Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 237
  1. #181
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,236
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    But one only needs to mention that they are "trans" if them being trans is relevant to the conversation. For example,...
    Agreed.
    For example:

    this thread.

  2. #182
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    It is not the default position that every single thing that a teacher says during the class is on the test. Some information presented is on the test and the rest isn't on the test. I think that particular piece of information would be so basic that it isn't worth putting on the test. Maybe I'm right about that and maybe I'm wrong.

    But it's your argument that it will be put on the test so the burden is yours to support that.
    It is the default position that anything a teacher teaches may be tested. It would be your burden to explain how this is incorrect. Obviously, the exact questions on a test are not predictable, but a student is expected to be ready to answer any test question based on what is being taught. You are trying to make a rebuttal based on mere semantics. A math teacher may not put a specific equation on a test, but this does not mean the students should ignore the equation on the basis of not absolutely knowing the equation will be tested.

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    But then the burden on that issue is also yours. You are the one arguing that they way they are presenting the information is improper.
    I am arguing that it is not necessary or germane to the lesson being taught. Menstruation has nothing to do with the issue of transgenderism. If all tg people know their biological sex (which you have conceded that they do) and menstruation is based solely on one's biological sex, then what does it matter what social construct they choose to define themselves as?

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    But how about this:

    Lesson 1. Menstruation - Just the biological facts about the female reproductive system with no mention of transgenderism
    Lesson 2. Transgenderism - Teaches all of the pertinent information about transgenderism and mentions that transgendered boys are biologically girls and therefore menstruate.

    So it's quite easy to both teach the strict biological facts without introducing transgenderism and still teach about transgenderism at a later time.
    If menstruation is taught as a product of being a biological girl, then how does lesson #2 add to anyone's understanding? Again, it is superfluous. You may as well be saying in lesson #1 menstruation is taught as being linked to biology and lesson #2 is a reminder that menstruation is linked to biology. The point?

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    No, it's a FACT.

    It's a FACT that transgendered males are biologically female. It's also a FACT that transgendered males can have periods. I don't find the issue confusing at all nor do I think it will confuse school children.
    A fact? It is a social construct. The concept of what being transgender is, is not a fact. It is opinion. An opinion of which well-meaning people may disagree. As such, there is no legal definition of what it means. So, again, I ask, how does this belong in a lesson on biology?

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    The only ideological issue is whether we SHOULD consider transgendered males to be "boys" instead of "girls" and EITHER position, "yes" or "no" or "don't discuss it", is an ideological position. And going by the ideology of "the default position is to treat people with respect", we should consider them "boys". But then arguing that they should be considered "girls" or the issue just should not be brought up is also ideological. So there is no getting around ideology here and therefore criticizing what they are doing as "ideological" is responded with "so what?".

    So okay, ideology is inevitably involved in the issue and therefore the position they took as an ideological basis (the ideology of respect). But so what?
    If I simply am offering that the issue isn't discussed, exactly what ideological position have I taken?


    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Your ideological viewpoint on the issue is noted.
    Again, what ideological position am I taking here?

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    But I can't think of any better place to teach about transgenderism than in a sex ed class. Where are you suggesting students learn about it instead? Or are you saying that it should not be taught at all?

    If so, that is very much an ideological viewpoint and one that I disagree with.
    You are moving the goal posts. We are specifically discussing the topic of menstruation, not sex ed in general. I have yet to hear any sort of explanation on how introducing the topic of transgenderism (a social construct) improves the understanding of menstruation (a biological function).
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  3. #183
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,236
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Well, defect means broken. Not working correctly. Trans people are not exactly broken. They function. They have some challenges. This is not like a disease you need to cure.
    If, as you say, a Trans person has a physical abnormality that contributes to a state of affairs that is not desired and causes issues/challenges, why is offering some form of medical "cure" an issue if a Trans person so chose?
    If being Trans is at least partly due to something "abnormal or not working correctly" it seems to make sense...
    Last edited by Belthazor; October 10th, 2019 at 01:31 PM.

  4. #184
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,707
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    It is the default position that anything a teacher teaches may be tested.
    Moving the goalpost. Your original argument is that they WOULD be tested on it, not may be tested on it.

    I will consider the argument that they will be tested and graded on whether they confirm that boys can have periods to be withdrawn until I see support for this particular argument.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    I am arguing that it is not necessary or germane to the lesson being taught. Menstruation has nothing to do with the issue of transgenderism. If all tg people know their biological sex (which you have conceded that they do) and menstruation is based solely on one's biological sex, then what does it matter what social construct they choose to define themselves as?
    But there is absolutely no evidence that the issue is being introduced in the lesson on menstruation.

    In fact, the article in the OP seems to indicate otherwise. To quote:

    "School children will be taught that "all genders" can have periods in new sex education lessons"

    So it looks like they are not "adding" transgenderism to the lesson on menstruation but creating a NEW lesson about transgenderism where they will address menstruation.

    So transgenderism does not need to be taught during the lesson on menstruation but apparently that isn't happening. But transgenderism is being taught in its own lesson. What's wrong with that?

    And also, I do not accept your statement that transgenderism is a social construct and therefore that position will need to be supported before it can be forwarded as 'true" for this debate.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    If menstruation is taught as a product of being a biological girl, then how does lesson #2 add to anyone's understanding? Again, it is superfluous.
    It doesn't add further understanding of the biology of menstruation but it certainly adds understanding to the understanding of transgenderism. And as I think school children should learn about transgenderism, it's not superfluous to sex education in general (which is what the article was referring to).


    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    A fact? It is a social construct. The concept of what being transgender is, is not a fact. It is opinion. An opinion of which well-meaning people may disagree. As such, there is no legal definition of what it means. So, again, I ask, how does this belong in a lesson on biology?
    It is a FACT that transgendered people exist. This FACT is accepted by the medical and psychiatric community. Are you actually challenging this? If so, please directly state that you take the position that transgendered people don't actually exist so I know that that is a topic of debate.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    If I simply am offering that the issue isn't discussed, exactly what ideological position have I taken?
    You have taken the ideological position the issue should not be discussed.

    If the position that it SHOULD be taught is ideological then surely the position that it SHOULD NOT be taught is ideological as well.
    Last edited by mican333; October 11th, 2019 at 08:38 AM.

  5. #185
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,474
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    If, as you say, a Trans person has a physical abnormality that contributes to a state of affairs that is not desired and causes issues/challenges, why is offering some form of medical "cure" an issue if a Trans person so chose?
    If being Trans is at least partly due to something "abnormal or not working correctly" it seems to make sense...
    Because not everyone reacts to it the same way. For some people, the dichotomy is maddening and we call that gender dysphoria. They often want to undergo some process to try and fix the situation, usually by changing their body or their recognition in society. For others, its an issue, but not one they want to take any dramatic action for. Others may actually revel in the dichotomy and enjoy both their male and female aspects. it's just not enough of a unified experience to really say its a defect the way say, scoliosis is.

    ---------- Post added at 12:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:10 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I have generally used several adjectives at a time to avoid a semantic discussion.
    Seems a good approach.

    I get your point, but it is what most of the issue has been about.
    Then its rather misplaced I think. What the school policy actually is, matters way more than the provocative headline someone slapped on the article.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  6. #186
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Moving the goalpost. Your original argument is that they WOULD be tested on it, not may be tested on it.

    I will consider the argument that they will be tested and graded on whether they confirm that boys can have periods to be withdrawn until I see support for this particular argument.
    If you really want to play semantics, have fun. I'd have figured you understood the point which is that students would be motivated to learn and support whatever the teacher was teaching in the belief that it would be graded. This means if the teacher says, there are 58 genders, then students will be expected to offer that answer if they are tested on it. As such, it would be fair to state that if the teacher tells the students there are 58 genders, then students will be encouraged to believe that there are 58 genders. Whether this is factually true or the teacher's opinion is irrelevant. The students will be expected to learn and repeat the information.


    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    But there is absolutely no evidence that the issue is being introduced in the lesson on menstruation.

    In fact, the article in the OP seems to indicate otherwise. To quote:

    "School children will be taught that "all genders" can have periods in new sex education lessons"

    So it looks like they are not "adding" transgenderism to the lesson on menstruation but creating a NEW lesson about transgenderism where they will address menstruation.
    You are extrapolating something which is not stated in the quote. It does not say they are creating a NEW lesson about tg. Support or retract this. All we know, and all I've been arguing, is that a lesson on menstruation needn't discuss tg.

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    So transgenderism does not need to be taught during the lesson on menstruation but apparently that isn't happening. But transgenderism is being taught in its own lesson. What's wrong with that?

    And also, I do not accept your statement that transgenderism is a social construct and therefore that position will need to be supported before it can be forwarded as 'true" for this debate.
    If tg isn't a social construct, then please share with the class its actual biological/scientific definition.

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    It doesn't add further understanding of the biology of menstruation but it certainly adds understanding to the understanding of transgenderism. And as I think school children should learn about transgenderism, it's not superfluous to sex education in general (which is what the article was referring to).
    Maybe students should learn about tg. I am not making an argument one way or the other. All I am arguing is that discussing tg in a lesson on menstruation is superfluous and ideological.

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    It is a FACT that transgendered people exist. This FACT is accepted by the medical and psychiatric community. Are you actually challenging this? If so, please directly state that you take the position that transgendered people don't actually exist so I know that that is a topic of debate.
    Ok. What is the definition? According to the NCTE
    "However, being transgender means different things to different people, according to the National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE). "
    https://www.livescience.com/54949-tr...efinition.html

    I am not claiming tg people do not exist. I am claiming that the definition is subjective. It is not based in a biological truth. It is not defined by science. It isn't even defined by law. It is a social construct and its meaning differs from person to person.

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    You have taken the ideological position the issue should not be discussed.

    If the position that it SHOULD be taught is ideological then surely the position that it SHOULD NOT be taught is ideological as well.
    If I say we should not discuss Jesus in the lesson on menstruation, does this make me an atheist? I am not taking an ideological position. Unless you can describe the ideological position you are accusing me of taking, then I'll consider this argument invalid.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  7. #187
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,707
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    If you really want to play semantics, have fun. I'd have figured you understood the point which is that students would be motivated to learn and support whatever the teacher was teaching in the belief that it would be graded. This means if the teacher says, there are 58 genders, then students will be expected to offer that answer if they are tested on it. As such, it would be fair to state that if the teacher tells the students there are 58 genders, then students will be encouraged to believe that there are 58 genders. Whether this is factually true or the teacher's opinion is irrelevant. The students will be expected to learn and repeat the information.
    Well, let's keep it to the actual topic which is "boys can have periods". And the difference between "WILL be tested on it" and "MAY be tested on it" is not a mere semantic difference.

    I see absolutely no support that students will be graded on whether they will be presented with a test question that says something like "True or False. Boys can have periods" and answer "true" or not.

    I think it is a significant point if they are being tested and graded on whether they agree to that statement when it is presented on a test and if that's what is happening, you have a point. But you have not supported that that is happening. You are just presenting that notion that it may be happening. When you support that it is, then you have point. Until then, you don't.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    You are extrapolating something which is not stated in the quote. It does not say they are creating a NEW lesson about tg. Support or retract this.
    Yes, it pretty much does.

    "School children will be taught that "all genders" can have periods in new sex education lessons"

    Okay, so there are new sex education lessons that teach that boys can have periods. It's not exactly a wild leap to think that a lesson that holds that boys can have periods is a lesson about transgenderism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    All we know, and all I've been arguing, is that a lesson on menstruation needn't discuss tg.
    Sure. And as far as I know, that isn't happening. There's is zero support that their lesson on menstruation is discussing tg at all. The article doesn't say "menstruation lessons". It says "new sex education lessons".

    So I don't so much challenge your statement about menstruation lessons as hold that it's irrelevant. It's pretty much a straw-man. When someone says it is or should be taught during the lesson on menstruation, then we can discuss that. Otherwise, it is like objecting to it being taught in math class. Yes, it should not be taught during math class but since it no one has shown that it is being taught then, it's not really something to debate.




    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    If tg isn't a social construct, then please share with the class its actual biological/scientific definition.
    Shifting the burden. If you are going to argue that it's a social construct, then the burden is on you to show that it is, not me to show that it isn't.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Maybe students should learn about tg. I am not making an argument one way or the other. All I am arguing is that discussing tg in a lesson on menstruation is superfluous and ideological.
    Okay. But since I'm not arguing that it should be taught then and you haven't shown that it is, this argument is not particularly relevant to the actual situation.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Ok. What is the definition? According to the NCTE
    [FONT="]"However, being transgender means different things to different people, according to the [/FONT]National Center for Transgender Equality[FONT="] (NCTE). "[/FONT]
    https://www.livescience.com/54949-tr...efinition.html

    I am not claiming tg people do not exist. I am claiming that the definition is subjective. It is not based in a biological truth. It is not defined by science. It isn't even defined by law. It is a social construct and its meaning differs from person to person.
    The definition I found is "denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex" which corresponds to the definition I've always held. And you have not supported that there is no biological component in whether one is transgendered or not. In fact, there seems to be evidence that there is. In support:

    "The causes of transsexuality have been studied for decades. The most studied factors are biological. Certain brain structures in trans women have been found to be similar to cisgender women's as opposed to cis men's, and trans men's have been found to be similar to cis men's, even controlling for hormone use, which can also cause trans people's brains to become closer to those of cis people of the same gender. However, these studies are limited as they include a small number of tested individuals.[2] Brain structure differences have also been part of extensive research on biology and sexual orientation. Studies have also found that both androphilic and gynephilic trans women's brain function and responses are like cis women's and unlike cis men's, or are intermediate between the two. Likewise, studies such as Rametti's have found that trans men have male-like white matter patterns (even before using hormones), regardless of sexual orientation."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_transsexuality

    I don't really care to get into a full debate on how much biology plays but your statement that it's opinion or a social construct seems to be somewhat contradicted by scientific evidence and you've certainly provided no support that there is no biological component.




    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    If I say we should not discuss Jesus in the lesson on menstruation, does this make me an atheist? I am not taking an ideological position. Unless you can describe the ideological position you are accusing me of taking, then I'll consider this argument invalid.
    I am accusing you of taking the position that "boys can have periods" should not be taught in school at all, which is an ideological position. If your position is instead it's alright to teach "boys can have periods" in sex ed as long as it is pertinent to the specific lesson (such as a class about transgenderism instead of a class about menstruation) then I withdraw my accusation. But then it seems that we agree that it's alright to teach "boys can have periods" in sex ed class in general and therefore don't really have a disagreement.

    And if you do disagree with my position about teaching that in general, then your position is no less ideological than mine.

  8. #188
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,236
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    I don't really care to get into a full debate on how much biology plays but your statement that it's opinion or a social construct seems to be somewhat contradicted by scientific evidence and you've certainly provided no support that there is no biological component.
    Interesting comment.
    Since, as you say, "biology only plays a part" in being Trans, that naturally means that it is not the "only" reason. So there does appear to be an element of choice involved also.


    Also, you haven't responded to post #181. I wanted to make sure you had seen it before I just assume you conceded the point.


    ---------- Post added at 04:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:48 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Ok. What is the definition? According to the NCTE
    [FONT="]"However, being transgender means different things to different people, according to the [/FONT]National Center for Transgender Equality[FONT="] (NCTE). "[/FONT]
    https://www.livescience.com/54949-tr...efinition.html

    I am not claiming tg people do not exist. I am claiming that the definition is subjective. It is not based in a biological truth. It is not defined by science. It isn't even defined by law. It is a social construct and its meaning differs from person to person.
    Agreed.
    Per your link https://www.livescience.com/54949-tr...efinition.html :

    "Gender, on the other hand, is a societal construct that deals with the expected behaviors, roles and activities typically associated with the different sexes, the APA said. Gender roles, which vary across cultures, influence how people act and feel about themselves."

    I would say you are spot on!

    ---------- Post added at 04:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:52 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Because not everyone reacts to it the same way.
    I don't think this answered my question. I specifically said "if a Trans person so chose?".

    That a given "cure" may work on one person and not another is immaterial in this case since the definition of Trans is so dramatically broad, it would suggest a broad range of "cures"...

    ---------- Post added at 04:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:57 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Then its rather misplaced I think. What the school policy actually is, matters way more than the provocative headline someone slapped on the article.
    1. It is what this thread is about.
    2. Mican, among others, is fully supportive of that "misplaced idea" and actively support it, so I don't think I'm off that mark here at all.
    3. Incrementalism.
    Last edited by Belthazor; October 11th, 2019 at 06:19 PM.

  9. #189
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,474
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I don't think this answered my question. I specifically said "if a Trans person so chose?".

    That a given "cure" may work on one person and not another is immaterial in this case since the definition of Trans is so dramatically broad, it would suggest a broad range of "cures"...
    Let me see if I can simplify for you.

    It's too presumptive to call it a defect unless you are specific to a person's situation and it is a problem for them. In that instance, you could say it is a defect. But for another person, it wouldn't be the best word to use.

    1. It is what this thread is about.
    2. Mican, among others, is fully supportive of that "misplaced idea" and actively support it, so I don't think I'm off that mark here at all.
    3. Incrementalism.
    3. Incrementalism. = Slippery slope fallacy. (that is unless you can explain this in some greater detail)

    The thread is about the posted article, presumably, and related topics. I have my own position I argue for. I like it when people are accurate.

    You offered what you thought was a reasonable position.
    I pointed out that the article we are discussing takes that same position.
    You said: What about the headline?
    I responded that headlines are ******** and the actual school policy is what matters. You actually agree with the school policy.

    We could all argue that the slaughter of unicorns for their meet is a bad thing, and you might be right, but since there are no unicorns, its a pretty moot topic. You can argue against imaginary strawmen if you like, or you could accept that the schools actual policy is actually in line with what you suggested would be reasonable and maybe they aren't really that crazy or misguided.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  10. #190
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,707
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Interesting comment.
    Since, as you say, "biology only plays a part" in being Trans, that naturally means that it is not the "only" reason. So there does appear to be an element of choice involved also.

    I did not way "biology only plays a part". I said "I don't really care to get into a full debate on how much biology plays" which makes no statement on how much biology plays.

    And the primary reason I wasn't seeking that debate is because as far as I know, the evidence is not conclusive either way. But it looks like biology certainly does play a role (and I have supported that) even if there is a choice element (and for the record, I personally doubt that there is), it is not "only a choice".

    But here's what I think on the issue.

    In simple terms, transgenderism is the body and brain being of different sexes (female body, male brain) so it would be kind of expected that one would find that the brain of a transgender person is similar to the brain of a cisgender person of the opposite sex and again, there is evidence that that is the case.

    And "not biological" does not default to "choice". There is also environmental factors which one does not choose either so even if it's not 100% biological, if the "leftover" is environment, then choice still plays no role. IMO, about the only "choice" transgender people have is to how to behave due to their transgenderism, similar to how gays have a choice to be openly gay or in the closet.

    So no, I don't think that there is much choice in whether one is transgendered or not. I think it's pretty much like sexual orientation in that respect. Just like I can't choose to be attracted to men, I can't choose to identify as a woman and just like a gay man can't choose to like women, a trans male can't choose to identify as a female.

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Also, you haven't responded to post #181. I wanted to make sure you had seen it before I just assume you conceded the point.
    Thanks. I did miss it.

    But I'm not sure what I'm conceding. I mean, yes, mentioning a transgendered person is transgendered when discussing their transgenderism is indeed a time when it's appropriate to refer to them as transgendered. But my point is when one's transgenderism is not relevant to the conversation the person should just be referred aa a "boy" and not a "trans boy". So for MOST conversations, they should just be referred to as "boys", just like how you call cisgendered boys "boy" and only mention that they are cisgendered when it's relevant to the conversation.

    As an example, my brother is cisgendered and since that his cisgender status is relevant to THIS conversation, I am justified in calling him a cisgendered boy right now. But I certainly don't refer to him as a "cisgendered boy" when him being cisgendered is not relevant to the conversation (which is practically all of the time). Likewise outside of conversations like this, I refer to my transgender male friend as a "boy" just like do with my brother,

    Assuming you agree with my criteria of when to call transgendered boy simply "boy", this particular issue is settled. If you don't, then state your disagreement. I'm not absolutely certain we are on the same page on what the argument and if we aren't, hopefully this clears it up.

  11. Likes Sigfried liked this post
  12. #191
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,236
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Let me see if I can simplify for you.

    It's too presumptive to call it a defect unless you are specific to a person's situation and it is a problem for them. In that instance, you could say it is a defect. But for another person, it wouldn't be the best word to use.
    Hmm, ok...

    So a Trans person (per you):
    1. has a physical abnormality that can predispose a person to a state of affairs where the brain and body don't seem to match (with regards to the m/f sexes).
    2. this can lead to diagnosable mental illness
    3. it appears there are factors besides genetics involved


    You make being Trans sound a lot like being an alcoholic?


    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    3. Incrementalism. = Slippery slope fallacy. (that is unless you can explain this in some greater detail)
    Again, see #1 & #2 above. You will note the vigor Mican has put into (your words) "that misplaced idea". He is hardly alone.

    --------

    I'm curious. What did you think of IBELSD "the most serious debater left" link from post #186:

    " https://www.livescience.com/54949-tr...efinition.html :

    "Gender, on the other hand, is a societal construct that deals with the expected behaviors, roles and activities typically associated with the different sexes, the APA said. Gender roles, which vary across cultures, influence how people act and feel about themselves."


    Seems a much more realistic view of the topic than what you and Mican are forwarding...

    ---------- Post added at 04:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:33 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    But I'm not sure what I'm conceding.
    That, with regards to the Op, it is not appropriate/good communication/etc to say "boys can have periods" in school lessons.....

    To say:
    "gender is a social construct, and all genders can have periods"
    would make more sense (if some one thought it was necessary in the first place).

    ---------- Post added at 05:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:58 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    In simple terms, transgenderism is the body and brain being of different sexes (female body, male brain) so it would be kind of expected that one would find that the brain of a transgender person is similar to the brain of a cisgender person of the opposite sex and again, there is evidence that that is the case.

    And "not biological" does not default to "choice". There is also environmental factors which one does not choose either so even if it's not 100% biological, if the "leftover" is environment, then choice still plays no role. IMO, about the only "choice" transgender people have is to how to behave due to their transgenderism, similar to how gays have a choice to be openly gay or in the closet.
    1. "Some" similarities have been found between "the brain of a transgender person is similar to the brain of a cisgender person of the opposite sex", but these are very limited similarities.
    2. My brother dated women exclusively till he was about 35. Now exclusively men. Sounds like he chose change to me.....
    Last edited by Belthazor; October 14th, 2019 at 05:36 PM.

  13. #192
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,707
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    That, with regards to the Op, it is not appropriate/good communication/etc to say "boys can have periods".....

    To say:
    "gender is a social construct, and all genders can have periods"
    would make more sense (if some one thought it was necessary in the first place).
    I disagree. The OP is about a school having menstrual bins in the boys room. So if one asks the question "Why are there menstrual bins in the boys room?", the answer "Because some boys have periods" seems like a pretty spot-on response.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    1. "Some" similarities have been found between "the brain of a transgender person is similar to the brain of a cisgender person of the opposite sex", but these are very limited similarities.
    I see nothing in the support that I provided that said the similarities were very limited nor have you supported that they are. As far as I know, how significant the similarities are has not been determined but it definitely points to there being a biological factor. And I've seen no evidence that it's based on choice. As far as I can tell, you are just saying that choice is a factor but not backing it up with anything concrete.

    I think common sense points to it not being a choice. I can't choose to identify as a female so I have no choice in having a male gender so that would indicate that gender is not a choice. That's certainly not hard evidence but again, I see nothing that gives me reason to think it is a choice.


    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    2. My brother dated women exclusively till he was about 35. Now exclusively men. Sounds like he chose change to me.....
    He chose to change who he dated, yes.

    I could choose to date men. But I can't choose to be attracted to men. That's because sexual orientation is not a choice.

    I think the reason that people change from dating the opposite sex to the same sex is likely:
    1. They are attracted to both genders.

    and/or

    2. They are attracted to the same sex but felt considerable pressure to stay in the closet and therefore chose to date the opposite sex until they decided to be more true to themselves.

  14. #193
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Well, let's keep it to the actual topic which is "boys can have periods". And the difference between "WILL be tested on it" and "MAY be tested on it" is not a mere semantic difference.

    When you are studying and expected to learn the course materially whether the information is ON the test or merely may be on the test is irrelevant. Again, you are playing semantics.


    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    I see absolutely no support that students will be graded on whether they will be presented with a test question that says something like "True or False. Boys can have periods" and answer "true" or not.

    If that is the material being taught, is there any reason to believe it won't be tested?

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    I think it is a significant point if they are being tested and graded on whether they agree to that statement when it is presented on a test and if that's what is happening, you have a point. But you have not supported that that is happening. You are just presenting that notion that it may be happening. When you support that it is, then you have point. Until then, you don't.

    So, you understand the underlying principle but you are going to haggle over whether the information is on the test, always on the test, sometimes on the test... How does any of that alter how the student must study and prepare to take the test?



    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Yes, it pretty much does.

    "School children will be taught that "all genders" can have periods in new sex education lessons"

    Okay, so there are new sex education lessons that teach that boys can have periods. It's not exactly a wild leap to think that a lesson that holds that boys can have periods is a lesson about transgenderism.

    Wild leap? Perhaps not wild. It is a leap since it was never actually stated. Unless you can demonstrate that the lesson was actually on transgenderism and not a lesson added to the topic of menstruation, you are merely making an assumption.


    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Sure. And as far as I know, that isn't happening. There's is zero support that their lesson on menstruation is discussing tg at all. The article doesn't say "menstruation lessons". It says "new sex education lessons".

    I guess it comes down to how you are interpreting the term, lesson. A lesson just means they are adding something to be learned. If you are inferring anything more than that, it is up to you to demonstrate it.


    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    So I don't so much challenge your statement about menstruation lessons as hold that it's irrelevant. It's pretty much a straw-man. When someone says it is or should be taught during the lesson on menstruation, then we can discuss that. Otherwise, it is like objecting to it being taught in math class. Yes, it should not be taught during math class but since it no one has shown that it is being taught then, it's not really something to debate.

    If you don't believe the lesson should be included in a section on menstruation, then we agree on that point. So, if we agree on that, I am perfectly willing to discuss whether menstruation needs to be covered in a section on transgenderism.


    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Shifting the burden. If you are going to argue that it's a social construct, then the burden is on you to show that it is, not me to show that it isn't.
    I actually provided support through my quote from the NCTE. I'll repeat it.
    "However, being transgender means different things to different people, according to the
    National Center for Transgender Equality
    (NCTE). "

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    Okay. But since I'm not arguing that it should be taught then and you haven't shown that it is, this argument is not particularly relevant to the actual situation.

    It is relevant to the actual argument I have made. Whether it applies to the straw man you are trying to construct is another matter.


    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    The definition I found is "denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex" which corresponds to the definition I've always held. And you have not supported that there is no biological component in whether one is transgendered or not. In fact, there seems to be evidence that there is. In support:

    "The causes of transsexuality have been studied for decades. The most studied factors are biological. Certain brain structures in trans women have been found to be similar to cisgender women's as opposed to cis men's, and trans men's have been found to be similar to cis men's, even controlling for hormone use, which can also cause trans people's brains to become closer to those of cis people of the same gender. However, these studies are limited as they include a small number of tested individuals.[2] Brain structure differences have also been part of extensive research on biology and sexual orientation. Studies have also found that both androphilic and gynephilic trans women's brain function and responses are like cis women's and unlike cis men's, or are intermediate between the two. Likewise, studies such as Rametti's have found that trans men have male-like white matter patterns (even before using hormones), regardless of sexual orientation."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_transsexuality

    I don't really care to get into a full debate on how much biology plays but your statement that it's opinion or a social construct seems to be somewhat contradicted by scientific evidence and you've certainly provided no support that there is no biological component.

    Per your own quote, the studies are limited. I don't think there is any harm in admitting there is more we do not know about transgenderism than what we do know. Right now, there is simply no agreed upon definition. It means different things to different people. As such, the best we can say is that, right now, the term amounts to little more than a social construct.

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    I am accusing you of taking the position that "boys can have periods" should not be taught in school at all, which is an ideological position. If your position is instead it's alright to teach "boys can have periods" in sex ed as long as it is pertinent to the specific lesson (such as a class about transgenderism instead of a class about menstruation) then I withdraw my accusation. But then it seems that we agree that it's alright to teach "boys can have periods" in sex ed class in general and therefore don't really have a disagreement.

    And if you do disagree with my position about teaching that in general, then your position is no less ideological than mine.
    Except that isn't the position I have taken. It is a straw man you constructed. I have not actually offered my belief as to whether such a concept should be taught. All I am saying is that it should not be taught within the topic of menstruation. I am not making a claim, one way or the other whether it should be taught as parts of other topics. I mean, what is the purpose of a sex ed class? Is it to teach biology, health (mental/physical), ideas, pedagogies? So, even claiming transgenderism should be a part of a sex ed class isn't immediately obvious to me. I am not saying it absolutely should not be included, I am saying it should be aligned with the purpose of the course and, as with all things, the devil is in the details.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  15. #194
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,707
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    When you are studying and expected to learn the course materially whether the information is ON the test or merely may be on the test is irrelevant. Again, you are playing semantics.
    No, I'm not. Semantics is arguing over the definition of a word and I am not doing that.

    And the difference between IS on the test or MIGHT BE on the test is significant. IF it IS on the test, then a child's success in a class is dependent on whether they affirm that "boys can have periods" when asked on a test. IF it's NOT on the test, then this issue does not arise. So there is a significant difference in whether it is or is not on the test.

    So anyway, we've settled that it's not supported that the students will be tested on any particular thing about transgenderism.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    If that is the material being taught, is there any reason to believe it won't be tested?
    Of course there is. A class is not tested on every single thing that a teacher says in class. If every utterance were on a test, then a test would likely be twenty times longer than it typically is. A teacher picks and chooses which thing mentioned ends up on the test and most things don't end up on the test so all else being equal, odds are it won't be on the test just based on the law of averages.

    And also if X is on the test, how the question is worded is significant.

    I very much doubt that even if the issue is directly addressed on the test, the question would not be "True or False. Boys can have periods". I think the question might be something like:

    Transgender males are:
    1. Biologically male
    2. Biologically female


    And of course if they get the right answer (2. biologically female) there is no need to ask about transgender males and menstruation since the students can be expected to already know that biological females menstruate.

    But anyway, that's what I think. And let's not forget that the burden here is yours. If you are going to argue that what I think would happen is wrong and that the issue will be taught some other way than how I assume it will, you will need to support that. Otherwise, I am justified in doubting that "can boys have periods" is likely to a test question.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    So, you understand the underlying principle but you are going to haggle over whether the information is on the test, always on the test, sometimes on the test... How does any of that alter how the student must study and prepare to take the test?
    I thought the underlying principle is that the students would essentially be forced to say "yes" to the question "can boys have periods" as in it WILL be on the test and they WILL have to say "yes" or their test score will suffer.

    If that the is not the underlying principle or point of your argument then I don't know what the point is.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Wild leap? Perhaps not wild. It is a leap since it was never actually stated. Unless you can demonstrate that the lesson was actually on transgenderism and not a lesson added to the topic of menstruation, you are merely making an assumption.
    That conclusion is certainly the most logical given what is stated.

    "School children will be taught that "all genders" can have periods in new sex education lessons"

    It's a NEW lesson, as in a lesson that was not included previously. Since it's pretty obvious that menstruation is not a new topic in sex ed class, it is not a leap to assume that the lesson is not about menstruation. And since the topic is clearly related to transgenderism, transgenderism is certainly a part of the new lesson if not the primary focus.

    And again, the burden is yours. I could just go "support or retract" without justifying my reasoning for disagreeing with you but I think it's better debating to state the reasoning for one taking the opposing position, which is what I'm doing. So I don't have the burden to prove that my interpretation is correct. So if you want to argue that, for a fact, my interpretation is wrong, please provide support. And just "seeing it differently" does not count as support.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    I guess it comes down to how you are interpreting the term, lesson. A lesson just means they are adding something to be learned. If you are inferring anything more than that, it is up to you to demonstrate it.
    And that is how I interpret it. If you want to argue that my interpretation is incorrect and therefore a different interpretation is the correct one, you will need to support it. Otherwise, I have justified my reasoning for not accepting your argument (which I'm not required to do anyway until you support your position). But again, I think it's better debating if I do take the time to state why I disagree with you. But that does not shift the burden to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    If you don't believe the lesson should be included in a section on menstruation, then we agree on that point. So, if we agree on that, I am perfectly willing to discuss whether menstruation needs to be covered in a section on transgenderism.
    As I hold that whether it should or should not be included in the section on menstruation is irrelevant to this debate (since it's not been supported that it was included), I don't take a position on it either way.

    So feel free to move to other issue.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    I actually provided support through my quote from the NCTE. I'll repeat it.
    "However, being transgender means different things to different people, according to the
    National Center for Transgender Equality
    I don't see the part that says "and therefore transgenderism is a social construct".


    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Per your own quote, the studies are limited. I don't think there is any harm in admitting there is more we do not know about transgenderism than what we do know. Right now, there is simply no agreed upon definition. It means different things to different people. As such, the best we can say is that, right now, the term amounts to little more than a social construct.
    Anyone can disagree with any definition that exists so there being some disagreement does not mean much and it certainly does not automatically lead to the conclusion that it is a social construct. I mean I'm pretty sure whatever the definition of social construct is, it is not "thing that have definitions that various people don't agree on".

    I mean, here's a definition that corresponds to how I understood the term to be defined:

    : of, relating to, or being a person whose gender identity differs from the sex the person had or was identified as having at birth

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transgender

    And I assume you define it that way as well. So apparently there's some other people who don't agree with that definition? And therefore because these people disagree, transgenderism is a social construct or something? That really doesn't make sense to me so I can't agree with you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Except that isn't the position I have taken. It is a straw man you constructed. I have not actually offered my belief as to whether such a concept should be taught. All I am saying is that it should not be taught within the topic of menstruation. I am not making a claim, one way or the other whether it should be taught as parts of other topics. I mean, what is the purpose of a sex ed class? Is it to teach biology, health (mental/physical), ideas, pedagogies? So, even claiming transgenderism should be a part of a sex ed class isn't immediately obvious to me. I am not saying it absolutely should not be included, I am saying it should be aligned with the purpose of the course and, as with all things, the devil is in the details.
    But then your "should not be taught as part of menstruation class" is a straw man. Did someone argue that it should be? I didn't. Is it being taught? I've seen no evidence that it should be.

    And while you can have your doubts about whether transgenderism should be taught at all, that does not amount to a specific argument against, well, anything.

    I assumed you were arguing that it was being taught in menstruation class and therefore they were making a mistake. Whether you pulled back from the argument or were never making it in the first place doesn't seem to matter now. It's not a valid argument either way and at this point I'm not sure what your point is.

    If it's just that transgenderism should not be taught during a menstruation lesson, my response is "okay, but so what?". If you have some point that is relevant to what the school in the OP has done, what is it?

  16. #195
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,692
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    'I am otherworldly': Ex-transgender man, 33, who now identifies as an 'agender ALIEN' reveals they have had their nipples and eyebrows REMOVED to look 'less human'

    A 33-year-old, who was born as a woman before transitioning into a man, has revealed that they think they belong to any gender, and is an alien.

    Jareth Nebula, from Edmonds, Washington, transitioned from female to male and changed their name at the age of 29.

    The barber's shop receptionist, who also works as a model, has even gone as far as having their nipples removed in order to 'feel less human'... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...der-alien.html
    Mican, in post #64, you wrote: "And when these people come forward and directly state such concerns is when I will seriously consider what you propose."

    So, it's time for you to consider. Do you think "agender alien" is okay for gender identification? Or does it make sense to just have the "non-quad" gender identification that I proposed? If the real goal, as you described it, is to give people the respect they deserve, how should this person's gender identification be categorized?


    And I'm going to try one more time to get you to answer a simple question without evasion. What does the word "boys" mean? You wrote earlier in post #141 that "Trans boys are boys." Give me a clear simple definition of the word "boys" as used at the end of that sentence. Do it without using the word boy or boys in the definition. Substitute your definition in the sentence "Trans boys are ________________."

    Now, if you've used the word "male" in your definition, define that word without using that word in the definition. Try to not be circular or evasive in your answer. Give it to me straight. Can you do that?
    Last edited by evensaul; October 21st, 2019 at 01:22 PM.
    "If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

  17. #196
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    No, I'm not. Semantics is arguing over the definition of a word and I am not doing that.

    And the difference between IS on the test or MIGHT BE on the test is significant. IF it IS on the test, then a child's success in a class is dependent on whether they affirm that "boys can have periods" when asked on a test. IF it's NOT on the test, then this issue does not arise. So there is a significant difference in whether it is or is not on the test.

    So anyway, we've settled that it's not supported that the students will be tested on any particular thing about transgenderism.




    Of course there is. A class is not tested on every single thing that a teacher says in class. If every utterance were on a test, then a test would likely be twenty times longer than it typically is. A teacher picks and chooses which thing mentioned ends up on the test and most things don't end up on the test so all else being equal, odds are it won't be on the test just based on the law of averages.

    And also if X is on the test, how the question is worded is significant.

    I very much doubt that even if the issue is directly addressed on the test, the question would not be "True or False. Boys can have periods". I think the question might be something like:

    Transgender males are:
    1. Biologically male
    2. Biologically female


    And of course if they get the right answer (2. biologically female) there is no need to ask about transgender males and menstruation since the students can be expected to already know that biological females menstruate.

    But anyway, that's what I think. And let's not forget that the burden here is yours. If you are going to argue that what I think would happen is wrong and that the issue will be taught some other way than how I assume it will, you will need to support that. Otherwise, I am justified in doubting that "can boys have periods" is likely to a test question.




    I thought the underlying principle is that the students would essentially be forced to say "yes" to the question "can boys have periods" as in it WILL be on the test and they WILL have to say "yes" or their test score will suffer.

    If that the is not the underlying principle or point of your argument then I don't know what the point is.





    That conclusion is certainly the most logical given what is stated.

    "School children will be taught that "all genders" can have periods in new sex education lessons"

    It's a NEW lesson, as in a lesson that was not included previously. Since it's pretty obvious that menstruation is not a new topic in sex ed class, it is not a leap to assume that the lesson is not about menstruation. And since the topic is clearly related to transgenderism, transgenderism is certainly a part of the new lesson if not the primary focus.

    And again, the burden is yours. I could just go "support or retract" without justifying my reasoning for disagreeing with you but I think it's better debating to state the reasoning for one taking the opposing position, which is what I'm doing. So I don't have the burden to prove that my interpretation is correct. So if you want to argue that, for a fact, my interpretation is wrong, please provide support. And just "seeing it differently" does not count as support.





    And that is how I interpret it. If you want to argue that my interpretation is incorrect and therefore a different interpretation is the correct one, you will need to support it. Otherwise, I have justified my reasoning for not accepting your argument (which I'm not required to do anyway until you support your position). But again, I think it's better debating if I do take the time to state why I disagree with you. But that does not shift the burden to me.



    As I hold that whether it should or should not be included in the section on menstruation is irrelevant to this debate (since it's not been supported that it was included), I don't take a position on it either way.

    So feel free to move to other issue.




    I don't see the part that says "and therefore transgenderism is a social construct".




    Anyone can disagree with any definition that exists so there being some disagreement does not mean much and it certainly does not automatically lead to the conclusion that it is a social construct. I mean I'm pretty sure whatever the definition of social construct is, it is not "thing that have definitions that various people don't agree on".

    I mean, here's a definition that corresponds to how I understood the term to be defined:

    : of, relating to, or being a person whose gender identity differs from the sex the person had or was identified as having at birth

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transgender

    And I assume you define it that way as well. So apparently there's some other people who don't agree with that definition? And therefore because these people disagree, transgenderism is a social construct or something? That really doesn't make sense to me so I can't agree with you.



    But then your "should not be taught as part of menstruation class" is a straw man. Did someone argue that it should be? I didn't. Is it being taught? I've seen no evidence that it should be.

    And while you can have your doubts about whether transgenderism should be taught at all, that does not amount to a specific argument against, well, anything.

    I assumed you were arguing that it was being taught in menstruation class and therefore they were making a mistake. Whether you pulled back from the argument or were never making it in the first place doesn't seem to matter now. It's not a valid argument either way and at this point I'm not sure what your point is.

    If it's just that transgenderism should not be taught during a menstruation lesson, my response is "okay, but so what?". If you have some point that is relevant to what the school in the OP has done, what is it?
    Mican, your whole response reeks of a bit of insincerity. I was addressing the OP and was pretty clear from my first post that I was interpreting the OP to suggest whether transgenderism in general, and the question of boys menstruating specifically should or should not occur in a sex ed class during a discussion on menstruation. Now, how you have gone about this discussion is to first attempt to misrepresent my position. In my first post on this topic I plainly noted the following:

    "In terms of teaching on menstruation, which is how this thread started, what does gender have to do with biological function? What do social constructs have to do with menstruation? This concept of gender, which I think reasonable people may disagree, is clearly an attempt to introduce a certain ideological view into the classroom. And this, to me, is an abuse of power. More than just introduce this ideological view, it forces students to accept this ideological view of gender. I can only assume the students will be tested on this information."

    From the OP itself:
    "The report recommends that "language and learning about periods is inclusive of all genders, cultures, faiths and sexual orientations. For example; ‘girls and women and others who have periods'".

    In other words, when discussing menstruation, the report recommends that teachers explain menstruation as something that can occur for both boys and girls. I have laid out my argument as to why I believe this is inappropriate. If you wish to address that fine. Otherwise, please stop pretending that some new lesson, outside of the discussion on periods is occurring. It may be, but that is not what was suggested in the OP and it is not what I am discussing.

    As to whether this information will be tested, is tested, could be tested... it must be studied. The students must be prepared to present the information however it is taught to them as any lesson on any subject may be tested. Certainly the students, nor you, could guess what question may be asked nor how it will be asked. If the teacher of a math class explains addition as X + Y + 1 then I better be prepared to answer 7 when she asks on a test what is 4 + 2. I will study for questions similar and, indeed learn that all addition is X + Y + 1 even though it is simply wrong. Your contention is that if she decides not to test us on addition problems, then no harm was done. The teacher is free to teach whatever opinions so long as they do not actually make it on the test. Of course, it is absurd.

    Whether transexualism is a social construct is also seemingly obvious. If it can mean different things to different people and does not have a scientific (or even legal) definition, then it is obviously a social construct. Gender is a social construct. Facebook offers something like 50+ different genders to choose from. Your definition of transexual is based on gender identity. So, of course it is a social construct. Now, there are people who believe gender is not a social construct. There are those who believe that gender and biological sex are aligned and when they are not, we would note that the person has sexual dysphoria. Hence, for these people, transexualism is a symptom of a mental disorder. I am not making an argument one way or the other. All I am claiming here is that stating that you know the definition and that is based on science and fact is simply absurd.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  18. #197
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,707
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Mican, your whole response reeks of a bit of insincerity.
    Then I would say that you are a very poor judge of my sincerity. Please keep such opinions to yourself in the future.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    I was addressing the OP and was pretty clear from my first post that I was interpreting the OP to suggest whether transgenderism in general, and the question of boys menstruating specifically should or should not occur in a sex ed class during a discussion on menstruation.
    But then you have not supported that transgenderism is being discussed during menstruation lessons.

    Again, I think it's more likely that there is a lesson on transgenderism where menstruation is discussed and during the lesson on menstruation, they are restricting the lesson to the strict biology.

    Maybe I'm right and maybe I'm wrong but again, the original burden is yours. If you are arguing that the ARE teaching about transgenderism during the lesson on menstruation, please support that.

    If you can't or won't, then it's not supported that that is happening and therefore any discussion about whether such a thing should or should not happen is relegated to a discussion of the hypothetical and not necessarily relevant to what is actually occurring.




    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    In terms of teaching on menstruation[/B], which is how this thread started, what does gender have to do with biological function? What do social constructs have to do with menstruation? This concept of gender, which I think reasonable people may disagree, is clearly an attempt to introduce a certain ideological view into the classroom. And this, to me, is an abuse of power. More than just introduce this ideological view, it forces students to accept this ideological view of gender. I can only assume the students will be tested on this information.
    That seems to be sneaking in the premise that transgenderism is brought up when they are teaching about menstruation. That is not supported and therefore this argument is based on an unsupported premise.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    From the OP itself:
    [/COLOR][COLOR=#333333]"The report recommends that "language and learning about periods is inclusive of all genders, cultures, faiths and sexual orientations. For example; ‘girls and women and others who have periods'".

    In other words, when discussing menstruation, the report recommends that teachers explain menstruation as something that can occur for both boys and girls. I have laid out my argument as to why I believe this is inappropriate. If you wish to address that fine. Otherwise, please stop pretending that some new lesson, outside of the discussion on periods is occurring. It may be, but that is not what was suggested in the OP and it is not what I am discussing.
    It's not just suggested that there are new lessons discussing this; it explicitly says so. To quote:

    "School children will be taught that "all genders" can have periods in new sex education lessons"

    So there ARE new sex educations lesson where children are taught that all genders can have periods.

    So I get that you think that it would be inappropriate to have a class that is suppose to be about the biological facts about menstruation and then talking about the relatively off-topic issue of transgenderism. But the OP does not say that it is happening and the most accurate interpretation of what is said is that the issue of boys having periods is being taught not in the menstruation lesson but a different (new) lesson.

    So while I understand your concern, I see no support that what you are concerned about is happening and therefore it's not a valid reason to be against lesson. You need to support that they ACTUALLY are doing it wrong before you can criticize them for doing it wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    As to whether this information will be tested, is tested, could be tested... it must be studied. The students must be prepared to present the information however it is taught to them as any lesson on any subject may be tested. Certainly the students, nor you, could guess what question may be asked nor how it will be asked. If the teacher of a math class explains addition as X + Y + 1 then I better be prepared to answer 7 when she asks on a test what is 4 + 2. I will study for questions similar and, indeed learn that all addition is X + Y + 1 even though it is simply wrong. Your contention is that if she decides not to test us on addition problems, then no harm was done. The teacher is free to teach whatever opinions so long as they do not actually make it on the test. Of course, it is absurd.
    Straw man - I made no such contention. Here is my latest response to this issue - copied from my last post and was not directly responded to.


    I thought the underlying principle is that the students would essentially be forced to say "yes" to the question "can boys have periods" as in it WILL be on the test and they WILL have to say "yes" or their test score will suffer so they are in essence coerced into saying "yes" when asked.

    If that the is not the underlying principle or point of your argument then I don't know what the point is.





    Quote Originally Posted by Ibelsd View Post
    Whether transexualism is a social construct is also seemingly obvious. If it can mean different things to different people and does not have a scientific (or even legal) definition, then it is obviously a social construct.
    Gender is a social construct. Facebook offers something like 50+ different genders to choose from. Your definition of transexual is based on gender identity. So, of course it is a social construct. Now, there are people who believe gender is not a social construct. There are those who believe that gender and biological sex are aligned and when they are not, we would note that the person has sexual dysphoria. Hence, for these people, transexualism is a symptom of a mental disorder. I am not making an argument one way or the other. All I am claiming here is that stating that you know the definition and that is based on science and fact is simply absurd.
    Since definitions are subjective, no one "knows" the definition of any word and people are free to disagree with any definition. But there is indeed a clear definition of "transgender" which is coherent enough to be used in both science and law. I mean there ARE laws regarding transgenderism so OBVIOUSLY there is enough agreement on what transgenderism is to make coherent laws regarding it. Likewise, I'm pretty sure that any medical scientific professional could explain what transgenderism is when asked and it will almost certainly be similar the dictionary definition that I provided in my last post.

    So I'm not sure what your point is here. While not everything is known about transgenderism, the basic concept is pretty clear to most people.

    If there's someone or some people who do not agree with the definition as most people understand it, so what?


    ---------- Post added at 03:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:40 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    Mican, in post #64, you wrote: "And when these people come forward and directly state such concerns is when I will seriously consider what you propose."

    So, it's time for you to consider. Do you think "agender alien" is okay for gender identification? Or does it make sense to just have the "non-quad" gender identification that I proposed? If the real goal, as you described it, is to give people the respect they deserve, how should this person's gender identification be categorized?
    I'd have to know a lot more about this particular person before I could say what the appropriate response is. Is he sincere? Is he just trolling and is not serious? Is he mentally ill? Are there others who also identify like that?




    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    And I'm going to try one more time to get you to answer a simple question without evasion. What does the word "boys" mean? You wrote earlier in post #141 that "Trans boys are boys." Give me a clear simple definition of the word "boys" as used at the end of that sentence. Do it without using the word boy or boys in the definition. Substitute your definition in the sentence "Trans boys are ________________."
    "Trans boys are people who are biologically female but personally identify as male."



    Quote Originally Posted by evensaul View Post
    Now, if you've used the word "male" in your definition, define that word without using that word in the definition. Try to not be circular or evasive in your answer. Give it to me straight. Can you do that?
    I'll give you a straight answer to your last question ("Can you do that?"). The answer to that question is "No, I can't". I gave it some thought and I don't know how to define "male" without referring to itself (or referring to its the opposite, like "not female") just like I can't define "dark" without referring to it or its opposite (absence of light). Even the dictionary definition of "male" is self-referential.

    So that's my answer and I think it should give you something to work with if you have an point regarding this question.
    Last edited by mican333; October 29th, 2019 at 07:37 AM.

  19. #198
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,474
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Hmm, ok...

    So a Trans person (per you):
    1. has a physical abnormality that can predispose a person to a state of affairs where the brain and body don't seem to match (with regards to the m/f sexes).
    2. this can lead to diagnosable mental illness
    3. it appears there are factors besides genetics involved


    You make being Trans sound a lot like being an alcoholic?
    I don't think so. What is your point?


    Again, see #1 & #2 above. You will note the vigor Mican has put into (your words) "that misplaced idea". He is hardly alone.
    I don't understand this.

    I'm curious. What did you think of IBELSD "the most serious debater left" link from post #186:

    " https://www.livescience.com/54949-tr...efinition.html :

    "Gender, on the other hand, is a societal construct that deals with the expected behaviors, roles and activities typically associated with the different sexes, the APA said. Gender roles, which vary across cultures, influence how people act and feel about themselves."
    Note: The quote you give is from Mican333, not Ibelsd... I will address what Ibelsd quoted in 186 first...

    He is cherry-picking in one instance. Both sources he quotes have a clear definition stated upfront in the article in the first sentence of each.

    Example 1: ""Transgender" is an umbrella term that describes people whose gender identity or expression does not match the sex they were assigned at birth.

    Example 2: "Transgender people are people whose gender identity is different from the gender they were thought to be at birth. "

    What he cherry-picks is a statement trying to say that the way transgendered people feel about themselves has considerable variance. AKA all transgendered people are not the same with respect to ther gender feeling, sexual preferences and so on. Basically its a statement of inclusion, something common in liberal academia and organizing.

    The quote you offered, that's a pretty well-accepted idea. Gender expression is a social construct for the most part, though it is very much linked to biological sex.

    Seems a much more realistic view of the topic than what you and Mican are forwarding...
    You are confused, it is what Mican and I are arguing in part. It is not the sum total of the argument, but those who support Trans expression tend to accept the idea that gender is largely a social construct, while sex is a biological one.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  20. #199
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,236
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    I don't think so. What is your point?
    I believe these were all points that you made (save the comparison to alcoholism). I am just clarifying your position here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    I don't understand this.
    The "misplace idea" (your words) is being promoted by Mican right now in this very thread. He has been quite clear about this point.

    Again, that is the push of the issues in this thread pretty much so far.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Note: The quote you give is from Mican333, not Ibelsd...
    I'm sure I must be misunderstanding you here because:

    IBELSD was responding to Mican and I shared his link with you. Mican does not agree with that link.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    He is cherry-picking in one instance. Both sources he quotes....
    The quote you offered, that's a pretty well-accepted idea. Gender expression is a social construct for the most part, though it is very much linked to biological sex.
    I only quoted one link from IBESLD, but it was only to show this idea is a social construct. Since you agree (for the most part) with that I'm thinking we generally agree here.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    You are confused, it is what Mican and I are arguing in part. It is not the sum total of the argument, but those who support Trans expression tend to accept the idea that gender is largely a social construct, while sex is a biological one.
    One of us is sure not understanding Mican's position in this thread!
    " If you are going to argue that it's a social construct, then the burden is on you to show that it is, not me to show that it isn't."
    (Mican)

    You are both on the side of political correctness is always the go to response. That is about where you two part ways on this subject IMHO (and there is a push for exactly what the Op says as apposed to everyone agreeing with you it's "largely a social construct"...)

  21. #200
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,474
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Boys Can Have Periods Too!

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    One of us is sure not understanding Mican's position in this thread!
    " If you are going to argue that it's a social construct, then the burden is on you to show that it is, not me to show that it isn't."
    (Mican)

    You are both on the side of political correctness is always the go to response. That is about where you two part ways on this subject IMHO (and there is a push for exactly what the Op says as apposed to everyone agreeing with you it's "largely a social construct"...)
    Let me try to break it down a bit if I can....

    Gender is a social construct.

    This means that what it means to be a man or woman in society is a social construct. AKA what it means to be a man in America is different than what it means to be a man in Saudi Arabia in various respects. Even more so, what it means to be a woman in America vs Saudi Arabia. These cultural expectations and affectations are not determined by what genitalia you have. They are tied to them of course, but having a dick doesn't automatically make you aggressive, or a good breadwinner, etc... both traits that sometimes are ascribed to being a man in a given culture. Nor does having a vagina mean you should wear pink clothes, but its still something we associate with being a woman in American culture.

    Being Transgender is not a social construct

    Which is to say, that the aspect of it where you have male parts but you think you are a woman is not a social construct. It appears to be a kind of biological fact. Both the genitalia and the sex identity instinct seem to be something from your genetics.

    That said, what you do about it, how you portray it, and the like, that is a social expression. And wanting people to treat you with the same cultural attitudes of cis-gendered people is also social in nature. But the fact of your trans-status is not just an affectation or social norm.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

 

 
Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Time for some encouraging news boys and girls!
    By cstamford in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: February 10th, 2014, 03:44 PM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: June 11th, 2011, 04:40 PM
  3. Backstreet Boys?
    By Mr. Hyde in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 28th, 2006, 11:42 PM
  4. Hello Again, Boys And Girls
    By DeviantNorm in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: October 20th, 2005, 11:00 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •