It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
low rated
avatar
kai2:
avatar
morolf: I disagree, the "T" part in LBGTQ+ is a huge problem imo. This isn't about tolerance of homosexuals anymore, about granting them the right to civil unions or marriage etc. (which is indeed probably relatively uncontroversial by now in most Western countries), it's about forcing all of society to accept an ideological agenda with very dubious tenets ("more than two genders", "gender has no basis in biology" etc.). And there's real harm involved here. Do you really believe it's natural that it suddenly seems to be a thing among teenagers (teenage girls especially) to believe they're trans? Do you really believe it's good to encourage them to take hormones and have irreversible surgeries (which, to put it bluntly, involve the amputation of body parts)?
To claim this is just about tolerance in a "live and let live" sense is quite disingenuous imo, it has moved well beyond that.
T is a difficult subject...

... but some gender ambiguity has been with humanity since the inception of society.

To disregard this would be intellectually dishonest.

In fact traditional Polynesian cultures revered males who lived in the female role... but again, these people worked for their society, not undermine it.

The problem today is...

... "transsexual" transition was meant for those with persistent and debilitating cross-gender feelings (dysmorphia). This was meant as a treatment primarily for people born with some level of DSD (disorder of sexual development). As can be imagined, this group was VERY small and seemed to have relatively good outcomes.

In the late 1990's...

... a transvestite (a person who derives sexual pleasure from dressing as the opposite sex) coined the term "transgender" in order to get the ability to "transition." (prior to this transvestites were not permitted to transition per the Harry Benjamin Standards of Care). The "transgender" community exploded since there are far more "transvestites" than "transsexuals."

The medical / psychological establishment adopted "transgender" and in the mid 2000's lowered rules for medical transition to allow transition with fewer and fewer "checks and balances." As this has occured, young people -- who already feel uncertain of their bodies, roles, and places in society have gravitated toward transgenderism.

So, with that said...

... you may be surprised to find that many "transsexuals" believe in the gender binary (they wish to be part of society), believe in rigorous "gatekeeping" prior to transition (to make certain they are benefiting their lives and truly entering the role they are meant to live), and cannot understand the "transgender" or "non-binary." In fact many see those groups as undermining the medical and legal validity of transition.

So, when talking of "T"...

... yes, the current "transgender" radicals are problematic for many reasons, but there is much more in the "T" than you might think

If it were me, I'd be looking hard at the medical establishment for their reasons for making giant, life-altering changes easier and easier for people young and younger with other underlying issues.
Post edited June 04, 2021 by kai2
low rated
avatar
SmollestLight: There was no newspost because we thought a big spot visibility and a partner page that explains the reasoning behind the collection was enough.
Weird! That certainly never seemed to be the mentality for Cyberpunk stuff.
low rated
avatar
kohlrak: I could argue all against this, but it would be going down the rabbit hole and allow you to dodge the acutal point that was being made: that the pride stuff, racial history studies, etc, only reinforces group mentality which in turn upsets the out group which in turn keeps the groups against each other.
avatar
rojimboo: Speaking of dodging the actual point and appeals to emotion - you didn't even bother replying to my (admittedly lengthy) post content and were instead content to divulge some personal anecdotes to...what? Prove a point? I'm not sure anymore.
Why should i stick to your point when you can't even stick to mine? You don't get to change the topic then complained that i derailed.
Look, your *entire* point relies on the fact that your way of equality (which is allowing the powerful majority responsible for persecuting the minorities to continue business-as-usual) would work. News flash - it doesn't and it hasn't. There's still a ridiculous amount of inequality and prejudice in the world and no matter how loud you shout 'true equality for all! no discrimination against straight white men!' it will still be the case, unless we do something about it. That something is equity.
As continued to be demonstrated for all to see, sure.
Pride and the celebration of minorities fits right into that. Why do we celebrate it? Why do *you* think that is? The common argument (which I will no doubt hear from you soon) is that why aren't we celebrating straight people too? Surely we are all equal? Why are the LGBTQ+ people 'special' and deserve 'special' treatment? I'd like to hear your answer to this, because the actual answer is very simple and clear for many people. Empathy, solidarity and compassion, hint.
What we generally celebrate is people overcoming something. But pride appears to be moving away from that. And, same with black history month. Instead, we keep getting told how no one overcame. Wouldn't that mean we're celebrating a little early?
The fact that you think this celebration 'keeps the groups against each other' showcases that you think the prejudiced in the majority are so rigid and brainwashed and stuck in their ways, that nothing will deter them from hating fellow human beings based on anything non-conforming. Well, some people have more faith. It's not the fault of the victims that inequality is perpetuated, or prejudice. You can't just go "Well, if they kept it in their bedrooms, out of sight, we would all get along'. No. That's you burying your head in the sand and allowing injustice to keep occurring. You wouldn't say anti-semitism is the fault of Jewish people, now would you? Same thing here. It's not the fault of people celebrating Pride that people hate it and turn against them, the blame is squarely on those people themselves.
Oh goodie, i said something about keeping it in their bedrooms? Why does anyone think that I have a problem with gay people or something? The non-straight people i interact with the most see pride as an insult. They push back, themselves. Imagine being these people for a minute that turn around and have to say "no, I don't support hating on gay people, as I am gay" or "no, I agree the age of consent for both sex and medical treatment is 18." I can imagine the poor trans people right now saying "no, i don't believe you should conform to my whims if you don't like what is beneath my skirt." And the whole marketing behind it is an insult to them, too. Pride used to be wholesome, back in the day.
avatar
kohlrak: I mean, we could talk about these things, but my guess is it's all from some classroom instead of down in the dirt. Do you even know what poor is like?
etc
You think we are discussing some hypotheticals from some social studies class? That's why you went on with your personal anecdotes (that actually were really hard to follow and had little semblance of a point)? Real people are affected, and many draw upon what they write from their own experiences, or friends' or families'. Just because I'm not sharing my childhood story and detailed income level and bracket growing up, doesn't invalidate my points.
You're right, an argument is independent of the speaker. But, you're not exactly known for not trying to throw authority around. Frankly, I have doubts to all the sentiment i keep hearing. I just keep seeing people who pride themselves on their education, status, etc, all going around telling people how they know how to fix a problem, but no one else does. The whole hubris of it all, and often times these people are so separated from the impoverished it's questionable they even know what poverty looks like. And this can be said of pretty much anyone in the west compared to third world countries, but if we're going to use a western standard for western countries, i still doubt those shouting that they know the solution have any connection to what's going on. For all the words and money that get thrown at the problem, it sure as hell never seems to be getting better. In fact, for some reason things seem to be getting worse on the racism front, but i'm sure scapegoats X, Y, and Z to blame.

I mean, common, dirt's dirt. Nothing can go wrong extending the homestead act so people start tilling a bunch of dirt in dry territory. You see, the experts have it all figured out. There's no possibility that they left something unaccounted for.
avatar
morolf: I disagree, the "T" part in LBGTQ+ is a huge problem imo. This isn't about tolerance of homosexuals anymore, about granting them the right to civil unions or marriage etc. (which is indeed probably relatively uncontroversial by now in most Western countries), it's about forcing all of society to accept an ideological agenda with very dubious tenets ("more than two genders", "gender has no basis in biology" etc.). And there's real harm involved here. Do you really believe it's natural that it suddenly seems to be a thing among teenagers (teenage girls especially) to believe they're trans? Do you really believe it's good to encourage them to take hormones and have irreversible surgeries (which, to put it bluntly, involve the amputation of body parts)?
To claim this is just about tolerance in a "live and let live" sense is quite disingenuous imo, it has moved well beyond that.
avatar
kai2: T is a difficult subject...

... but some gender ambiguity has been with humanity since the inception of society.

To disregard this would be intellectually dishonest.

In fact traditional Polynesian cultures revered males who lived in the female role... but again, these people worked for their society, not undermine it.

The problem today is...

... "transsexual" transition was meant for those with persistent and debilitating cross-gender feelings (dysmorphia). This was meant as a treatment primarily for people born with some level of DSD (disorder of sexual development). As can be imagined, this group was VERY small and seemed to have relatively good outcomes.

In the late 1990's...

... a transvestite (a person who derives sexual pleasure from dressing as the opposite sex) coined the term "transgender" in order to get the ability to "transition." (prior to this transvestites were not permitted to transition per the Harry Benjamin Standards of Care). The "transgender" community exploded since there are far more "transvestites" than "transsexuals."

The medical / psychological establishment adopted "transgender" and in the mid 2000's lowered rules for medical transition to allow transition with fewer and fewer "checks and balances." As this has occured, young people -- who already feel uncertain of their bodies, roles, and places in society have gravitated toward transgenderism.

So, with that said...

... you may be surprised to find that many "transsexuals" believe in the gender binary (they wish to be part of society), believe in rigorous "gatekeeping" prior to transition (to make certain they are benefiting their lives and truly entering the role they are meant to live), and cannot understand the "transgender" or "non-binary." In fact many see those groups as undermining the medical and legal validity of transition.

So, when talking of "T"...

... yes, the current "transgender" radicals are problematic for many reasons, but there is much more in the "T" than you might think

If it were me, I'd be looking hard at the medical establishment for their reasons for making giant, life-altering changes easier and easier for people young and younger with other underlying issues.
Given the amount of support for those who actually make no changes, jsut simply declare pronouns, i'm gonna go with this being part of the church of post-modernism. It's not enough that we let someone be, but somehow not seeing someone the way they want to be seen is somehow harming that person.
Post edited June 04, 2021 by kohlrak
low rated
avatar
kohlrak: Why should i stick to your point when you can't even stick to mine? You don't get to change the topic then complained that i derailed.
I actually answered your point, you never did mine. I mean, I can't force you to reply to the relevant topic at hand - you can go off on tangents with personal anecdotes and fantasise about the Pride that was, and is no more, suit yourself. I'm still definitely gonna point it out though for the hell of it, as I wrote quite a bit and you handwaived it away for no reason.

avatar
kohlrak: What we generally celebrate is people overcoming something. But pride appears to be moving away from that. And, same with black history month. Instead, we keep getting told how no one overcame. Wouldn't that mean we're celebrating a little early?
Wait. You actually think LGBTQ+ have overcome nothing? Even in 2021? Wow. Hence why we are not communicating. That's delusional.

And you conveniently dodged the question. A simple pertinent, straight question lobbed at you. Well, not conveniently, more like unsurprisingly.

avatar
kohlrak: The non-straight people i interact with the most see pride as an insult. They push back, themselves. Imagine being these people for a minute that turn around and have to say "no, I don't support hating on gay people, as I am gay" or "no, I agree the age of consent for both sex and medical treatment is 18." I can imagine the poor trans people right now saying "no, i don't believe you should conform to my whims if you don't like what is beneath my skirt." And the whole marketing behind it is an insult to them, too. Pride used to be wholesome, back in the day.
It's clear you object to Pride. Sure. But why is it? Really? Why do you take such offense at a minority celebrating? Ask yourself that and try to answer truthfully. None of this 'wellll, my gay friend said something about it, so I'm gonna think it's a disgusting celebration now anyways and in any case it coincides with my views'.

avatar
kohlrak: But, you're not exactly known for not trying to throw authority around.
Lol, what 'authority' do you exactly think I have on a vidya gaming forum between anonymous forum goers trying to desperately discuss politics? It's really sad when I put it that way actually. Hm.
low rated
avatar
kai2: T is a difficult subject...

... but some gender ambiguity has been with humanity since the inception of society.
Unequivocal biological sex is a fact for the vast majority of people (yes, I know, there are intersexuals, and their status should be a granted legal recognition, but that's a different subject from trans issues imo). So what's "gender ambiguity" supposed to mean? I mean we're not talking about a movement here which seeks to soften rigid gender roles, in the sense of boys exploring their "feminine" side and doing ballet or whatever, helping women get ahead in male-dominated professions etc. We're talking about something altogether more radical.
Anyway, I probably shouldn't write more, I've been suspended twice in the past, and I don't want to risk another ban. My views should have become clear enough.
low rated
avatar
kohlrak: Why should i stick to your point when you can't even stick to mine? You don't get to change the topic then complained that i derailed.
avatar
rojimboo: I actually answered your point, you never did mine.
You didn't.
I mean, I can't force you to reply to the relevant topic at hand - you can go off on tangents with personal anecdotes and fantasise about the Pride that was, and is no more, suit yourself. I'm still definitely gonna point it out though for the hell of it, as I wrote quite a bit and you handwaived it away for no reason.
'Cause you didn't address the point...
Wait. You actually think LGBTQ+ have overcome nothing? Even in 2021? Wow. Hence why we are not communicating. That's delusional.
It's called sarcasm. I honestly think the community has overcome alot, however you think that the way the complaints are levied.
It's clear you object to Pride. Sure. But why is it? Really? Why do you take such offense at a minority celebrating? Ask yourself that and try to answer truthfully. None of this 'wellll, my gay friend said something about it, so I'm gonna think it's a disgusting celebration now anyways and in any case it coincides with my views'.
Because it's not pride. And, well, it's not about celebrating overcoming something if we keep getting told that nothing was overcome, or that there's alot of work ahead, or whatever. You'd think that it should be a celebration for society as a whole, instead a minority, right? The same thing is in the past opposition to Christmas, which has largely been the same way. An atheist society doesn't really think Christmas represents it, anymore (most do, but some don't, and it's those vocal few who oppose it). What i'd like to know is why we also don't celebrate the end of slavery (then again, it is still being practiced in some parts of the world). Also, why a month instead of a day like other holidays? Jews only ask for a week for their cultural heritage, and i think i could get behind that, especially as it ultimately is the cultural heritage of most of the west, and I don't think we appreciate them enough.

Lol, what 'authority' do you exactly think I have on a vidya gaming forum between anonymous forum goers trying to desperately discuss politics? It's really sad when I put it that way actually. Hm.
None, really, same as everyone else who bothers to enter this topic, even so far as the gog staff. But, hey, I'm anti-authority at the end of the day, so I wouldn't be such a good person to ask. Mankind always seems to love sticking it's foot in it's mouth.
low rated
avatar
Canuck_Cat: Would be interesting to see sources here.
avatar
GamezRanker: If you mean a study, article, etc....I don't have one atm...but I do have life experiences/etc.

It's called watching the world & things around you and elsewhere, and then forming/coming to conclusions....i.e. what humans used to do much more of before relying on "authoritative sources".

(not trying to nag on ya with the above btw....just saying that imo one shouldn't rely only/mostly on such sources and that one should more so use their own mind to interpret things around them/others)
Thank you for the disclaimer; I'm also trying to keep this discussion as civil as possible.

Scientific articles aren't as authoritarian as you might think. They do research, discussions, visit conferences, etc. to produce results. Oftentimes, their work is based of large sample sizes conducted by 2+ highly trained specialists (PhD, Masters), reviewed by 2-3+ third-party trained specialists of the community, and then publish on journals for all the experts in the community to read, critique, and reproduce its results. If they've passed through those checks, then it becomes assimilated into the community knowledge.

It's not perfect because it's got its own problems with research funding, academia politics, citation bias, bogey experiment setup and results, poor journals, etc., but it's the best system available to draw non-biased facts from since results can be reproduced to within an acceptable margin of error to confirm findings. This is because you aren't just drawing from one person's life experience; you're drawing from the knowledge of the sample size's experiences in the dozens, hundreds, thousands, etc. supported by two dozen other professional works, and at least half a dozen experts to produce these labour-intensive works. Then they can form a community opinion on the subject. From there, it's up to lawmakers to take that distilled info and enact it if they believe it's what their constituents want. So there is present multiple layers of separation between scientists' opinions, biased or not, and lawmakers they report to.

avatar
GamezRanker: We could keep stuff like halloween, valentine's day, the holidays, etc.
The more holidays, the better for us regular folks.

avatar
Shadowstalker16: I just assumed, obviously there isn't an arbiter or anything. Reasoning is that of all the things to take pride in, its the uncontrollable things that someone should take pride in? Instead of making or working towards something to be proud of why take pride in an aspect of ourselves that we had no hand in choosing? Are humans amazing just because of existing?
Thank you for clarifying. Sometimes people want some time to celebrate both their uncontrollable identity and to celebrate past achievements. For example, Turing is also celebrated this month who contributed to WW2 decryption efforts and is widely considered the father of modern computer science. And certainly there are no shortages of patriots celebrating their uncontrollable identities in their respective countries too. Again, as long as no one is getting hurt or elevating themselves above regular citizens, let them be.

Also, everyone is working on making and working towards things during normal days. Unless I'm missing something, LGBTQ+ people work the same 8-12 hours as the rest of us miserable people. And they go home to celebrate whatever on their own time like a relative's birthday just like the rest of us. No negative externalities here, so what's the harm besides thinking it's dumb?

avatar
Shadowstalker16: I don't see any relation between festivals done within a religion to pride festivities today. The cause of any given religious festival isn't pushing the religion into the public conscience or to make people think about them. Basically, they're not PR or educational in nature. Either way, what I'm saying is that taking both festivals described in old books and festivals that celebrate who one has sex with too seriously is dumb.
They're both similar in celebrating a history and lifestyle. And it is part of the collective consciousness if it's celebrated as a public holiday where people are given time off their everyday lives to celebrate it. Deciding what people should be celebrating or what to take pride in is not up to the sole decision of laypeople like you or me except at a household level. It's up to communities and governments to work together to decide that. If you think all festivities should be banned, you're more than welcome to start your own community and recruit others into your campaign to get public acknowledgement.

I have a suspicion if LGBTQ+ community were given the same level of respect as Irish Americans or Jewish Americans as previously mentioned, they wouldn't be so prominent in the parades, news, and so highly politicized like the Irish or Jewish American populations. There are a list of other observance months I've never heard of and I surmise it's because their plights aren't as severe or as persistent as it is in the LGBTQ+ community.
Post edited June 04, 2021 by Canuck_Cat
low rated
IMHO this topic has gotten toxic and that it should be locked. if anyone has any objections, state the reason why.
low rated
avatar
kai2: T is a difficult subject...

... but some gender ambiguity has been with humanity since the inception of society.
avatar
morolf: Unequivocal biological sex is a fact for the vast majority of people (yes, I know, there are intersexuals, and their status should be a granted legal recognition, but that's a different subject from trans issues imo). So what's "gender ambiguity" supposed to mean? I mean we're not talking about a movement here which seeks to soften rigid gender roles, in the sense of boys exploring their "feminine" side and doing ballet or whatever, helping women get ahead in male-dominated professions etc. We're talking about something altogether more radical.
Anyway, I probably shouldn't write more, I've been suspended twice in the past, and I don't want to risk another ban. My views should have become clear enough.
This is where it gets sticky, because if we are to recognize intersex, and also accept their transitions (should they choose to engage in this), that means we also have to accept the transitions of transsexuals as well, just fundamentally speaking. I don't see how you could separate them, given the transgender argument is often right-brain-wrong-body or something to that effect (weird how that argument stayed around). The fundamental opposition should, however, be specific to the jurisdiction: it is my choice whether or not I accept a certain notion or not (i could go deeper on this, but what's the point?. It gets stickier when involving the government. Frankly, the government should be keeping itself to sex, rather than gender, because the ambiguity that gender provides is untenable, especially when unironic whim-flipping is argued for, and the challenge of going beyond 2. As for the effects of hormones on sports and prisons, i think that can be handled better (for sports, let the organzations themselves sort that out, and for prisons, you should probably be raising workplace safety standards for corrections officers to begin with).
low rated
avatar
zgrillo2004: IMHO this topic has gotten toxic and that it should be locked. if anyone has any objections, state the reason why.
People who want to post in this thread might get frustrated and compensate by committing some violent crime...do you want that?
low rated
avatar
zgrillo2004: IMHO this topic has gotten toxic and that it should be locked. if anyone has any objections, state the reason why.
Fundamentally i disagree with topics getting locked. The more you avoid issues, the more the derailing and such will happen, just because people need to "get it out." We're having the problem of discussion precisely because society has been avoiding this issue. More avoidance isn't going to solve it.
low rated
avatar
zgrillo2004: IMHO this topic has gotten toxic and that it should be locked. if anyone has any objections, state the reason why.
avatar
morolf: People who want to post in this thread might get frustrated and compensate by committing some violent crime...do you want that?
Those people need to see a therapist, IMHO and you have no right of inciting violence.
avatar
zgrillo2004: IMHO this topic has gotten toxic and that it should be locked. if anyone has any objections, state the reason why.
avatar
kohlrak: Fundamentally i disagree with topics getting locked. The more you avoid issues, the more the derailing and such will happen, just because people need to "get it out." We're having the problem of discussion precisely because society has been avoiding this issue. More avoidance isn't going to solve it.
the problem is that as more and more people fight over a controversial topic, it gets locked anyway. just watch. This forum is dead to me. if these people want to do what they want to do, fine by me. just stop getting me involved in it.
Post edited June 04, 2021 by zgrillo2004
low rated
avatar
kohlrak:
You don't understand what intersex is, they're people whose biological sex is ambiguous. That clearly needs to be accommodated in some way, either by granting them legal recognition as a "third sex" (which many of them want) or letting them choose what they want to be in legal terms.
And no, I don't think this means one has to accept transgenderism. These are very distinct issues.
avatar
zgrillo2004: Those people need to see a therapist, IMHO and you have no right of inciting violence.
No, I'm trying to prevent violence. And therapists are expensive and have long waiting lists, so that isn't really a useful recommendation.
Post edited June 04, 2021 by morolf
low rated
avatar
morolf: People who want to post in this thread might get frustrated and compensate by committing some violent crime...do you want that?
avatar
zgrillo2004: Those people need to see a therapist, IMHO and you have no right of inciting violence.
Don't get me wrong, I certainly agree with the sentiment, but I do believe that there's an issue that human beings being forced quiet will speak up with violence. The more someone's backed into a corner, especially after being radicalized and have no way to challenge their radical ideas, the more likely they are to snap.
avatar
kohlrak: Fundamentally i disagree with topics getting locked. The more you avoid issues, the more the derailing and such will happen, just because people need to "get it out." We're having the problem of discussion precisely because society has been avoiding this issue. More avoidance isn't going to solve it.
the problem is that as more and more people fight over a controversial topic, it gets locked anyway. just watch.
You would be right, but that's precisely where the problem comes from. information silos, and it's always someone else's problem. Not saying gog'll solve it, but someone's gotta get an idea somewhere.
avatar
kohlrak:
avatar
morolf: You don't understand what intersex is, they're people whose biological sex is ambiguous. That clearly needs to be accommodated in some way, either by granting them legal recognition as a "third sex" (which many of them want) or letting them choose what they want to be in legal terms.
And no, I don't think this means one has to accept transgenderism. These are very distinct issues.
I thought from the context we were talking about people with "both parts." As a result, if we recognize what they do to convert to one sex or the other (which often happens), then we need to recognize transsexuals similarly, else what basis do we have to support or condemn one but not the other?
Post edited June 04, 2021 by kohlrak
avatar
zgrillo2004: IMHO this topic has gotten toxic and that it should be locked. if anyone has any objections, state the reason why.
avatar
kohlrak: Fundamentally i disagree with topics getting locked. The more you avoid issues, the more the derailing and such will happen, just because people need to "get it out." We're having the problem of discussion precisely because society has been avoiding this issue. More avoidance isn't going to solve it.
Sure. On the other hand, there's the whole Internet out there for everyone to "get it out", and this here is like the "sir, this is Wendy's" meme coming to life.