gender neutral debate

[YesNo]

All that does is sidestep the pressing issue of what it means to accept people as trans and as the gender they identify with. Most of society will have to undergo a radical redefinition of gender even to accept that it should be based around brain chemistry (an old argument anyway) rather than genitalia.

What part of Young and Alexander's "The Chemistry Between Us" do you disagree with?

I don't think conservatives will have any problem with gender definition extended by neuroscience as long as it is not wrapped in liberal moral rhetoric.

[Danik 2016]

I am traveling at the moment and not able to discuss this because of time and internet issues. I don't think looking at brain scans to obtain gender information implies diagnosing illness. It simply is another way to identify gender. One doesn't need to actually have any brain scan if gender identification is clear.

I was thinking about the issues in this thread while traveling and I think there is a solution that involves three components with scientific data, not radical chic politics, to back them:

1) Alexander and Young's "The Chemistry Between Us" to identifying gender differences in individuals without resorting to social construction of gender.
2) Jonathan Haidt's "The Righeous Mind" where six moral foundations are identified providing the social context missing from Alexander and Young's survey. This data shows that liberals are not as well balanced on Haidt's moral foundations as conservatives causing issues with conservative acceptance of LGBT individuals when those individuals' gender concerns are packaged with liberal moral rhetoric.
3) Socionomics for understanding why liberals shifted so far to the individual rights' side over the past two hundred years on Haidt's moral foundations and where that might lead in the future.

I haven´t read yet the authors you suggest, as I am finishing my paper. What I understand is that you want to base the discussion on scientific data.That´s quite ok with me one has to have objective data.
I don´t know how far this kind of data will contribute to a better acceptance of the LGBT group, which I think is the main issue at the moment.Brazil figures in the statistics as being the country where most people of that group are killed, not to speak of persecutions, beatings and other sorts of harassments. The problem has become so acute that soap opera authors (Soap operas have become opinion makers in this country where very few people read books)systematically introduce LGBT themes and personages in its stories in an atempt to contribute to the diminution of prejudice.

Enjoy your trip, Yes/No!

[OrphanPip]

What part of Young and Alexander's "The Chemistry Between Us" do you disagree with?

I don't think conservatives will have any problem with gender definition extended by neuroscience as long as it is not wrapped in liberal moral rhetoric.

Of course they have a problem with it, what fantasy world do you live in. Gay people have been arguing they are born gay for well on close to 100 years and still the religious right insists it is a choice, otherwise they can't justify their religion's opposition to it.

Also, I never disputed that biology influences gender identity. The point that you fail to understand is that brain scans are not simple and gender identity is a matter of consciousness, it has to do with how people view themselves relative to others. The idea that trans people have brain structures more similar to the opposite sex than to their biological sex is extremely old. There is flimsy science with small correlations that supports the idea, again that doesn't stop the fact that most people will insist your gender should be determined by your sex chromosomes and should correspond directly to your biological sex.

Your solutions are, frankly, stupid and divorced from political reality. What has been effective in improving the conditions for trans people so far? It's been Liberal politics, the majority of Canadians support trans rights, trans people are protected by the Charter of Rights, and trans people have free access to medical care. Teaching tolerance and acceptance of difference has improved how they can integrate into society and their sense of being able to live productive lives.

Why would people follow some path that clearly leads to a dead end, does nothing to address their actual concerns as individuals, and completely ignores social reality?

[desiresjab]

As a heterosexual incubus I feel mightlily slandered whenever I pass a protest with Stop Homophobia signs displayed. Thanks, Yes/No, for pointing this out.

Brain scans are the best thing yet for making clear there is a difference. In other words, something went askew, something has gone awry in this brain that looks down and sees its penis and desires larger breasts. Of course, it could also be an invisible long term survival mechanism, but I don't see how that might work at present.

Fear not, it is just ourselves redefining what humanity is. What is happening today may seem ludicrous, and it is, but it is necessary to get plenty of practice for the coming decades. Implants are coming that will integrate with consciousness. There may be a creature two doors down that is harder to define than anything we have tried yet, and is more queer than any mere queer.

I am convinced we will be in much need of redefining. Or perhaps we should adopt the favorite slogan "Inclusion," of many, and call any old partially human calculator human.

We are going to be able to perform tricks on our brains that make gender identity issues trivial.

[desiresjab]

The implant technology to transform lisping gays into burly men is just a couple of generations around the corner. The implant will tease their brain structures back to sexual normalcy in a matter of days or even hours, so that for the first time they awake with erections and a desire to plough womankind. The errancy of nature shall be corrected at last.

I would, however, advise not to tamper genetically with this abberration, lest it actually be a hidden survival mechanism we durst not destroy.

[YesNo]

I haven´t read yet the authors you suggest, as I am finishing my paper. What I understand is that you want to base the discussion on scientific data.That´s quite ok with me one has to have objective data.
I don´t know how far this kind of data will contribute to a better acceptance of the LGBT group, which I think is the main issue at the moment.Brazil figures in the statistics as being the country where most people of that group are killed, not to speak of persecutions, beatings and other sorts of harassments. The problem has become so acute that soap opera authors (Soap operas have become opinion makers in this country where very few people read books)systematically introduce LGBT themes and personages in its stories in an atempt to contribute to the diminution of prejudice.

Enjoy your trip, Yes/No!

If the 1925-1935 rise and fall of "pansies" surrounding a market top and depression is what we are seeing replaying now at a larger degree of market topping pattern then interest in LGBT groups may be unintentionally setting them up for a fall.

Although I used transgender groups to think through that three part theory I outlined above, I am more interested in heterosexuals. They fit the pattern as well.

[YesNo]

Of course they have a problem with it, what fantasy world do you live in. Gay people have been arguing they are born gay for well on close to 100 years and still the religious right insists it is a choice, otherwise they can't justify their religion's opposition to it.

Which are you more interested in doing: (1) make life safe and meaningful for LGBT people, or (2) eliminate religion? I suggest reading Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind". He describes a different moral balance for liberals as for conservatives. Liberals have an unbalanced approach to moral foundations emphasizing the three individual rights foundations and de-emphasizing the three communal service foundations. Conservatives are more balanced.

Also, I never disputed that biology influences gender identity. The point that you fail to understand is that brain scans are not simple and gender identity is a matter of consciousness, it has to do with how people view themselves relative to others. The idea that trans people have brain structures more similar to the opposite sex than to their biological sex is extremely old. There is flimsy science with small correlations that supports the idea, again that doesn't stop the fact that most people will insist your gender should be determined by your sex chromosomes and should correspond directly to your biological sex.

I don't think the idea is very old. Even the idea of having different male and female brains comes after 1970 based on memory of what I read in Alexander and Young's survey. This idea goes against the "social construction of gender" which assumes that brains are the same at birth, blank slates, upon which gender is socially constructed.

Your solutions are, frankly, stupid and divorced from political reality. What has been effective in improving the conditions for trans people so far? It's been Liberal politics, the majority of Canadians support trans rights, trans people are protected by the Charter of Rights, and trans people have free access to medical care. Teaching tolerance and acceptance of difference has improved how they can integrate into society and their sense of being able to live productive lives.

Why would people follow some path that clearly leads to a dead end, does nothing to address their actual concerns as individuals, and completely ignores social reality?

The interest in LGBT may be part of a topping process that is close to an end. Then a corrective wave starts. Looking at Haidt's differences in liberals and conservatives, are you teaching individual rights tolerance at the expense of communal service?

[Danik 2016]

If the 1925-1935 rise and fall of "pansies" surrounding a market top and depression is what we are seeing replaying now at a larger degree of market topping pattern then interest in LGBT groups may be unintentionally setting them up for a fall.

Although I used transgender groups to think through that three part theory I outlined above, I am more interested in heterosexuals. They fit the pattern as well.

I don´t understand anything about markets, but to my mind it´s the quantity of investements people have that would make a difference in market behaviour, not gender.

[Ecurb]

Liberals have an unbalanced approach to moral foundations emphasizing the three individual rights foundations and de-emphasizing the three communal service foundations. Conservatives are more balanced.

?

Huh? Since when? Individual right to property (as one example) is a conservative position; the notion that goods, the means of production, etc. may be communal is a liberal one.

[OrphanPip]

Which are you more interested in doing: (1) make life safe and meaningful for LGBT people, or (2) eliminate religion?

I haven't any interest in eliminating religion, what a bizarre question.

I don't think the idea is very old. Even the idea of having different male and female brains comes after 1970 based on memory of what I read in Alexander and Young's survey. This idea goes against the "social construction of gender" which assumes that brains are the same at birth, blank slates, upon which gender is socially constructed.

Social construction of gender does not imply brains are blank slates, which I've repeated to you numerous times.

The interest in LGBT may be part of a topping process that is close to an end. Then a corrective wave starts. Looking at Haidt's differences in liberals and conservatives, are you teaching individual rights tolerance at the expense of communal service?

Your inability to conceive of these issues in terms of their impact on real lives suggests you have a striking lack of empathy for other human beings.

[desiresjab]

Let me be clear. I am not for denying transgenders any basic human rights. But I am against awarding them free sex change operations.

Where should they go to the bathroom?

A small bathroom kit slung over the shoulder consisting of a portable toilet and related accessories, could be the answer. Then I suppose they would find it necessary to pack a tent for setting the apparatus up in, enabling them to use the head almost anywhere. Imagine going to the finest restaurant in the city only to notice small tents beside several of the tables and another being erected. Now that's wining and dining.

[desiresjab]

Let me be clear, lest it be thought I am insensitive. I am not for denying transgenders any basic human rights. But I am against awarding them free sex change operations.

But where should they go to the bathroom?

A small bathroom kit slung over the shoulder consisting of portable toilet and related accessories, could be the practical answer. Then it would be necessary to pack a tent for setting the apparatus up in, enabling them to use the head almost anywhere. Imagine going to the finest restaurant in the city only to notice small tents beside several of the tables and another being erected. Now that's wining and dining. That's social awareness in action. That's caring--when you solve the problems.

In case most public bathrooms of the future will require attendants, I would discriminate openly, and hire only transgenders for these positions, solving two problems at once. Give an adult transgender the responsibility of watching out for the children at a playground restroom, and you would have a tiger on your side eager to protect the reputation of his ilk, and nothing to worry about.

If the transgender is an incubus or a succubus, they should not be considered for these positions. I once knew a succubus hired as a restroom attendant who had the entire male faculty of the university lined up outside her door at lunchtime for the blumpkin specials. Education took a real dump while she was there.

More to the point, we have wheelchair ramps for the handicapped, we can find a way for transgenders to relieve themselves comfortably. I tout the portable bathroom kit, but there may be even better solutions. I would like to hear them , now that I am deeply engaged with the problem.

[YesNo]

I don´t understand anything about markets, but to my mind it´s the quantity of investements people have that would make a difference in market behaviour, not gender.

These are all meters of something larger called "social mood". So one could look at the behavior of the "pansies" in 1925-1935 to understand something about the markets and vice-verse. Social mood drives them both. So you don't have to understand anything about markets. Or anything about LGBT behavior. Market charts however provide a detailed measurement of social mood, something one won't get from looking at how gender behavior illustrates social mood.

[YesNo]

Huh? Since when? Individual right to property (as one example) is a conservative position; the notion that goods, the means of production, etc. may be communal is a liberal one.

A community of selfish individuals is a liberal dystopia. Individuals need the means (property rights) to be altruistic toward the various groups they belong to: family, local community, religious organizations and even language groups. That is where property rights come in. Communities of altruistic individuals is a more balanced approach to Haidt's moral foundations and it is a non-liberal view of humanity which includes political conservatives.

Haidt actually measured liberal and conservative views on those moral foundations. I may not be representing him correctly, but his perspective fits my common sense of their differences.

[Dreamwoven]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT. I know it is meant to avoid any gaps, but I've never understood it as more than this. In Sweden HTBQ is the usual way to describe this.