for now), while her gender is female.

While we're at it, one thing that has become abundantly clear over time, and once we've freed ourselves from the shackles of culturally determined thinking (as opposed to actual 'truth'), gender/sex are not dichotomous concepts. Like most things, they exist on a spectrum. There's an enormous amount of information about this out there, and if you're really interested in learning this (as opposed to insisting on culturally/religiously based misconceptions, biases, stereotypes, etc.), then I invite you to read up on it.

 

[fishonjazz]

I dont like this thread.


(my dislike for this thread is unrelated in any way to how i feel about dudes transforming into chicks)

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

Masculinity and femininity can have their base in physiology, but if you ask two people from two completely different cultures what fits a masculine and feminine profile, you're going to get two very different answers.

And if you ask two people in the same culture but across a different time period, you're going to get two different answers, as well, so the concept is very dynamic.

A perfect microcosm of how social constructs shape our views on masculinity would be to compare how an NFL locker room defines masculinity relative to the general population or other social groups. Gender is a totally fluid concept and an almost entirely social construct.

This is just another area (out of many) in which traditional/conservative religious and other social groups get it entirely wrong.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

Hold the hell up.

Transphobic to say otherwise? So if I state I disagree, I'm afraid of transvestites? I can assure you I don't have a fear of them. But maybe I'm a muslimphobe too. Hell, I'm probably an organicphobe in that case.

Or if people disagree with Christianity, can I go out and call them disrespectful christianphobes? Is that how this works?

I think he was referring to being afraid of trans gendered, not transvestites. Yes, there's a big difference between the two.

I don't think your transphobic. I would say, however, that disagreeing with Christianity is hardly being Christianphobic. It's not the Christians we don't like (speaking on behalf of others) but the horribly bad ideas they espouse and which they ceaselessly try to impose on others. Granted, it can be a fine line at times between hating the ideas and hating the people who espouse them, but there's nothing phobic about being opposed to unscientific, socially ignorant and bigoted ideas that have their roots in Iron Age superstitions.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I have no issues with people doing what they want as long as it doesn't infringe on anyone else's right to do what they want and vice versa. Which actually makes smokers an interesting discussion because their choice to smoke in public interferes with my right to not have smoke blown in my face as I walk down the street. But I digress...

But I call ******** on the whole societal construct gender-fluidity thesis that is every bit as much a construct as gender is claimed to be. Call it what it is, a choice. They choose to be a different gender. Done. Over. Choices are just fine. But to strive so hard for some kind of scientific or academic legitimacy is a lot like all the crap people go through to avoid the impact of their choices. Just ball up...or ovary up I guess, and make the choice and live your life. I have read interviews with Jenner and he says more or less the same, that this is his choice and he accepts what comes along with it in our society. I agree that people who make such choices should not be punished for those decisions, but not because of some gawd-awful attempt at a legitimizing theory of trans-genderness that transcends all physical metaphysical gobbledygook, but just plain old do what is right. So for Jenner, good on him, er, her. Take it like a man..uh, woman. Um. Take it like a human being!

More correct, I believe, to say that Jenner chose to take actions to live her gender identify (e.g.,, come out in public, wear the clothes, get the operation, etc.), but she did not choose to identify herself as a female, not any more than a homosexual choose to be sexually attracted to men, or a heterosexual male chooses to be attracted to women.

It seems to me you're conflating two very distinct issues here.