Trans/pride flag in children's stickers

[timeforacoffeebreak]

This was included in a pack of squishmallow stickers... why???
AIBU or is this totally wrong ??

Dr Christian Jesse

Jessen

Christian Jessen, maybe, in convo with the Horrendous Harrop?

I think you could be right. I did think though that Tatchell supported the conversation, but maybe I just drew parallels between that conversation and Tatchell’s support of Sarah Cook’s marriage to an adult.

either way Jessen also is a man saying that porn should be used to teach sex in schools. They share that belief as well.

https://x.com/jeremyvineon5/status/991347011143196672?s=46&t=HTxp6zC_d4GZ2FFv4a-YeQ

Disagree with the pile of garbage you have written here, but it’s entirely besides the point.

The point is that being trans is no more comparable to a “religious belief” than being gay is. And pointing that out doesn’t make me “anti religion”, it’s just an extremely offensive comparison.

How isn't it a religious belief though? Gender isn't provable, it's a belief system. You can believe a person can be born in the wrong body, but what is it that's in the wrong body? A soul? You can believe that certain likes or behaviours is what makes someone a man or woman, rather than the fact of their sexed bodies but again, that's a belief. How does a man who feels like a woman, know what feeling like a woman is like? How does he know that's what he is feeling, since he isn't a woman? It's a belief.

Being gay is not a belief. Clothes or hobbies or stereotypes don't make you gay, your sexual attraction to people of the same sex as you does. That's all.

Completely inappropriate.

nothingcomestonothing

I am looking forward to the answer. But I suspect it will be swathed in post modern philosophy about people being what they say they are.

I then look forward to the explanation of why the people who declare they are cats and indeed have surgery to thread whiskers through their cheek or are snakes and get their tongues split are different.

But Sexuality isn’t “provable” either.

Clothes or hobbies or stereotypes don't make you gay. No, and nor do they make your trans. This is not what being trans is- you have misunderstood.

Your experience of sexual attraction (to others of the same sex) makes you gay, your experience of gender other than that assigned to you at birth makes you trans.

Sexual attraction is provable though. If you are sexually attracted to someone, that is scientifically measurable.

Also, sexual attraction is a clearly defined term and gender is not.

It’s impossible yo experience another sex. No man can ever ever understand what it is to be born in a female body and the biological impact of that. They can only ever experience what it is like to be born in a man’s body and their interpretation of what it ‘feels’ like to be a woman which will be entirely based on gender stereotypes

How is Neptunigender measurable in the same medically observable way that homosexuality can be observed?

And if it cannot be measured under clinical observation, how is it not a belief system or a political identity?

I think this is a bizarre thing to claim. Look at asylum court cases where the claim is persecution based on sexual orientation.

Sexual attraction has a bodily response. It is observable. Why do you find the claim bizarre. You (general you) are either attracted to the same sex, both sexes or the opposite sex. Your body responds.

Seems rather ‘bizarre’ to not provide evidence that gender can be observed and defined the same way? Or are you (Tandora) now claiming that homosexual people just say they are and that sexual arousal for the same sex is not present? What are you claiming ?

Gender is complex, but it is absolutely clearly and coherently definable. The problem is those who want to reduce gender to genitals, or chromosomes.it is not reducible to that. that doesn’t mean it’s not definable.

So no evidence for this either?

I’m sure you can define it for us then Tandora

Gender is complex, but it is absolutely clearly and coherently definable

Ok. Off you go.

The problem is those who want to reduce gender to genitals, or chromosomes

This is sex.

Eagerly awaiting your definition of gender

@Sueveneers I’ve only had a brief look at the study you linked to at the bottom of your reply, so forgive me if this is incorrect, but this study says it had specifically looked at “324 transgender people that had undertaken sex reassignment surgery between 1973 and 2003.”

Therefore these were crimes were committed by transwomen who did not still have penises to rape people with, but the transwomen still showed male levels of violent crimes.

Bearing in mind the fact that the majority of transwomen do still have intact male genitalia, it would seem likely that when you include the “transwomen” that can actually rape people, the rate of offending would be much higher than for men (which is also what is suggested by the UK census data).

Edit - I’m referring to the Swedish study with the blue and pink table of results - just clarifying as it seems to have dropped off the post I quoted!

a bodily response to something sexual (arousal) does not define one’s sexuality/ sexual orientation. If you think one is reducible to the other, you have some seriously problematic attitudes towards sexuality. (This is a difficult subject- Read about bodily sexual arousal amongst rape victims).

As I say, have a peruse of some asylum law cases that rest on a person being able to “prove” one’s sexuality, for context of how hard this is, and the types of “evidence” relied upon.
We don’t use “tests” to objectively measure people’s “bodily responses” to things. Why do you think this is?

The sexual attraction of a person to another is a material reality. Please provide evidence that gender is a material reality and observable in clinical observation.

Please provide studies that can be accessed so all readers can read and query.

Your whataboutery is clear to all those reading your posts.

Ok. Off you go.

There are definitions everywhere if you were genuinely interested in understanding. But I know very well that you aren’t.

I would happily provide you the definitions of sex and gender that I think are most accurate/ helpful , but you would no doubt accuse me of spouting a load of “post modern psychobabble” or some such.

Gender is complex, that doesn’t mean it’s “made up”. Life is complex. People are complex. Biology is complex.

Okey, dokey.

This is the dialogue between the celebrity doctor and pal.

However, Tatchell also penned an article endorsing child marriage. I'll see if I can find that next.