Movies That Feed Your Ego

I know both of these things. My main point was that it's an irritating moment to have someone correct my definition of a word which, for all intents and purposes, was accurate until they suddenly decided to reinterpret and foist new meaning into it.

I know this too, my point here is that most defenders can't even adequately articulate these distinctions themselves.

That wasn't meant to be taken entirely seriously, nor is that even remotely like any sort of conversation I've had. I was inyending to paint the concept as ludicrous, which I maintain that it is. If "Two-Spirited" can be a gender then it pretty much destroys any serious mean;ng the word might have had.

I actually had an extremely detailed, lengthy, and therefor nigh unquotable, debate in another forum with a transgender over this topic. Despite citing numerous references, the arguments were inarticulate, riddled with logical fallacies, and ultimately convinced me I was justified in my skepticism.

My general position now is that this movement to redefine gender is the result of the LGB civil rights activists letting the snowball get away from them. It's not about sexuality anymore, it's about gender.

I'm all for less segregation between men and women, but the bathroom debate should start there: at sexism. Not at some guy who fancies himself a woman or something equally ridiculous like transableists.

Is that how you became gay? You heard a bunch of people talking about being gay and started to think you were gay too?

G-d, all the arguing lately has made me want to leave this place.

A few years ago (on a different forum) I was engaging in the some of the same-sex / redefinition of marriage debates.

The irony of that is I brought up bathrooms and genders. (I won't go into how or why, just that I was making a point that genders are biologically & fundamentally very different, and thus we have segregated restrooms.)

Anyway, I was told that these "slippery slope" arguments were ludicrous, pointless and ridiculous as this would NEVER become an issue for anyone, and only someone so obviously insane (me) would foresee it ever being even remotely discussed by anyone anywhere, no less by people on a national level.

I have other "insane" scenarios that I predict will become "issues" in the future, but if I state them now I'll be called ludicrous and insane for even imagining such things!

I could have a very long conversation with you all about this topic.... but I won't. Not because I can't, but because I really don't want to..... and we're not even in the right subforum to talk about it.......

The whole transgender thing also flies directly in the face of this whole pride concept LGB has built up too. You're not accepting who you are or the way you were born if if it means velieving you were born "wrong".

Yeah, I was thinking that too.

Irritating though it may be, it's ultimately better to have a shared understanding of the words rather than get caught up in miscommunication over inconsistent definitions.

Setting up a straw man is hardly the way to go about that, though, especially since it can just as easily come across as you being unable to define the terms yourself and throwing them together in order to create an unreasonable-sounding imaginary person for you to argue against and prove yourself right.

See, this is how setting up a straw man and having a hypothetical exchange to illustrate your point can backfire on you - even if you yourself know that you're not being too serious with your delivery of your point, you're still expecting people to take it seriously in order to engage with you. As a result, it has the effect of making you look just as unreasonable as your straw man, if not more so. Also, can you explain exactly why the concept of Two Spirit is so ludicrous without resorting to a straw man?

[citation needed]

(seriously, though, unless you can actually provide a link to said debate then this is inadmissible)

It can be about two things.

Isn't thinking of a woman as a man sexist?

I see where you're coming from here, but is it really that far removed from homosexuals being told that they were born wrong because of their orientation?

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

You're into some kinky sh*t. Damn, boy. And I thought you are pious.
Wow, CiCi!!! Stop being so mean!!! Why are you insulting the people of Nigeria?!

I came up with a joke today:

Leviticus gets up in the morning.
It's the 1st of May. He takes a coin.
Heads - Islam, Tails - Judaism.
So it is tails again, them bleedin' infidels live another month.

For the record gender and sex were never exact synonyms. Gender has always been more of a sociological and psychological concept, and did not refer to the biological sex of a person. This is how it was taught (with great emphasis) to me in human sexuality classes going back to the early 80s. Just so you know.

As for the rest of the madness in the thread, you guys can have it.

__________________
I may go back to hating you. It was more fun.

Agreed.

It wasn't intended to be a solid argument, it was intended to throw a piece at Sexy who I'm pretty sure already knows where I'm coming from on this issue. I was just confirming it with him.

I'm pretty sure he got the "Ms." part too.

I wasn't trying to engage people with it. Had I intended to debate, I'd have said something totally different.

If the definition is as follows:

Then that's a pretty ******* vague way to describe a gender which is traditionally binary with the reasonable exception of hermaphrodites. I don't really need a strawman for my point to stand: it renders the term "gender" virtually meaningless if it can be stretched to encompass something like "spiritual masculinity" which already stretches the definition of the "masculinity".

I don't think so, like I said, I didn't intend to argue with it, just briefly explain where I stand. Besides that even, it's so long that posting anything substantial from it would be inappropriate given how off-topic we already are and posting anything less than that doesn't adequately reflect the whole argument given that it's a very complex issue.

I COULD maybe go digging it up since I may have it saved somewhere, but I really don't think it's called for here.

It can, I take that back: it's mostly about gender now.

POTENTIALLY, yes, which is another part of the reason I'm arguing against it. Based on my understanding of sexism though, that's only circumstantially true, not necessarily true.

You're mixing the message though. LGB isn't telling LGB that. T is telling T that.

__________________
Movie Reviews | Anime Reviews
Top 100 Action Movie Countdown (2015): List | Thread
"Well, at least your intentions behind the UTTERLY DEVASTATING FAULTS IN YOUR LOGIC are good." - Captain Steel

I have not taken those classes.

Regardless, the definition of "gender" goes back a long ways.

Omnizoa, you may not intend to debate when you make a post, but this is a discussion board and it is obviously very possible that someone will want to engage with your points regardless of whether or not you were being serious, especially when it comes to such a contentious issue.

It is? Seems like its own topic. If ya'll wanna discuss this, apart from urging civility on all sides, I'd definitely start a new thread.

EDIT: I should clarify that I'm not faulting anyone. I didn't realize how much earlier this thread had flown off-track. If people still want to discuss is I can move the relevant posts into a new thread, or we can close it and start a new one. Lemme know if anyone has any opinions about how/whether to do it.

Burn this sucker to the ground lol!

I say delete it, pretty sure he'll open another thread, and direct it from topic to something offensive again. Just my 2 cents

Boogie Nights 😉

Superman (1978)

Don't get me started on that movie.

Yeah, I know, but as Yoda says:

I really don't want to get into a whole thing in a thread that opens with "Humble yourselves down to the true Creator of everything."