I would suggest, then, that you don't understand and that's not what it's like.
How is it different? If all your life you have felt like a box and believed you were a box in a woman's body then its exactly the same.
Upvote
0
I would suggest, then, that you don't understand and that's not what it's like.
How is it different? If all your life you have felt like a box and believed you were a box in a woman's body then its exactly the same.
Then I bid you good day. I have no interest in discussing your video because this is not the same situation.
For one, boxes aren't human. Boxes are incapable of speaking, don't need sustenance. This comparison is even further off than the trans species examples usually provided because boxes aren't even alive.
I'll just let you argue with yourself here. Let us know who wins.
It is easy to hand-wave stuff away. Things get more interesting when one can make a consistent set of arguments for or against something. That's obviously not happening here - this is just head in the sand "is not"! knee-jerkery.
How is it honestly different?
Its exactly the same if the sincerity is there. If someone called you something you are not you would probably be offended. Yet, people choose to call themselves something they are not and to try to be something they are not. Is acceptance so difficult?
Its exactly the same if the sincerity is there. If someone called you something you are not you would probably be offended. Yet, people choose to call themselves something they are not and to try to be something they are not. Is acceptance so difficult?
Different species is more than a little different than different gender. Also, and I am just assuming here, but there is probably absolutely no reason other than being difficult that the person is claiming the rat is a dog.
Well, in the movie the character is delusional and really believes some things when the reality is different. So, we can't question the fact that he is convinced in his own mind the rat is a puppy. But, if you look at the rat, it appears like a rat. If you test it's DNA, it comes out as a rat. It sounds like a rat. In fact, the only thing that supposedly makes it a puppy is his honest opinion. Problem is, outside of his subjective opinion, there is nothing objectively true about his claim.
Let's just say at this point that I understand why you think it's a valid comparison. However, we depart at the idea that there is no objective truth to the trans situation
I'll just let you argue with yourself here. Let us know who wins.
It is easy to hand-wave stuff away. Things get more interesting when one can make a consistent set of arguments for or against something. That's obviously not happening here - this is just head in the sand "is not"! knee-jerkery.
Okay, that's fine. What is measurably true about transgenderism then? WHat criteria can be empirically tested and verified?
Not to nitpick, but we are discussing transsexuals mainly because that is the transgender subgroup that actually proceeds to alter our bodies.
But your point is well made
There isn't any. We've been wasting away at this subject for over a long time now, and they've presented is speculation, absolutely no conclusive evidence, and emotional arguments.
They've also, multiple times, simply just tried to go around and be dishonest about that fact and deny even the simplest of observations.
It is obvious that they live in a corruption, a lie, and do not plan to ever admit it. I say just leave them to it.
Is a "Transsexual" someone who is Transgender and transitions, whilst a Transgender individual may or may not have transitioned? Just trying to get the terminology clear, as I thought that they meant the same thing, but Transsexual was an outdated term. Just trying to make sure that I don't use the wrong terms and spread confusion, thanks!
Is a "Transsexual" someone who is Transgender and transitions, whilst a Transgender individual may or may not have transitioned? Just trying to get the terminology clear, as I thought that they meant the same thing, but Transsexual was an outdated term. Just trying to make sure that I don't use the wrong terms and spread confusion, thanks!
That's a tough one because not everyone agrees. From my understand and in my usage, a transexual is a person who is living life full time as their identified gender. They may or may not have even had surgery. Transgender is an umbrella term that includes anyone that is gender variant. Transexuals are transgender but not all transgender are transexuals. Kind of like all German shepards are dogs but not all dogs are German shepards.
Transgender is the umbrella term for those who do not fit within the gender binary, including cross dressers, drag queens, intersex are sometimes included. Transsexuals are transgender under the above definition, but more specifically we are transsexuals because we are actively changing our physical state to be congruent with our mental gender.
Okay, that's fine. What is measurably true about transgenderism then? WHat criteria can be empirically tested and verified?