Yes, but the salient point is that absent a birth defect or genetic mutation, the body is not what is broken. The body is fine. The issue is with the brain, and I've never seen any evidence of any "Trans" person having a brain which is physically at odds with the body.
Given that it has its basis on genes and epigenetics, why not consider the surgeries as corrective, not mutilation?
So, not a delusion, not a psychological disease, but a variant of human biology. And as time goes on, the evidence continues to accumulate that this has been the case for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.
By the way, I'm a woman. Unlike many of the so-called "women" of the "social justice" movement, I was actually born a woman.
Calling someone a so-called woman is kind of insulting, don't you think? Not all of us are crazy SJWs who think that political correctness is our God. See my post here as one example. I've seen life from both sides of the fence, and yes, there are things that need to be changed. However, cooperation, discussion, compromise, and leading by example are a better method than SJWs, who seem to be preoccupied with scoring points on how many misanthropic positions they can stir up the muck around, how much PC they can force down the throats of BOTH sexes, and how much fame and fortune they can milk it for.
Compounding the problem is how some M2F transsexuals take on the whole agenda as a way of ensuring that others wouldn't dare question that they're women for fear of being attacked for being unPC, showing their inner uncertainty. Same as the ones who over-exaggerate, and end up looking like drag queens on parade, amplifying every single gesture and movement until they become caricatures of femininity. Come on, lose the scarecrow eye shadow, the million rings, the layers of make-up, and the 6" stilettos - it's not appropriate anywhere except a drag contest, and certainly not while doing the groceries.
Your example clearly disproves your position. Obama got elected. So which do I have to choose from - an article from wikipedia, your your own example that clearly contradicts what you claim? Easy choice. Empirical evidence FTW.
More and more, negative campaigning and rumor mongering is a sign of desperation of losers, by losers, for losers. Not a great demographic except among the fringe, whose minds won't be swayed by evidence anyway. MOO!
Unfortunately, we don't have the same vetting process for political candidates. So, if a candidate has preemptively put everything out there and answers all questions, just how are they going to be doxxed? It's the same as having a secret that you don't want your boss to know (maybe you're gay or whatever) and someone tries to blackmail you. Tell the boss, the blackmailer now has no leverage.
You're assuming the dox to be something truthful. And before you say that if it's not truthful that the politician could just deny it - it just doesn't work that way (ie Obama and his birth certificate).
Your example proves otherwise - Obama got elected twice, and anyone still following the "birther" agenda is regarded as a kook.
Most people don't even want to be interviewed on TV or the radio. And look how few people use their real name here... Many people are shy when not in their natural environment. Certainly jails, court houses, or any contact with the justice system is already intimidating enough for most people.
Don't you agree that people have a right to know what they're buying when they go shopping. Knowing that the product meets certain standards of safety, inspection, etc? Would you buy processed foods that don't contain a list of ingredients? Would you use prescription drugs without any knowledge of their side effects?
Unfortunately, we don't have the same vetting process for political candidates. So, if a candidate has preemptively put everything out there and answers all questions, just how are they going to be doxxed? It's the same as having a secret that you don't want your boss to know (maybe you're gay or whatever) and someone tries to blackmail you. Tell the boss, the blackmailer now has no leverage.
BTW - not caring about what someone thinks about you as a person is NOT the same as not caring about getting their votes. Your vote should be cast based on who you think will do the better job. Merit, not political correctness.
Redhat is the one pushing systemd. Since they employ the main developers of systemd, if you're a company that wants to run the latest and greatest, you'd better stick with Redhat as they are the ones who are really in charge, or switch to one of the *BSDs. 'Nuff said?
The way she was flapping her arms like Big Bird and walking on the wrong side of the street, I would have thought drugs or a mental disorder, no matter what color they are.
If the kids are to blame, at least remember to share some of that blame with the parents. I've seen too many parents who go into foul-mouthed screaming rages, strings of put-downs, whatever... The kid's been trying to tell you for half an hour that they've got to go to the bathroom, don't get all mad because they finally couldn't hold it any more.
There are a lot of jobs that workers SHOULD insist that they be recorded, for their own safety. Teachers being falsely accused of hitting students, daycare workers and hospital / convalescent worker falsely accused fo being abusive or stealing stuff (old people do this all the time in homes, then are surprised when it turns out THEY were the ones that hid the item in the first place). Cops to avoid false accusations of brutality or rape. Cashiers as a deterrent to robbers. Pastors and priests for $YOU_KNOW_WHAT. Doctors, nurses, pharmacists so that there is no question that the patient was given the correct instructions. Delivery drivers when someone goes through a red light and rams them.
What's really needed is a google glass that doesn't make you look or act like a dick.
Sure, but maybe those politicians should have realized that in an open environment they're not exactly ideal candidates to begin with. Or they can hope that those who don't care outnumber those who do. They can just hire a pollster to find out before taking the plunge.
And yet a burner phone is NOT tied to your identity. That's the whole concept behind a burner phone. Disable GPS and only triangulation works - and I've seen in court testimony how vague that is.
First, people would be wondering why I should apologize to you for a rape that is physically impossible... get the apology from the perp.
Then again, here we have defamation laws that cover defamation by innuendo; stuff like that would be a slam dunk:-) In Canada, even the truth is not a complete defense for defamation - it all depends on the intent.
I wouldn't volunteer for it (well, maybe I might consider it if it will help others who are going through the same situation be able to see for themselves that there is sometimes hope of recovering normal function, but even then, just a picture of someone sitting on the throne with a caption saying "I couldn't do this before" would be both more effective and less offensive).
Ah, but I'm not running (purely for health reasons, and because our federal election just finished). Sure, when I ran in the past, I lost. Big deal. But I did get votes and media coverage. Even saw one of my ideas that was denounced as stupid at the time implemented a year later, so I have had an effect. I'm satisfied with that - and it's certainly more than most "keyboard warriors" have done. It's easy to get off your ass to vote, yet so many people don't. It's a lot harder to run for office and bang on doors while still working, but I did it.
Don't put words in my mouth, please. I used the word "demoted" because anyone who puts stock in every idle rumour that goes around should be demoted before they cause their employer grief. Such as the credulous low-level employee who answers the phone, and the next thing you know, the company is signed up for a hugely outrageous electricity plan (it's happened, esp. in Alberta).
"Disenfranchised" is an entirely different concept. Look them up if you don't believe me:-)
The topic was doxxing in politics. Releasing everything ahead of time is the simplest solution to having someone make a big deal later on that you deemed "not important." For those who feel that they can't be open because they have some shameful secret, the answer is simple - don't run, because secrets have a way of coming out at the worst possible time.
You're also missing out on those who want to run to make a statement, even though they know their chance of winning is slim to none, and slim just left town.
When women first ran for president, nobody took them seriously. Running still sent a message - "we're here, and it's no longer games as usual." Today, both parties have a woman running for president.
<rant>Your assumptions are correct, I'm none too popular with the LGBT movement because if the stupidity going on there, and I've called it out too often for their comfort, I guess. For example, last week there was this big to-do about how it's so great that they added male and female signs to handicapped washrooms at the University of British Columbia so that trans people would be safe using them.
The sign actually looks like it's just a handicapped washroom for both sexes. Of course, if people get into the habit of "understanding" that the washroom is for trans as well as handicapped, anyone who enters or exits who is not visibly handicapped has just been "outed." How does this solve anything? Guess I'm too stupid to get it...
They did this because some people were being harassed when using the washrooms of their target gender, even to the point of being escorted out of the washrooms. I pointed out that all the person being harassed had to do was file a complaint against both the students involved and the university with the BC Human Rights Commission under section 8 of the act. Problem solved. The procedure is VERY easy, the commission will investigate, provide mediators or even a lawyer if mediation is not successful. But no... that doesn't get the SJWs their ego boosts, and the people affected are to cowardly to stand up for their rights in public, or even a private mediation session. I see their refusal to act as dishonoring the risks and hard work of those who have passed for us (yes, I've gone to my human rights commission twice for people outing me to the general public, it's not that hard)
The week before that someone was passing around that all trans should wear a purple shirt on some specific day or other. Talk about slacktivism. I pointed out that it was a totally useless gesture because nobody outside their little ghetto would understand it, so what's the point? Far more constructive to wear a T-shirt with "Ask me what it's like to be a transsexual?" on it. THAT I could get behind. Another lecture on how I was not "supporting the community."
No, I'm "against the community." Of course I'm against the community. It's a cesspool of political correctness that continues to reinforce the idea that we need the LGBT community to "protect us." We never actually needed protection like they did - people have been more fascinated by us than anything else since the time of Christine Jorgensen. We are the "new hotness". We've got the laws on our side, the judiciary on our side, the medical community on board, the politicians on board, all without having a single transsexual riot. (NOTE: The first act of violence at the Stonewall gay bar riot was by a cross-dresser, not a transsexual). We've even been able to marry in our target gender without too many problems for who knows how long. As long as you had your corrected birth cert, who would even question it? If anything, LGBT organizations have been riding on our coat-tails of public acceptance, all the while treating us like a useless appendage.
And then there's organizers for the gay pride parade that say that obviously they support us, they had cross-dressers on the last pride parade. GTFO. Really, a fine display of the confusion between transsexuals and crossdressers that the LBGT movement continues to evoke. Just like those same organizers automatically assume we're gay. Nope - doesn't necessarily work that way.
My community is my family, friends, neighbors, and anyone else who wants to interact with me, on or off-line. Not a bunch of people who have bought into the lie that the whole world is hostile to us and that we need to have "safe spaces" to live "authentic lives." Just how you achieve an authentic life while withdrawing from the general public is an exercise best left to the reader, because they sure as heck do NOT get the contradiction. But that's what happens when you surround yourself with activists with their own agenda, y
In the Guy Turcotte case, the retrial is being done because of media attention against the verdict of not criminally responsible whipped up by his ex-wife and given a LOT of media play. In that sense, the retrial is unjust. The appeal should only have been allowed based on the merits of the case for an appeal.
In the US, in some cases the courts have ordered people to be medicated against their will so that they would be fit to face the death penalty at trial. Their argument is that anyone who is avoiding the death penalty by staying mentally ill is acting rationally. Kind of ignores the true nature of mental illnesses, especially psychosis.
If people want privacy, it is their right. I have no problem with that. However, public figures do not have the same expectations, hence the need to cultivate a thick skin. if someone is looking for your vote, you have a right to kick the tires to see just who you're voting for rather than buying a pig in a poke.
Nobody has a "right" to my vote. You want it, show me why I should vote for you, not why I should not vote against someone else. If you either are unwilling to or unable to divulge your dirty secrets because you're afraid of the backlash, then maybe running for office isn't for you in the first place. Nothing complicated about that.
We should treat our politicians with at least as much scrutiny as a used car. Otherwise, you deserve a lemon for your naiveté at the ballot box.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but the salient point is that absent a birth defect or genetic mutation, the body is not what is broken. The body is fine. The issue is with the brain, and I've never seen any evidence of any "Trans" person having a brain which is physically at odds with the body.
If you haven't seen evidence, maybe you haven't looked too hard, or have been looking in the wrong places (confirmation bias)? As just one example of how genes and the uterine environment combine to contribute to being transsexual, please consider this: 90% of the population are right-handed, but the majority of transsexuals are lefties. This is relatively old news for anyone who bothered to look, but it agrees with studies that show a difference in the ratio of the lengths of the 2nd and 4th finger (2d-4d ratio) where M2F women have ratios similar to genetic women instead of genetic men, and that one structure of the brain more closely resembles that of our target, rather than birth, sex. Both of those are caused by genes expressing themselves differently, and the 2d/4d ratio is genes expressing themselves under hormonal effects in the uterine environment. So, I hope you can see why we say we're "born that way, and with all the problems it brings, it's certainly not a choice unless you are extremely masochistic.
Given that it has its basis on genes and epigenetics, why not consider the surgeries as corrective, not mutilation?
So, not a delusion, not a psychological disease, but a variant of human biology. And as time goes on, the evidence continues to accumulate that this has been the case for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.
By the way, I'm a woman. Unlike many of the so-called "women" of the "social justice" movement, I was actually born a woman.
Calling someone a so-called woman is kind of insulting, don't you think? Not all of us are crazy SJWs who think that political correctness is our God. See my post here as one example. I've seen life from both sides of the fence, and yes, there are things that need to be changed. However, cooperation, discussion, compromise, and leading by example are a better method than SJWs, who seem to be preoccupied with scoring points on how many misanthropic positions they can stir up the muck around, how much PC they can force down the throats of BOTH sexes, and how much fame and fortune they can milk it for.
Compounding the problem is how some M2F transsexuals take on the whole agenda as a way of ensuring that others wouldn't dare question that they're women for fear of being attacked for being unPC, showing their inner uncertainty. Same as the ones who over-exaggerate, and end up looking like drag queens on parade, amplifying every single gesture and movement until they become caricatures of femininity. Come on, lose the scarecrow eye shadow, the million rings, the layers of make-up, and the 6" stilettos - it's not appropriate anywhere except a drag contest, and certainly not while doing the groceries.
Your example clearly disproves your position. Obama got elected. So which do I have to choose from - an article from wikipedia, your your own example that clearly contradicts what you claim? Easy choice. Empirical evidence FTW.
More and more, negative campaigning and rumor mongering is a sign of desperation of losers, by losers, for losers. Not a great demographic except among the fringe, whose minds won't be swayed by evidence anyway. MOO!
Good summary :-)
Unfortunately, we don't have the same vetting process for political candidates. So, if a candidate has preemptively put everything out there and answers all questions, just how are they going to be doxxed? It's the same as having a secret that you don't want your boss to know (maybe you're gay or whatever) and someone tries to blackmail you. Tell the boss, the blackmailer now has no leverage.
You're assuming the dox to be something truthful. And before you say that if it's not truthful that the politician could just deny it - it just doesn't work that way (ie Obama and his birth certificate).
Your example proves otherwise - Obama got elected twice, and anyone still following the "birther" agenda is regarded as a kook.
Most people don't even want to be interviewed on TV or the radio. And look how few people use their real name here ... Many people are shy when not in their natural environment. Certainly jails, court houses, or any contact with the justice system is already intimidating enough for most people.
Or maybe you can just test it against cheap, rusty steel? Old cans from the dump, maybe?
Unfortunately, we don't have the same vetting process for political candidates. So, if a candidate has preemptively put everything out there and answers all questions, just how are they going to be doxxed? It's the same as having a secret that you don't want your boss to know (maybe you're gay or whatever) and someone tries to blackmail you. Tell the boss, the blackmailer now has no leverage.
BTW - not caring about what someone thinks about you as a person is NOT the same as not caring about getting their votes. Your vote should be cast based on who you think will do the better job. Merit, not political correctness.
Redhat is the one pushing systemd. Since they employ the main developers of systemd, if you're a company that wants to run the latest and greatest, you'd better stick with Redhat as they are the ones who are really in charge, or switch to one of the *BSDs. 'Nuff said?
We heard you liked
More and more stuff
So we had to add
More and more cruft
Bloat is the name
Lines of code is the game
Bumping version numbers
Gets us attention again
Sure you don't need
These improvements but we
Need them for vendor
Lock-in you see.
You want something simple
Like green eggs and ham
Don't be a fool
Just eat our spam.
Burma Shave
This post was NOT brought to you by "the crucial U1F32D character," which many of us have survived without until now. What a bunch of hype!
Some witnesses will clam up if you shove a camera in their face.
The way she was flapping her arms like Big Bird and walking on the wrong side of the street, I would have thought drugs or a mental disorder, no matter what color they are.
If the kids are to blame, at least remember to share some of that blame with the parents. I've seen too many parents who go into foul-mouthed screaming rages, strings of put-downs, whatever ... The kid's been trying to tell you for half an hour that they've got to go to the bathroom, don't get all mad because they finally couldn't hold it any more.
There are a lot of jobs that workers SHOULD insist that they be recorded, for their own safety. Teachers being falsely accused of hitting students, daycare workers and hospital / convalescent worker falsely accused fo being abusive or stealing stuff (old people do this all the time in homes, then are surprised when it turns out THEY were the ones that hid the item in the first place). Cops to avoid false accusations of brutality or rape. Cashiers as a deterrent to robbers. Pastors and priests for $YOU_KNOW_WHAT. Doctors, nurses, pharmacists so that there is no question that the patient was given the correct instructions. Delivery drivers when someone goes through a red light and rams them.
What's really needed is a google glass that doesn't make you look or act like a dick.
Sure, but maybe those politicians should have realized that in an open environment they're not exactly ideal candidates to begin with. Or they can hope that those who don't care outnumber those who do. They can just hire a pollster to find out before taking the plunge.
And yet a burner phone is NOT tied to your identity. That's the whole concept behind a burner phone. Disable GPS and only triangulation works - and I've seen in court testimony how vague that is.
First, people would be wondering why I should apologize to you for a rape that is physically impossible ... get the apology from the perp.
Then again, here we have defamation laws that cover defamation by innuendo; stuff like that would be a slam dunk :-) In Canada, even the truth is not a complete defense for defamation - it all depends on the intent.
I wouldn't volunteer for it (well, maybe I might consider it if it will help others who are going through the same situation be able to see for themselves that there is sometimes hope of recovering normal function, but even then, just a picture of someone sitting on the throne with a caption saying "I couldn't do this before" would be both more effective and less offensive).
Health permitting, I may do it again ...
Don't put words in my mouth, please. I used the word "demoted" because anyone who puts stock in every idle rumour that goes around should be demoted before they cause their employer grief. Such as the credulous low-level employee who answers the phone, and the next thing you know, the company is signed up for a hugely outrageous electricity plan (it's happened, esp. in Alberta).
"Disenfranchised" is an entirely different concept. Look them up if you don't believe me :-)
The topic was doxxing in politics. Releasing everything ahead of time is the simplest solution to having someone make a big deal later on that you deemed "not important." For those who feel that they can't be open because they have some shameful secret, the answer is simple - don't run, because secrets have a way of coming out at the worst possible time.
You're also missing out on those who want to run to make a statement, even though they know their chance of winning is slim to none, and slim just left town. When women first ran for president, nobody took them seriously. Running still sent a message - "we're here, and it's no longer games as usual." Today, both parties have a woman running for president.
Thanks. Warning - rant ahead.
<rant>Your assumptions are correct, I'm none too popular with the LGBT movement because if the stupidity going on there, and I've called it out too often for their comfort, I guess. For example, last week there was this big to-do about how it's so great that they added male and female signs to handicapped washrooms at the University of British Columbia so that trans people would be safe using them.
The sign actually looks like it's just a handicapped washroom for both sexes. Of course, if people get into the habit of "understanding" that the washroom is for trans as well as handicapped, anyone who enters or exits who is not visibly handicapped has just been "outed." How does this solve anything? Guess I'm too stupid to get it ...
They did this because some people were being harassed when using the washrooms of their target gender, even to the point of being escorted out of the washrooms. I pointed out that all the person being harassed had to do was file a complaint against both the students involved and the university with the BC Human Rights Commission under section 8 of the act. Problem solved. The procedure is VERY easy, the commission will investigate, provide mediators or even a lawyer if mediation is not successful. But no ... that doesn't get the SJWs their ego boosts, and the people affected are to cowardly to stand up for their rights in public, or even a private mediation session. I see their refusal to act as dishonoring the risks and hard work of those who have passed for us (yes, I've gone to my human rights commission twice for people outing me to the general public, it's not that hard)
The week before that someone was passing around that all trans should wear a purple shirt on some specific day or other. Talk about slacktivism. I pointed out that it was a totally useless gesture because nobody outside their little ghetto would understand it, so what's the point? Far more constructive to wear a T-shirt with "Ask me what it's like to be a transsexual?" on it. THAT I could get behind. Another lecture on how I was not "supporting the community."
No, I'm "against the community." Of course I'm against the community. It's a cesspool of political correctness that continues to reinforce the idea that we need the LGBT community to "protect us." We never actually needed protection like they did - people have been more fascinated by us than anything else since the time of Christine Jorgensen. We are the "new hotness". We've got the laws on our side, the judiciary on our side, the medical community on board, the politicians on board, all without having a single transsexual riot. (NOTE: The first act of violence at the Stonewall gay bar riot was by a cross-dresser, not a transsexual). We've even been able to marry in our target gender without too many problems for who knows how long. As long as you had your corrected birth cert, who would even question it? If anything, LGBT organizations have been riding on our coat-tails of public acceptance, all the while treating us like a useless appendage.
And then there's organizers for the gay pride parade that say that obviously they support us, they had cross-dressers on the last pride parade. GTFO. Really, a fine display of the confusion between transsexuals and crossdressers that the LBGT movement continues to evoke. Just like those same organizers automatically assume we're gay. Nope - doesn't necessarily work that way.
My community is my family, friends, neighbors, and anyone else who wants to interact with me, on or off-line. Not a bunch of people who have bought into the lie that the whole world is hostile to us and that we need to have "safe spaces" to live "authentic lives." Just how you achieve an authentic life while withdrawing from the general public is an exercise best left to the reader, because they sure as heck do NOT get the contradiction. But that's what happens when you surround yourself with activists with their own agenda, y
Putin would have a field day exploiting the power vacuum in so many ways.
In the Guy Turcotte case, the retrial is being done because of media attention against the verdict of not criminally responsible whipped up by his ex-wife and given a LOT of media play. In that sense, the retrial is unjust. The appeal should only have been allowed based on the merits of the case for an appeal.
In the US, in some cases the courts have ordered people to be medicated against their will so that they would be fit to face the death penalty at trial. Their argument is that anyone who is avoiding the death penalty by staying mentally ill is acting rationally. Kind of ignores the true nature of mental illnesses, especially psychosis.
If people want privacy, it is their right. I have no problem with that. However, public figures do not have the same expectations, hence the need to cultivate a thick skin. if someone is looking for your vote, you have a right to kick the tires to see just who you're voting for rather than buying a pig in a poke.
Nobody has a "right" to my vote. You want it, show me why I should vote for you, not why I should not vote against someone else. If you either are unwilling to or unable to divulge your dirty secrets because you're afraid of the backlash, then maybe running for office isn't for you in the first place. Nothing complicated about that.
We should treat our politicians with at least as much scrutiny as a used car. Otherwise, you deserve a lemon for your naiveté at the ballot box.