moksha wrote:He was violating his vow of conservative heterosexual averagality.
This is doubly important when you consider that this violation is flouting the very same unwritten rules that underline the basis of modern LDS culture.
I liked 'I Have A Question' mentioning the Great and Specious Board, since this quote by Scott Lloyd about the former racial purity ban was fun, "My recollection is that it was pretty much the conventional wisdom that the ban was temporary." This is a glowing example of unwritten rule #7 - Make Believe in Everything.
EAllusion wrote:A kid who is transgender. Seems self-explanatory.
No, not really. My imagination is capable of quite a lot. I'm wanting you to paint a picture for me so we're both talking about the same thing. See, when you say something about transgender kids and suicide, the image that comes into my mind is child abuse. Which I agree is a problem. Please stop being a supporter of child abuse.
It's an oversimplification, but I'm sure you heard of the notion of being a woman trapped in a man's body and vice versa. This happens to a certain % of the population. Some people are just transgender or gender non-conforming. As you so bluntly put it, facts don't care about your feelings. People who experience this are prone to receiving a lot of mistreatment for it and, if they aren't lucky, concerted effort on the part of others to stop them from doing logical things to fix it. Children who experience this are disproportionately likely to attempt suicide. It's so common, in fact, that it's a disturbingly large % of the cases that my partner sees at at the child psychiatric hospital. The statistics on what this population faces, and the resultant rates of suicide attempts, is a silent tragedy.
Presumably, what you are saying is allowing people under the age of 18 to use hormone therapy, dress differently, etc. constitutes child abuse. You'd know that'd be offensive to someone who is saying the things I am, so I imagine this to be provocative.
What I find interesting about it is how quickly and readily people are conflating gender identity with homosexuality. The only person that really seems to see the distinction, is cinepro.
The interesting thing here to me is that it shouldn't be a problem at all for the LDS to be accepting of transgender persons. There isn't anything that should commit an LDS to thinking a person has to live as the gender that most closely matches their genitalia they were born with. The thread you linked portrays the position you'd expect to hear from LDS, which is that the mental state is the problem, not the sex characteristics, but they could just as easily see it as the opposite. One poster goes this route in talking about how people can spiritually be a woman and physically a man. That position is open to LDS.
The problem with this SP should be that women aren't allowed to be SP's nor are LDS allowed to be in same-sex relationships. It's funny, but expected, that transphobia just supercedes this.
EA, I think what 'water dog' has in mind as "transgender kid" is a full post-op trans-sexual kid forced into surgery by gay parents in denial. That would be child abuse I'm pretty sure. Fortunately it's never happened.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.
LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
If only there were some kind of institute funded by a prestigious university that has studied human sexuality and identity over the last 60 years where one could get thorough research on the topic...
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Water Dog wrote:I'm really not sure what you're talking about. How am I hurting this guy's feelings or getting into his business? And for that matter what does hurt feelings have to do with anything, anyway? What, is the entire LDS church supposed to play dress up with this guy, just to make him feel good about himself?
You're a smart guy, WD, and I would hope that you could give me some credit for at least being somewhat intelligent myself. I am saying that, in principle, and as a matter of day-to-day attitudes, we should behave with compassion, not hide behind un-contextualized "brute facts" (usually betraying a very limited understanding) as an excuse to be rude or denigratory. The wise thing to do is treat everyone with respect. I would expect a Church with such lofty aspirations to be able to figure this out, especially where it concerns their own members. They choose instead to remain ignorant about the science of sex and then punish members based on their own ignorance. I expect better of them, and, frankly, I expect better of you.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
cinepro wrote:My ward has a TBM family whose teenage son stopped attending a few years ago. Now he's 18 and has announced that he wants to become a woman.
So this issue just got very real for the families in the ward, and it will be interesting to see what happens.
Why is it an "issue" for the families in the ward?
I'm not sure what you don't understand about group dynamics, so I don't know what to tell you.
Gadianton wrote:EA, I think what 'water dog' has in mind as "transgender kid" is a full post-op trans-sexual kid forced into surgery by gay parents in denial. That would be child abuse I'm pretty sure. Fortunately it's never happened.
That's what I imagined, though I'd also include that he might be implying that indulging a transgendered minor in allowing any steps towards transitioning is an act of child abuse. I wanted him to come out and say it.
I have a question wrote:Like I've said, I'm uneducated on this topic, but isn't the objective biological fact that he has a male body rather than "he is a man"? Understanding the differentiation between those two things seems to me to be the crux of this.
I think the question is more whether genitalia are the only biology that matters. Remember that brain is biological.
The question is even if there are for some people a different brain than a normal brain for someone with the relevant genitalia, is that true for everyone? I personally believe it's entirely possible for one of the three components of sexuality (attraction, identity, performance) to switch or otherwise be disrupted due to biological reasons. However I also suspect that some portion of people claiming to be trans are also likely suffering from a type of body dysmorphia. Exactly how to tell which is which isn't at all clear since we honestly know so little about the biology of the brain.
Last edited by Guest on Thu Jul 20, 2017 10:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The hypothesis that gender identity is an innate, fixed property of human beings that is independent of biological sex—that a person might be "a man trapped in a woman’s body" or "a woman trapped in a man’s body"—is not supported by scientific evidence.
<snip> So here's a example I'm pulling out of my ass....
WaterDog, your quote is from an article in "The New Atlantis." Do you know anything about that journal? Who publishes it, or what their mission statement is? Do you know what type of articles it publishes and what standards are in place for publication? I ask because I am trying to determine whether you are presenting it as a scientific source.
