I remember someone on Reddit once tried using doctors as proof of trans legitimacy. They actually used that as proof. I just reminded them what happens to doctors who don’t drink the Kool aid.
I had the same happen years ago when I argued gender was a medical term and turning it into a sociological one was bastardizing the scientific process and making an unproven ideology superior to hard science. The rebuttal was “why aren’t biologists speaking out then”, of course predditors couldn’t figure out the sociologists took over the admin and who was allowed to be “biologists”…
Gender has only become a medical term because we, as a society, became squeamish about the word "sex." There are two sexes in the human race, male and female. Gender has its roots in linguistics. It referred to the grammatical gender of nouns (masculine, feminine, or neuter.)
Gender then became a euphemism for biological sex. Then it became a term for the expectations and social role that related to a particular sex. Then, it became an abstract "identity" that was distinctive from one's actual sex or even the role traditionally associated with the new identity. Now, it's become a catch-all for everything related to the sexes. It can refer to biological sex exclusively, mental identity, or anything tangentially related to them.
That’s actually not true for English. The English usage of gender is tied to the Greek root word genos. The version you’re thinking of is the French version which is based off genre and still a classification word.
no, he's right. The root is latin "Gens" which shares the same root as the greek "Genos" as an Indo-european ur-word meaning "Kind". Languages can have many genders, not just the three we associate with sex. Gender can also indicate abritrary grouping (like the 4th and 5th nominal genders of Latin), animacy (Slavic languages encode for animacy. so do Baltic), Material, ensoulment etc. Several african languages have up to 10 nominal genders. It means type, and nothing more.
Don't forget the people who were instrumental in the 50s/60s/70s shift of the meaning of the term 'gender' to mean 'sex roles'
There's a certain monster named Money who was involved. The things he did to those poor kids... I don't even want to talk about it, but it forms the foundation of all gender theory today. Him and that french bitch.
I remember when it started to be trendy a retired doctor got a lot of heat for saying that you shouldn’t affirm a delusion. So it’s no wonder doctors are scared to call this out
What the fuck happened for the NHS to basically comit Grand Treason against Intersectional groomers?
I'm pretty sure this would be hate speech in Canada, "litterally killing trans youth" by not enabling a self-destructive obsession seeded into kids by their teachers, the media and sometimes their parents.
Maby something about the lawsuit by the brown chick who got fast-tracked into "transition', which virilized her onto an ugli(er) mess.
In England there was a counter-reaction of GC (called the slur TERF by troons who also call on people to rape and kill them), which unlike our protests, was given legitimacy by the establishment.
I was (and still am in many ways) an acolyte of Richard Dawkins and the new atheism movement although I would now consider myself very distant from it now. That whole movement identified genuine criticisms of dogmatic thinking in religion. Where it went too far was in assuming that if something was not literally or scientifically true that it could not hold meaning or truth.
This is where the religious right is owed an apology. In defending the learned wisdoms and traditions of our ancestors the religious right was never incorrect regarding the hubris and arrogance of man. The inherent presupposition of our technological and industrial society is that religious beliefs are antiquated since no direct attribution to those values can be ascribed from them. At least this is the zeitgeist formed from modern institutions wholly divorced from religion in their left leaning influenced maxims, from which many people (intellectuals especially) exist entirely within.
The slippery slope is real. For every inch given a mile is taken. Resistance to the incessant advance of "progress" merely for the sake of "progress" justifies the position of the religious right, and for that I too owe them an apology.
"Why the fuck is this fence here? It is so damn old! Does anyone know what it does? Look, it is made of poorly assembled dry stone, and there are gaps in it. I can see one from here! Wait, is that section of the fence a hedgerow? It is totally shit! Look, I can't see any reason for this fence, so we should just tear it down."
Later:
"What do you mean that the fence was an important boundary marker? Holy shit was it a reference point for an entire system of surveying markers? It marked the borders of a nation? Why didn't anyone tell me it was important!"
they aren't divorced. They just invented a new one to worship. In many ways they are way more dogmatic than most people that can actually call themselves religious ever were.
I know quite a few doctors in the NHS for reasons and publicly/professionally, as well as frequently personally, they say nothing about this because most are close to retirement and know not to rock the boat lest they torpedo their retirements and pensions.
I think one of them mentioned out of all their colleagues only one had left/retired and felt the profession was in better shape than when they had started. Everyone else felt the opposite that things had gone to shit but knew there wasn't really anything they could do about it since not only would little actually change it would cost them significantly regardless.
A kid refusing to eat his potatoes if they touch his peas is going through a phase. It's not really a phase if it's a result of being groomed by a pedophile.
Although good as the less you do other than therapy with a neutral party you do, the better these kids are, is it finally a sign we are getting a tipping point or something else?
Really hoping for the former as means less maimed teens, the latter means in best case, it's only the UK making this move so it won't spread to other countries.
Or maybe the "experts" are just reading the winds, and know that the trans-side is a losing battle to the point that elections will be swayed so heavily against them, literally no one will be left that will believe in any general election that results in their favor.
Years? I'm thinking months if this is just being published now. They're going to get pushback from troons and American/EU "experts" in short order.
I remember someone on Reddit once tried using doctors as proof of trans legitimacy. They actually used that as proof. I just reminded them what happens to doctors who don’t drink the Kool aid.
I had the same happen years ago when I argued gender was a medical term and turning it into a sociological one was bastardizing the scientific process and making an unproven ideology superior to hard science. The rebuttal was “why aren’t biologists speaking out then”, of course predditors couldn’t figure out the sociologists took over the admin and who was allowed to be “biologists”…
Gender has only become a medical term because we, as a society, became squeamish about the word "sex." There are two sexes in the human race, male and female. Gender has its roots in linguistics. It referred to the grammatical gender of nouns (masculine, feminine, or neuter.)
Gender then became a euphemism for biological sex. Then it became a term for the expectations and social role that related to a particular sex. Then, it became an abstract "identity" that was distinctive from one's actual sex or even the role traditionally associated with the new identity. Now, it's become a catch-all for everything related to the sexes. It can refer to biological sex exclusively, mental identity, or anything tangentially related to them.
That’s actually not true for English. The English usage of gender is tied to the Greek root word genos. The version you’re thinking of is the French version which is based off genre and still a classification word.
no, he's right. The root is latin "Gens" which shares the same root as the greek "Genos" as an Indo-european ur-word meaning "Kind". Languages can have many genders, not just the three we associate with sex. Gender can also indicate abritrary grouping (like the 4th and 5th nominal genders of Latin), animacy (Slavic languages encode for animacy. so do Baltic), Material, ensoulment etc. Several african languages have up to 10 nominal genders. It means type, and nothing more.
Don't forget the people who were instrumental in the 50s/60s/70s shift of the meaning of the term 'gender' to mean 'sex roles'
There's a certain monster named Money who was involved. The things he did to those poor kids... I don't even want to talk about it, but it forms the foundation of all gender theory today. Him and that french bitch.
I remember when it started to be trendy a retired doctor got a lot of heat for saying that you shouldn’t affirm a delusion. So it’s no wonder doctors are scared to call this out
What the fuck happened for the NHS to basically comit Grand Treason against Intersectional groomers?
I'm pretty sure this would be hate speech in Canada, "litterally killing trans youth" by not enabling a self-destructive obsession seeded into kids by their teachers, the media and sometimes their parents.
Maby something about the lawsuit by the brown chick who got fast-tracked into "transition', which virilized her onto an ugli(er) mess.
In England there was a counter-reaction of GC (called the slur TERF by troons who also call on people to rape and kill them), which unlike our protests, was given legitimacy by the establishment.
Reminder that a lot of people, myself included, owe the religious right an apology.
I was (and still am in many ways) an acolyte of Richard Dawkins and the new atheism movement although I would now consider myself very distant from it now. That whole movement identified genuine criticisms of dogmatic thinking in religion. Where it went too far was in assuming that if something was not literally or scientifically true that it could not hold meaning or truth.
This is where the religious right is owed an apology. In defending the learned wisdoms and traditions of our ancestors the religious right was never incorrect regarding the hubris and arrogance of man. The inherent presupposition of our technological and industrial society is that religious beliefs are antiquated since no direct attribution to those values can be ascribed from them. At least this is the zeitgeist formed from modern institutions wholly divorced from religion in their left leaning influenced maxims, from which many people (intellectuals especially) exist entirely within.
The slippery slope is real. For every inch given a mile is taken. Resistance to the incessant advance of "progress" merely for the sake of "progress" justifies the position of the religious right, and for that I too owe them an apology.
Later:
they aren't divorced. They just invented a new one to worship. In many ways they are way more dogmatic than most people that can actually call themselves religious ever were.
Wow. I’m surprised they would say that. But that should be common sense. I would think believing you are the opposite sex is a sign of deeper issues.
I know quite a few doctors in the NHS for reasons and publicly/professionally, as well as frequently personally, they say nothing about this because most are close to retirement and know not to rock the boat lest they torpedo their retirements and pensions.
I think one of them mentioned out of all their colleagues only one had left/retired and felt the profession was in better shape than when they had started. Everyone else felt the opposite that things had gone to shit but knew there wasn't really anything they could do about it since not only would little actually change it would cost them significantly regardless.
A kid refusing to eat his potatoes if they touch his peas is going through a phase. It's not really a phase if it's a result of being groomed by a pedophile.
It can still be a phase, just one caused by grooming. Get away from the grooming influence, and it will probably go away.
The grooming is now on an industrial scale, so it becomes more difficult to point to a specific perpetrator.
i still prefer my food to not touch
This was basic common sense to every illiterate medieval peasant 500 years ago.
It was common sense to cavemen 18,000 years ago. Just like what a woman is.
YOU THINK OGRA DOESN'T KNOW WHAT WOMAN IS? ME THINKS YOU WANT OGRA'S CLUB ON HEAD!
This is violence.
Although good as the less you do other than therapy with a neutral party you do, the better these kids are, is it finally a sign we are getting a tipping point or something else?
Really hoping for the former as means less maimed teens, the latter means in best case, it's only the UK making this move so it won't spread to other countries.
We've known this for a long time now but it's good to see them making this change.
Or maybe the "experts" are just reading the winds, and know that the trans-side is a losing battle to the point that elections will be swayed so heavily against them, literally no one will be left that will believe in any general election that results in their favor.
Happy Opposite Day everyone!!!