jet23

tallest skill said:
And since he’s the initial claim for the “success” of transgender in the first place...
Do you really need your hand held?

Do you not recognize that you are literally making an argument from fallacy here? Just because an "initial claim" (which you are building up as a straw man, btw) contained a fallacious premise (i.e. the man was not actually transgender) it does not render its conclusion, that transgender identity is real, to be false. Don't call people out on rhetoric if your argument is made of Swiss cheese.

tallest skill said:
In David’s own account, he did not identify as a girl.

Can you read your own words?

List literally one, since I’ve done no such thing and you’ve provided absolutely nothing WHATSOEVER to back your claims other than “it hurts my feelings”. I’m not fucking playing around here. You don’t get to say whatever you want and have it be taken as fact. You don’t get to pretend that your feelings dictate reality. Have a fucking argument.

Are you kidding me? I listed sources. You ignored them.

I'm not saying that sources from conservative publications are wrong because they are conservative (which would be a genetic fallacy) but that your biased consideration of evidence and confirmation bias in compiling your sources does nothing to advance your point.

Your false equivalency? How about that short story you wrote about identifying as Napoleon. Give me a break.

You still have been unable to provide a single legitimate source backing up your point of view.

tallest skil said:

Excuse me; try the FUCK again. Where do you get off, exactly? I mean where do your fallacies stop? Do they? We’ve already had an “appeal to fact” in the thread; I don’t think they can GET any more fallacious, by definition.
When trannies call themselves trannies, it’s hardly derogatory to do so.
SO. PROVE. IT. BY. DISPROVING. ANYTHING. I. HAVE. SAID.

Now either respond with a refutation, rebuttal, disproof, or actual argument, or don’t fucking bother.

Oh my, you're still going on about this?

There was no "appeal to statistics," in a rhetorical sense. I was merely pointing out the fact that you repeatedly refer to statistics that don't exist. From your own words, only a few pages ago: "Except it’s proven by every statistic ever recorded" and "Because of statistics?" And yet--and this is what's really telling--when I called you out on it, you spewed pages and pages of "evidence" that was taken from right wing sources based on conspiracy theories, along with a few broken links and several medical journals that actually disproved your argument.

I can see this practice, in particular, is a pattern with you, because your citing David Peter Reimer only serves as evidence that gender identity is not something that can be arbitrarily decided by a third party, and resides (of course) within the individual's brain.

Has everyone on this thread who has argued against you made flawless arguments backed up by citations of scholarly research? No, of course not. This is an internet forum, not a college research paper. But based on the poor evidence you have provided, your false equivalencies that border on creative fiction exercises, and so many straw men and ad hominem that I can't even keep track any more, you would decidedly receive an F on this paper.

 roake said:

So your argument is that it's okay for my children to be exposed to nude adult strangers, and to try to shield them from that will cause "hang-ups?"  You talk about cubicle bathrooms, but what about school or gym open showers?  Clearly, there is no point in further discussion here.

Look, I understand that your point of view is coming from a genuine concern for your children being exposed to something you worry might scar them emotionally. I don't agree with you, but I can understand why you have that position (unlike tallest skill who I think might genuinely be a performance artist). All I ask is for you to imagine for one moment, one of your children telling you one day that they are transgender. Put aside your feelings of "I know my children! That would never happen," because that's what all parents say.

Would you want them to be barred from ever using a public restroom? Would you want laws to prevent them from taking legal action against discrimination in the workplace? You can't just hide in your home for the rest of your life. You have to be a part of society. And that's why this law is a problem. It operates within the fantasy that transgender people are just going to go away. They're not.

londor said:

koop said:

Holy lord in heaven your sources are so terrible Tallest Skil. Conservative think tanks, an Iranian source, two that wouldn't even load and another journal where they interviewed an insanely small sample of 45 people outside of a clinical setting. 

I threw up in my mouth a little. Anyone can cite a bunch of crap. Try to cite something of value.

You are wasting your time. He is so used to take at face value what's written in a 2000 years old fantasy book that he can't tell the difference between a peer-reviewed scientific paper and a bunch of crap.

As I said no matter how much neanderthals like him cry out they are on their way out.

koop, thanks for going through that. To my dismay, I flipped through them as well and between the right wing media and broken links were several clinical studies that actually stated the opposite of his point. For example: "Psychological evaluation has shown that sex reassignment increases the well-being of transsexuals, but it should not be considered as a cure-all; it is rehabilitative relieving gender dysphoria, but some transsexual subjects may still experience other problems (e.g. comorbid psychiatric problems, social isolation, troubled relationships, prejudice, and discrimination)." So you know, as they say, there you go.

londor, I agree. Had no idea the level of crazy

tallest skil said:

jet23 said:
If you can’t see how passing discriminatory legislation against LGBT people...

If you can’t see how this isn’t that...
Some people would say that forcing their daughters to share bathrooms with men is horrific.You’re gonna want to try again.
I’m pretty sure the majority HERE is in favor of trannies, but statistically we’re in the majority.
Learn what hate is, for fuck’s sake.Because of statistics? Because your fallacy is meaningless to the point? Take your pick.
Except it’s proven by every statistic ever recorded, so why not stop supporting mental illness and come back to reality?Appeal to authority. Try the fuck again.
You’ve made it clear that you prefer mental illness to go untreated, so your opinion is instantaneously meaningless.
Cute, more fallacies.

...the dialogue expressed on this topic would be a cause for shame in this community.

Your beliefs are pretty shameful.
Learn what hate is.
The only one I’ve seen weigh in supports your side, so shut the fuck up about your victim complex and stop supporting mental illness.

I love when people accuse me of rhetorical fallacies when they themselves are committing the fallacy they accuse me of. Thank you, though, for proving my final sentence correct, "I am fairly certain that my words will be baselessly attacked with hateful language."

It's not an "appeal to authority," clearly. Because you're clearly not a doctor. My point is not that doctors are always correct, but that you should avoid making diagnoses of mental illness for an entire segment of the population that you don't know. It's just rude.

In fact, your appeal to statistics (which you never provide, despite reprimanding others for not providing them) is maybe the biggest load of crap on this thread. "There are no statistics that support the idea that lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered individuals are more likely to commit sexual assault or be sex offenders than heterosexuals." https://sapac.umich.edu/article/52

In fact, the majority of transgender individuals are themselves the victims of assault. http://www.ovc.gov/pubs/forge/sexual_numbers.html

Stories about transgender people assaulting children in bathrooms are fabricated and perpetuated by right-wing media. http://mediamatters.org/research/2014/03/20/15-experts-debunk-right-wing-transgender-bathro/198533

I can't believe you're making me go here, but here we go, "Hate (v) feel intense or passionate dislike for (someone)." Let's see, you claim that transgender people (who you refer to as "trannies") 1) are more likely to commit sexual assault and 2) should undergo treatment for mental illness. Those seem like pretty strong feelings based solely upon someone's "identity" and not the quality of their character. I think your own words have justified my use of the word "hate."

roake said:

jet23 said:

Oh, are you a doctor?

Yes, thank you for asking!  In fact, I AM a doctor - in a large city at an extremely busy hospital.  I'm an M.D., but not a psychiatrist (they couldn't pay me enough).  I've taken care if plenty of LGBT patients.  I don't address their psychiatric issues, just their medical problems.  Interesting, however, is that I have had *many* LGBT patients, but zero that did not admit to a plethora of psychiatric problems, not just the usual anxiety and depression, but the much more serious psychiatric diagnoses - the ones that get them on government disability.  I wonder if that's significant somehow...

Thank you for admitting that you don't work with psychiatric issues. I hope you've never offered the above observation to your patients. Your evidence is colloquial, but have you ever considered that some LGBT individuals could be suffering because they live in a society that passes legislation that discriminates against them? Making blanket statements about people's mental health is perilous, which you should know, as a doctor.