Eegore wrote on 10/22/18 at 07:06:26:

"Sex means a person’s status as male or female based on immutable biological traits identifiable by or before birth"  

Can you post a link, that gives the full version of that new, 'law', or, regulation ?

Where their is no description of the difference between, gender Reassignment  and gender Identity.

And no possible remedy of someone having surgery years ago, as to how they are functioning today.

"Can you post a link, that gives the full version of that new, 'law', or, regulation ?

Where their is no description of the difference between, gender Reassignment  and gender Identity.

And no possible remedy of someone having surgery years ago, as to how they are functioning today."

 No.

"You're not a science denier, are you?"

 No.

 I am not denying factual science which is why I stated: "I'm ok with having a unified definition to base policy off of"

 What I am attempting to say is that I see a varying degree of commitment to gender roles among people who are affected by government definition of gender.  Some claim psychologically that they are opposite gender while other go through physical changes over many years.  It is less likely that a surgically and pharmaceutically gender reassigned person is trying to get into a college and then just flip around after they graduate.  

 Science isn't saying that a male is now female, that person is.  Something about our right to the Pursuit of Happiness could apply here given that gender reassignment is not illegal.  

 An example is that there are some veterans that get prescription medication while they are enlisted, and it used to be that those prescriptions became so cost-ineffective to get after discharge that most did not continue the medications which resulted in higher healthcare costs to the VA, as well as higher suicide and homicide rates.  Once AFA guaranteed their medications things improved.  

 People who have been able to afford gender-reassignment hormones at an affordable cost may lose this option because of a definition change.  This has more to do with the effect of the definition change than the definition itself.

 By science I am European, but by definition I am American.

 Illegal immigrants by science are not American, legal immigrants that gain citizenship are by science still an immigrant and not American.  There's a commitment (and economic) difference between legal and illegal immigrants, which I see as being similar to how people commit to gender-change roles.  

@Eegore

Interesting topic for this particular forum. As you say there's two completely separate issues. Regarding the first issue, personal opinion in this instance have to be subjugated to the laws of the land and the social realities. Having said that, a man who has had his Bwana Dik cut off and pumped full of hormone does not make him a woman. I'd respect the decision and call her she and respect her right to do this, and be treated as a woman. This is a tricky one for misogynists though because they don't appreciate a women and see them more like female men anyway.

On the second issue. It's plainly fcuking ludicrous. However I am actually tackling this bs in my own work which is a wider sexual philosophy. We need to educate the upcoming crop of teens and I'm currently building a complete reworking of sexual education in schools.

Apparently I can identify as a squirrel if I want, which is nuts. Jordon Peterson has an amusing discussion with a whiney little baitch professor that's a bit of a riot...


https://youtu.be/SiijS_9hPkM


P.S. FFS when is someone going to turn of the fcuking forum 'bad words' spell correction. It a pointless anachronism.

Let me add that in my work my primary concern is only for the kids who are growing up in this very fcuked up world, because they do not have a chance they do not have the knowledge to make an informed decision. We are in a situation now when people think it's OK for a 3 year old to decide their gender identity.

Oh and on a side issue, you know how we're always hearing about guys who have lived a normal male life, married with kids, suddenly deciding they were really 'gay' all the time, how come we never hear about gay people who come out as straight? It's the same frikken concept. Or if people can suddenly change their gender identity or back again on a whim, it makes a mockery of humanity.

eau de sauvage wrote on 10/22/18 at 16:29:12:

Or if people can suddenly change their gender identity or back again on a whim, it makes a mockery of humanity.

Well in this country, suddenly changing gender identity, will depend on if a pervert wants to see little girls going to the bathroom.

And all curtsy of the UL, Socialist, Progressive, Fairy Dust Sprinklers.

eau de sauvage wrote on 10/22/18 at 16:29:12:


"there are  gays that reverted to being strait, but you never hear of them, not the narrative that radical gays want.

 Again I am not trying to debate IF a man is a woman if they get gender reassignment surgery.  I am asking if they should have certain privileges revoked, like paying equal for healthcare coverage.

 Science says they are a male. They are male, no debate about him being a male. This is a male in the next subject.

 But as a male that has gender reassignment that person gets the same rights as if he was born a woman, like paying for healthcare.  If the definition changes then insurers can take away the hormone coverage because of "science".  If he had been born a woman they would provide coverage.

 So if an immigrant is scientifically "Australian" as in born to parents originating from Australia (parents hold citizenship) and is born in Australia, science dictates that person Australian.  So once that Australian takes all US citizenship courses and becomes, legally, a US citizen he is an "American" citizen by law and thus by "definition".  Science says Australian, US law says American, so he gets all American citizen rights and privileges.  "Science" is being used loosely here as a way of defining geographical origin of birth.

 So if a man born in America to legally American citizen parents and surgically reassigns himself, legally, he is still scientifically a man and by "definition" a man, therefore he as an American citizen does not get all privileges.

 He is a man, the discussion is not about IF he is a man.