Berkeley Prof tangles with Sen Hawley, calls him trans phobic

So what role do you think hormones play in gender determination?

 

I've been called worse.

Everyone draws their own lines. I'll call a biological man a woman if that's their preference, out of simple courtesy, but I don't believe men can become pregnant. Pregnancy, by definition, is the domain of the female of the species. I don't know how it can be argued otherwise, unless one is building their whole argument on the existence of a vanishing small number of biological oddities.

I'd like to build my identity around a tall, leggy and athletic woman, but I'm 5' 2", and the WNBA isn't calling anytime soon.

 

The morally self-righteous on this board are hilarious. They think they have their "gotcha" moment for you.

 

I don't think that is what is happening, though. More accurately, it's an oversimplification of what is going on. When a person says that a "trans man isn't a man," they are pretty clearly (in my opinion) saying that they are not a "male." I think a certain percentage of our population assumes that everybody should and does use the terms men/women as a completely different concept from males/females. I think this desired distinction lacks genuine meaning for most of our society.

How I handle this situation is mostly determined by how I was raised and the environmental influences that have impacted my life. Even if I could crush this situation and not be bothered by it, I can still recognize that not everybody is equipped to process it that way. This is how people get manipulated to do stupid things; a sense of people-pleasing to the highest order. It would likely be devastating. That said, if somebody told me "you'll never play in the NBA" - I wouldn't take that as a criticism, I would take it as an obvious statement. If somebody said "you'll never be pregnant" - same thing, not a criticism. So what matters here is understanding what exactly is being communicated. Is something being said as a practical limitation on me (regardless of whether it is nice or not); or is somebody presenting me in a de-humanizing fashion (which I believe is implied in your example). Your example here is loaded, but take a lighter version of it, one person says: "to me, you are not a man, but we may have different ideas on what constitutes a man." I think that's a potentially more fair statement. At minimum, it could open the discussion of what "being a man" means to each individual.

I think no matter who you are, you can be respectful by referring to them by their first name (as opposed to pronouns). This is probably the safest road to travel for any given party that may not be comfortable with the gender identification aspect of things.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

 

The cap freeze sucks man. Its been tough.

 

Sometimes the brain doesn't align with the body. I don't know what it's like to be trans, gay, or whatever other anomaly mother nature has bestowed upon us, but I sure am empathetic.

 

Actually two D men and a D minded forward...man.

 

They walk out with empty hands and paint on their shoes.

 

Going too far out on this particular limb, and handing the likes of Hawley a saw, is politically dubious.

 

Careful Dyno. They'll be painting you into a corner with talk like that.

(Maybe you should go by DINO )

 

I have no issue with your responding honestly. I don't think you should feel the need to lie about your beliefs or convictions, whatever those are on this issue. I think this is a relatively recent issue for many of us and that we should encourage honest dialogue.

I do think if you're willing to make a concession to an individual out of respect - that it would make sense to logically apply that generally. I don't think that requires you to take a favorable moral position on transitioning, etc. Nor does it require you to deny that biological sex exists. Gender dysphoria, by definition, acknowledges the existence of biological sex, and so I think that's mostly a straw man (to the extent you may have that concern).

I'm not trying to criticize you here, but you have suggested that the left is changing definitions just to look progressive. You've also accused the left of waging a war on women. Respectfully, I find those sorts of statements hard to square with your wanting to be given the benefit of the doubt as to your motives (which I'm happy to give you and have no reason to doubt) and also hard to square with the understanding and respect you're willing to express to individual transgender folks.

 

Of course a man can't become pregnant, but a trans man who was born a woman, as long as they have the plumbing, can become pregnant. What is so hard to understand?

Not sure why they'd be with a man.... unless they are a gay trans man? Help me here.

 

Almost everyone agrees with this statement.

This is really a semantic argument above all else. One side is resorting to strict definitions with the rare gray areas that become more difficult to define. The other is resorting to no definitions or circular definitions that cannot be pinned to anything because gray area cases exist.

 

I just want to say, I appreciate your approach in these conversations.

I think the issue here is, in a general conversation voicing opinions we should feel a bit more free to discuss our opinions openly whereas in person you should be cognizant of the persons personal feelings. As a person who fancies myself a follower of Christ, I will attract no one to Him by being a jerk.

I try and follow His way. He spoke freely about His feelings about rights and wrongs, but when facing those doing the wrongs He offered grace and dignity. It is a fine line between compromising your faith and treating people decently, but as a Christian I am called to do both

 

Good one!

I'd like to think I'm as tolerant as the next person, and I'm always up for a good academic debate, but I'm not in favor of handing over an election for an issue like "what is a man, what is a woman." The Middle and the Moderates can answer that question, and it isn't, "well, that depends..."

 

In other words, it would be unkind, right? I don't think any transgender people read this forum, and even if they did, you have every right to express your opinion. But the reason I used that word earlier is because pretending that transgender people aren't what they say they are is insulting to them.

You aren't saying it to their face, and you've made clear that you don't behave that way IRL, so I will apologize for using that language and rescind the comment. But you can see why that comment might be appropriate for people who do behave that way IRL to their faces, right?

 

Why not?

 

I wouldn't throw you and your rights under the bus to win an election, Dyno. I also won't do that with members of the LGBTQ community, including transgender people.