Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
-
- Posts: 545
- Joined: July 19th, 2014, 9:58 pm
Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
For better or worse, sexual identity is the primary matrix by which we perceive others. That's because our one, insatiable human imperative (once personal survival is secured) is to reproduce. Even in homosexual relationships, the male-female personae persists, and are the masks worn in such relationships. Sexual ambiguity (within the context of a simple, binary model) seems to illicit a strong, visceral confusion. Social engineering and indoctrination may well enforce a rote tolerance of "transgender identity", but that "tolerance" can never usurp the deeper imperative of binary sexual bonding. Hurtful slurs and cruel epithets will always be on the tips-of-the-tongues of those who feign acceptance, but secretly decry forced compliance.
Transgender people resent and fear exclusion from the umwelt of their "sexually unambiguous" peers. Social convention is but a thin veneer, a white-washing of this underlying tension. While human behavior is admittedly pliable, genetic constraints are implacable limits on society's enforced egalitarianism. Transgender people will continually be regarded with suspicion, and perhaps even with envy for their presumed insights into both genders. Their fate is to be revered as oracles, and reviled as freaks. All the while they're denied the fate of simply being people. Moral opprobrium follows them throughout their lives, as they continually confuse and confound the sexual mores of "normal" folk. They'll remain the fodder of prurient sexual fantasizes, labeled derisively as chicks-with-dicks. Transgender people are indeed "morally ambiguous", and there is no recourse to the fairness they deserve. They'll just have to settle for a "phony egalitarianism".
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5765
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
Only if that 'we' means sexists. Many people aren't that sexist, and many people regularly use other priorities to judge and perceive others.Platos stepchild wrote:For better or worse, sexual identity is the primary matrix by which we perceive others.
Source please.Platos stepchild wrote:That's because our one, insatiable human imperative (once personal survival is secured) is to reproduce.
What about elderly people with no children? Would you propose executing them? Why or why not?
What about non-human animals like dogs and rabbits? Are you saying that those non-human animals have other major priorities besides mere sex (after personal survival)? Or when you write the word human do you mean some broader category that includes these other animals? If the latter, then are you saying human behavior is as primitive as these wouldbe lower animals?
Why do so many people choose not to have kids?
Why do so many people get vasectomies? Why do so many people use condoms?
But what are homosexual relationships? Does this sentence in the context of your post doesn't put the cart before the horse? What about all the times when a woman with two X chromosomes has had a sexual relationship with a person with Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS), considering that throughout almost all of history and today would have been seen, called and had the legal status of a "female" (at least unless if ever and if possible genetically tested)? Is that a homosexual relationship?Platos stepchild wrote:Even in homosexual relationships, the male-female personae persists, and are the masks worn in such relationships.
Source please.Platos stepchild wrote:Transgender people resent and fear exclusion from the umwelt of their "sexually unambiguous" peers.
I don't see how this conclusion follows at all from the rest of the post. Can you walk me through the logic? Let's start with the bare minimum of premises you need considered true for the sake of argument to get to this conclusion. What are those premises?Platos stepchild wrote:Transgender people are indeed "morally ambiguous", and there is no recourse to the fairness they deserve.
Perhaps a lot of transgender people don't really care whether the displayed emotions of potentially insecure haters are real or not. In analogy, throughout the civil rights movement and still today in the USA the efforts to move away from racism and towards racial equality may be less focused on wanting to eliminate the secret negative feelings of racists as much as stopping significantly destructive actions and the political, social and economic policies that enable or encourage those actions, even with simple things like bathroom-assignment that are still very different than the secret hatred one might harbor behind a phony egalitarianism while still letting you use the bathroom you want to use.Platos stepchild wrote:They'll just have to settle for a "phony egalitarianism".
But one would have to ask transgender people to find out what they want, and ask a lot of them at that to have anything of statistical significance.
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
Notice any thing strange about societies increase in Homosexuality lately???
Everyone wants to flaunt his, hers or their sexuality.
-- Updated September 28th, 2015, 10:04 am to add the following --
Once a person Tolerates Homosexuality as not being immoral, Homosexuality is accepted as being moral; Homosexuality is then embraced because it has value.
Notice any thing strange about societies increase in Homosexuality lately???
Everyone wants to flaunt his, hers or their sexuality.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15005
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
- Misty
- Premium Member
- Posts: 5934
- Joined: August 10th, 2011, 8:13 pm
- Location: United States of America
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
Correction: the persons who are homosexual are embraced because they have value.Wayne92587 wrote:Once a person Tolerates Homosexuality as not being immoral, Homosexuality is accepted as being moral; Homosexuality is then embraced because it has value.
The eyes can only see what the mind has, is, or will be prepared to comprehend.
I am Lion, hear me ROAR! Meow.
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
I said nothing about the person, the homosexual. My post was made in reference to sexuality, not the individual.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15005
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
There most likely has not been an "increase in homosexuality lately" either; gay people today are less likely to be pressured to pretend to be straight.
Think about it logically. When you found out about homosexuality did it make you fancy women less? Did you suddenly find the bulge in other gentlemen's trousers of interest?
People are diverse in various ways. We have seven billion people on the planet and we can't feed and house them all. It would seem to me that the more gay people are allowed to be themselves, the better.
-
- Posts: 1017
- Joined: November 27th, 2012, 2:11 am
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/sexual-orient ... ml#EqdQphPGreta wrote:Think about it logically. When you found out about homosexuality did it make you fancy women less? Did you suddenly find the bulge in other gentlemen's trousers of interest?
According to a new YouGov survey, 49% of 18-24 year-olds in Britain define themselves as something other than completely heterosexual. The Kinsey scale invented in the 1940s placed people on a range of sexual preferences from exclusively heterosexual at 0 to exclusively homosexual at 6.
A lot of males have homosexual fantasy thoughts when they're still young boys. Not unlike 12 year-old boys find themselves sexually attracted to 11 and 12 year-old girls. The question is why do some boys grow into 35 year-old men still sexually attracted to 12 year-old girls or 30 year-old men?One of the most striking findings of the new study is that with each generation, people see their sexuality as less fixed and more fluid.
No one is born heterosexual. And the idea someone is born homosexual is equally ridiculous.
From my own anecdotal experience the heterosexuals most inclined to engage in homosexual sex are those that do not really object to homosexuality. Not really different than men that don't object to sex with 4 year-old girls being more inclined to engage in that or men that don't object to cheating on wives being more inclined to do that or men that don't object to stealing groceries being more inclined to do that.
Those that vehemently oppose a thing can do it too. Like any man that vehemently opposes raping women or opposes raping little children and child porn can still do those things. But from my experience they are less likely to do them than those that see nothing with them. Because people can be talked into things. They can be talked into revolutions. The American or South American not vehemently a capitalist, not vehemently opposed to communism, can be talked joining the communist revolution. Same thing with democratic revolutions or socialist revolutions. Today in the USA and Europe it is the LGBTQ revolution. The irony is that supposedly the communist Russians intentionally planted the seeds of this revolution in both the Catholic Church and America, before the Soviet Union collapsed, to cause and internal collapse. Supposedly they planted the seeds of a number of revolts to cause internal decadence and collapse (Kind of like the FBI COINTELPRO planted the seeds of collapse inside the Black Panther Party).
I'm not sure how much truth there is to the Soviet Russian claim (although, it is now known through form communist agents that the Soviets did infiltrate the Vatican itself and broader Catholic Church and plant seeds of internal strife, gather intelligence and so forth.)
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
There is more to being a man or a woman than sexuality or body type.
How many women do you see flaunting their masculinity in public by letting their Male Member proudly hang out.
Medusa, Rage, Masculinity, is the new symbol of Women's Liberation, Femininity, is all the rage, a bitch out to subjugate the Male, to rule the world.
The sign of the Beast, Machismo.
-
- Posts: 1500
- Joined: December 22nd, 2013, 4:57 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eric Hoffer
- Location: California, US
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
Are you saying that it's all cultural conditioning? I don't believe that. It was in evolution's best interest to have us all interested exclusively in the opposite sex. I believe that that was a difficult thing to program in our brains, since we recognize beauty in both sexes and like people of both sexes and yet are supposed to be sexually excited only by the opposite sex, and with the complex hormonal interplay during fetal development it doesn't always get it exactly right. (Right in the sense of promoting procreation, not morally right.)Supine wrote: No one is born heterosexual. And the idea someone is born homosexual is equally ridiculous.
But as a heterosexual male, I've never even fantasized about a homosexual encounter. Possibly that's an example of repression, but I've no memory of such. I know that plenty of people are bisexual or at least open to experimentation in that area, but it's never appealed to me - consciously, at least. So I believe that many of us were "born" heterosexual", and so I assume that some were born homsexual.
-
- Posts: 1017
- Joined: November 27th, 2012, 2:11 am
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
That's not really what I was trying to communicate. Although, yes, I would say the concepts of "heterosexuality" and "homosexuality" or even "bisexuality" are to some extent culturally constructed, just like race.Wilson wrote: Are you saying that it's all cultural conditioning? I don't believe that.
Take Brazil vs the USA. Obama is viewed as "black" in the USA but he would not be in Brazil. Furthermore, if Obama were sodomize in a dominate fashion effeminate gay men, while Obama continued to exhibit masculine behavioral traits and mannerism all the while also being attracted to women, he would in Brazil be viewed as heterosexual. But in the USA he would be viewed by some as homosexual and by others as bisexual.
Brazil never had the concept of racially "passing" either. The United States by-and-large no longer does but it has taken that old racial concept and applied it to its modern political-scientific views of sexual orientation. And men that have sex with men but women as well are viewed even by the American left as "passing" for heterosexual as best (one can not pass for "homosexual" in the USA no more than a "light-skinned black person" in the 1930s USA could "pass" for black. One can only "pass" for heterosexuality or for being white.)
But what I was trying to communicate is that sexual orientation is something acquired after birth and likely after infancy. My brothers and I were raised in the same household and have the same biological parents but for whatever reason they've been mostly attracted to white women and I mostly to darker hued women be they black or Latino etc.
All sexual orientation is predicated largely on the visual. (What sexual orientation is a person born blind and deaf?) And whether one likes white women or darker hued men... this all has to due with phenotype. And phenotype crosses into morphological features (e.g., shapes of genitals, shapes of butts, shapes of jaw lines).
So, people sometimes complain the "white beauty standard" prevails in the media and Asian, black, and darker Latino women are mentally tortured trying to adopt white beauty traits. Furthermore, that men of all races sexually indoctrinated, influenced, by the media as to what to find sexually attractive.
If that is the case such indoctrination occurs, then men can be indoctrinated into finding "women" with penises, born with penises and testicles, and no vaginas as sexually attractive as women born purely with vaginas.
No one is born heterosexual or homosexual or sexually attracted to Male-to-Female transsexuals with penises larger than they have. That's an acquired sexual attraction.
In philosophy courses that cover biology its taught that God does not exist, that Intelligent Design does not exist within biological evolution or the physical evolution of the planets, and therefore evolution has no "mind" or "intent." If it did then philosophy says that would be an Intelligent Designer.It was in evolution's best interest to have us all interested exclusively in the opposite sex. I believe that that was a difficult thing to program in our brains, since we recognize beauty in both sexes and like people of both sexes and yet are supposed to be sexually excited only by the opposite sex, and with the complex hormonal interplay during fetal development it doesn't always get it exactly right. (Right in the sense of promoting procreation, not morally right.)
So, biological evolution never had any "interest."
The Theory of Evolution can really be reduced in simplicity to this: sex and death.
Traits survive or become prevalent in relation to the degree parents of opposite sex have sex, reproduce children, pass on those genetic traits... and said offspring survive into reproductive years, have sex with members of the opposite sex, and produce children.
If homosexuality were genetically heritable, and if homosexuality became tolerated, celebrated, and homosexual marriage became legal and accepted, if gay and lesbian men and omen no longer stayed in the closet and married the opposite sex and produced children. Then we would expect to see a decline, a great drop in those societies with gay marriage, of the homosexual or bisexual trait. Such acceptance and failure of gay people to reproduce children in gay marriages should drive the homosexual genetic trait to near extinction.
Instead... as I predicted... we see a massive rise in the behavioral trait. Because behaviors are largely non-genetically deterministic (not caused by genetic programming prior to birth), and at most, usually epigenetic.
Epigenetics is a little more complicated. Some things can occur prior to birth based on the environment, stresses, experiences of the mother. Other things alter human genetic expressions after birth by a person's own environment or even choices and behaviors. Like drug addiction. Heroin addiction or alcoholism is epigenetic--post birth epigenetic. The person does not have a choice to be a heroin addict or alcoholic but that outcome--that lack of choice--occurred from repetitive behaviors which ultimately altered the genetic networks of their brain. And the brain of heroin addict causes physiological intense responses once a heroin addict sees for say.... a needle sitting on a desk.
Not so unlike the physiological responses that occurs in the heterosexual males attracted to women of Halle Berry's phenotype when they see such a woman emerge from a swimming pool naked.
How does one become heterosexual? I'm not quite sure. My guess is that it's not unlike the complaint women have about "white beauty standards" and "thin women." Young boys and young girls--most at least--adopt the prevailing sexual norms of the culture they are in. If that culture encourages heterosexual pairing and not only that but pairing with thinner women... then that's what most the young boys will filter into their brains, masturbate on, and hard wire their epigenetic system for.
Young boys that fantasize too mush or masturbate to much to homosexual thoughts are reinforcing that and setting their epigenetic attractions. That's what I suspect. That's what I suspect similarly occurs with pedophiles too.
Few want to be pedophiles or drug addicts or homosexual. But once that epigenetic trait is set choice is no longer involved. At least not in the physiological aspects.
My own view is that humans are fundamentally "bisexual"--if a label of the big 3 had to be used.But as a heterosexual male, I've never even fantasized about a homosexual encounter. Possibly that's an example of repression, but I've no memory of such. I know that plenty of people are bisexual or at least open to experimentation in that area, but it's never appealed to me - consciously, at least. So I believe that many of us were "born" heterosexual", and so I assume that some were born homsexual.
The LGBTQ revolution is rapidly expanding into new indoctrinational grounds. Now "panssexual" is the emerging cool and new thing. It's concept annihilates all notions of "born that way." Being pansexual differs from being "bisexual" in that bisexuals don't claim to be attracted to pre-op transsexuals or cross dressers or "furries." Pansexuals are the new enlightened in the LGBTQ revolution who say they are open to all sexually and are only sexually attracted to the invisible person expressed in the person's "personality."
In other words the pansexual is saying outward appearances, the visual phenotype, looks period do not matter to them. They are true egalitarians of sexual arousal.
That young female singer came out as pansexual.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15005
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
-
- Posts: 1500
- Joined: December 22nd, 2013, 4:57 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eric Hoffer
- Location: California, US
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
I'm very well aware of how evolution works, and your summary just above is pretty much correct. Evolution is of course not an entity, so it's not aware of anything, it doesn't work toward something - but I find it a convenient shorthand to think of it as acting logically - because "it" does act extremely logically, much as we use trial and error in solving puzzles.Supine wrote:In philosophy courses that cover biology its taught that God does not exist, that Intelligent Design does not exist within biological evolution or the physical evolution of the planets, and therefore evolution has no "mind" or "intent." If it did then philosophy says that would be an Intelligent Designer.It was in evolution's best interest to have us all interested exclusively in the opposite sex. I believe that that was a difficult thing to program in our brains, since we recognize beauty in both sexes and like people of both sexes and yet are supposed to be sexually excited only by the opposite sex, and with the complex hormonal interplay during fetal development it doesn't always get it exactly right. (Right in the sense of promoting procreation, not morally right.)
So, biological evolution never had any "interest."
The Theory of Evolution can really be reduced in simplicity to this: sex and death.
Please be logical. You seem to have a fundamental grasp of evolution, so don't you see that heterosexual orientation is preferable to homosexual orientation in terms of sending one's seed forward? That's not complicated. Someone exclusively homosexual will not procreate at all. A bisexual person will presumably have fewer offspring than an exclusively heterosexual individual (though not always). The way I look at it is that it was damn hard to program the brain for individuals to get along with both sexes, to like and admire people of both sexes, to appreciate beauty in both sexes, but to desire congress only with the opposite sex. Think about how that might be accomplished in the wiring of the brain, through step-by-step genetic changes. So maybe about 80-90% exclusive heterosexuality was the best it (evolution) could do. But it's silly to think that evolution didn't move toward promoting heterosexual intercourse - or, if you prefer, it's silly to think that heterosexuals would not have sent their DNA in greater numbers into future generations.My own view is that humans are fundamentally "bisexual"--if a label of the big 3 had to be used.
I don't think there's anything morally wrong with homosexuality or bisexuality. I'm just saying that it's critical to the survival of a species that its individuals are programmed to prefer heterosexual sex, in the majority of cases. Due to hormonal factors in the uterus, psychological factors and experiences during the formative years, who knows why, some deviate from the standard model. But it sure isn't that our sexuality is a blank slate at birth.
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
Homosexuality is a perversion born of deception, guilefulness, deceit, lies, most of which are perpetrated upon the individual by Self.
The first time a person cheat on their mate is not the first time it has come to Mind.
Some Homosexuality begins as a compulsion; many not knowing, understanding how it all began.
Compulsions are born of repetitive Illusion, Imaginings.
A person for various reasons, fear, feeling a great need to defend their honor, they feeling the they have been disrespected,
Having thought, fantasized, imagined, dreamed about what they would do if need be, numerous times.
While driving in heavy traffic, someone finds themselves???? that's right, Full Blown Rage, Road Rage; the desire of their Fantasies become so ingrained in their mind, that they take out his or her gun and start shooting.
A Fantasy so ingrained in the Mind that a person is compelled to act upon past, thought.
Fantasize about cheating on your mate enough time and you will become so comfortable with the thought that you, without great thought make your dreams come true.
Born of the Imagination a compulsive act destroys Lives.
Fantasy, deception, guilefulness, Lies, destroy what little Free Will we have to make a choice.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15005
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Why Transgender People are Morally Ambiguous
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023