4 ms·

I don't know who you have been confirming your biases with, but you have arrived at a position in contradiction of fact. To the degree to which gender is not a

by sethrin 10y ago

I don't know who you have been confirming your biases with, but you have arrived at a position in contradiction of fact. To the degree to which gender is not a social construct, it does not seem to be perfectly aligned with sex. I don't really have the stomach to dissect your Napoleon analogy, but instead I will simply note that you have made a false equivalence and suggest that laughing at or trivializing peoples' mental illnesses is not particularly helpful. I think that a comparison to phantom limb syndrome or alien hand syndrome would be more accurate. Most people can rely on their brain telling them accurate information about their bodies. Some of us are not so lucky. I can't begin to describe how difficult it is to have your brain constantly at war with itself. I can promise that therapy isn't going to fix that sort of brain malfunction, any more than "pray away the gay". With rare (and controversial exceptions), the majority of studies agree that HRT/GRS + therapy produces better quality of life than therapy alone. The suicide rate is pretty high for both groups though. Manufacturing jobs and my body may both make Republicans feel uncomfortable, but are not otherwise linked. You are displaying emotional reasoning, not logic. There is no reason to compare these two things, and the worrying implication of your reasoning is that any injury to a minority can be absolved if the majority can be shown to have suffered some other harm. There are a number of issues where conservatives have taken a stance against empirical reality (with its well-known liberal bias). It's tough to build a coherent worldview if it's not founded on empiricism. Trump epitomizes this problem. One hopes that the same may not be said of you.

jimmywanger 10y ago
> There is no reason to compare these two things, and the worrying implication of your reasoning is that any injury to a minority can be absolved if the majority can be shown to have suffered some other harm. You are missing the main thrust of my argument. Transgender issues are such a vanishingly small portion of the population of course people who speak about the economy will get more traction. And people who fixate on transgender issues will rightfully be seen as fringe elements who are completely out of touch with most of the country. Complaining about not being able to use the bathroom you want to use instead of worrying about towns and communities getting hollowed out because of manufacturing jobs leaving and never coming back does not get you votes and does not portray your side of the argument in a flattering light. It'd be like complaining about grizzly bear attacks while getting drunk and driving home. One is a much more pressing concern. > There are a number of issues where conservatives have taken a stance against empirical reality (with its well-known liberal bias). Which are?
- sethrin 10y ago
  Let's be clear, the focus on transgender rights is a conservative one. Conservatives lost the fight on gay marriage and needed another moral crusade to rile up their base. So far it has been quite effective. Transgender persons are as you say, a tiny minority, and politically a nonentity. The status quo on bathroom laws was really just fine. Trans people are more worried about nomenclature and paying for therapy, and reducing the amount of nonsense required to legally change one's gender marker. Some progressive institutions were voluntarily providing accommodations for trans persons, partially as a safety issue as they are very frequently targets of violence, and this was also uncontroversial. The main thrust of your argument was that we must either talk about jobs or trans issues. This is a false dichotomy. I'd say it's a pretty clever way to control public opinion, but we've seen these same rhetorical tactics being used against gay rights for some decades now. It seems to be very effective with the more emotionally driven populace.
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    > The main thrust of your argument was that we must either talk about jobs or trans issues. This is a false dichotomy. This is most certainly not a false dichotomy. Everybody has a certain amount of mind share that they command. If you're talking about Subject A you're not talking about Subject B. That goes a long way to explaining again why liberals seem so out of touch with most working class folks living in middle america. They don't care about what rights a tiny portion of Americans have, or what bathrooms they can and cannot use. They care about getting jobs and food and making rent, which are the concerns of a much greater proportion of the populations. When they hear about politicians ramble on about things that only affect a tiny minority of people, while ignoring things that affect much more people in a larger way, then you have an out-of-touch political party.
    - sethrin 10y ago
      The ones "rambling on" are the conservatives. They invented this issue, and immediately started to legislate it. At which point people started objecting. Stop making laws about bathrooms and we all can stop worrying about it. Mindshare may or may not be a finite resource but there is nothing suggesting that we are over-budget on that. But if that is a problem, again, your team created it. You are the party of legislating bathrooms and bedrooms. Own it. Also, you may want to consider different news sources, as you seem to have a problem with repeating talking points instead of supporting your arguments with facts. This "out of touch" rhetoric is being heavily pushed by the right-wing apparatchik, and I am sure that you would rather be able to have your own opinions rather than the ones that the Party thinks you should have.

by sethrin 10y ago

jimmywanger 10y ago

> There is no reason to compare these two things, and the worrying implication of your reasoning is that any injury to a minority can be absolved if the majority can be shown to have suffered some other harm. You are missing the main thrust of my argument. Transgender issues are such a vanishingly small portion of the population of course people who speak about the economy will get more traction. And people who fixate on transgender issues will rightfully be seen as fringe elements who are completely out of touch with most of the country. Complaining about not being able to use the bathroom you want to use instead of worrying about towns and communities getting hollowed out because of manufacturing jobs leaving and never coming back does not get you votes and does not portray your side of the argument in a flattering light. It'd be like complaining about grizzly bear attacks while getting drunk and driving home. One is a much more pressing concern. > There are a number of issues where conservatives have taken a stance against empirical reality (with its well-known liberal bias). Which are?

sethrin 10y ago
Let's be clear, the focus on transgender rights is a conservative one. Conservatives lost the fight on gay marriage and needed another moral crusade to rile up their base. So far it has been quite effective. Transgender persons are as you say, a tiny minority, and politically a nonentity. The status quo on bathroom laws was really just fine. Trans people are more worried about nomenclature and paying for therapy, and reducing the amount of nonsense required to legally change one's gender marker. Some progressive institutions were voluntarily providing accommodations for trans persons, partially as a safety issue as they are very frequently targets of violence, and this was also uncontroversial. The main thrust of your argument was that we must either talk about jobs or trans issues. This is a false dichotomy. I'd say it's a pretty clever way to control public opinion, but we've seen these same rhetorical tactics being used against gay rights for some decades now. It seems to be very effective with the more emotionally driven populace.
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  > The main thrust of your argument was that we must either talk about jobs or trans issues. This is a false dichotomy. This is most certainly not a false dichotomy. Everybody has a certain amount of mind share that they command. If you're talking about Subject A you're not talking about Subject B. That goes a long way to explaining again why liberals seem so out of touch with most working class folks living in middle america. They don't care about what rights a tiny portion of Americans have, or what bathrooms they can and cannot use. They care about getting jobs and food and making rent, which are the concerns of a much greater proportion of the populations. When they hear about politicians ramble on about things that only affect a tiny minority of people, while ignoring things that affect much more people in a larger way, then you have an out-of-touch political party.
  - sethrin 10y ago
    The ones "rambling on" are the conservatives. They invented this issue, and immediately started to legislate it. At which point people started objecting. Stop making laws about bathrooms and we all can stop worrying about it. Mindshare may or may not be a finite resource but there is nothing suggesting that we are over-budget on that. But if that is a problem, again, your team created it. You are the party of legislating bathrooms and bedrooms. Own it. Also, you may want to consider different news sources, as you seem to have a problem with repeating talking points instead of supporting your arguments with facts. This "out of touch" rhetoric is being heavily pushed by the right-wing apparatchik, and I am sure that you would rather be able to have your own opinions rather than the ones that the Party thinks you should have.