Diorte said:
No it's not. A dude has a penis.
You're using "dude" to mean "male" here, then.
Which is different from man. Man is a gender role, male is not.
Also, "dude" is not generally meant to mean male. It's a slang to mean man.
Diorte said:
A dude acts like he has a penis. He wants to do things with it. That's what makes him a dude.
Wanting to do something with a penis is a LOT different from acting out a gender role.
Diorte said:
I never said a guy can't wear a dress. There's a name for guys who wear dresses. They're called fairies.
You implied they shouldn't from the start.
Also, fairy is a slur.
Diorte said:
It's not silly, men just don't look attractive to women when they're wearing dresses, so they don't do it.
Tell that to the hordes of thousands of Visual Kei fangirls.
If something is uncommon in society, THAT'S THE POINT. Going against gender means going against society, not going against biology, has been the entire point here.
You such don't know how to keep up your biology argument. You're giving me food.
Diorte said:
It's that simple. If it looked good, we'd do it, but it doesn't, so we don't.
There is not such thing as an objectively "good looking" thing when it comes to humans. You're treating human aesthetics objectively and they're not. You'd might as well be saying there's an objectively good sounding music and objectively bad sounding music.
Diorte said:
Purposely wearing a dress to say "I can wear a dress if I want to," if you're a male, just makes you look like a jackass.
It makes you look open minded.
Insulting men who wearing dresses is what makes a person a jackass.
Diorte said:
I didn't need parental and societal conformity to know I wanted to fuck women.
I'm sure you didn't. But the problem here is you're associating this with gender. Sexuality and gender are two different things.
Diorte said:
I figured it out on my own after my dick got hard seeing naked women.
Good for you. But it's completely irrelevant to whether gender makes sense or not. You're not saying anything in favor of gender here.
Remember, I said gender is determined by society, not sexuality.
Diorte said:
It doesn't matter if it's anyone's business to know if he/she is a he/she
Sure it is. The parents are hiding this for the public so the child can more easily be whatever gender they want.
Diorte said:
since 99% of the time you know instantly what the person's gender is by looking at them or hearing them speak.
I wouldn't say 99%.
Also, you're using gender wrongly. You're using gender to mean sex, two different things. Gender maybe, but not male or female.
Diorte said:
It's human nature to conform.
Naturalistic fallacy.
Diorte said:
Get into psychology and you'll discover this wonderful fact of life.
Appeal to pity.
Diorte said:
Doesn't matter. People will know by looking at him/her.
Not necessarily no. There's a lot of natural variation in looks.
Lots of women would look mistakable for males if they fit the masculine gender role enough. And lots of men would look mistakable for females if they fit the feminine gender role enough.
Diorte said:
Purposely going out of your way to hide the gender of a child is just going to confuse everyone, make everyone feel awkward, make everyone ask if he/she is a boy or girl,
All the more reason to do it. You can just tell them they don't need to know.
The point of nonconformity is to change something you believe in changing.
Diorte said:
Another sex as in something other than male or female?
I said nothing of the sort.
Again, as I've said, I'm against gender, not biological sex. Learn to understand the difference.
Not giving the child a gender and letting them choose, allows them to choose their personal behavior on individuality. They can be boygender, girlgender, or genderless. Whether they are male or female.
Diorte said:
The only other thing is an "it," and I don't see how it's beneficial to anyone to be referred to as "it."
One doesn't have to refer to people as by a gender.
Diorte said:
A child does not have the right do decide because a child is still in development.
I didn't imply they should immediately decide everything about their life at a young age. I implied it's not a good idea to brainwash your child into a gender and let them develop on their own as they need. It's not really a decision. But yes, I do believe a child, while still in development, can decide whether they want to play with a firetruck or a pullip doll.
Diorte said:
That's why children can't do so many things until they're an adult. An adult has the right to do whatever they want with their reproductive organs if they have the money to pay for the procedures.
Again, I'm not talking about reproductive organs here, I'm talking about gender.
Diorte said:
Sex and gender are the same thing
No they are not. Sex is the biology of being male or female. Gender is a societal construct in which people fill out roles by culture. Such as clothing, profession, hobbies, and such.
Gender is a behavior. A behavior grouping, more precisely. Sex is a form of the genitals.
Diorte said:
I don't know why you keep talking like they're different.
Because they are.
Diorte said:
You need to start saying "gender role," not "gender."
The term gender is sometimes broadened to mean biology as well.
But it primarily means gender roles.
In most cases, gender is differentiated from sex to mean a societal thing of behavior rather than biology.
I'm not planning in getting into an argument on semantic here.
But know that what I am talking about is the culture and behavior in this discussion. Not biology.
Diorte said:
It makes you seem less ignorant and asinine.
Ad hominem.
Diorte said:
It's not like humanity decided "Hey, we should divide people into male and female because it's a great idea and will work wonders for society!"
People made all sorts of differentiations on people based upon nonsensical things. Including race. Though it's pretty debatable how much race determines culture. But yes, society did create the ideas that women should wear different clothing from men, do different kinds of work, and so on and so forth.
Diorte said:
Some men and women want to reverse this, and we've developed a procedure for this and allow them to do so. Some men and women want to go completely against this and look like jackasses.
What's a jackass notion, is putting forth the idea that for women and men to want to be treated differently, they should try to stop having a penis or vagina, and alter biology, instead of society.
Diorte said:
I didn't say anything that contradicts this.
Sure you did. In your first response to the parents who raises their child to be without gender brainwashing, is that the person has a penis, the person should fill out the culture of the male gender role.
And when I started talking about how it's not necessary for a male to act masculine, you started going on about the penis. You equated masculine and feminine behavior with sexuality.
Diorte said:
It doesn't?
No, children should be allowed for form themselves as individuals. Without gender role brainwashing.
Diorte said:
I already said how I knew I liked girls.
You sure did. As irrelevant as it was.
Diorte said:
It wasn't pressed upon me by society. As a matter of fact, I don't know of a single person who only likes the gender they do because of what society tells them. Nobody does. My gay friends knew they liked guys after they got turned on looking at naked men. My lesbian friends knew they liked chicks after getting turned on looking at naked women. My bisexual friends knew they liked men and women after getting turned on looking at both. If you don't get turned on by either, then good for you, you don't have to go through any sexual frustration that most people do.
More irrelevant stuff.
Diorte said:
Why do I think it's stupid for this child's parents to raise said child as such? Because it's making it overly complicated for me to refer to the child
No it doesn't. People should be referred to as individuals. And people. Not men and women. Gendered language is not necessary.
Diorte said:
, it's going to set the child up to possibly be outcast, and being an outcast makes life miserable.
From this logic, one could say that race mixing is wrong.
And that children should be protected from anything slightly unusual.
Unusual religion. Unusual music. Unusual movies and music. Unusual sports. And so on and so forth.
Diorte said:
“It's cruel to bring a child into the world with a blue or pink stamp on their forehead.” Really? No the fuck it isn't.
Yes, it quite is. Though what's cruel is really a subjective matter.
Diorte said:
I am against people who are setting their child up for a life that's harder than it needs to be.
What children need, more than anything, is self esteem.
The world will become a better place from this spike in the system.
And people who would not accept a child for conforming to gender roles, are not people the child needs to be around anyway.
Good parenting is also to keep children around and away from bad folk.
There are some people in the world who will kill your child for not being a Muslim. Perhaps by that logic a child should be converted to Islam? I think not. One just has to keep their child safe from people would do harm to their children.
Winter 2016 Anime Theme Songs Skillfully Covered
Osomatsu-san’s Iyami Takes The Mound
Asuna’s Rapier Radiantly Recreated
China Elevator Woman “Starved To Death Over Month”
Goddess of Twitter: “Flat is Justice!”
