Jeremy Clarkson really doesn't want to make another car show, this time by comparing transgenderism
502 replies, posted
I'm not talking about all debates. I'm talking about fruitless ones. Like, should we have a debate with the Flat Earth Society and a group of geologists over whether or not the Earth is round?
In the same vein, should we put Jeremy Clarkson and a psychologist on a stage as they debate whether or not gender dysphoria is actually a thing and transwomen are just ladyboys? The science is there.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;49598607]But people are already either on one team or the other and a "debate" isn't going to sway anybody. It just gives the creationists artificial legitimacy because they can say "look, we're a reasonable position because all these scientists will stand on a podium with us!"[/QUOTE]
No one says that, that's ridiculous. Debates aren't for the debaters, they're for the audience.
It's extremely important to have debates for issues that are still controversial. You're really jumping the shark if you want to skip that for gender dysphoria, or gay rights, or, unfortunately creationism (though that's really going down). Nowadays a slavery debate would be stupid, because such a large majority of the population already know that it's bad. Just because you know something is bad doesn't mean you can jump important steps.
[editline]24th January 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;49598633]I'm not talking about all debates. I'm talking about fruitless ones. Like, should we have a debate with the Flat Earth Society and a group of geologists over whether or not the Earth is round?
In the same vein, should we put Jeremy Clarkson and a psychologist on a stage as they debate whether or not gender dysphoria is actually a thing? The science is there.[/QUOTE]
no because we have so much evidence that flat earth is fucking stupid. we don't have the same thing for gender dysphoria, whether you think you do or not. there are studies, but not yet to the point where it's concrete.
[QUOTE=Lium;49598065]People believing they're something they're not is less valid than people believing they're something they're not.
Well that sure is an amazing argument, you've completely changed my outlook.[/QUOTE]
Actually there is a sizable difference between someone believing they are a train versus someone identifying as a gender opposite their body.
First clearly have nothing in common with human beings.
Secondly, leading research shows that trans people have brains more like that of their identified gender then that of their assigned sex.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;49598633]I'm not talking about all debates. I'm talking about fruitless ones. Like, should we have a debate with the Flat Earth Society and a group of geologists over whether or not the Earth is round?
[/QUOTE]
It should be simple enough to disprove and would show that flat earthers are blatantly wrong and potentially convince some flat earthers to change their mind.
Saying, "No you can't debate with us because it's a protected topic" would only foster persecution complexes.
Imagine if youtube banned all discussion of conspiracy theories. The entire spectrum of people curious to full blown NWO would the be essentially hearded to more secluded websites, fostering groupthink without room for disagreement or debate.
Weird, I just watched that Top Gear episode with the ambulances where he kept referring to the medical dummy as a "ladyboy" and I was surprised he never got into hot water about it then.
i find it very interesting that people are so afraid and stubborn of debating this subject that they, instead, just attack someone's character over a simple disagreement. so he said something you didn't like. big fucking deal. he didn't murder a transgendered person while screaming "tranny", he was asked for his opinion and he gave it. holy shit call the police
i respect anyone's right to do whatever they want to their bodies. however, doctors indulging people who want to change genders so that they can sell hormone treatments without telling anyone the risk of the mental disorder that someone may have (please refer to transgender suicide rates) is one of the reasons discussions on this subject grind to a halt, and why "not feeling like your body is your own in the gender you were born" is so widely accepted as ok. that feeling is most certainly not "ok" and may be the tip of the iceberg in terms of serious mental disorders. the fact that i bring this up will get very many people riled up and i'll probably get one or two people to believe i'm anti-trans or transphobic, instead of engaging in the topic.
i feel like the west has this obsession over transgenders and putting them up on this pedestal like they're gods, instead of just treating them like human beings. it's just above and beyond the call of transgendered rights. a celebrity riding the coat tails of their failing sports popularity and the family ties to the kardashians recently completely avoided scrutiny of their vehicular murder by becoming transgendered and not very many people batted an eye, and instead called them brave and plastered their face all over every magazine imaginable. why? why the obsession? why the immediate rejection of thinking differently from you?
[QUOTE=Jordax;49598300]How controversial it might sound, he has a valid point in his piece, since it seems to be aimed the most towards parents who push their kids to it:[/quote]
Its not a valid point if its something that literally never happens, and if it does its more an issue of child abuse then an issue with transgenderism.
[quote]
And really, call me old-fashioned and all that, but I think children shouldn't be allowed to transition at such a young age. It should be a decision that should be made when they are adults.[/quote]
Oh boy here we go with people spouting off about things they don't know anything about. Most doctors will not prescribe hormones to underage children. This runs counter to most standard practices. The most they'll do is give them puberty blockers to temporarily stop the development of secondary sex characteristics until the child is of an age to make a more informed decision.
[quote]
Given how very permanent said decision is, and how it will impact the rest of their lives, I just feel like it isn't right to push a child towards such a permanent decision given how children seem to have phrases which can make swing their mood and life choices a lot, and it doesn't really even out until they are adults.[/quote]
Good thing that in the vast majority of cases this is literally never the case.
[quote]
My older niece was also in such a phrase when she was younger, in they way that she preferred to be treated as a boy until she was 15 or so. It completely went away after that. Locking a 10-year old kid into a choice they made then for the rest of their lives just doesn't seem right to me. Yeah, I know that it is a controversial opinion here, but that's my take on it.[/QUOTE]
Personal anecdotes combined with clear ignorance of the topic at hand make great arguments, right guys? :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Thlis;49598658]It should be simple enough to disprove and would show that flat earthers are blatantly wrong and potentially convince some flat earthers to change their mind.
Saying, "No you can't debate with us because it's a protected topic" would only foster persecution complexes.
Imagine if youtube banned all discussion of conspiracy theories. The entire spectrum of people curious to full blown NWO would the be essentially hearded to more secluded websites, fostering groupthink without room for disagreement or debate.[/QUOTE]
The thing is, it's simple enough but people who are determined enough to believe you're full of shit will always think that, no matter the evidence.
The people who think the earth is flat literally have a reason why EVERYTHING is proof that the world is flat.
The concept that you can just debate that type of person away is wrong. You cannot. They will not "Debate". They will hear what you have to say and say "No, I'm right".
Same here.
[QUOTE=kikomia;49597890]He's correct, though.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=bisousbisous;49597902]He's completely right.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Lium;49597879]Well, he's not wrong. You can paint stripes on a horse but that doesn't make it a zebra.[/QUOTE]
Literally everyone qualified to comment on the legitimacy of transexuality disagrees with you.
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2754583/[/url]
[quote]These findings provide new evidence that transsexualism is associated with distinct cerebral pattern, which supports the assumption that brain anatomy plays a role in gender identity.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7477289[/url]
[quote] Our study is the first to show a female brain structure in genetically male transsexuals and supports the hypothesis that gender identity develops as a result of an interaction between the developing brain and sex hormones.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10843193[/url]
[quote]The present findings of somatostatin neuronal sex differences in the BSTc and its sex reversal in the transsexual brain clearly support the paradigm that in transsexuals sexual differentiation of the brain and genitals may go into opposite directions and point to a neurobiological basis of gender identity disorder.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15724806[/url]
[quote] In the human brain, structural diferences have been described that seem to be related to gender identity and sexual orientation.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16140461[/url]
[quote] Our findings support a biological etiology of male-to-female transsexualism, implicating decreased prenatal androgen exposure in MFT.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17765230[/url]
[quote]These data support CYP17 as a candidate gene of FtM transsexualism and indicate that loss of a female-specific CYP17 T -34C allele distribution pattern is associated with FtM transsexualism.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18056697[/url]
[quote]These data suggest a pattern of activation away from the biological sex, occupying an intermediate position with predominantly female-like features.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18980961[/url]
[quote]We showed for the first time that INAH3 volume and number of neurons of male-to-female transsexual people is similar to that of control females. The female-to-male transsexual subject had an INAH3 volume and number of neurons within the male control range, even though the treatment with testosterone had been stopped three years before death.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18962445[/url]
[quote]This study provides evidence that male gender identity might be partly mediated through the androgen receptor.[/quote]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20562024[/url]
[quote]Our results show that the white matter microstructure pattern in untreated FtM transsexuals is closer to the pattern of subjects who share their gender identity (males) than those who share their biological sex (females). Our results provide evidence for an inherent difference in the brain structure of FtM transsexuals.[/quote]
[url]http://press.endocrine.org/doi/full/10.1210/jcem.85.5.6564[/url]
[quote]Male-to-Female Transsexuals Have Female Neuron Numbers in a Limbic Nucleus[/quote]
The rest of these below are basically just reaffirming that the medically agreed way of treating gender dysphoria is through sexual reassignment. Read them if you want.
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22051008[/url]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22105293[/url]
[url]http://www.gires.org.uk/assets/Medpro-Assets/AMA122.pdf[/url]
[url]http://www.wpath.org/site_page.cfm?pk_association_webpage_menu=1352&pk_association_webpage=3947[/url]
[url]http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/about-ama/our-people/member-groups-sections/glbt-advisory-committee/glbt-resources/lgbt-health-resources.page[/url]
[url]http://www.apa.org/about/policy/transgender.aspx[/url]
And this is not including the links I was too stupid to understand the language of, I cut out like, half
Clarkson is a hateful idiot, don't get your political/social ideals from him
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49598707]The thing is, it's simple enough but people who are determined enough to believe you're full of shit will always think that, no matter the evidence.
The people who think the earth is flat literally have a reason why EVERYTHING is proof that the world is flat.
The concept that you can just debate that type of person away is wrong. You cannot. They will not "Debate". They will hear what you have to say and say "No, I'm right".
Same here.[/QUOTE]
There will always be a percentage of the group that will never change their minds, and there will always be a percentage of the group that will.
You can't stop speaking to one because the other exists. You'll never get anywhere like that.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49598707]The thing is, it's simple enough but people who are determined enough to believe you're full of shit will always think that, no matter the evidence.
The people who think the earth is flat literally have a reason why EVERYTHING is proof that the world is flat.
The concept that you can just debate that type of person away is wrong. You cannot. They will not "Debate". They will hear what you have to say and say "No, I'm right".
Same here.[/QUOTE]
You are assuming that everyone is absolutely hardline.
[QUOTE=TheJoey;49598690]he was asked for his opinion and he gave it. holy shit call the police [/QUOTE]
Yeah. His opinion is shit, and his opinion is the same as many people who are stalwart defenders of backwards political and social decisions that make being transgender not only difficult but sometimes outright dangerous.
And in my opinion, he's a fucking retard.
[QUOTE=srobins;49598544]Like, doesn't the concept of gender dysmorphia require that gender be a natural phenomenon in order for someone to be born with one that doesn't match their sex?[/QUOTE]
There's a difference between gender and gender roles. Gender is woman or man, gender roles are what is typically expected of these people due to historical social constructs.
That's my understanding of it at least
[QUOTE=Thlis;49598716]You are assuming that everyone is absolutely hardline.[/QUOTE]
Think of it this way. Idiots aren't going to stop talking just because you aren't debating them. They'll just be speaking unopposed.
And people who aren't involved in the issue, who aren't decided, are probably going to be more convinced by their unopposed rhetoric than your insults.
I'm pretty boggled that this appears to be some watershed for people on deciding that Jeremy Clarkson is a massive nob. He's had fucking distasteful views on the environment (and environmentalists etc), race, and generally being an all round mean-spirited tory cunt for the past ten/fifteen years and this is what pisses people off? Did anyone seriously [b]not[/b] expect him to hold this view?
He's a hyper-conservative dickwad, of course he doesn't support LGBT rights or believe the T part is a real thing.
I stopped watching Top Gear as a fucking teen because I got pissed off with him constantly making a joke out of things like Climate Change, Deforestation etc.
[QUOTE=Thlis;49598716]You are assuming that everyone is absolutely hardline.[/QUOTE]
I don't know about that but if you argue with those types of people for as long as I have before, you'll tend to realize they're more determined to twist things to their own benefit than they are to really talk about it.
Now I'm not saying you cannot debate them at all, or that you shouldn't, but it's not always going to be effective, it's not going to resolve it entirely.
I don't believe in shutting conversations down at all, and I'm not advocating to shut it down here. I'm just saying the amount of effort put into arguing with people who are hardline is wasted.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49598707]They will hear what you have to say and say "No, I'm right". [/QUOTE]
Of course they will, but the [I]audience[/I] will hear what you have to say and have all the resources to make up their own minds, hopefully based on the mountains of evidence you provide. As opposed to refusing to engage, where the flat-earthers then can say 'see, they know their beliefs are weak and aren't willing to face us!', and on a subject less ludicrous than flat Earth might have a convincing position.
For example, do you think the growing anti-vaccination movement is going to be eliminated by scientists saying 'You're all idiots and we're not going to talk to you'? No, I think that that's exactly what the anti-vaxxers want to hear, so they can peddle their bullshit unopposed and also throw in about how the scientific community is scared for vaccines to be exposed as the sham they are.
Debate isn't about convincing the other side, it's about convincing the people on the fence, and regardless of how concrete you feel your position is, nothing is less convincing to outside observers than outright refusing to defend your position in public.
(edited for clarity)
Wow this thread got triggered fast
[QUOTE=catbarf;49598738]And the difference to the [i]audience[/i], convincing whom is the purpose of debate, hears your arguments. As opposed to refusing to engage where the flat-earthers can say 'see, they know their beliefs are weak and aren't willing to face us!' and on a subject less ludicrous than flat Earth might have a convincing position.
Do you think the growing anti-vaccination movement is going to be solved by scientists saying 'No you're all idiots and we're not going to talk to you'? No, I think that that's exactly what the anti-vaxxers want to hear, so they can peddle their bullshit unopposed and also throw in about how the scientific community is scared for vaccines to be exposed as the sham they are.
Debate isn't about convincing the other side, it's about convincing the people on the fence, and regardless of how concrete you feel your position is, nothing is less convincing to outside observers than outright refusing to defend your position in public.[/QUOTE]
okay consider my point rebuked
i feel like you all took it a little differently than I meant it, but okay
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49598735]I don't know about that but if you argue with those types of people for as long as I have before, you'll tend to realize they're more determined to twist things to their own benefit than they are to really talk about it.
Now I'm not saying you cannot debate them at all, or that you shouldn't, but it's not always going to be effective, it's not going to resolve it entirely.
I don't believe in shutting conversations down at all, and I'm not advocating to shut it down here. I'm just saying the amount of effort put into arguing with people who are hardline is wasted.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, don't ever expect to change the mind of the person you're arguing with. The dialogue is for the benefit of the people not arguing.
[QUOTE=OvB;49598351]Can gender dysphoria be properly diagnosed at a young age?[/QUOTE]
To a degree. Gender dysphoria often starts to show itself at an early age. This is why you have stories of 9 year olds trying to mutilate their genitals and such. It also shows up less dramatic ways. Off the top of my head, depression, a tendency to isolate themselves, and a tendency to more easily make friends of the opposite sex are some of the early signs.
Of course none of those are conclusive so the most any doctor will do is prescribe some puberty blockers to delay the development of secondary sex characteristics until the child is of an age to make a more informed decision on the matter.
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;49598745]Yeah, don't ever expect to change the mind of the person you're arguing with. The dialogue is for the benefit of the people not arguing.[/QUOTE]
I know that
I don't know how to phrase my original point anymore so I won't.
Well, I'm pretty sure he ain't getting up after this, and he deserves every bit of scrutiny he gets for saying those things.
I'm genuinely surprised that we have this many transphobes on a forum this liberal and with this many transfolk.
[QUOTE=Kyle902;49598766]I'm genuinely surprised that we have this many transphobes on a forum this liberal and with this many transfolk.[/QUOTE]
Well, pretty huge userbase, gaming is a hobby that transcends political/social belief, so you're bound to have a cross-section of society on it which includes transphobes etc.
I remember back when homophobia and racism were more common on the forum than they are now, so all I can say is that things are improving?
[QUOTE=Kyle902;49598766]I'm genuinely surprised that we have this many transphobes on a forum this liberal and with this many transfolk.[/QUOTE]
maybe what you consider a "transphobe" is someone who is simply on the other side of the fence from you when it comes to a still young issue?
i didn't browse through all 6 pages here so maybe i've missed some of the more hateful comments. i think a lot of people you think are "transphobic" would agree that people who label themselves as transgendered are people too regardless of opinions, and that there are many facts and still unknown variables in the ongoing debate of transgender procedures.
I love this man
[QUOTE=Kyle902;49598766]I'm genuinely surprised that we have this many transphobes on a forum this liberal and with this many transfolk.[/QUOTE]
It's starting to feel like every time you post a dissenting opinion, or just generally playings devils advocate on the subject you're automatically labled as transphobe.
[QUOTE=kenji;49598820]It's starting to feel like every time you post a dissenting opinion, or just generally playings devils advocate on the subject you're automatically labled as transphobe.[/QUOTE]
Well here, let's think about it. The "dissenting opinions" in this thread, for the most part, have been basically saying that transgenderism isn't real and that trans people are just faking it/doing it for attention.
I dunno, if I were a trans individual and I were to look at it, that'd seem pretty bigoted to me!
Oh wait!
[I]I am![/I]
[QUOTE=kenji;49598820]It's starting to feel like every time you post a dissenting opinion, or just generally playings devils advocate on the subject you're automatically labled as transphobe.[/QUOTE]
That's like playing the devils advocate on racial equality.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.