All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"?

submitted by BiologyIsReal from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

Well we debate with people we disagree with. We're likely to see things differently. If you aren't going to have people with different points of view there isn't gong to be much debate here.

What would agreement from me look like? Stop being a crossdresser?

EDIT Also I'd explicitly believe there are more than one take on both sides. There are in fact many positions. I'd like to see more positions categorised.

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Well we debate with people we disagree with. We're likely to see things differently. If you aren't going to have people with different points of view there isn't gong to be much debate here.

The point that went over your head is that you often seem to be tilting at windmills. You tend to debate & disagree not with what other posters here have actually said or what we believe, but with what you'd like to think or pretend we've said & believe.

You also frequently - & inappropriately in every sense of that word - try to turn the topic of discussion to you personally & specifically to the behavior that you engage in for your own sexual arousal. To wit:

What would agreement from me look like? Stop being a crossdresser?

Like I've said before, your "debate" tactics are transparent & tiresome.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

The point that went over your head is that you often seem to be tilting at windmills.

I think that depends on the particular point and the particular person. GC isn't all one position, neither is qt.

If it looks like I'm arguing only against one false, unclaimed position. But I see positions I disagree with.

You tend to debate & disagree not with what other posters here have actually said or what we believe, but with what you'd like to think or pretend we've said & believe.

I think think I can make the same arguments back.

I asked you before what is your general take on gender? How should things be done? I was genuinely interested, didn't assume you had to take a "party position," wanted to know where you were coming from.

[–]MarkTwainiac 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

In another thread quite a while ago, I explained to you at great length some of my views on gender. But you repeatedly twisted & ignored my views so that you could put words in my mouth & attribute to me beliefs I do not hold. This was because what I said, in very clear language, did not match what you had already decided "the GC view" is, which IIRC was based on a single short statement of one or two sentences that a lone individual you said is GC posted on social media. I eventually disengaged from that exchange with you because, as I explained then, I thought your "debating" tactics were disingenuous, underhanded & tiresome.

Just the other day, on a more recent thread, we had another exchange which illustrates the dynamic that often occurs when posters try to engage with you in debate/discussion in good faith. In that exchange, I said that I and many (most?) other women see breastfeeding as a function of biological sex, not of "gender." I fleshed out my point by going into the the difference between reproductive sex roles that are the product of nature (such as women being the only ones who breastfeed) and "gender roles" that are the product of sex stereotypes and social hierarchy in which males are dominant & the have higher status than women & children (such as women & girls in family structures being responsible for feeding the whole family forevermore, & making sure the menfolk get fed to their fill first).

But instead of taking my points in, or even taking time to try to consider them, you put words into my mouth once again, repeatedly insisting that I and other women see breastfeeding as a behavior that's "feminine" and an expression of "womanhood" or womanliness. I responded by saying, no, for the last time, that's not true: I and other women associate breastfeeding with being a female mammal who has given birth and is in the postpartum phase of life. Then I linked to a video showing all sorts of female mammals who'd recently given birth suckling their young. You responded with silence.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm sorry if you are frustrated with discussing with me and I apologise if it comes across as bad faith. Often people here are coming from very different perspectives.

I do want to hear your opinions, I'm not always going to disagree like some contrarian.

If I don't always respond it might be because I'm busy or tired or need some time to think about it.

If it sounds like I'm putting words in your mouth, think of it more as "this is how I understand your argument and feel free to point out where I'm wrong."

Regarding breastfeeding and femininity it did give me pause for thought. I'm still pondering that question of the difference between those words and categories.

You said you connected breastfeeding to femaleness but not to womanhood or femininity. Which I think is an interesting question. But then it would also prompt me to ask how many categories and what are they for?

Bringing up other animals can be useful but everyone (on all sides) has a tendency to see what they want in other animals. But I don't think we can escape nature.