40 replies to this topic

[truepurple]

@urakaze

There has only been two towns killed off, and the other one was a small town and not because the person who authorized the slaughter felt regretfuf about the lack of a option to surgically alter zir body because of regeneration.

 

 

So Oroachihes, how long ago in our evolutionary history, do you suppose that females felt a drive to have certain pronouns used with them  and get sugery in order to like watching sports and action movies, otherwise they wish for death and kill off towns? Otherwise, define a evolutionary human gender identity for us, don't be vague and attempt esoteric.

 

Or how about something simpler. For any of the following, provide a website link even hinting at any of this being thus, even conspiratorial. 

1. Some apes have learned basic human language in the form of sign language, most famously, Coco. So, a ape that has ever been offended at which gender pronoun you used with it, whether it matched the genitalia or not.

2. A deer or other such animal that grows hard structures on its head with the males, but not the females, where a female has been observed to try to get branches on its head or other such to imitate a male, being male on the inside. Or a male having been observed trying to destroy its antlers because it feels female on the inside.

3. With many birds, the males are brightly colored, and the females much more drab colored. With one such species, a male covering itself with mud in order to look female, identifying itself as female. Or a female who has rolled around in colored chalk to appear male.

So provide me proof of any of that, or something similar in nature, and I will consider the possibility that "gender identity" is a real and evolutionary thing.

 

 

Also, again no one has defined where they are in the issue of "transgender", what it is, and how it should be handled. If your just speaking against me for it's own sake, then you are trolling.

 

How much of your tax dollars do you two think should go to gender reassignment surgery and drugs? Should teachers be required to use the gender pronoun their students desire or be fired? What about using bathrooms assigned for those of a certain gender, should someone with a penis be allowed to go the girls wash room, shower, etc because they identify as female?

Edited by truepurple, 27 March 2017 - 07:21 AM.

[klayes]

This thread was a fun read.

[Skuzze]

This gender side story is interesting to me.

 

She thinks shes a man and wants to physically mutilate herself to become a man, but she has the whole fast healing thing so she can't do what her mental illness tells her to. So in the end (like many gender confused people irl) she killed herself.

 

P.S. there are only two genders.

Edited by Skuzze, 13 April 2017 - 07:07 PM.

[truepurple]

She thinks shes a man and wants to physically mutilate herself to become a man (and failing that, killed herself in a painful way)

 

   You might as well have said, she thinks shes a toaster, and wanted to physically mutilate herself to become a toaster, and failing that, killed herself.  Either way, serious mental illness that one would not arrive at on their own without outside influence. (At least you seem to know it's not the outcome of sound thought since you called it mental illness.) At least real life idiots have the excuse of SJW pressure to excuse their lunacy and aid in their death. She had no excuse other than the author made her do it, OK I take that back, that is a good excuse. Authors are gods to their characters after all. In this case, a lame ass god.

 

Chapter 48 pages 10-11: around this time was when I became a man(even though I was still a woman), Agni. I wanted to save someone just like movie protagonists do.

 

    It seems to me, the author is saying these are connected. That she needs to be a man, to save someone like a movie protagonist. Also, it seems that dream didn't stand up well, considering her slaughtering a town. Well because as the author seems to be saying, because she couldn't become a man, she became a villain instead of a hero.
 

there are only two genders.

 

   Yes, the gender of having a penis, and two immature breasts. Or the gender of having a vagina and two breasts that develop fully upon adolescents.  Well and for a very rare few, those who have a bit of both. One can like and dislike anything, have any personality, regardless of these physical attributes.

 

What is your point?

Edited by truepurple, 14 April 2017 - 05:56 AM.

[Fendrix]

[Pyronex]

Ayy, it's a manga the characters are hyper stylized. Real world logic doesn't apply.

[truepurple]

Fendrix, I agree that guy is a idiot, can't remember his name though. But that is completely off topic.

[RexMcCoolguy]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Gender+dysphoria

 

It's really not hard to educate yourself, please at least attempt to do that before you start having a fit in forums.

[truepurple]

I'm not going to educate myself about anything imaginary for your sake. Also imaginary is your fit.

[tenryuwu]

I'm not going to educate myself about anything imaginary for your sake. Also imaginary is your fit.

So you admit that you started this thread because you were ignorant and now you refuse to actually learn about what you were complaining about and dismiss it as "imaginary?" Alright, man. Hope you had fun with your fit.

[RexMcCoolguy]

It's pretty hilarious how you people will scream for years about how lgbt people are just ignoring science yet as soon as you get proven wrong you'll just plug your ears and claim you're right.

Gender Dysphoria has been documented in countless studies as soon as 1980 but I guess it's imaginary, lol.

[truepurple]

Flat earthers (people who believe Earth is flat, search youtube) sing a similar tune, It doesn't matter how much documentation or "studies" are done, if it doesn't hold up to the scientific method, it isn't "science". You're the one ignoring others and just asserting a position solely on your say-so.

 

In fact, almost no mental illness is testable/verifiable. Mostly it comes down to someone getting a list of symptoms/behaviors and deciding if it fits any of the established mental illnesses listed in an immense book (I can't remember the acronym name of the book, doesn't matter anyway, But it keeps on growing by leaps and bounds in size and is immense. Homosexuality was once recognized as a mental illness by that book, it was eventually removed.) And most of those got in there by having enough people with similar symptoms and behavior and the personal opinions of various recognized as experts the field. Bully dysphoria, Species dysphoria, Object dysphoria, Courage dysphoria, whatever, You can justify almost anything if you try hard enough.

 

If you got some kind of proof, provide it, link the proof. Don't tell me to search for something I know doesn't exist, don't expect me to try to prove your point for you, you lazy, arrogant, ass. Literally, the entirety of your argument so far has been telling me to google the subject and appealing to vague authority fallacy with no proof to back it up (who do you think you are with that second one, Donald Trump? You're going to win this discussion huge, all the experts say you are right.)

 

The fact that no other animals than humans have been observed to show anything like "gender dysphoria" goes to show it's an invented problem. Humans can have any kind of delusion and false problem imaginable, they just need to convince themselves, human intellect turning in on itself. I am not forgetting the important social influence that gets the ball rolling.

Edited by truepurple, 09 May 2017 - 12:55 PM.

[RexMcCoolguy]

All of your arguments are so wildly stupid I'm tempted to completely ignore your reply and just ignore you but I'll humor you just for once.

 

"You're the one ignoring others and just asserting a position solely on your say-so."

Literally the entire scientific and psychology community agrees that gender dysphoria is something that esists, you are literally the first person I've ever seen on the internet trying to deny that. 

Trying to make the argument that this is in any way comparable to flat earthers is absolutely moronic, even a cursory knowledge of astronomy proves that wrong, the only people who support it are quacks and conspiracy theorists with no basis in reality, meanwhile gender dysphoria and trans issues have been long stuided by the scientific community, and guess what the consensus is, they exist.

 

The clinical diagnosis in the US DSM V is Gender Dysphoria and internationally in the ICD 11, Gender Incongruence. These diagnoses are not mental disorders or "mental illnesses."

Or are you claiming that those doccuments are fake and not real too ?

https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/gender-dysphoria/what-is-gender-dysphoria

 

Also LOL at you thinking transgenderism is a mental illness, you cite homosexuality having been cited once as a mental illness too, just admit you're a bigot and move on. 

Meanwhile studies show that's far from the truth and transgenderism has no correlation with mental illness or psychopathology  

 

"The American Psychiatric Association, publisher of the DSM-5, states that "gender nonconformity is not in itself a mental disorder. The critical element of gender dysphoria is the presence of clinically significant distress associated with the condition"

 

https://www.psychiatry.org/File%20Library/Psychiatrists/Practice/DSM/APA_DSM-5-Gender-Dysphoria.pdf

 

"Results support the view that transsexualism is usually an isolated diagnosis and not part of any general psychopathological disorder"

 

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1024517302481?LI=true

 

I have no idea what you're even tryign to say when you listed " Bully dysphoria, Species dysphoria, Object dysphoria, Courage dysphoria, whatever, You can justify almost anything if you try hard enough." as examples of some stupid slippery slope argument, but it betrays a fundamental lack of understanding. You seem to not understand what dysphoria is.

 

"Dysphoria (from Greek: δύσφορος (dysphoros), δυσ-, difficult, and φέρειν, to bear) is a profound state of unease or dissatisfaction. In a psychiatric context, dysphoria may accompany depression, anxiety, or agitation. It can also refer to a state of not being comfortable in one's current body, particularly in cases of gender dysphoria. Common reactions to dysphoria include emotional distress, in some cases, even physical distress is seen. The opposite state of mind is known as euphoria."

 

How do bully or courage fit into that ? Object ? 

 

The only one that is scientifically valid is species dysphoria, which guess what, is another doccumented condition. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_dysphoria

 

The thought of you trying to prove gender dysphoria as not real because animals don't have it makes me rupture my sides with laughter, is depression not real because it's not observable or as acute in animals ?

A moot point made by someone grasping at straws with no reputable sources to fall back onto.

 

Now go ahead, please disprove all of my arguments, with links, or are you just too lazy/scared to do a simple google search that would prove your bigotry and ignorance wrong ?

[truepurple]

Don't bother responding if you are going to argue in such an incredibly false dishonest way. I shall respond to only one part of what you said to demonstrate your dishonesty in arguing. If you wish for me to respond to, or even read the rest fully, you will need to change to discussing the issue on its points in an intellectually honest way.

 

you cite homosexuality having been cited once as a mental illness too, just admit you're a bigot and move on.

 

Because it has been in the DSM that I already covered and you talk like I said nothing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_psychology That doesn't show me to be a bigot, (total ad-hominem fallacy there, which means to use personal attacks to impune your opponents position. You are saying I don't have a point about DSM having homosexuality in it as a mental illness before, because I am a bigot.) What it shows is how lacking in scientific authority the DSM is. And how dishonest you are, and how little you have on the subject that has been discussed.

 

Also, even if I hadn't ever mentioned the DSM already (though I had already Impugned its authority before you used it) it's a repetition of your appeal to authority fallacy. This argument fallacy is where you simply vaguely point to others and say essentially the authorities/"experts" say it's so, or "everyone says it's so" (you "literally" nearly said exactly that), so no way it can't be true, so you don't have to have any proof or argument/point yourself.

 

You copy alot of the shitty dishonest way Donald Trump talks about things, are you sure you aren't a DT long lost son wannabe? Well at least you don't use sentence fragments, in text anyway.

Edited by truepurple, 10 May 2017 - 03:57 AM.

[RexMcCoolguy]

Hnnnggg i got proven wrong better attack something irrelevant in their argument instead hngggg...

What a deflection lmao

 

Also since you're trying to hit me with a "you used ad hominem so your entire argument is false" let's list your fallacies for a second:

 

• Shifting the burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false.
• Fallacy of quoting out of context (contextomy) – refers to the selective excerpting of words from their original context in a way that distorts the source's intended meaning.
• Kettle logic – using multiple, jointly inconsistent arguments to defend a position.
• Ignoratio elenchi (irrelevant conclusion, missing the point) – an argument that may in itself be valid, but does not address the issue in question.
• Moving the goalposts (raising the bar) – argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded.
• Psychologist's fallacy – an observer presupposes the objectivity of his own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event.
• Red herring – a speaker attempts to distract an audience by deviating from the topic at hand by introducing a separate argument the speaker believes is easier to speak to.
• False analogy – an argument by analogy in which the analogy is poorly suited.
• Hasty generalization (fallacy of insufficient statistics, fallacy of insufficient sample, fallacy of the lonely fact, leaping to a conclusion, hasty induction, secundum quid, converse accident) – basing a broad conclusion on a small sample.
• Tone policing – a subtype of ad hominem focusing on emotion behind a message rather than the message itself as a discrediting tactic.
• Appeal to tradition (argumentum ad antiquitatem) – a conclusion supported solely because it has long been held to be true.
• Association fallacy (guilt by association and honor by association) – arguing that because two things share (or are implied to share) some property, they are the same.
• Bulverism (psychogenetic fallacy) – inferring why an argument is being used, associating it to some psychological reason, then assuming it is invalid as a result. It is wrong to assume that if the origin of an idea comes from a biased mind, then the idea itself must also be a falsehood.
• Pooh-pooh – dismissing an argument perceived unworthy of serious consideration.
• Slippery slope (thin edge of the wedge, camel's nose) – asserting that a relatively small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact/event that should not happen, thus the first step should not happen.

 

We could go on all day, when you're ready to actually listen to what other people tell you instead of deflecting and ignoring arguments made towards you please give me a ring.

Also quit it with the stupid trump comparisons, they make your argument childish.

 

Also no, it's not ad hominem, ad hominem implies that I ignored your entire argument and resorted to insulting you instead of proving you wrong, which I obviously did not. You would have known if you bothered to check the mountain of evidence I've listed to support my claims.

Edited by RexMcCoolguy, 10 May 2017 - 06:00 PM.

[truepurple]

since you're trying to hit me with a "you used ad hominem so your entire argument is false"

 

Not what I said, putting words in my mouth like that is a Strawman fallacy.That is where you invent an argument for your opposition and then attack your own invented argument.  Since you are only using fallacies and not logic, there is nothing to discuss till you actually provide some reasonable argument, but I won't hunt for it among a bunch of fallacies.

 

i got proven wrong better attack something irrelevant in their argument instead

 

You did not prove me wrong, you didn't offer ANY proof. I had already refuted the DSM before you even brought it up. And again, pointing to it is appealing to authority and not providing your own proof. "These experts say it's so, so it's so and I don't have to prove anything". Going through your previous post, the DSM and statement by its authors is the ONLY thing you brought up and offered as proof (unless for some reason you are counting you giving the dictionary definition of 'Dysphoria' as proof of something). Far from being any mountain or even ant hill.

 

 

it's not ad hominem, ad hominem implies that I ignored your entire argument and resorted to insulting you instead of proving you wrong,

 

That is false, ad hominem isn't defined that way. An  ad hominem is when you use insults in place of arguments. One could ignore someone arguing and insult them, as long as you don't pretend the insults are an argument rebuttal, it's not ad hominem. You can insult someone during an argument and it not be an ad hominem, as long as it's not in lieu of valid argument. And any time you replace logic with put downs and pretend it's still logic/valid argument response, it's ad hominem; whether it's part of the discussion or the whole thing. And that is what you did to me, I already listed how.

 

You list a bunch of Logic fallacies, claiming I did those, yet not giving one example of that, only the definitions instead, so proofless accusations. But it does allow me to point out two more fallacies you have done. When you said I was 'literally the first person who didn't know the truth' of your claim and linked me to a google search that was both Shifting the burden of proof and Pooh Pooh. Your attitude/.words were of 'Can you believe this person who doesn't know that my belief is an obvious truth?!?" Is Pooh Pooh, and of course the google search link is Shifting the burden of proof, as well as just plain rude.

 

And if you think that stuff about the definition of 'Dysphoria' is proof of some kind, it's either Ignoratio elenchi or Red hearing.

Edited by truepurple, 10 May 2017 - 11:58 PM.

[RexMcCoolguy]

"You didn't offer any proof"

 

Aight if you ignore literally all the proof I presented with sources and citations I guess I didn't.

Arguing with you at this point is a waste of time since you obviously don't want to learn or have your position challenged in any way, bye bye, take care now.

 

[truepurple]

You have proven again which was already apparent, you don't want a discussion, so you are unwilling to listen at all. You just want to arrogantly force your point of view as unquestioned fact. So yeah, bye.

[Ironclad]

It's pretty hilarious how you people will scream for years about how lgbt people are just ignoring science yet as soon as you get proven wrong you'll just plug your ears and claim you're right.

Gender Dysphoria has been documented in countless studies as soon as 1980 but I guess it's imaginary, lol.

 

It's also been documented to self-resolve before puberty in like 90% of all cases. Just because a 3 year old boy wants to wear dresses one day, doesn't mean you should cut his pecker off and call him Sally.

[hidayato]

what.the.hell?? O_o