RIP Boy Scouts

[liminal_luke]

2 minutes ago, windwalker said:

"When that happens, that boy belongs in the Boy Scouts. "

 

No

 

That person is not male, and never will be.  They have no "right" that automatically in titles them based on feelings just as a man can never conceive a child no matter what they feel.

 

 

 

A lot of women can`t conceive children, but ya know...I`ve think we`re long past the point where we should of "agreed to disagree."

[Marblehead]

Yeah, we've gotten to the point of walking on quicksand.  There will be strong opinions regarding this last exchange.

 

I will not state my opinion.

 

[rene]

It's best for me to remember that things are different now.

 

I was born in 1955 with all my lady parts. I don't know what all social pressures may have been on my parents to shape me in one direction or another - but they apparently were immune to them. I was raised with complete freedoms & love, told always I was capable of anything, and allowed to grow/develop according to my nature. While young (3-6), I never felt like a 'girl'. I never felt like a 'boy' either. I was just me! I had for toys the easy bake oven and dolls, etc, but they didn't really interest me; my brother had the trucks & train sets - but they didn't really interest me either. I read a LOT, and my fav toys were lincoln logs & building blocks! The neighborhood had mostly boys & I ran and played with them, building forts, climbing trees, etc. Mom signed me up for Brownies, and later Girl Scouts, and it was okay... but I wasn't really into what they were doing. My clothing of choice was and is jeans & a flowery shirt. boy/girl balanced, lol. (Just for Marblehead I'll resist saying Both, same time.  Hmmm...then again, it does seem to be my nature, heh)

 

I guess my point to sharing all this is: I wasn't socially 'conditioned' into 'being' either gender... or locked into what 'society' thought not only what I should be doing, but what I should 'be'.  I was lucky enough to be in a place and time wherein who I 'was' and 'am' developed on its own - with male/female energies and activities balanced - on their own.

 

As far as how this applies to the Scouting topic?  IMO the best thing would be to let kids choose who they are. And then help them be whoever they become; or at the minimum - stay out of their way while they try.

 

Then again, that idea might not work in these days and times. I need to remember things are different now. Good thing I'm not in charge of their worlds, lol. First to go would be all the cell phones/social media/etc. Heh.

[Aetherous]

There are kids who are being conditioned by their "parents" to be transgender. They end up getting hormone replacement and surgery at too young of an age, and later realize that they feel like their biological/birth gender and want to switch back. More and more liberal people (or...what else should this type of person be called?) are thinking that even little kids can have the autonomy to "decide" for themselves...so the moment the little boy tries on his mom's bra out of curiosity, he's inundated with mind warping nonsense from his "parents"...and ends up getting nearly irreversible things done to his body at an age where his brain isn't even developed yet. Where he hasn't even hit puberty!

Another example...there was a UFC fighter who joined the women's division, fought multiple women, knocked one of them out quickly...and only later revealed that "she" was a biological male. Should every man who calls himself a woman be allowed to physically compete against other women? Only the strong survive? In a society without boundaries or sense...yes.

There are real world problems, some of them severe (like child abuse in the first example), surrounding transgenderism. It's not simply a matter of being closed minded if you say, "well, no, that's actually a man" when referring to a transgender female. Everything about them is a man, except for their belief and feelings. And it doesn't mean you oppose who that person is, or would treat them poorly in any way, if you state the truth.

Taking it back to Boy Scouts...we live in an era where you have to let everyone do anything, otherwise you risk being sued. But in the previous era, if there was a "tomboy" or what people today might quickly label as a transgender "boy" (biological female), a good leader would let them join on an individual basis. Not make a big virtue signaling scene, forcing others nationwide to implement some policy...but simply treat the individual as a human being, stand up, and protect their dignity by including them. That's what a good person does.

[windwalker]

2 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

A lot of women can`t conceive children, but ya know...I`ve think we`re long past the point where we should of "agreed to disagree."

 

It's ok as long as it remains civil.  

BTW for me its not agree or disagree only reading about different view points trying to understand the thought process that may form them.  I find it interesting .

 

You've not answered if a man can feel they are a woman, and a woman can feel they are a man, make changes to do so and ask society to accept it,  why is not the same as someone who feels black, makes changes to become black and self identifies as black but their birth cet..list them as white.  

[rene]

16 minutes ago, windwalker said:

....as someone who feels black, makes changes to become black and self identifies as black but their birth cet..list them as white.  

 

Oh! That exact thing happened near here... big scandal... she was even elected to head the local NAACP. When outted as 'white' all hell broke loose.

*******

Link to article

Rachel Dolezal: White woman who identifies as black calls for ‘racial fluidity’ to be accepted

 

'Gender is not binary, it is not even biological but what strikes me as so odd is that race is not biological either' - Dolezal

 

Edited October 18, 2017 by rene
Add link

[Marblehead]

Well, I have a penis so I know I'm a man and there ain't no man ever sucked on it.

 

Most of this gender stuff is psychological.  Taught to the kids and the kids believe it.  It's bullshit.

 

Our harmony of Yin and Yang are very important here.  We can be a very Yin person but still be a man.  Same with women, very Yang but still a woman.

 

Homosexuality is a choice, not an instinct.

 

 

[Apech]

17 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Well, I have a penis so I know I'm a man and there ain't no man ever sucked on it.

 

Most of this gender stuff is psychological.  Taught to the kids and the kids believe it.  It's bullshit.

 

Our harmony of Yin and Yang are very important here.  We can be a very Yin person but still be a man.  Same with women, very Yang but still a woman.

 

Homosexuality is a choice, not an instinct.

 

 

 

 

Not sure why anyone would choose to be ostracised, beaten up, called a pervert and even possibly deemed a criminal (including death penalty in some places) - when it was not 'an instinct'.

 

I think it's important to remember that what we call gender traits are statistical distributions across populations.  So although on average men are taller than women there will always be outliers where say, some women are taller than some men.  We have evolved this way to have population groups that vary quite widely and this must be an advantage to our species.  We are not like termites with millions of identical drones.  This is a good thing.  But we also need to take into account that variations occur in generations which may not be advantageous.  But if we look over a long period of time and say that homosexuality has existed in most/all cultures that we know of it is safe to assume that there is some kind of advantage to this and that it is has been selected for in a certain small percentage of the community.  What that advantage is I'm not sure but I think it has been proven that gay men have a higher than average IQ for instance - so maybe it is some kind of mechanism whereby gifted people are freed from household responsibility to work on the creative fringes of society (just hypothesising here).

 

 

[Marblehead]

9 minutes ago, Apech said:

Not sure why anyone would choose to be ostracised, beaten up, called a pervert and even possibly deemed a criminal (including death penalty in some places) - when it was not 'an instinct'.

 

I cannot speak to your second paragraph and I don't want to do the research in order to speak to it.  (I know just enough to be dangerous.)

 

Cost/benefit analysis to your first paragraph.

 

They didn't choose to be all those things.  They accepted the possibility of it happening.

 

I still suggest that it is not an instinct.  Yes, it happens in most other species as well but there are observable processes taking place allowing for reasonable conclusions to be put forth.  Far too many processes to discuss here.

 

Keep in mind, I am not passing judgement here - only stating my observations and understandings.

 

 

 

[windwalker]

36 minutes ago, Apech said:

What that advantage is I'm not sure but I think it has been proven that gay men have a higher than average IQ for instance - so maybe it is some kind of mechanism whereby gifted people are freed from household responsibility to work on the creative fringes of society (just hypothesising here).

 

You think.    you might start by seeing how many "gifted people" are gay vs those who are not. 

 

The point of the thread was that social engineering is being fostered on age groups that can not really understand the implications of it by those with an agenda....Boy scouts are for boys,  girl scouts are for girls not for people who feel they are. 

 

If this is the case then people or feel and think they'er black, what ever ethnicity,   should be allowed and be able to receive the benefits of being so.  For most cultures if one is born into them they will not be accepted totally unless they are ethnically so.  This is also true of US blacks, who did not accept rachel dana.  

 

why ?

 

one might look at the benefits she received as being part of a perceived victim group. 

  

 

Edited October 18, 2017 by windwalker

[windwalker]

35 minutes ago, Apech said:

Not sure why anyone would choose to be ostracised, beaten up, called a pervert and even possibly deemed a criminal (including death penalty in some places) - when it was not 'an instinct'.

 

 

People chose many things that can cause all the things listed...

In most cultures killing another person is not a good thing and cause one to be deemed a criminal and put to death.

[Marblehead]

4 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

In most cultures killing another person is not a good thing and cause one to be deemed a criminal and put to death.

But in some cultures people pride themselves in how many of the enemy they have killed and those who have killed more are honored the most.

 

 

[windwalker]

1 minute ago, Marblehead said:

But in some cultures people pride themselves in how many of the enemy they have killed and those who have killed more are honored the most.

 

 

 

 

"Alvin Cullum York (December 13, 1887 – September 2, 1964), also known as Sergeant York, was one of the most decorated United States Army soldiers of World War I.[1] He received the Medal of Honor for leading an attack on a German machine gun nest, taking 35 machine guns, killing at least 25 enemy soldiers, and capturing 132. York's Medal of Honor action occurred during the United States-led portion of the Meuse-Argonne Offensive in France, which was intended to breach the Hindenburg line and force the Germans to surrender."

 

and the point is?

[Marblehead]

The case is the point.  No absolutes.

 

[windwalker]

edited: 

 

Edited October 18, 2017 by windwalker

[Marblehead]

First, let it be known that I do not watch videos such as this but I did watch this on all the way through just to see if there were any strong biases.  I saw none.

 

The most important part of this video, in my opinion, was at the very beginning where he stated that homosexuality is counter to the instinct of a species to propagate for the survival of the species.  This is why I stated above that homosexuality is not an instinct.

 

I have never gone to, nor will I ever go to, a gay pride event.  There is no interest in such things in my life.

 

If others choose to be gay who am I to say anything about it?  That would negate my Anarchist philosophy.  I can acknowledge it without accepting it for myself.  Others are allowed their own preferences as long as it doesn't harm others.  (Therefore no forced homosexuality acts.)

 

The closing statement in the video was a little extremist because it was assumed that everyone was going to become a homosexual.  This isn't going to happen.

 

 

 

[windwalker]

2 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

First, let it be known that I do not watch videos such as this but I did watch this on all the way through just to see if there were any strong biases.  I saw none.

 

The most important part of this video, in my opinion, was at the very beginning where he stated that homosexuality is counter to the instinct of a species to propagate for the survival of the species.  This is why I stated above that homosexuality is not an instinct.

 

I have never gone to, nor will I ever go to, a gay pride event.  There is no interest in such things in my life.

 

If others choose to be gay who am I to say anything about it?  That would negate my Anarchist philosophy.  I can acknowledge it without accepting it for myself.  Others are allowed their own preferences as long as it doesn't harm others.  (Therefore no forced homosexuality acts.)

 

The closing statement in the video was a little extremist because it was assumed that everyone was going to become a homosexual.  This isn't going to happen.

 

 

 

 

 

If it was the clip I posted I deleted feeling that some here would get the wrong idea.

you caught most of the main points.  The point is that 

 

"Gender dysphoria, or gender identity disorder (GID), is the distress a person experiences as a result of the sex and gender they were assigned at birth. In this case, the assigned sex and gender do not match the person's gender identity, and the person is transgender. "

 

"GID exists when a person suffers discontent due to gender identity, causing them emotional distress.[12] Researchers disagree about the nature of distress and impairment in people with GID. Some authors have suggested that people with GID suffer because they are stigmatized and victimized;[19] and that, if society had less strict gender divisions, transsexual people would suffer less.[20]"

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

 

why would anyone encourage this in young kids, who maybe acting out of emotional distress.  What would happen if the kid feels they should only have one arm, would people then cut of the other one to make the person feel complete or whole.

 

Its sad for those who are afflicted with this,  they are having to go against their own biology which now science understanding enough of is able to allow them to dooming them to a life of consistently fighting their own bodies through drugs and cosmetic surgery .

[Marblehead]

No problem with what you said.

 

I have said all I want and can say about this topic.  It took me many years to convince my best friend that he should not be judging homosexuals.  We can acknowledge without accepting it into our own life.  (He still has problems with pierced noses and tongues though.)

 

[liminal_luke]

15 hours ago, Marblehead said:

 

I will not state my opinion.

 

 

5 hours ago, Marblehead said:

Well, I have a penis so I know I'm a man and there ain't no man ever sucked on it.

 

Most of this gender stuff is psychological.  Taught to the kids and the kids believe it.  It's bullshit.

 

Our harmony of Yin and Yang are very important here.  We can be a very Yin person but still be a man.  Same with women, very Yang but still a woman.

 

Homosexuality is a choice, not an instinct.

 

 

 

Guess you changed your mind? 

[liminal_luke]

13 hours ago, windwalker said:

 

You've not answered if a man can feel they are a woman, and a woman can feel they are a man, make changes to do so and ask society to accept it,  why is not the same as someone who feels black, makes changes to become black and self identifies as black but their birth cet..list them as white.  

 

I dunno, Windwalker.  What does identifying as black even mean?  It`s all so confusing.  A good friend got genetic testing done a few years back and found he was 57% black.  Another relative of his did the test and came out 25%, a number she found distressingly low.  How do you think they should identify?

 

My default position is to allow people to do what they want to do.  I guess if an organization wanted to limit membership to black people then there would have to be some sort of objective criteria, and I`m fine with people coming up with whatever criteria they like.

 

Everybody is free to have black friends.  Everybody is free to dress in historically black styles, to listen to historically black music, to talk using historically black idioms, to eat historically black food.  Nobody is forced to consider anybody else black if they don`t want to.  In short, we`re all free. 

[Chang]

In the U.K. Government Organisations such as the Police (who may have to conduct personal searches on individuals) were advised that such searches should be conducted by a person of the same sex. There was the obvious question of transgenders and who should conduct searches on such an individual. The problem was answered as follows.

 

Should Transgenders have to be dealt with then their sex will be considered whatever they choose it to be. This obviously raises certain questions as well as problems.......... Good luck to whomesoever has to sort them out.

[rene]

5 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

My default position is to allow people to do what they want to do.  I guess if an organization wanted to limit membership to black people then there would have to be some sort of objective criteria, and I`m fine with people coming up with whatever criteria they like.

 

Me too...but it raises some interesting (rhetorical) questions. Are whites/blacks/etc only groups then  deemed racist? Is a no-Gays group homophobic? Is a Gay-only group heterophobic?

 

Maybe our default position is valid... and the raison d'etre of the individual group determines appropriateness.

 

5 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Everybody is free to have black friends.  Everybody is free to dress in historically black styles, to listen to historically black music, to talk using historically black idioms, to eat historically black food.  Nobody is forced to consider anybody else black if they don`t want to.  In short, we`re all free. 

 

I think in the Dolezal case a big part was not only the whiteness... but the deception

[liminal_luke]

3 minutes ago, rene said:

 

Me too...but it raises some interesting (rhetorical) questions. Are whites/blacks/etc only groups then  deemed racist? Is a no-Gays group homophobic? Is a Gay-only group heterophobic?

 

Maybe our default position is valid... and the raison d'etre of the individual group determines appropriateness.

 

 

I think in the Dolezal case a big part was not only the whiteness... but the deception

 

You raise some great points Rene, and I don`t think there are any easy answers.  I`m fine with groups limiting membership to women, to blacks, or to gays.  But if a countryclub wanted to limit membership to white men I`d raise my eyebrows.  Some people here will no doubt consider me the worst kind of liberal hypocrite for saying so so openly, but I`m getting used to that. 

 

(I don`t know anything about the Dolezal case, and haven`t watched any of the videos posted in this thread.  But yeah, deception is bad.)

[liminal_luke]

6 hours ago, Marblehead said:

 

Homosexuality is a choice, not an instinct.

 

 

I wonder if you`d be open to consider my point of view?

 

Behavior, I agree, is a choice.  Assuming willing sex partners are available, you could chose to have sex with a man or a woman or both.  So could I.  Doesn`t mean we`d necessarily like it in all cases, but it could be done.  If you`re talking only about sexual behaior, we totally agree.  

 

Attraction itself is another thing. You`ve made it very clear over the years that you are strongly and exclusively attracted to women.  This attraction seems to be deep and natural for you: you see an attractive woman in a skimpy bikini walking along the beach, you feel attracted.  Now, here`s my question: if you really wanted to (and I know you don`t) do you think you could chose to stop being attracted to that beautiful woman?  Could you turn off your heterosexual libido just by willing it away?  Let`s take it a step further...could you decide instead to become attracted to an attractive man in a speedo?

 

I`m guessing you could do none of these things.  What I`m hoping you`ll consider is this: gay people can no more change who they are attracted to than you can.  They could chose not to have gay sex, but they can`t chose not to be attracted to the same gender.  You could chose not to have heterosexual sex, but you can`t chose not to be attracted to women. 

 

I speak to you from my own experience.  

 

 

Edited October 18, 2017 by liminal_luke

[Stosh]

17 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

You raise some great points Rene, and I don`t think there are any easy answers.  I`m fine with groups limiting membership to women, to blacks, or to gays.  But if a countryclub wanted to limit membership to white men I`d raise my eyebrows.  Some people here will no doubt consider me the worst kind of liberal hypocrite for saying so so openly, but I`m getting used to that. 

 

(I don`t know anything about the Dolezal case, and haven`t watched any of the videos posted in this thread.  But yeah, deception is bad.)

Luke, its the definition of hypocritical, whether you say it or not. Leave your eyebrows down.

Someone has instilled the idea in you that its fine to be -ist against white men , which it isn't, you lose the moral high ground if you're just as bad.