= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Elo comments on Stupid Questions May 2015 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (263)
Except it correlates with a bunch of things from chromosomes, to physical strength, to IQ, to ability to impregnate versus to become pregnant. If we look at a few prominent examples of trans-"women" the results don't appear to be hard to tease out.
I wrote a response and then realised I was unclear as to what you were saying and asking. Can you elaborate?
Well, I wasn't disagreeing with anything you said in the grandparent although possibly with some things you meant to imply. (I'm not completely clear on what you meant to imply.)
I was unclear as to the quote you selected and the link to your comment.
What do you think I was implying; I don't think I was implying anything particularly hidden. It would help me to understand what I might have been implying for improving my communication in the future.
perhaps you meant to quote:
I hope I wasn't implying that the map is wrong; I was trying to say that the map is historically quite good; and only recently is it becoming challenged with the possibilities of more modern genders opening up through technology or medical intervention.
Except for the most the the technologies haven't changed it, e.g., men still can't give birth and women can't impregnate women. Also most of the people claim to be "transgender" aren't even availing themselves of ancient that can do something, e.g., Bruce Jenner wasn't even willing to cut off his penis.
Be careful with your sweeping statements. I personally know of greater than one person who has gone through gender reassignment surgery. while the ability to ipregnate/be impregnated is still very much permanently attached to XYgender, it is only a matter of time.
You might know of the prevalence of "Ladyboys" in thai culture. there is a gene that is linked to that condition, and it affects a large number of their population.
I wouldn't be forcing people who don't fit into the existing gender territory to attempt to fit if they don't (especially if all they do is break your personal map about it). I believe in personal liberties as long as you don't harm others.
My point is that can't be what the "transsexual" movement [edit: is about], so why did you claim it was?
Sorry, but in this case the "liberty" in question is the right to insist others play along with their delusions and/or acting out.
You got downvoted for having a contrarian view that was also badly expressed. I have neutralised. (try to express it clearer or more delicately in the future)
I am sorry; I don't understand this sentence, was there perhaps a spelling error?
I can see what you are saying that it burdens everyone else to go along with the decisions of a person to make choices that are non-standard about gender. I haven't really considered the effect of the total burden placed on others.
when analysing this issue; I tend to weigh up the perspectives:
for whatever reason; (reason not relevant at all; ranging from hormonal imbalances to psychological reasons to environmental factors), a person decides their ability to fit into the M/F gender structure of society works better if they fit in a place other than the one phenotypically associated with their brain at birth. Their attitude is around their personal relationship with the world.
from the perspective of anyone this person interacts with; "this is slightly confusing". It might be an assault on one's understanding to be thrown into a state of confusion, there are multiple solutions to this problem; they might include:-
a. avoiding the assault on your sensibilities by avoiding the people who don't fit the map
b. ensuring that there are no people who do not fit your map by changing the people, or
c. ensuring there are no people who don't fit the map, by changing the map.
In the sense that we really only have power over ourselves. we sure can wish to be able to control others; but that is wrong. and conflicts with personal liberties.
The person in 1; is changing themselves to better fit into the world they find themselves in.
The person in 2b is trying to change the world where it disagrees with them, whereas in 2a or 2c, the person is finding solutions that involve changing themselves, and not the world.
I wouldn't be insisting anything of you; but I would like to make it clear that the 2b attitude is literally impossible to maintain. If we were to fulfil the desires of every person who wished to change the external world; the wishes would come into conflict where some 1 person would wish for something one way and some 2b person would wish it the opposite.
In this sense the right to "insist others play along", is nothing but the right to ask permission to entertain your own delusions (and maps) about yourself and your interaction with the world. It carries no bearing on what external parties do; unlike a party who is claiming that "playing along with someone else's gender delusion" is a burden on them, and insists that external parties play along with their own map (of M/F etc).
I'd like to encourage you to further express your opinion in this discussion but I have to point out; as evidence by a downvote; you are talking about a delicate issue; one likely to be downvoted simply for your view; in light of this - please be delicate in expressing your reply; and to save me some time misunderstanding; feel free to be verbose about it.
Down voted for concern trolling. (And no I don't care about a single down vote.)
Fixed. I changed the grammar of that sentence several times as I was editing.
Suppose a man walks up to you and claims to be both Jesus and John Lennon, and another man walks up to you claiming to be a woman. Would you accommodate one or both of their delusions and how? What accounts for the difference? Also note how LW takes a very different approach to discussing the two delusions.
Except not all maps are equal. Some are more accurate then others.
Except it does, e.g., the deluded individual insists men on attending women's colleges and going to women's bathrooms.
That depends on what is required to accommodate the two people.
If "jesus" guy insists on being worshipped, then thats infringing on the boundaries of others; if he wishes to be left to his own devices of enlightenment (talking to bushes and drinking wine-water) - then sure, good for him and his utilons of happiness.
Similarly if "woman" wishes to change the world that could be violating the personal rights of others; however keeping to yourself and what you can reasonably have power over - does not burden others.
This is an example that describes violating personal rights of others. Because of this example I believe I agree with you, however we disagree over what could/could not be permitted by reasonable liberties.