Ah good point. I can see that now. Well no I don’t hold that view.

To explain myself I’m very critical of current progressive “orthodoxy” because it tries to pass itself as populist when it is in fact technocratic. The end result is that it looks like a very dishonest movement. My view is that the progressive movement needs to come to terms with the fact that it is technocratic, and that it cannot ever be populist if it retains its current ideology. This also means it won’t win elections in the near future.

On the other hand if it wants to win elections it needs to become more of a socialist workers movement but that will mean compromise in the trans right movement because the vast majority of transphobic people are of the working class.

Removed by mod

Absolutely not. Did I say I thought thought that trans people should be excluded from bathrooms? Or did I say that the working class doesn’t like when trans people use their bathrooms?

Meh, she also does her makeup like a grandma I wonder if that’s on purpose to appear conservative?

But is ripped more or less than smacked down? We need a chart people.

Proof that stupids are stupids no matter their politics.

Edit: Yikes.

Get ready because you’re about to get dragged through the streets for stating simple common sense. We don’t like winning elections around these parts.

I know what a priori means and I think I sufficiently established that I in fact made my statement regarding regressives with a posteriori reasoning. But that’s neither here nor there, because all you are doing is deflecting and moving goalposts to discredit me.

Here’s the damning thing for you. First of all your arguments are empty appeals to authority, not once have you provided any proof that discredits the argument that there might be a neurological cause to some instances of transgender identity or that it is not a valid line of inquiry, while I have with links to a study that suggests there is validity to it and I could produce one or two more if you wanted them. You have not even directed me to a source that could prove me wrong, all you’ve said is “the experts decided this already and they are right for all of eternity and the matter will not be investigated any more” despite the fact that this line of inquiry has not been in fact seriously undertaken and therefore has not been proven or disproven. All because you’re afraid. It’s ridiculous and transparently dishonest to anyone and you know it but admitting it would mean breaking ranks with the movement because you are all terrified of what could happen if there indeed was a neurological difference in transgender individuals. Which is understandable but not rational, and in fact impedes the development and improvement of treatments.

No one is born with any ideology, because ideologies are passed on socially. I’m open to the idea that there might be a predisposition to accepting conservative or regressive policy based on some neurological factors, why not? I’ve seen some studies thrown around to suggest that. But to claim that anyone can be born with any ideology does not pass any common sense, logical or empirical test. If that were the case people would be unable to change their stances, but people change ideology many times in their lives. Sometimes subtly other times in big ways. Depending what life throws at them.

Happy? Does that make me qualified to discuss this in good faith with you?

But you know what yes, you are right in one thing I am saying that there’s something that maybe could be fixed. It’s up to the individual to accept the fix if one were to exist. I’m not suggesting that this is a settle thing, but rather something that we should look into. I could be completely wrong, but we don’t know that because no one will fund this line of inquiry.

And I do not necessarily think that it applies to all cases of gender dysphoria either. Some might have purely social causes, other might be caused by a mix of genetics and social (as the case with intersex persons).

My problem is that this is seen as some kind of heresy and the door is absolutely barred to even exploring the notion of a pathological cause to some cases of gender dysphoria. At a logical level I understand the defensiveness, but it’s just not intellectually honest.

I did not decide anything just because, I don’t know if you can see all my replies here but in all of them I have substantiated my claims with logical reasoning where scientific evidence is not available due to a distinct lack of research in that direction.

I also posted one study that suggests some basis to my argument https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34030966/

I’m of saying there’s something to fix, but there’s something that can be treated. Are we fixing adhd people when we give them adderal or are we helping them live a better life? They can choose not to medicate, or to take different avenues of medication like sound therapy etc. Why is it outrageous to suggest that some transgender individuals might have a neurological issue that could be treated with either transition or whatever medical treatment that might come from such a line of inquiry?

Removed by mod

I would have to write a book to explain that.

This is issue is one example. Another is that I think capitalism is not the root of all evil, but rather that it is necessary to create the conditions for socialism. We need to blunt it with regulations and through public funding of essential things like health and education. I reject the communist and anarchistic notion of a stateless society because it’s simply not a possible thing.

I obviously believe that socialism is a desirable end goal for society so that already puts me at odds with most of the right. I agree that abortion is murder after 8 weeks because it is a human life at that point, but I do not think that life itself is valuable but that rather the quality of life is the most valuable thing, so abortion should be legal because I can’t imagine a worst life than that of a kid who is not loved by their mother. I don’t believe in making any substances illegal, because eliminating the supply when there’s demand only creates issues, so every drug should be legal, manufactured professionally, and taxed to hell to pay for anti drug advertising and rehab programs.

That’s a quick overview of the big issues we’re im not completely on board with either side. There’s many more but man I’ve written a lot today.

Removed by mod

Even if it were human diversity there would be a biological root to it. That’s different from a political view. Regressives aren’t born regressive, they become regressives through their particular life experiences. Just like progressives aren’t born progressives.

If the psychological effects of dysphoria were a simply a matter of acceptance then I posit that with acceptance the need to transition would dissipate entirely.

Removed by mod

I’m familiar with this. It doesn’t really contradict what I’m saying. The vast majority of humans are born with either a penis or a vagina, and they feel generally comfortable with what they have and it doesn’t cause them significant psychological distress. It doesn’t matter if they have certain traits of the other sex, in fact I think it’s almost obvious that it will be the case since we are sexless at conception. Therefore we have all the equipment to be either sex. Men with manboobs are everywhere. Most of them might feel self conscious about it due to standards of beauty but usually not in a way that it causes suffering to the same level as gender dysphoria.

In fact I think this article might actually further my point, because if we exist all in a spectrum why would a small percentage of us associate so strongly with one particular gender to the point that not having the primary characteristics of that gender ends up causing significant psychological distress? My view is that a neurological divergence could be responsible for the dysphoria. Or at least that it should be seriously considered and investigated.

I don’t know what is wrong with what I said but ok.

And you got that from me making an observation about how other people feel about T people in society? Cool but inaccurate.

I guess I could be perceived as centrist because I’m not entirely on board with any of the agendas or ideologies but I’m sure most conservatives would consider me a progressive. Realist progressive feels like the term but I don’t think that means what I think it means.

That makes sense. But does that mean that if transgender individuals had support then they would have no need to transition at all?

Guess we should fund the research then!