RE: Another Outrage

RE: Another Outrage (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

PeonForHer -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 5:58:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Which, the fact that you were only trolling is why you deserved to be ignored Do you ever answer questions? Gawd. What am I thinking? No, don't bother to answer that question, either. [:D]

Kirata -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 6:51:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I'm afraid your opinion is still somewhat obscure to me, K. Perhaps I'm being slow tonight. Would you mind stating it? My opinion was in the OP, and you even quoted it when you asked me what it was. I don't know what you think this thread is about or where you're getting that idea, whatever it is. But for the second time now, the topic of the OP is the characterization of a doctor telling a mother the sex of her newborn found in the paragraphs I quoted from Slate. The seemingly obvious clue to this lies in the fact that I quoted them and commented on them. Would it help you to know that Thorazine is a brand name for the anti-psychotic drug chlorpromazine? K.

Lucylastic -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 7:17:44 PM)
FR...Another Outrage it isnt. Its one persons hypothetical situation in a blog, on a left wing site. Every parent fucks up their child, wether its from gender, vaccination choice, religious choice, homosexuality, food choices, and other "choices" or beliefs they have. Its been that way for centuries, but its only now with new technology and understanding of just how much we get fucked up in out childhoods that people want and are able to suggests changes. Its valid to her, and to a fair number of people who think like her or given some people new things to ponder, however to class it as an outrage is overstepping normal english definitions by a factor of a trazillion!!!![8D] I find that to be the biggest problem in this topic YMMV

Kirata -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 7:31:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Another Outrage it isnt... Its valid to her, and to a fair number of people who think like her or given some people new things to ponder, however to class it as an outrage is overstepping normal english definitions by a factor of a trazillion!!!![8D] Really? I think it's outrageous for a doctor to impose on a conscious and competent patient, without her knowledge or consent, a medical treatment with potentially serious undisclosed risks. But, of course, I acknowledge that your opinion is valid for you. [:)] K.

GotSteel -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 7:54:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Do people often feel the need to use a 2x4 to get a concept through to you? The child's sex or gender is not determined by its genitals. That is outmoded thinking. What matters is the brain and until the child can communicate we won't know for sure if the brain matches the genitals so why assign gender based on those genitals? So my niece's second birthday's next week. She's just getting to the point that she has enough language to express herself and has at this point been through 2 years of gender role indoctrination, I find it a little creepy. We had to wait to find out her gender before we could get clothing because heaven forbid a newborn be dressed in a color that's too masculine. She has a play kitchen set which she wouldn't if she were a boy despite chef being a male dominated profession. Looking at it I think the way children are typically raised has a lot to do with preparing them for their place in a gender segregation that no longer really exists. I expect some of this outdated indoctrination to get mothballed in the next few generations which hopefully will make life easier for those who are having trouble coping with their genitals. I don't expect that society at large is going to ignore the physical reality of genitalia any time in the foreseeable future but maybe at some point it won't be such a big deal.

Lucylastic -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 7:59:47 PM)
but a doctor isnt imposing anything. unless you are a thought police person...and newborns are hardly competent. the parent indeed may not be either.depending on what you treatment you are looking at.... ie...circumcision... hypotheticals arent reality, they can be extremely stoopid...outrageous...meh...reality is more outrageous

Kirata -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 8:11:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Do people often feel the need to use a 2x4 to get a concept through to you? Only idiots who are laboring under the impression that they know what they're talking about. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The child's sex or gender is not determined by its genitals. That is outmoded thinking. What matters is the brain and until the child can communicate we won't know for sure if the brain matches the genitals so why assign gender based on those genitals? You're just making shit up. Sex and gender are not interchangeable terms. Sex is a biological designation based on reproductive function. Gender reflects social and psychological factors relating to masculinity and femininity. What is the difference between sex and gender Feminist perspectives on sex and gender K.

tj444 -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 8:33:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata The outrageous treatment goes by two different names: "It's a boy!" and "It's a girl!" Yeah, seriously. Anybody else think maybe it's time to start putting Thorazine in the water? K. [/font][/size] I think its outrageous that a baby leaves the hospital with a SSN applied for/assigned to him/her... perhaps testing the child's chromosomes would give the correct answer?

DomKen -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 9:07:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Do people often feel the need to use a 2x4 to get a concept through to you? Only idiots who are laboring under the impression that they know what they're talking about. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The child's sex or gender is not determined by its genitals. That is outmoded thinking. What matters is the brain and until the child can communicate we won't know for sure if the brain matches the genitals so why assign gender based on those genitals? You're just making shit up. Sex and gender are not interchangeable terms. Sex is a biological designation based on reproductive function. Gender reflects social and psychological factors relating to masculinity and femininity. What is the difference between sex and gender Feminist perspectives on sex and gender K. How many different ways does this need to be said, what matters is the child's gender not the child's plumbing. Your fixation on the newborn's sex ignore both gender dysphoria and a whole host of physical and hormonal abnormalities that can result in malformed or incorrect sex organs developing.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 9:09:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 I think its outrageous that a baby leaves the hospital with a SSN applied for/assigned to him/her... I'm curious. Why do you think that outrageous?

Kirata -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 9:59:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen How many different ways does this need to be said, what matters is the child's gender not the child's plumbing. How many different ways does this need to be said: Gender is a social/psychological term. No matter what gender characteristics the baby develops, the fact remains that barring abnormality the newborn is either a boy or a girl, and to argue that this is something we shouldn't acknowledge is beyond bizarre. What other aspects of reality does this religion of yours demand we ignore? K.

DomKen -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 10:43:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen How many different ways does this need to be said, what matters is the child's gender not the child's plumbing. How many different ways does this need to be said: Gender is a social/psychological term. No matter what gender characteristics the baby develops, the fact remains that barring abnormality the newborn is either a boy or a girl, and to argue that this is something we shouldn't acknowledge is beyond bizarre. What other aspects of reality does this religion of yours demand we ignore? I'm not saying we should ignore it. I'm saying we should not treat it as a matter of any relevance. There is a difference. Try and get this into your head, the essay is arguing that we should stop letting a baby's sex determine the assignment of the baby's gender.

tj444 -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 10:58:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 I think its outrageous that a baby leaves the hospital with a SSN applied for/assigned to him/her... I'm curious. Why do you think that outrageous? there is no reason at all for a baby to need one at that age and it sets up children for identity theft which can go on for many years before the kid finds out his/her credit rating, job prospects, insurance rates, ability to rent, etc are screwed up.. I didn't have a SIN (Canada's "SSN") until I was 17 & living on my own and had my first job, until you are working there is no need for it.. And in Canada the SIN is to be used only for tax purposes, it is not a national identity number/card there like it is here..

DomKen -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 11:20:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 I think its outrageous that a baby leaves the hospital with a SSN applied for/assigned to him/her... I'm curious. Why do you think that outrageous? there is no reason at all for a baby to need one at that age and it sets up children for identity theft which can go on for many years before the kid finds out his/her credit rating, job prospects, insurance rates, ability to rent, etc are screwed up.. I didn't have a SIN (Canada's "SSN") until I was 17 & living on my own and had my first job, until you are working there is no need for it.. And in Canada the SIN is to be used only for tax purposes, it is not a national identity number/card there like it is here.. It used to be that way here. Then they required that every kid have a SSN if you wanted to claim the kid as a dependent.

thishereboi -> RE: Another Outrage (6/28/2014 11:21:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata It's a strange hypothetical scenario to imagine. Pressure to accept a medical treatment, no tangible proof of its necessity, its only benefits conferred by the fact that everyone else already has it, and coming at a terrible expense to those 1 or 2 percent who have a bad reaction. It seems unlikely that doctors, hospitals, parents, or society in general would tolerate a standard practice like this. Except they already do. The imaginary treatment I described above is real. Obstetricians, doctors, and midwives commit this procedure on infants every single day, in every single country. In reality, this treatment is performed almost universally without even asking for the parents' consent, making this practice all the more insidious. ~Slate The outrageous treatment goes by two different names: "It's a boy!" and "It's a girl!" Yeah, seriously. Anybody else think maybe it's time to start putting Thorazine in the water? K. Kirata, what's your opinion on all this? You're the thread-starter, but your OP gives no hint of your own beliefs on the matter. Was this thread just a way of providing a lot of righties - including even the most stupid of them - a fun chance to snort at lefties and their 'political correctness gone mad', or did you find the article thought-provoking and make you wonder what others felt about it? Do you feel able to share your own beliefs about a given issue on this occasion? ETA: And yes, I know I'm the only one to have used the phrase 'political correctness gone mad'. [;)] Maybe you are the only one trying to turn it into a right vs left fight.

Kirata -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 12:06:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Try and get this into your head, the essay is arguing that we should stop letting a baby's sex determine the assignment of the baby's gender. Well in the English version, the essay is arguing that the mere act of ascertaining a newborn's sex is "gender assignment." It's called infant gender assignment: When the doctor holds your child up to the harsh light of the delivery room, looks between its legs, and declares his opinion: It's a boy or a girl, based on nothing more than a cursory assessment of your offspring's genitals. In the real world, of course, it's not just his "opinion," it really is a boy or a girl, and sex and gender aren't the same thing. K.

crazyml -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 1:35:33 AM)
FR In my view the premise of the article is utter bullshit. The assignment of sex is not a treatment it is a diagnosis, so the whole bullshit analogy falls apart instantaneously. As a diagnosis it has an accuracy of 98-99%, which even with all the swanky medical science we have, is right fucking up there in terms of reliability. I do feel for the author, and I cannot imagine the pain and hurt her status as a trans person has brought her, but it always worries me when I read things like this, because they tend to do more harm to the movement they're promoting than they do good. The article would have been far more effective if it had called on people to reflect on the possible impact that the diagnosis of sex might have on the one or two percent, and to consider ways to better understand the distinction between sex (which is in the vast majority of cases a pretty fucking binary thing) and gender. But no, instead of asking us to consider the child in this story, the child is almost forgotten in a specious argument about medical treatment. [Edited for the typos I spotted]

PeonForHer -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 6:16:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I'm afraid your opinion is still somewhat obscure to me, K. Perhaps I'm being slow tonight. Would you mind stating it? My opinion was in the OP, and you even quoted it when you asked me what it was. I don't know what you think this thread is about or where you're getting that idea, whatever it is. But for the second time now, the topic of the OP is the characterization of a doctor telling a mother the sex of her newborn found in the paragraphs I quoted from Slate. The seemingly obvious clue to this lies in the fact that I quoted them and commented on them. Would it help you to know that Thorazine is a brand name for the anti-psychotic drug chlorpromazine? K. You cited the post and added your little snark about thorazine. I thought there might, just might, be more to your thinking about it before posting your OP. The article was written as a thought experiment - that is, unless the author was so dense and/or mad that she couldn't have been able to put a sentence together, never mind a whole article. Bringing the whole thing down to earth and out of this weird, gnashing and fuming, 'civilisation will fall apart' outer-space stuff (that's forever invoked but never, ever specified): the baby has dick or it has a vadge. In all but a couple of percent of cases the medics and the parents will match gender to physical sex and everything will be hunky dory. But supposing it isn't. Well, of course the baby will at first be too young to give a toss one way or another. However, later, it has to be brought clothes. As it grows it will learn gendered language, watch gendered TV and have gendered stories read to it. When it goes out into the world it will be going to a gendered school and work in a gendered workplace. Bugger all will have changed one way or another. The child, and probably the adult, later, will have inevitable problems, no matter what the medics did or didn't say on the first day of its life. Pfft. Move on, folks, there's nothing to see here, unless you really, really need to have a good old, furious, triumphant snort at yet another paper tiger. I guess it's too early in the year for those "They're going to ban Christmas!" threads, isn't it?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 7:30:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 I think its outrageous that a baby leaves the hospital with a SSN applied for/assigned to him/her... I'm curious. Why do you think that outrageous? there is no reason at all for a baby to need one at that age and it sets up children for identity theft which can go on for many years before the kid finds out his/her credit rating, job prospects, insurance rates, ability to rent, etc are screwed up.. I didn't have a SIN (Canada's "SSN") until I was 17 & living on my own and had my first job, until you are working there is no need for it.. And in Canada the SIN is to be used only for tax purposes, it is not a national identity number/card there like it is here.. The SSN is used for tax purposes here. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen It used to be that way here. Then they required that every kid have a SSN if you wanted to claim the kid as a dependent. Which would be a - wait for it - tax purpose! (ETA: Fixed a typo.)

thishereboi -> RE: Another Outrage (6/29/2014 7:48:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail how about boi and gurl? Or baby? Yea because there is nothing a kid likes more than to be refered to as a baby. I made that mistake when my nephew was about 3 and he let me know in no uncertain terms that he was not a baby, he was a little boy. But what the hell. Maybe it's time to push people to stop using gender until the kid hits high school. We can refer to them as it's and only buy gender neutral clothing. Maybe insist they all cut their hair the same so one doesn't appear more feminine than the other. That should really drive the public support behind tgs. I mean it's bad enough that so many people think it's a mental disease, lets show them that just how wacked out it can really be.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625