New Gender Options for Facebook Users

[Cake Faice]

What does this even mean? Please check the syntax of your posts in the future.

If you dunno what that means, then it's beyond me.

I don't think you understand how gender psychology actually works. Are you just making up this imaginary narrative as you go along based on what you've heard? Have you actually spoken to any transgender people rather than hearing stories on news sites that you subscribe to because they align closely with your political views? The extent to which you all ignore your own confirmation bias is astounding.

You claim I don't know any transgendered people, yet I highly doubt you've ever spoken to someone that has their reasons against it.

On whose authority? Do you speak for the entire human race, from which you conveniently exclude people you don't like? You only think that transgender people won't be accepted because you refuse to listen to anyone who does. (Again, reminding you that they are people, not an abstract concept that you can accept or deny.)

If you think society will 100% accept transgenders, then you should really try to break out of the tumblr world and enter reality every once in a while.

English.

Ursus pls

This isn't even an argument on your part. It's just you complaining about how stupid you think it is. Are you just trying to spam the thread or something?

Just like you trying to mask your complaining using 3 length essays on why those who don't agree are wrong?

What's a pink agenda? What actions of yours are being forced because of it? The only thing in your life that's different because of this is you choosing to vehemently attack their rights and identities with zero direct provocation.

I'm surprised you don't honestly know what that means by now. God forbid if someone disagrees with something. In this case, only LGBT should have the only opinion and the right to speak.

Also, what is the content of the agenda itself, since you're so angry about it? Do you think that they're trying to convince people to acknowledge their humanity and afford them basic courtesy and respect for some sinister purpose? Do you think that transgender people make up their entire lives and identities just so an online news site they have no stake in can profit from it? Where are these imaginary evil motives you're referring to?

Once again, please, go watch any modern media source. How do you expect me and others to respect them when they do shit like this infront of everyone:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I don't even need to add further.

Also you'd be surprised how many openly gay/trans/LGBT members will bash religion and trash traditional values because of the "muh oppression" movement. That, and most of them usually cannot understand the concept of "not everyone agrees with you". Example: See the Chick-fil-A and the disagreement of gay marriage.

Yes. They want to have normal lives. They would like nothing better than to see absolutely no reason to talk to you about their problems or their identity. You and them seem to want the same thing.

This is not the case because trans people, as it stands, have to live their lives in constant fear of physical abuse, murder, verbal and emotional abuse from their family and even psychologists/therapists. It doesn't help that there are people who refuse to even acknowledge them or these fears because they disagree with their entire existence.

There's quite a sizable amount of these people. Do you believe they're all choosing to completely fabricate the exact same types of experiences across the world, independently of one another, just to satisfy a desire for attention? Where is the logic in this? I've offered you detailed and sound explanations for why they're speaking out and you're still insisting that it's all for some kind of "agenda."

Gee, I wonder how many trans people you talked to live outside of your extremely biased community. A transgender person doesn't live in fear every day of their life unless they purposely wear degrading clothing, have inappropriate behavior, and live in an extremely conservative area. I don't know where you get your credible sources from, saying that transgendered people get the shit beat out of them often, as you put it, and hated upon by many. Believe it or not, I have friends that are gay, or support gay rights, and you know what? They do nothing wrong to get hatred. They dress normal, talk normal, act normal, just the only thing is they like the same sex. They don't go on and tell me about how they're gay and I should have to treat them different. One of my very close friends actively supports gay marriage and the LGBT community, and he knows I very much disagree. But I don't look down upon him or disrespect him, nor does he look down upon me. They don't do the shit that LGBT attention seeking whores do.

No one will have a problem with a transgendered person if they don't do out-casting, "look at me I'm different", attention seeking crap. Wearing normal clothes or engaging in normal behaviors won't provoke anyone, since the city I live has them almost in the millions range, compared to the millions who travel here everyday. Dunno if I told you, but yes I do interact with one or two on a weekly basis, there's nothing for me to be angered by them for, they don't do provoking shit or force their beliefs on me, even though I find it wrong that they are. At least gays are happy with their body, unlike a tranny who is too confused/screwed up in the head to choose what side.

Unless you're afraid you'll hook up a chick with a dick. In which case, better luck next time skippy.

Sabb pls, no, pls.

[Sabb]

If you dunno what that means, then it's beyond me.

You claim I don't know any transgendered people, yet I highly doubt you've ever spoken to someone that has their reasons against it.

If you think society will 100% accept transgenders, then you should really try to break out of the tumblr world and enter reality every once in a while.


Ursus pls

Just like you trying to mask your complaining using 3 length essays on why those who don't agree are wrong?

I'm surprised you don't honestly know what that means by now. God forbid if someone disagrees with something. In this case, only LGBT should have the only opinion and the right to speak.

Once again, please, go watch any modern media source. How do you expect me and others to respect them when they do shit like this infront of everyone:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I don't even need to add further.

Also you'd be surprised how many openly gay/trans/LGBT members will bash religion and trash traditional values because of the "muh oppression" movement. That, and most of them usually cannot understand the concept of "not everyone agrees with you". Example: See the Chick-fil-A and the disagreement of gay marriage.

Gee, I wonder how many trans people you talked to live outside of your extremely biased community. A transgender person doesn't live in fear every day of their life unless they purposely wear degrading clothing, have inappropriate behavior, and live in an extremely conservative area. I don't know where you get your credible sources from, saying that transgendered people get the shit beat out of them often, as you put it, and hated upon by many. Believe it or not, I have friends that are gay, or support gay rights, and you know what? They do nothing wrong to get hatred. They dress normal, talk normal, act normal, just the only thing is they like the same sex. They don't go on and tell me about how they're gay and I should have to treat them different. One of my very close friends actively supports gay marriage and the LGBT community, and he knows I very much disagree. But I don't look down upon him or disrespect him, nor does he look down upon me. They don't do the shit that LGBT attention seeking whores do.

No one will have a problem with a transgendered person if they don't do out-casting, "look at me I'm different", attention seeking crap. Wearing normal clothes or engaging in normal behaviors won't provoke anyone, since the city I live has them almost in the millions range, compared to the millions who travel here everyday. Dunno if I told you, but yes I do interact with one or two on a weekly basis, there's nothing for me to be angered by them for, they don't do provoking shit or force their beliefs on me, even though I find it wrong that they are. At least gays are happy with their body, unlike a tranny who is too confused/screwed up in the head to choose what side.




Sabb pls, no, pls.

Do you believe it's their fault that they're uncomfortable in their body?
In my opinion there's something biological or maybe psychological for them to truly feel that way. I'm not talking about the attention seeking ones. There are people who simply feel they don't belong in the body they've been given and while I can't relate, I can't blame them either and so, why not let them live their lives as they wish? That question has still been left unanswered.


And on another note you literally used the counter-argument I was going to use to your argument in your own post.

Once again, please, go watch any modern media source. How do you expect me and others to respect them when they do shit like this infront of everyone:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I don't even need to add further.

No one will have a problem with a transgendered person if they don't do out-casting, "look at me I'm different", attention seeking crap. Wearing normal clothes or engaging in normal behaviors won't provoke anyone, since the city I live has them almost in the millions range, compared to the millions who travel here everyday. Dunno if I told you, but yes I do interact with one or two on a weekly basis, there's nothing for me to be angered by them for, they don't do provoking shit or force their beliefs on me, even though I find it wrong that they are. At least gays are happy with their body, unlike a tranny who is too confused/screwed up in the head to choose what side.

Cross-dressing isn't for attention. Maybe for some very select few people, but that's not generally the reason they do it. I don't have tolerance for the people who I feel do throw their sexual orientation in everyone's face for attention though. But they're not all like that.
It's just like calling all Christians preachers or atheists bigots. Blame the individual, not a group they've been associated with. I think I said something similar in another post in this thread.

[Prox]

There's no more to discuss here. I've said too many times that what we're talking about isn't directly political.

So, which case do you think is more likely to be true, a claim that LGBT issues aren't related to politics by someone who himself isn't interested in politics or a claim that LGBT issues are related to politics by someone who has been interested in politics for a while? You know the answer.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=define+sarcasm
I do not think /pol/ is your only source of information.

I hope you realize that this kind of sarcasm of yours was put in a very bad time. I personally find it hard to think that it was sarcasm even now, but since you assured me that it is, I do kind of see it now.

Marriage is actually now just as much if not more simply for legalities. For example, people with no religious values certainly can and do get married. Notice that the definition (from the Oxford dictionary) doesn't even mention religion. In fact...

Adoption. If a husband or wife in a traditional marriage is infertile does that mean they shouldn't get married since they can't have children of their own? The only purpose of marriage isn't to raise a family. I know many married couples who don't ever want children including one of my neighbours.

Even if your greatly insightful Oxford dictionary isn't mentioning religion, it still doesn't change the fact that marriage originated from it and I don't see how extra definition that "(in some jurisdictions) a formal union between partners of the same sex" supports your argument. It just tells us that there are places in the world where same sex couples can get married.

Why is it necessary for someone like you to have marriage? You can like a woman and live with her too, you don't have to marry her. It's about equality.
It's all about treating people with respect, decency, and improving the lives of others. Your values of marriage or life or anything don't have to change to adapt to them. Hell, you don't even have to acknowledge them, but at least let them live equally and allow them to have their own values because it really doesn't affect you. I believe this is also relevant to the gender issue which is why I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of other genders, though I still don't support it either.

I feel that legalizing homosexual marriage would only degrade it's value and would probably contribute to increasing the divorce rate which is already pretty high in some places. I also don't think it's necessary for homosexuals to be able to marry each other, they are different then us after all when it comes to sexual orientation, I also personally find homosexuality quite disgusting(except for maybe lesbians lol but hey, other females would probably find female on female act displeasing so I have to be fair lol) and because of it I don't want to see it being promoted. But seriously can we just drop this already? I've started this thread to discuss gender not traditional values or homosexual marriage and I am really not interested in doing so because we've already had multiple discussions on this topic before so please let's just get away from this topic because I probably won't bother discussing this issue in this thread anymore. 

I never said it's normal nor do I think it is or will ever be. Biologically it's certainly abnormal. That doesn't mean it can't be accepted. I see no harm in allowing them freedom of their own sexual orientation and personal practices so long as it doesn't harm anyone or anything else.

What exactly makes you think that all this transgender bullshit isn't harming anyone or anything? In fact I do believe it does contribute greatly to the moral decay in today's society and transgender people easily fit the definition of a degenerate. When will you people realize that allowing everyone to be and do whatever the hell they want with themselves can be extremely harmful to the society? I repeat my self saying that there must be high moral standards who would apply to everyone without exception and we shouldn't tell to those people who fail to meet those standards that it's okay because by doing so we're basically saying that our society should have high moral standards but you don't have to if you don't want, this isn't something people should be allowed to choose.

[ursus]

What exactly makes you think that all this transgender bullshit isn't harming anyone or anything? In fact I do believe it does contribute greatly to the moral decay in today's society and transgender people easily fit the definition of a degenerate. When will you people realize that allowing everyone to be and do whatever the hell they want with themselves can be extremely harmful to the society? I repeat my self saying that there must be high moral standards who would apply to everyone without exception and we shouldn't tell to those people who fail to meet those standards that it's okay because by doing so we're basically saying that our society should have high moral standards but you don't have to if you don't want, this isn't something people should be allowed to choose.

Two things.

First, can you offer literally any evidence that this is true? Saying it's true isn't enough. You can't just assert that the existence of a group of people is harmful to society because you think it is.

Second, this isn't something people can choose like you say. Transgender people have been around just as long as humanity itself, but they were never open about their identities because it would get them killed or exiled on the spot. It still does, but fortunately the internet allows them to function as a group and wield more power to protect themselves that way. 

You do know that we (I, at least) live in a democracy right? It's not your will that determines the fate of humanity. If a majority of people support something, it eventually happens. No law can be "forced" on anyone unless it's by politicians, who at the very least have to worry about re-election.

[Prox]

First, can you offer literally any evidence that this is true? Saying it's true isn't enough. You can't just assert that the existence of a group of people is harmful to society because you think it is.

I do not think that existence of transsexuals is necessarily harmful to the society, however accepting it as something that's normal or alright does. Why? Because such acts of one individual changing his/her gender are disgusting and absolutely unnatural.

Second, this isn't something people can choose like you say. Transgender people have been around just as long as humanity itself

I'm sorry but it is hard not to laugh at this statement. They absolutely have the ability to choose it because in order to become a trans gender person you have to make a decision to perform such surgery. I also wasn't aware that people back in the stone age had the technology to perform complex surgeries to change their gender with stone tools.

You do know that we (I, at least) live in a democracy right? It's not your will that determines the fate of humanity. If a majority of people support something, it eventually happens. No law can be "forced" on anyone unless it's by politicians, who at the very least have to worry about re-election.

People can be persuaded to accept transsexuals trough media just as easy as they were persuaded into wars, especially today when television and the Internet has become so influential to our society. Also I do not think that majority of people approve of transsexuals just yet.

[Sabb]

So, which case do you think is more likely to be true, a claim that LGBT issues aren't related to politics by someone who himself isn't interested in politics or a claim that LGBT issues are related to politics by someone who has been interested in politics for a while? You know the answer.
I hope you realize that this kind of sarcasm of yours was put in a very bad time. I personally find it hard to think that it was sarcasm even now, but since you assured me that it is, I do kind of see it now.
Even if your greatly insightful Oxford dictionary isn't mentioning religion, it still doesn't change the fact that marriage originated from it and I don't see how extra definition that "(in some jurisdictions) a formal union between partners of the same sex" supports your argument. It just tells us that there are places in the world where same sex couples can get married.
 
I feel that legalizing homosexual marriage would only degrade it's value and would probably contribute to increasing the divorce rate which is already pretty high in some places. I also don't think it's necessary for homosexuals to be able to marry each other, they are different then us after all when it comes to sexual orientation, I also personally find homosexuality quite disgusting(except for maybe lesbians lol but hey, other females would probably find female on female act displeasing so I have to be fair lol) and because of it I don't want to see it being promoted. But seriously can we just drop this already? I've started this thread to discuss gender not traditional values or homosexual marriage and I am really not interested in doing so because we've already had multiple discussions on this topic before so please let's just get away from this topic because I probably won't bother discussing this issue in this thread anymore. 
What exactly makes you think that all this transgender bullshit isn't harming anyone or anything? In fact I do believe it does contribute greatly to the moral decay in today's society and transgender people easily fit the definition of a degenerate. When will you people realize that allowing everyone to be and do whatever the hell they want with themselves can be extremely harmful to the society? I repeat my self saying that there must be high moral standards who would apply to everyone without exception and we shouldn't tell to those people who fail to meet those standards that it's okay because by doing so we're basically saying that our society should have high moral standards but you don't have to if you don't want, this isn't something people should be allowed to choose.

I can't tell if it's the self-righteous belligerent attitude or the language barrier that makes you unable to understand what I say.

a claim that LGBT issues aren't related to politics

Where is such a claim? I see none.

In other words I'm saying there's a difference. While it is related to politics, I need no more political knowledge than I already have to have a valid opinion on the things discussed as it is not directly political. The only additional background information to support my opinion or anyone else for that matter is knowledge of my own (or their own) moral values.
It's like me saying that you can't have an opinion because you don't communicate with the LGBT community on a regular basis or are not part of it yourself. I've probably spoken to and heard more from these people than you have, whereas I choose not to use that as an argument to devalue your opinion. Besides, it's better that people have different sources for their opinions and information as different perspectives are shown. You'd recognize that if you actually wanted to hear (or god forbid reason) with perspectives other than your own.
If you still disagree, however, and think what I say has no meaning since I don't spend as much time researching politics and events then I would like to hear a specific example of where my opinion would be illegitimate for that reason. Give an example of something political I must know as well.
I mean really if it's so ideal (and I agree with you) then I may just do some browsing to learn more for the sake of the argument. Convince me.
And a tip I might add. You don't convince people to share your views by force or by proving you're more important. Give good reasoning. Keep in mind that when it came down to it we actually shared (and still do share) the same basic opinion on the gender issue. However, I very very strongly disagree with your reasoning and the authoritative approach you use to back the opinion. Really, I wouldn't want to be associated with it.

I hope you realize that this kind of sarcasm of yours was put in a very bad time.

I thought it was pretty clear especially since it was repetitive.

Even if your greatly insightful Oxford dictionary isn't mentioning religion, it still doesn't change the fact that marriage originated from it and I don't see how extra definition that "(in some jurisdictions) a formal union between partners of the same sex" supports your argument. It just tells us that there are places in the world where same sex couples can get married.

I never disagreed lol. Nor would I, it originated from religion. However the point I made (which you didn't address) is that it has already changed as everything else does, enough that even the oxford dictionary hasn't included any mention of religion in it's description.
Adding that extra definition was just a side point because you're usually pretty hard on definitions (the gender issue), and I thought it was worth noting that gay marriage is now a part of the definition, despite marriage's origin.
I also applaud your sarcasm.

=I feel that legalizing homosexual marriage would only degrade it's value and would probably contribute to increasing the divorce rate which is already pretty high in some places.

You supplied an idea, back it up with some information. Use your political knowledge, it's inferior.

they are different then us after all when it comes to sexual orientation, I also personally find homosexuality quite disgusting(except for maybe lesbians lol but hey, other females would probably find female on female act displeasing so I have to be fair lol)

You're not being forced into their sexual practices so I don't see how that's relevant. I find it gross too as I imagine most straight men would but that doesn't mean I'm going to prevent them from having freedom to do as they please in that regard. It's not affecting me.

But seriously can we just drop this already? I've started this thread to discuss gender not traditional values or homosexual marriage and I am really not interested in doing so because we've already had multiple discussions on this topic before so please let's just get away from this topic because I probably won't bother discussing this issue in this thread anymore.

Na, if you want to drop a topic you don't make several paragraphs long of counter-argument (if that's what you'd call it) and then just say "but hey, I don't want to talk about this." Expect a hefty response if you do so. Plus you and ursus went off topic about Jews previously because of a comment you made about them in your original post, but you didn't halt that discussion. Besides I brought it up because it is related to the original topic. Gay marriage has probably been the most controversial change that's being pushed by the LGBT community. If you were to become more open or accepting of gay marriage you'd most likely be more open about the other changes they ask for (the gender issue). It's also an example of how they're simply trying to get equal rights and to be considered as human as you or me, not to overrule and ruin tradition and morals and whatever else. Which brings me to something else which I didn't cover earlier.

I made a typo, when I said quality I meant so say equality. Also just to reassure you there are no disputing that care of others and respect for others are values.

If that's the case then relate this to you wanting limited rights for the LGBT people. How can you mention true equality when you have no support or willingness to reason with LGBT people, Jews, or for mixing races. Hell I don't know about you but that sounds like a lot of different social classes you want people divided between, and those are only the ones that you've either mentioned on this thread or to me personally so I'm sure there are more.

When will you people realize that allowing everyone to be and do whatever the hell they want with themselves can be extremely harmful to the society?

You have a very odd sense of equality. I may have to bring out my greatly insightful Oxford dictionary again.


For the record, if you still don't wish to discuss the marriage matter that's fine. You choose what you comment on. However it is relevant and a lot of what's discussed can be applied to the original discussion.


EDIT:

I do not think that existence of transsexuals is necessarily harmful to the society, however accepting it as something that's normal or alright does. Why? Because such acts of one individual changing his/her gender are disgusting and absolutely unnatural.

I made a typo, when I said quality I meant so say equality. Also just to reassure you there are no disputing that care of others and respect for others are values.

Where do your moral standards of equality apply here?
I'm sorry but you must be really fragile if you can't handle a few gay guys gone gals.

[Prox]

I can't tell if it's the self-righteous belligerent attitude or the language barrier that makes you unable to understand what I say.
Where is such a claim? I see none.In other words I'm saying there's a difference. While it is related to politics, I need no more political knowledge than I already have to have a valid opinion on the things discussed as it is not directly political. The only additional background information to support my opinion or anyone else for that matter is knowledge of my own (or their own) moral values.
It's like me saying that you can't have an opinion because you don't communicate with the LGBT community on a regular basis or are not part of it yourself. I've probably spoken to and heard more from these people than you have, whereas I choose not to use that as an argument to devalue your opinion. Besides, it's better that people have different sources for their opinions and information as different perspectives are shown. You'd recognize that if you actually wanted to hear (or god forbid reason) with perspectives other than your own.
If you still disagree, however, and think what I say has no meaning since I don't spend as much time researching politics and events then I would like to hear a specific example of where my opinion would be illegitimate for that reason. Give an example of something political I must know as well.
I mean really if it's so ideal (and I agree with you) then I may just do some browsing to learn more for the sake of the argument. Convince me.
And a tip I might add. You don't convince people to share your views by force or by proving you're more important. Give good reasoning. Keep in mind that when it came down to it we actually shared (and still do share) the same basic opinion on the gender issue. However, I very very strongly disagree with your reasoning and the authoritative approach you use to back the opinion. Really, I wouldn't want to be associated with it.

I think it's time for you to stop picking on my attitude over and over again it hardly contributes the discussion at all, and besides, it isn't as bad as it was in the first 2 pages of this thread. Also I think you should stop making assumptions that I somehow refuse to understand other ideas because I'm fairly confident with my ability to do so. Also I think I now understand you better on your stance about LGBT relation to politics although I'd like to say again, the more you know, the better. Also what force am I using to convince other people that I'm right? I'm just stating my views on the issue.


Also I didn't start this thread to discuss homosexuality or same sex marriage so I won't bother responding to that since I've already addressed that issue in a few previous posts already.

If that's the case then relate this to you wanting limited rights for the LGBT people. How can you mention true equality when you have no support or willingness to reason with LGBT people, Jews, or for mixing races. Hell I don't know about you but that sounds like a lot of different social classes you want people divided between, and those are only the ones that you've either mentioned on this thread or to me personally so I'm sure there are more.

So me not supporting LGBT or jews due to what they're doing means I'm against equality? Ok. Race mixing would require yet another separate discussion for it and just right of the bat, I'm not 100% against race mixing of any way shape or form.

You have a very odd sense of equality. I may have to bring out my greatly insightful Oxford dictionary again.



Where do your moral standards of equality apply here?
I'm sorry but you must be really fragile if you can't handle a few gay guys gone gals.

I don't have to apply my moral standards to all sorts of filth and degeneracy.

[Sabb]

I think it's time for you to stop picking on my attitude over and over again it hardly contributes the discussion at all, and besides, it isn't as bad as it was in the first 2 pages of this thread. Also I think you should stop making assumptions that I somehow refuse to understand other ideas because I'm fairly confident with my ability to do so. Also I think I now understand you better on your stance about LGBT relation to politics although I'd like to say again, the more you know, the better. Also what force am I using to convince other people that I'm right? I'm just stating my views on the issue.


Also I didn't start this thread to discuss homosexuality or same sex marriage so I won't bother responding to that since I've already addressed that issue in a few previous posts already.
So me not supporting LGBT or jews due to what they're doing means I'm against equality? Ok. Race mixing would require yet another separate discussion for it and just right of the bat, I'm not 100% against race mixing of any way shape or form.

 
I don't have to apply my moral standards to all sorts of filth and degeneracy.

A lot of points made in my post were unrelated to gay marriage and instead were related to the original discussion but they weren't addressed. You've clearly lost interest, so I won't continue. You can choose whether or not to consider the contradictions I've noted and arguments I've made as I feel pretty much everything I wanted to say has been said either on here or Steam.

[Prox]

A lot of points made in my post were unrelated to gay marriage and instead were related to the original discussion but they weren't addressed. You've clearly lost interest, so I won't continue. You can choose whether or not to consider the contradictions I've noted and arguments I've made as I feel pretty much everything I wanted to say has been said either on here or Steam.

Pretty sure I have addressed most of them, some of the points that I didn't addressed I either agreed with or I felt that I have made points in previous posts that relate to them. Either way you can quote a few of them if you want me to specifically address them. Also you're definitely right that I'm losing interest since I have never thought this thread would consume so much of my time and me arguing about off topic issues didn't really helped.

[Prox]

Bump: added a poll because I'm interested if anyone here besides us even bother reading this thread.

[Sabb]

I honestly wouldn't read through all that shit if I wasn't directly involved in it lol.

[ursus]

Pretty sure I have addressed most of them, some of the points that I didn't addressed I either agreed with or I felt that I have made points in previous posts that relate to them. Either way you can quote a few of them if you want me to specifically address them. Also you're definitely right that I'm losing interest since I have never thought this thread would consume so much of my time and me arguing about off topic issues didn't really helped.

okay then

It definitely isn't. Each gender has different physique as well as different hormones which directly result in males being "strong, working, an authority, fatherly, limiting" and females being "delicate, motherly, emotional, tender".

After me stating that gender is influenced by hormones, social environment, and past experiences, you responded by saying that each gender derives their behavior and physique from their hormones and hormones alone. Does this mean that:

 - People's behavior cannot be influenced by widely-held stigmas or media representation that shows all people of their sex acting a certain way?
 - People's behavior cannot be influenced by friends and family directly telling them that they should act a certain way because of their sex?

If anything, a room full of "cis-people" is the most qualified to discuss gender.

How is this true? Explain how a person with no psychological or hormonal variations in their gender and no education on their existence is the most qualified person possible to speak authoritatively on and interpret the experiences of someone who has all of these things.

No they can't, the can be considered as having a disorder.

After me stating that because gender is composed of hormone balance, social environment, and past experiences, variations in these can produce variations in gender, you said that this would simply be called a disorder. Why is it a disorder? Since you're convinced that "Jewish media" is influencing people's thoughts subliminally, it could also be supposed that portrayals of men and women in media influence men and women to act within a certain behavioral margin in real life.

This fits within your ideas that Jewish people are manipulating the world to make more money (I think it's non-specific to race, but I thought I'd incorporate your own ideas here) -- When you have the entire population drawing from only two sets of basic likes and dislikes, it's easier to sell things to them.

If someone's hormones differ naturally from birth or their behavior and thought patterns are fundamentally different because of their outside influences, how is it unreasonable to have broad gender classifications for these variations?

I'll direct you to my original argument on this, which you also never answered directly:

what constitutes a "disorder" to you?

if hormones and social context determine gender and  both of those things are subject to variation, how can you say gender is still logically restricted to a binary system? if I have blue paint, yellow paint, and red paint and i only mix the yellow and blue to make green, does that mean that it's literally impossible for me to make orange or purple? just because the overwhelming majority of people fall into one of two classifications and are often forced into them does not mean that any change in this is some kind of disease. are you just under the impression that transgender people don't exist?

Since I've faced complaints that my posts are too long for you to respond to, I'll just leave these two for now. I'll move on once you've addressed the central points directly.

[Prox]

After me stating that gender is influenced by hormones, social environment, and past experiences, you responded by saying that each gender derives their behavior and physique from their hormones and hormones alone. Does this mean that:

 - People's behavior cannot be influenced by widely-held stigmas or media representation that shows all people of their sex acting a certain way?
 - People's behavior cannot be influenced by friends and family directly telling them that they should act a certain way because of their sex?

I've also mentioned that the more intelligent and complex the animal specie is the more it can resist the pheromone influence. Humans are the most intelligent life form on Earth which surpasses all other species by light years so they are definitely able to act against the will of their pheromones.

How is this true? Explain how a person with no psychological or hormonal variations in their gender and no education on their existence is the most qualified person possible to speak authoritatively on and interpret the experiences of someone who has all of these things.

 
>no education on their existence
B-b-back to tumblr you go.

Also the room full of "cis-people" is qualified to discuss such things because they have the majority's interest first as opposed to trans gender people who have their own interest in mind, of course we need someone to advocate for trans gender rights in order to be able to have a discussion on such topic. Also going to repeat my self that the needs of many outweigh the needs of the few.

After me stating that because gender is composed of hormone balance, social environment, and past experiences, variations in these can produce variations in gender, you said that this would simply be called a disorder. Why is it a disorder? Since you're convinced that "Jewish media" is influencing people's thoughts subliminally, it could also be supposed that portrayals of men and women in media influence men and women to act within a certain behavioral margin in real life.

This fits within your ideas that Jewish people are manipulating the world to make more money (I think it's non-specific to race, but I thought I'd incorporate your own ideas here) -- When you have the entire population drawing from only two sets of basic likes and dislikes, it's easier to sell things to them.

If someone's hormones differ naturally from birth or their behavior and thought patterns are fundamentally different because of their outside influences, how is it unreasonable to have broad gender classifications for these variations?

Only someone as deeply deluded as you would be unable to understand why it's a disorder. The only way you would get it is if the SJW people on tumblr would tell you so for a long enough period of time.

Also you're literally retarded if you think that jews aren't overrepresented by a mile in governments, media and financial institutions. If you want to argue about jews then I would very much like you to address my previous arguments about them. All of this of course should be done in a separate thread.

what constitutes a "disorder" to you?

if hormones and social context determine gender and  both of those things are subject to variation, how can you say gender is still logically restricted to a binary system? if I have blue paint, yellow paint, and red paint and i only mix the yellow and blue to make green, does that mean that it's literally impossible for me to make orange or purple? just because the overwhelming majority of people fall into one of two classifications and are often forced into them does not mean that any change in this is some kind of disease. are you just under the impression that transgender people don't exist?

When someone has some sort of physical, mental, pheromone or any kind of other defect, for example a male who likes to behave like a female due to hormone imbalance or someone with downs syndrome. You're also using a straw man to support your argument if I can even call it like that since the example you proposed doesn't really make any sense. I'm also aware that trans gender people exist because such surgery is possible.
Also nobody is forcing male and female classifications on anyone it just is how it is and you're going to have to accept it.

[Sabb]

Also the room full of "cis-people" is qualified to discuss such things because they have the majority's interest first as opposed to trans gender people who have their own interest in mind

B-b-back to /pol/ you go.

[Prox]

B-b-back to /pol/ you go.

B-b-back to LGBT you go.