Is being Transgender a choice?

[AgnosticBoy]

I'm of the opinion that gender expression is a result of social conditioning. I know I used the word "choice" in the title, but that's only because people tend to associate behavior that can be changed or conditioned as being a "choice" (borrowing from the debate on born this way vs. choice).

In this thread, I want to focus on being transgender. Based on my above opinion, I also believe that being transgender is also a result of social conditioning (i.e. childhood experiences, what they learn from society, etc). If I'm right then I think that the recent focus on transgenderism in the media, in Hollywood, in schools, could lead some children to become transgender. And there is nothing wrong with that.

I also bring these points up because when some parents complain about their kids learning about transgenderism in school, the reaction is that it won't impact (some say "groom" ) the child into becoming transgender. If my view is correct, I think the pro-trans crowd should acknowledge that it can potentially influence children AND there's nothing wrong with that.

For Debate
1. Is being transgender a result of social conditioning?
2. Edit: Removed. Teaching kids about gender identity can be a separate thread.

[Purple Knight]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #140]

The trouble with this idea of every issue being different, everything being case-by-case, and that the right solution for one case is not applicable to another, is that then, human rights become meaningless, because what is a human right in one case, might not be in another.

For there to be meaningful human rights, we have to commit to some absolutes even if we don't want to. Examples like slavery is immoral, and such as people have the right to choose for themselves what they do with their own bodies.

I won't commit to slavery is immoral because I see it as problematic. People in prison are effectively enslaved, if they must do anything at all, and if they must not then it's not fair to everyone else who must do things to keep themselves alive. The best I'll commit to is race-based slavery is immoral when the race enslaved committed no injustice against the enslaving race.

But I'll commit to people should be able to make decisions about their own bodies for themselves; it's a human right. That means some unsavoury things like kids should be allowed to smoke. And because I'll admit I believe that, the position that happens to be popular is useless to me because all it does is mangle people who unscrupulous psychiatrists are probably misleading, and bring me scorn rather than popularity, but nonetheless I think it's important to have this absolute.

(And I think the solution to psychiatrists mangling people is to take away their authority. Extralegal organisations should never have legal authority. If lobotomies and shock therapy don't prove that there is something wrong with these people having power, then just crown them dictators and be done with the rest of the government since it clearly can't protect people from harm and abuse if the abusers raise the flag of I-know-best-I'm-an-expert. You want someone to counsel you? Hire someone - whoever you want. If they want to display certifications in their office they can, and those will have to earn their clout on their own merit, not be gifted false merit by the government.)

[oldbadger]

The phrasing above is poor, so to clarify... My hypothetical elderly neighbor that wont respect my preferred pronouns, would you seek to restrict her speech or would you not?

No....not really. If you have an ignorant and nasty minded neighbour who doesn't consider your personal feelings then you'll just have to ignore them.

I am glad to hear that you would be against laws that would restrict our speech (exceptions to every rule of course) as that would be an attempt to control and dominate others, something you are against.
Crazy don't you think as to how hard and how long it took us to get to this point? First you wanted examples, then when you got an example, you wanted to see convictions. It all seemed like a dodge to me.
:

Don't imagine that I would support your bigoted neighbour in anything that they say, CB. If they spread mucky ideas about you (or any) around the neighbourhood and you find that your home, grounds or lifestyle are being interfered with in any way because of his/her nasty mouth then you'll find me supporting some official action against them ...for sure.

I have already told you that if your neighbour (or any) are determined to spout any kind of hatred to or about anybody for any reason then I guess that you can, but if it leads to anything more then may the force of any laws that you've got (where you are) descend upon you.

The world is full of the self-righteous and judgmental types who are determined to mouth-off their hurtful opinions about others' private lives...... but that's not you, is it?

[brunumb]

The world is full of the self-righteous and judgmental types who are determined to mouth-off their hurtful opinions about others' private lives......

Is this the sort of thing you are alluding to?

[oldbadger]

The world is full of the self-righteous and judgmental types who are determined to mouth-off their hurtful opinions about others' private lives......

Is this the sort of thing you are alluding to?

Colonel Kelvin Wright resigned. And he is a transphobe.... he declared that ...
'Women cannot be men' and that is what got him reported by a subaltern officer.
Piers is ok, but he does manipulate his stories.

Daily Express:-
Officer 'forced out of the Army' for sharing 'men can't be women' statement......

........but he wasn't, he resigned. Transphobe medics in the British Army or NHS are a really bad idea.

Are you a Transphobe?

[brunumb]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #144]

He is entitled to his opinion and has a right to express it. Repeating that "men can't be women" is not justification for hateful mobs to go out of their way to hound anyone out of their position as has become common practice among the ideologically captured. This man did not attack any individual nor call for any hurtful or unlawful action against anyone. You seem to be holding contradictory views when it comes to free speech. It is not transphobic to merely express a difference of opinion.

Men cannot be women has been established by science. Sex is determined at conception and cannot be changed. Millions of years of evolution have cemented that in place. We are heading back to the kind of days when the church declared what is true and any difference of opinion earned you a date with a bonfire. The way gender ideology has been promulgated and inserted into society has all the hallmarks of cult practices. It is a complete anathema to science.

[brunumb]

Are you a Transphobe?

NO, and I would never treat a trans person the way trans activists treat people that they perceive to have opinions contrary to their own!

[oldbadger]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #144]

He is entitled to his opinion and has a right to express it. Repeating that "men can't be women" is not justification for hateful mobs to go out of their way to hound anyone out of their position as has become common practice among the ideologically captured. This man did not attack any individual nor call for any hurtful or unlawful action against anyone. You seem to be holding contradictory views when it comes to free speech. It is not transphobic to merely express a difference of opinion.

He resigned.

Men cannot be women has been established by science. Sex is determined at conception and cannot be changed. Millions of years of evolution have cemented that in place. We are heading back to the kind of days when the church declared what is true and any difference of opinion earned you a date with a bonfire. The way gender ideology has been promulgated and inserted into society has all the hallmarks of cult practices. It is a complete anathema to science.

In the UK our older teens can be prescribed with contraceptive medications, so under specialist advice they can still probably be prescribed with puberty blockers. And guess what...? ....... they have been produced by the very science that you are mentioning, above.

[oldbadger]

Are you a Transphobe?

NO, and I would never treat a trans person the way trans activists treat people that they perceive to have opinions contrary to their own!

Well maybe you should leave them alone to be who they want to be?

[Clownboat]

Well maybe you should leave them alone to be who they want to be?

Now that is some irony!

Your words: "Don't imagine that I would support your bigoted neighbour in anything that they say, CB. If they spread mucky ideas about you (or any) around the neighbourhood and you find that your home, grounds or lifestyle are being interfered with in any way because of his/her nasty mouth then you'll find me supporting some official action against them ...for sure."

"Leave trans people alone!"
"Let's take official action against the elderly neighbor that uses the wrong pronouns."
(Oh the irony)

Why shouldn't we leave the elderly neighbor alone and leave her to be who she wants to be? Why should anyone be allowed to dominate and control her speech via official action against her?
What if the elderly neighbor was trans and she referred to non trans people as hateful bigots who want to harm trans? Would you support official action against her nasty mouth in this instance, or are we out to only protect the feelings of trans people?

I'm all for trans people and the elderly to be allowed to speak as they see fit (exceptions to every rule).
I would support (may not agree with) the old lady's speech.
I would support (may not agree with) trans people's speech.
Let people show who they are I say, as I actually wouldn't seek to dominate or control them (like you seem willing to do), especially with official action against them. Your position isn't consistent and is therefore hard to agree with.

[brunumb]

Are you a Transphobe?

NO, and I would never treat a trans person the way trans activists treat people that they perceive to have opinions contrary to their own!

Well maybe you should leave them alone to be who they want to be?

I do. The activists want more than that. They want their ideology to govern every aspect of our lives. It's not enough that we just have acceptance, society must be totally molded to meet the needs of a few individuals. Why don't we see demands to affirm people suffering from other mental disorders such as anorexia? Because we understand that those people are mistaken in their belief. Just because people believe they are in the wrong body or are the wrong sex doesn't mean that they actually are. If some simply want to live as the opposite sex fair enough, but there also has to be trade-off. You can't have your cake and eat it too. For example, genetic women should have certain entitlements that trans women do not because no matter how loudly one may scream the mantra, men cannot be women.

There comes a point where being who one wants to be may infringe on other people being who they want to be. We are no longer allowed to express our opinions and are also facing compelled speech legislation. My feelings are now irrelevant while those few with gender dysphoria must be treated with kid gloves at all times in case they get upset. We can't address a group of people as "ladies and gentlemen" in case there is some individual among them who will have a melt down because they somehow perceive themself as being excluded. Narcissism, self-centredness and victimhood are driving too many of the activists and their supporters, patricularly the younger generation. I believe that they actually care less for any individuals than they do for their cause.