User Controls
Since men can never hit women...
-
2016-12-24 at 4:37 AM UTCYou don’t get one if you lack the class not to ask for it.
-
2016-12-24 at 3:24 PM UTCCan I hit OP?
-
2016-12-24 at 6:47 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Are you retarded? No one here has claimed biological sex is a social construct, no one has argued you can change your chromosomal sex. You open as if you acknowledge a sex/gender distinction but the screed that follows is just "herp derp attack helicopter".
I think you may be the retarded one. My argument is that the construct of "gender identity" is inferior to the natural gender identity associated with ones biological sex. To "self gender" is absolutely pointless and if you want to make an actual argument instead of constructing a straw man you must convince me otherwise on that point. -
2016-12-24 at 9:54 PM UTC
Originally posted by thelittlestnigger I think you may be the retarded one. My argument is that the construct of "gender identity" is inferior to the natural gender identity associated with ones biological sex.
I don't have any idea how what you posted before was supposed to mean this but uhhh, ok. The standard line here is that there is no such thing as a "natural gender identity", by merit of its status as a social construct. So you might say something like "yeah, but there's a natural basis for gender roles being tied to biological sex" and sure, we can find biological explanations for a lot gendered behaviors but this does not make those behaviors natural. Urinals also have a biological explanation but that doesn't make them an immutable law of the universe.
Maybe you could try to make some argument along the lines of "Gendered behavior X has a biological foundation in property Y and thus people with the biological property Y ought to engage in behavior X". So like wearing a bra is a gendered behavior but maybe we can think of heath benefits of people with breasts doing it regardless of their notion as to what their gender is (I understand this is a controversial point but whatever, let's just grant it) and like OK, I'm willing to accept at least the form of this argument, it may be a justification of a sex/gender alignment on utility. The issue is firstly that it does nothing to deny such a distinction exists or that people could have a combination of gender identity and biological features that's contrary to an "ideal" alignment based on utility mentioned before. Since the chromosomal demarcation criterion has been brought up: if that's your definition of biological sex it means gendered behaviors that are defensible in this manner must find a basis in a person's chromosomal arrangement which denies the majority of what we consider to be gender. Certainly there is no chromosomal basis for favorite hot button issues in anti-trans circles like bathrooms or how people dress.To "self gender" is absolutely pointless
Shifting goalposts, first it's denial that it's possible to be transgendered ("calling yourself a dog doesn't make you a dog") now you're saying it's "pointless" to be transgendered. Seems like you can't have it both ways. -
2016-12-25 at 3:20 AM UTCSpace rezerved 4 post that rapes ur point coming by 12/26/16
-
2016-12-25 at 3:20 AM UTCIf you edit u r gay
-
2016-12-25 at 3:49 AM UTC
Originally posted by thelittlestnigger Space rezerved 4 post that rapes ur point coming by 12/26/16
quoted yung blood -
2016-12-25 at 3:51 AM UTCFUCK YOU NIGGERThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2017-01-08 at 12:53 PM UTCUpdate
"Man" becomes pregnant (lolololol):
http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/08/british-man-becomes-first-in-britain-to-announce-hes-pregnant-6367883/
Trans-species, like my dog analogy, is now a legitimate thing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sObPHx2QMY0
We need a social revolution to get rid of these types of "people". -
2017-01-08 at 6:54 PM UTCWho says a man can't hit a woman???
If a woman hits me like a man she gets hit back like a man....
Hey, it's equality, right??? -
2017-01-09 at 1:33 AM UTC
Originally posted by reject Update
"Man" becomes pregnant (lolololol):
http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/08/british-man-becomes-first-in-britain-to-announce-hes-pregnant-6367883/
Trans-species, like my dog analogy, is now a legitimate thing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sObPHx2QMY0
We need a social revolution to get rid of these types of "people".
thats a pretty yummy looking cat.
-
2017-01-09 at 1:40 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny It says "sex determination system" right there though… are you denying the sex/gender distinction or are you criticizing the (obviously minority, and not here represented) position that sex is a social construct?
since there's a biological basis for sex, claiming a gender contradictory to that is utterly meaningless. it's ironic how the vast majority of those people eschew labels and roles until they start making them up themselves. -
2017-01-09 at 1:40 AM UTC
Originally posted by SCronaldo_J_Trump thats a pretty yummy looking cat.
come back and check when you're not tweakingThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-01-09 at 1:52 AM UTCFuck you its a good pussy.
-
2017-01-09 at 7:18 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra since there's a biological basis for sex, claiming a gender contradictory to that is utterly meaningless. it's ironic how the vast majority of those people eschew labels and roles until they start making them up themselves.
What does it mean gender that's "contradictory" to one's sex? If we accept gender is a social construct then there is no natural basis for a sex/gender alignment. -
2017-01-09 at 11:13 AM UTCEveryone in this thread I want to see your gendertalia.
Thank you -
2017-01-09 at 1:10 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny What does it mean gender that's "contradictory" to one's sex? If we accept gender is a social construct then there is no natural basis for a sex/gender alignment.
Gender is not a social construct it's a biological "construct". -
2017-01-09 at 11:35 PM UTC
Originally posted by blackbird Sex and gender are two different things. Yes, you’re physically male if you have a penis, but that doesn’t make you a man.
Right, killing people makes you a man. -
2017-01-10 at 12:44 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny What does it mean gender that's "contradictory" to one's sex? If we accept gender is a social construct then there is no natural basis for a sex/gender alignment.
in it's original sense, gender speaks of masculinity and femininity, traits that are typically associated with the male or female archetype. using it to define people, or to derive an identity from it seems to be a fairly recent trend - before the last five years or so I don't think I've ever heard anyone try to claim that harboring female traits makes them a woman, regardless of the fact that they're biologically a man (outside of certain fringe elements, of course).
what I guess I was getting at is the recent 'self-identification' trend - the conflation of this bastardisation of gender with sex; the idea that people treat their interpretation of their feelings as more authoritive than self-evident biological markers.
so sure, given the fact that there is zero actual basis for today's 'gender', you can call yourself whatever you want - there is no way to validate, it's literally just a blank space on your profile for autistic children to scribble garbage in.
claiming that what you 'feel' like, ie. someone of the opposite sex, made up sex, animal, child etc. overrides what you actually are - something that can be accurately tested and verified according to established standards - is dishonest to yourself and others. -
2017-01-10 at 1:09 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sophie Gender is not a social construct it's a biological "construct".
See my earlier response to TLN, there are behaviors that most people consider part of one's gender (clothing, for example) that are not biological facts. Also see that post for why finding some biological explanation does not move such things out of the real of social construct.
Originally posted by aldra in it's original sense, gender speaks of masculinity and femininity, traits that are typically associated with the male or female archetype. using it to define people, or to derive an identity from it seems to be a fairly recent trend - before the last five years or so I don't think I've ever heard anyone try to claim that harboring female traits makes them a woman, regardless of the fact that they're biologically a man (outside of certain fringe elements, of course).
The first thing that springs to mind is de Beauvoir, fairly early in the last century, advancing the idea of the social nature of gender ("one is not born, but rather becomes a woman") and being taken fairly seriously in academic circles. Now if you want to call out a certain trend towards centering gender identity in self-definition then I agree, certain elements have definitely had the effect of, in many ways, reducing people to their genders and I think to toxic result, but that doesn't really say anything about the orthogonality of sex and gender.claiming that what you 'feel' like, ie. someone of the opposite sex, made up sex, animal, child etc. overrides what you actually are - something that can be accurately tested and verified according to established standards - is dishonest to yourself and others.
The "performative gender" model, which I think is probably the dominant model among third wave feminists, doesn't suppose one's gender is a function of how one "feels" but how they act, their "performance" of gender. But even if you subscribe to the "I think I'm a woman so I am a woman" idea, there is no presumption that one's gender as a woman "overrides" their biological sex any more than one's race "overrides" their biological sex.
