The way I see it, Religion and Gender are both social constructs that exist to make life easier for people who need it (or, at least that’s what the original purpose of religion was).
There’s no definite, set-in-stone proof for either being true (as far as I know, do correct me if I’m wrong), but as long as they make someone’s life better without making others’ life worse, I see no issue with either existing.
It’s not really a fair comparison to say “God doesn’t exist, LGBTQ people do”, when one is a concept and the other is people. Religious people do exist, and the concept of “Gender” is just as vague and undefined as the one for “God”.
The reason why LGBTQ people are (rightfully) seen better than religious people is that they don’t force people to “join” them and don’t treat different people as the scum of the earth.
Religious people will easily tell you God can be empirically studied. The creation of the world, the forming of consciousness, and so on. They’re not proof in any way but imo it’s not much far off from “some (but not all) trans people have different brain waves than cis people” (at least that’s the most common thing I’ve heard about “objectivity” in gender).
To me the comparison was kinda fair, if not for the underlying conspiracy theory that “the ownerclass” is trying to turn people gay for some reason.
Religious people will easily tell you God can be empirically studied.
But that does not make it true. And by the way the whole point of believing is that you don’t need actual proof - if you have evidence you don’t need to believe, you know.
The creation of the world, the forming of consciousness,
Yes and when we study those empirical we come op with rather different explanations than offered by religion. The “God of Gaps” is getting smaller.
They’re not proof in any way but imo it’s not much far off from “some (but not all) trans people have different brain waves than cis people” (at least that’s the most common thing I’ve heard about “objectivity” in gender).
But again. I can go outside an meet trans people. You can have different explanation to why there is such phenomenon as trans people and come up with different explanations and mechanisms. You can’t do quite the same thing with god. But sure you are welcome to propose an empirical experiment on nature of god.
And by the way the whole point of believing is that you don’t need actual proof - if you have evidence you don’t need to believe, you know.
Isn’t a major talking point in LGBTQ culture also that asking for “proof” of being trans is rude and you only have to “feel” like one to be one? I’m not that informed in the culture but I know there’s a subset of “Transmedicalists” that are usually shunned because of that.
Yes and when we study those empirical we come op with rather different explanations than offered by religion. The “God of Gaps” is getting smaller.
Afaik we still didn’t find any possible explanation for either that doesn’t just bring up more questions. It got smaller for a long time but we’re at a point where we’re probably not ever going further unless someone does the biggest scientific breakthrough of history.
But again. I can go outside an meet trans people. You can have different explanation to why there is such phenomenon as trans people and come up with different explanations and mechanisms. You can’t do quite the same thing with god. But sure you are welcome to propose an empirical experiment on nature of god.
Again, you can meet with trans people just like you can meet with religious people. And both have (usually) no objective, biological way to discern them from cis people or atheists. If you want to go further, there’s also people who claim they talked with God or whatever. It’s all claims, as far as I know, on both sides. You can’t empirically test well something that, by definition, can’t have an objective tell.
Isn’t a major talking point in LGBTQ culture also that asking for “proof” of being trans is rude and you only have to “feel” like one to be one? I’m not that informed in the culture but I know there’s a subset of “Transmedicalists” that are usually shunned because of that.
I’m talking about religion. Also asking people to prove their gender in general is considered rude. If someone says she is a women, you don’t normally ask them to prove it - would kind of border on sexual harassment(joke). Not sure why it would be different for trans folk.
Afaik we still didn’t find any possible explanation for either that doesn’t just bring up more questions. It got smaller for a long time but we’re at a point where we’re probably not ever going further unless someone does the biggest scientific breakthrough of history.
What do you mean, we have hypothesis for both. Again the difference is we can actually study those things, we can’t study god in the same sense.
Again, you can meet with trans people just like you can meet with religious people.
You are keep switching between god an religious people. Wich is a bit annoying and makes the conversation less fun. You were saying:
Religious people will easily tell you God can be empirically studied. The creation of the world, the forming of consciousness, and so on. They’re not proof in any way but imo it’s not much far off from “some (but not all) trans people have different brain waves than cis people” (at least that’s the most common thing I’ve heard about “objectivity” in gender).
So comparing existence of god and trans people. So which one is it?
To be clear I’m not doubting that Religions people exists, I doubt that god exists in the capacity they claim it to exist. As a psychological ans sociological construct god is real - and I might join the first religion than will come down with such definition of god. But that is far from what religions claim to be.
Also asking people to prove their gender in general is considered rude. If someone says she is a women, you don’t normally ask them to prove it - would kind of border on sexual harassment(joke). Not sure why it would be different for trans folk.
That’s Sex, not Gender, though. Gender is unrelated to physical appearance, as far as I know (and is thus impossible to prove).
What do you mean, we have hypothesis for both.
Not definite ones that don’t bring more questions, is what I’m saying. We have the Big Bang, but how did it happen? What caused it? That’s a gap that will probably never be filled.
You are keep switching between god an religious people. Wich is a bit annoying and makes the conversation less fun. You were (…)
comparing existence of god and trans people. So which one is it?
To be clear I’m not doubting that Religions people exists, I doubt that god exists in the capacity they claim it to exist.
And I don’t doubt Trans people exist, I doubt “Gender” exists as more than a concept. I’m comparing a “concrete” God with a “concrete” Gender, and Religious people with Trans people.
Just like Religious people can exist without proof of God existing, Trans people can exist without Gender actually being a biological, provable and irrefutable thing. You’re saying “one is real and the other is not” because you’re conflating the two.
That’s Sex, not Gender, though. Gender is unrelated to physical appearance, as far as I know (and is thus impossible to prove).
So you don’t even know what gender is, but you chime in anyway - internet discussion at it best.
Not definite ones that don’t bring more questions, is what I’m saying. We have the Big Bang, but how did it happen? What caused it? That’s a gap that will probably never be filled.
There are books on knowledge more complex than what we learned in school. If you fit in physics you can make a rather deep dive into all the questions you just asked - it’s far more interesting than god just did it for the fun of it.
And I don’t doubt Trans people exist, I doubt “Gender” exists as more than a concept. I’m comparing a “concrete” God with a “concrete” Gender, and Religious people with Trans people.
So by this comparison you think that trans people believe to be trans in the same way religious people believe that god exists? Just need to clarify that I got you correct.
Just like Religious people can exist without proof of God existing, Trans people can exist without Gender actually being a biological, provable and irrefutable thing. You’re saying “one is real and the other is not” because you’re conflating the two.
Again, I don’t doubt that religious people exist. Not sure why you keep bringing it up.
So you don’t even know what gender is, but you chime in anyway - internet discussion at it best.
I’m plastering this discussion with “I think”, “as far as I know” and the likes exactly because I’m not fully knowledgeable on the matter. If I’m getting stuff wrong you could correct me instead of simply telling me I’m wrong.
Again, I don’t doubt that religious people exist. Not sure why you keep bringing it up.
I’m not. I’m saying “one is real and the other isn’t” works only if you compare God to Trans people instead of the concept of Gender.
So by this comparison you think that trans people believe to be trans in the same way religious people believe that god exists? Just need to clarify that I got you correct.
I’m not Trans and I’m not Religious so I have no actual way to tell. Only someone who is both could actually have a meaningful say in this discussion, and even then it’s just the opinion of one person and it wouldn’t represent the whole group(s). What I personally think (and again, this might be entirely wrong as I have no direct knowledge of it), is that they’re people who felt something wrong with their life and gave it an explanation that lets them live better. That explanation might be true or not, but as long as it makes them live better and doesn’t hurt others (and this is where unfortunately most Religious people fail), it doesn’t really matter for it to work and be accepted as a natural part of society.
I personally know no Trans person and it’s genuinely hard to talk about this online without being mistaken as one of the thousand different camps who hate Trans people for one dumb reason or another, so my knowledge about the subject is limited to this, unfortunately. If you know/think it’s different I’d be glad to hear why.
“To me the comparison was kinda fair, if not for the underlying conspiracy theory that “the ownerclass” is trying to turn people gay for some reason.”
I might be a poor word smith, I don’t believe that this is a conspiracy to turn people gay, I feel like it’s more of an over-arching agenda to amplify a divisive issue.
It is a very important message, but since legacy media is so enveloped in this, makes me suspicious, and by extension suspisious about legacy media owners’ agenda. Hence my suspicion of the owner class, or even better, the exploitation class.
The way I see it, Religion and Gender are both social constructs that exist to make life easier for people who need it (or, at least that’s what the original purpose of religion was).
There’s no definite, set-in-stone proof for either being true (as far as I know, do correct me if I’m wrong), but as long as they make someone’s life better without making others’ life worse, I see no issue with either existing.
It’s not really a fair comparison to say “God doesn’t exist, LGBTQ people do”, when one is a concept and the other is people. Religious people do exist, and the concept of “Gender” is just as vague and undefined as the one for “God”.
The reason why LGBTQ people are (rightfully) seen better than religious people is that they don’t force people to “join” them and don’t treat different people as the scum of the earth.
To be clear I’m not the one bringing up comparison of religion and LGBTQ. I’m pointing out the absurdity of that comparison.
Except you can study one empirically and not the other. Want to take a guess wich one?
Religious people will easily tell you God can be empirically studied. The creation of the world, the forming of consciousness, and so on. They’re not proof in any way but imo it’s not much far off from “some (but not all) trans people have different brain waves than cis people” (at least that’s the most common thing I’ve heard about “objectivity” in gender).
To me the comparison was kinda fair, if not for the underlying conspiracy theory that “the ownerclass” is trying to turn people gay for some reason.
But that does not make it true. And by the way the whole point of believing is that you don’t need actual proof - if you have evidence you don’t need to believe, you know.
Yes and when we study those empirical we come op with rather different explanations than offered by religion. The “God of Gaps” is getting smaller.
But again. I can go outside an meet trans people. You can have different explanation to why there is such phenomenon as trans people and come up with different explanations and mechanisms. You can’t do quite the same thing with god. But sure you are welcome to propose an empirical experiment on nature of god.
Isn’t a major talking point in LGBTQ culture also that asking for “proof” of being trans is rude and you only have to “feel” like one to be one? I’m not that informed in the culture but I know there’s a subset of “Transmedicalists” that are usually shunned because of that.
Afaik we still didn’t find any possible explanation for either that doesn’t just bring up more questions. It got smaller for a long time but we’re at a point where we’re probably not ever going further unless someone does the biggest scientific breakthrough of history.
Again, you can meet with trans people just like you can meet with religious people. And both have (usually) no objective, biological way to discern them from cis people or atheists. If you want to go further, there’s also people who claim they talked with God or whatever. It’s all claims, as far as I know, on both sides. You can’t empirically test well something that, by definition, can’t have an objective tell.
I’m talking about religion. Also asking people to prove their gender in general is considered rude. If someone says she is a women, you don’t normally ask them to prove it - would kind of border on sexual harassment(joke). Not sure why it would be different for trans folk.
What do you mean, we have hypothesis for both. Again the difference is we can actually study those things, we can’t study god in the same sense.
You are keep switching between god an religious people. Wich is a bit annoying and makes the conversation less fun. You were saying:
So comparing existence of god and trans people. So which one is it?
To be clear I’m not doubting that Religions people exists, I doubt that god exists in the capacity they claim it to exist. As a psychological ans sociological construct god is real - and I might join the first religion than will come down with such definition of god. But that is far from what religions claim to be.
That’s Sex, not Gender, though. Gender is unrelated to physical appearance, as far as I know (and is thus impossible to prove).
Not definite ones that don’t bring more questions, is what I’m saying. We have the Big Bang, but how did it happen? What caused it? That’s a gap that will probably never be filled.
And I don’t doubt Trans people exist, I doubt “Gender” exists as more than a concept. I’m comparing a “concrete” God with a “concrete” Gender, and Religious people with Trans people.
Just like Religious people can exist without proof of God existing, Trans people can exist without Gender actually being a biological, provable and irrefutable thing. You’re saying “one is real and the other is not” because you’re conflating the two.
So you don’t even know what gender is, but you chime in anyway - internet discussion at it best.
There are books on knowledge more complex than what we learned in school. If you fit in physics you can make a rather deep dive into all the questions you just asked - it’s far more interesting than god just did it for the fun of it.
So by this comparison you think that trans people believe to be trans in the same way religious people believe that god exists? Just need to clarify that I got you correct.
Again, I don’t doubt that religious people exist. Not sure why you keep bringing it up.
I’m plastering this discussion with “I think”, “as far as I know” and the likes exactly because I’m not fully knowledgeable on the matter. If I’m getting stuff wrong you could correct me instead of simply telling me I’m wrong.
I’m not. I’m saying “one is real and the other isn’t” works only if you compare God to Trans people instead of the concept of Gender.
I’m not Trans and I’m not Religious so I have no actual way to tell. Only someone who is both could actually have a meaningful say in this discussion, and even then it’s just the opinion of one person and it wouldn’t represent the whole group(s). What I personally think (and again, this might be entirely wrong as I have no direct knowledge of it), is that they’re people who felt something wrong with their life and gave it an explanation that lets them live better. That explanation might be true or not, but as long as it makes them live better and doesn’t hurt others (and this is where unfortunately most Religious people fail), it doesn’t really matter for it to work and be accepted as a natural part of society.
I personally know no Trans person and it’s genuinely hard to talk about this online without being mistaken as one of the thousand different camps who hate Trans people for one dumb reason or another, so my knowledge about the subject is limited to this, unfortunately. If you know/think it’s different I’d be glad to hear why.
“To me the comparison was kinda fair, if not for the underlying conspiracy theory that “the ownerclass” is trying to turn people gay for some reason.”
I might be a poor word smith, I don’t believe that this is a conspiracy to turn people gay, I feel like it’s more of an over-arching agenda to amplify a divisive issue.
It is a very important message, but since legacy media is so enveloped in this, makes me suspicious, and by extension suspisious about legacy media owners’ agenda. Hence my suspicion of the owner class, or even better, the exploitation class.