Challenge for LGBTQ+ community

Why is there so much drama around this, why is it such an obsession, I just don't think it's going to bring civilization to an end  if a transvestite wants to be considered a woman, it won't ruin police investigations and the justice system, it won't make the sky fall, and I'm sure that there isn't a transvestite in the world that gives a crap about this kids obsession with it.  I'll use whatever pronoun a person prefers, not as a political statement, just as a matter of civility.  and apparently the kid doesn't want to, doubt any transvestite will care about this kid.  

What about the generations of kids to come? You are going to have thousands of children getting surgery's that will affect their health, and cause our country's resource gathering ability, and defense ability to crumble. 

Why is there so much drama around this, why is it such an obsession, I just don't think it's going to bring civilization to an end  if a transvestite wants to be considered a woman, it won't ruin police investigations and the justice system, it won't make the sky fall, and I'm sure that there isn't a transvestite in the world that gives a crap about this kids obsession with it.  I'll use whatever pronoun a person prefers, not as a political statement, just as a matter of civility.  and apparently the kid doesn't want to, doubt any transvestite will care about this kid.  

The reason for this is because gender dysphoria, is a mental illness. Just like other mental illnesses, we are not supposed to affirm that person, because doing so could lead to worse things for that person. 

It's like schizophrenia. Schizophrenia patients seek for affirmation as well as gender dysphoria patients. Affirming someone who calls themselves transgender is the same things as going up to a schizophrenic person and saying that the walls are in fact talking to them, if that is their truth.  

And if you have a society that is promoting mental illness, then you have a society that is dooming themselves. 

No one looks at the big picture in these things. They look at what is optimal now and bubble themselves into a bubble of only right now matters. 

What about the generations of kids to come? You are going to have thousands of children getting surgery's that will affect their health, and cause our country's resource gathering ability, and defense ability to crumble. 

Simple challenge:

Define the word woman without using the word woman.

Data please. 

Here’s a simple challenge for you: define “woman” in a way that wouldn’t require you to undergo a full medical examination in order to tell whether any given person meets your definition.

Here’s a simple challenge for you: define “woman” in a way that wouldn’t require you to undergo a full medical examination in order to tell whether any given person meets your definition.

This question has to do with gender roles, and how certain gender/sexes portray themselves, and is a topic for a different forum. 

But the question still stands:

What is the definition of a Woman?

"The possible risks of transmasculine bottom surgery include, but are not limited to, bleeding, infection, poor healing of incisions, hematoma, nerve injury, failure of the transplanted tissues to survive, unsightly scars, exposure of the prosthesis, injury to the urinary tract, abnormal connections between the urethra"

"Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population."

This question has to do with gender roles, and how certain gender/sexes portray themselves, and is a topic for a different forum. 

But the question still stands:

What is the definition of a Woman?

I mean the data where, as you say in 34, "thousands of kids" are getting this surgery and somehow this affects our national ability to gather resources and undermines national defense. That was your claim, not that some people have considerably higher risk for psychiatric morbidity. You didn't say "AND THINK OF THE PSYCHIATRIC MORBIDITY OF THESE POOR CHILDREN." You said it affects our nation's ability to gather resources and defend ourselves. Please draw this connection as it is your claim, and support with data.  

The logical trap you continue to try and portray your question as only demonstrates your ignorance and/or unwillingness to engage in good faith conversation.

The definition of the word “woman” depends entirely on the context it’s being used in. If we’re talking about biology then that’s one thing, if we’re talking about socially that’s another.

If we’re talking medically that’s another.

So no, there isn’t one definition across the board and there shouldn’t be so long as we live in a society where we recognize the harsh realities some of us face and give a damn about doing what we can to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to live a dignified life.

t does affect our national ability to gather resources and defend ourselves, because this generation of new kids (which this stuff is being pushed on) is going to not be as strong, physically, or mentally, and when that comes to finding good politicians and military personal, that is going to be a major problem. 

you didn't refute any of the data that you asked for.

If we really want to live a dignified life, then we have to face the fact that facts don't care about your feelings. 

Some of us are working too hard and too long to improve this dignified society to care about someone's pronouns, or how they identify. So, it pisses us off when they start to become a threat to society, and the government won't do anything, so we the people have to go out of our way just to fix this problem. 

What do "we the people" have to do to fix the problem of transgender people using pronouns they see fit rather than what some sixteen year old thinks they should use?

What do "we the people" have to do to fix the problem of transgender people using pronouns they see fit rather than what some sixteen year old thinks they should use?

Use our voices and our constitutional right to fight back against this (not physically).

It's not a small issue that I am obsessing over, like you say I am. It's the future of this nation.

• If this happens, all communication would be meaningless because definitions!!!  (multiple posts)- Unsupported
  
• The greatest military power the world has ever known would crumble!!!! - Unsupported
  
• How will we continue to gather resources?!? - Completely abandoned
  
• If that happens, then thousands of kids (how many thousands, who knows) will immediately get life changing surgery! - Unsupported, and borders on 'raving'
  
• Less intellectual curiousity!!!!!! - Bald faced assertion with no backup or argument
  
• WHAT ABOUT THE AFTER EFFECTS OF SURGERIES!!! - Applies to all surgeries and still assumes the "thousands" of kids
  
• MORE MURDERS WILL HAPPEN! (this one is my favorite because it's easily the worst of the arguments, which is hard to do given the ones you've tried!) 
  

No. Read my statement again. Note the bold.

A logical trap is a question framed in such a way that the person answering it won’t be able to do so without arguing against a position they previously held.

You don’t see sex and gender as different things. That’s fine, you are free to view it however you like. But what you don’t get to do is pretend that the rest of us are looking at it the same way in order to attack things we aren’t even saying.

If you can’t be bothered to understand alternative points of views, then you don’t get to be taken seriously when you criticize them.

A trans man would no doubt according to you be considered a biological woman, but would have no need to see a gynecologist.

*No one [on the political right] really cares about your feelings*

Fixed, and agreed. This one sentence is really all you had to say, that is clearly the difference between people like you and people like myself. It’s not difficult to understand that there are a lot of people who have deep and sincere problems with this and carry it on their shoulders every day of their lives. All the political left is trying to do here is recognize these problems as being very real and do what we can to help people who are struggling with it. If calling someone a she instead of a he is what it will take to make someone feel like a human being, I don’t see a problem with that.

You however do. But instead of just admitting that when it comes to this issue at least, you’re just an asshole, you instead pretend that this debate is about facts and basic biology. It’s not. That’s your convenient excuse because you won’t just call yourself what you are.

I don’t say any of this to be disparaging or disrespectful to you, just calling it what it truly is.

Excellent...so when you're outvoted nationally, then what? You just accept that you hold a minority position and are free to maintain your personal beliefs, right?

 Can you describe to me what sort of platform a politician you'd be comfortable voting for would hold on this matter? What sort of legislation would this politician propose, for example. "My preferred politician would stand on a stage in front of people and say I swear when I'm elected, transgender people will _____________ ________________________________." I am trying to understand what you're looking for exactly that would be "legislatable." 

I can tell you're super worked up about it, but you've as yet been unable to demonstrate how, in practical terms, a person being able to pick their gender for themselves on legal documents is somehow deleterious to the future of this nation. You've made a bunch of claims:

 "My preferred politician would stand on a stage in front of people and say I swear when I'm elected, transgender people will _____________ ________________________________." I am trying to understand what you're looking for exactly that would be "legislatable." 

In my opinion, I believe that people should be able to identify as whatever they want, but that they can't force others to use certain pronouns, when taking to, or about them. As far as gender reassignment surgery, I think that it shouldn't be illegal, but the age limit for any kind of chemical castration, or surgery pertaining to this, should have an age limit, and anyone 17 or under shouldn't be allowed to get it. After all, when you're an adult, you can make whatever decision you want with your body. 

I have provided the reasons why doing this would affect our community's and nation in a bad way, but your lack of understanding, of how legal documents, work has blinded you from being able to understand any of my points. Legal documents are how people identify who you are, and if the biological aspects of yourself, doesn't line up with the legal identification of yourself, then that poses a big problem, and anyone with a functioning brain could see that. 

No one TODAY can force you to use certain pronouns, at all, and in fact no one can ever force you to use or not use certain language. So, problem 1 is entirely imagined.

Gender reassignment surgeries are not routinely performed on minors, but I agree with you that as an elective surgery, you should be an adult to get one.  Your "whatever decision you want with your body" probably needs some context as I know you don't actually think that, though. 

You have provided literally no evidence in support of those positions. What is the "big problem" legally that you see if your driver's license says M and you don't have a dick, exactly? Can you, for example, be convicted of vehicular manslaughter, or would having this mismatch mean all cases against you would automatically be dismissed? 

No one TODAY can force you to use certain pronouns, at all, and in fact no one can ever force you to use or not use certain language. So, problem 1 is entirely imagined.

Yes, the whole idea of what it would be a perfect politician, and what they would say is imagined. You asked me, "if". 

As for your confusion on my statement of "whatever decision you want with your body" what makes you think I don't think that?