Trib Opinion Piece Re: Church's Trans Policies

[Dario_M]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

She just told us that she encountered a mixed bathroom. Californiaboy and I just talked about finding them in Europe.  Bathrooms that are for men and women. 

Europe doesn't have mixed bathrooms for so far i know. At least not in the Netherlands at least. Or in any other Europees country's i have been to i have seen mixed bathrooms.

1 hour ago, Rain said:

While I found myself feeling ok in mixed bathrooms by the end of my time there I recognize that other people won't feel comfortable with it.

In Europe? Wich country's are we talking about then if i may be so free to ask? 

1 hour ago, Rain said:

I also feel women need to have safe places. (Men do too.) When you tell Mustard that she probably won't even notice and not to worry you are completely disregarding her lived experience as a woman especially when you just got done ignoring what she said was her experience. 

I asked her or she meant that it bothered her that transwoman also go to the woman bathroom. That that was a mixed bathroom because of the trans womans. Because i didn't really understand what she meant with mixed bathrooms anyway? In the Netherlands we don't have them.

I mean with "no worrie you don't notice it" that she probably won't even noticed it when a transwoman inters the door of a woman bathroom.

God forbid. 

Edited November 20, 2024 by Dario_M

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Dario_M said:

e society considered transwoman as "real woman" and therefor those woman do also have the right to enter a womans bathroom. You probably won't even notice it so don't worrie. 

Not all trans women have gone through medical transitioning.  And not all look as if born biologically female even when fully transitioned.  Not everyone can talk lessons on how to speak or makeup.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-50854359

[Dario_M]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

Not all trans women have gone through medical transitioning.  And not all look as if born biologically female even when fully transitioned.  Not everyone can talk lessons on how to speak or makeup.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-50854359

Oh my. Offcourse i was talking about trans woman who did the complete transition. Not trans woman who still have their male reproductive organ. God forbid. 🙏

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Dario_M said:

Europe doesn't have mixed bathrooms for so far i know. At least not in the Netherlands at least. Or in any other Europees country's i have been to i have seen mixed bathrooms.

In the Netherlands:

https://students.uu.nl/en/news/first-all-gender-toilets-realised-in-the-city-centre

and

https://nltimes.nl/2023/02/20/renovated-parliament-building-3-types-toilets-including-gender-inclusive

 

1 hour ago, Dario_M said:

In Europe? Wich country's are we talking about then if i may be so free to ask? 

I just said in this thread I have been to several in Hungary. I don't know which countries Californiaboy found them in.

1 hour ago, Dario_M said:

I asked her or she meant that it bothered her that transwoman also go to the woman bathroom. That that was a mixed bathroom because of the trans womans. Because i didn't really understand what she meant with mixed bathrooms anyway?

That both men and women can go in them. 

1 hour ago, Dario_M said:

In the Netherlands we don't have them.

Yes, you do according to the sites I listed above. 

1 hour ago, Dario_M said:

I mean with "no worrie you don't notice it" that she probably won't even noticed it when a transwoman inters the door of a woman bathroom.

I know what you meant. You are looking at this through your own eyes, not a woman's. Some transwomen won't be noticed in a woman's bathroom.  Some absolutely will be noticed. Especially when one is a woman alone. 

When you tell her not to worry you are essentially telling her to ignore her lived experiences. 

1 hour ago, Dario_M said:

God forbid. 

 

[Dario_M]

4 hours ago, Rain said:

In the Netherlands:

https://students.uu.nl/en/news/first-all-gender-toilets-realised-in-the-city-centre

and

https://nltimes.nl/2023/02/20/renovated-parliament-building-3-types-toilets-including-gender-inclusive

Well...i haven't seen any of those in the Netherlands yet. And i just asked my boyfriend or he has seen those mixed bathrooms and he also never have seen them. 

4 hours ago, Rain said:

I just said in this thread I have been to several in Hungary. I don't know which countries Californiaboy found them in.

It can be possible that Hungary, Greece, Turkey has those mixed bathrooms. But i've never been to those country's bevore because i'm not very interested in those type for country's to be honest. If i go to another country i wanna feel save there. After my disaster in Portugal i have been very carefull going somewhere abroad. I recently have been to Londen UK and i felt really save there. And the people where very nice.

4 hours ago, Rain said:

That both men and women can go in them. 

Okay yeah. That's kinda weird in my opinion. 

4 hours ago, Rain said:

Yes, you do according to the sites I listed above. 

?

4 hours ago, Rain said:

I know what you meant. You are looking at this through your own eyes, not a woman's. Some transwomen won't be noticed in a woman's bathroom.  Some absolutely will be noticed. Especially when one is a woman alone. 

When you tell her not to worry you are essentially telling her to ignore her lived experiences. 

 

Okay well..that was not my intention. My bad. 

 

Oh and i see that i have reached my limit. I can't post for the rest of the day.

Oh my...how many hours do i have bevore i can't even edit my last post anymore @Tacenda   ?

@smac97 I can't post anymore because i went over my limit for today. So...can we do this discusion later please. Like...when it is tomorrow in the United States. 

Oh lord. God forbid. 

Edited November 20, 2024 by Dario_M

[california boy]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

A miniature camera flat on the floor looking up could see way too much.

Well if that is the case, or even if it makes women feel unsafe, then it seems to me the need to have the bathroom stalls go from floor to ceiling out weighs the need for easier cleaning.

 

[smac97]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

Good for your daughter for the suggestion and good for you for accepting in a positive manner.  

My guess is they were in the first stages of transitioning as it is not a bad idea for a counselor to suggest group therapy before moving on to other therapies and actual medical interventions with the aim of changing appearance etc., especially if the individual was suffering from depression and anxiety or is wondering how much transitioning is appropriate in their lives.  It is wise with such a major undertaking to get a support system in place.  This is what should be happening with all ages.

They may have been reluctant to talk about planned details of transitioning in front of a man who might appeared to them as a tourist.  Just standard caution opening up around strangers.  Not everyone is able to do it.  Just because you are in group therapy doesn’t mean you feel safe…speaking from experience.

Yes, I got that vibe.  I did not feel particularly welcomed there.  In fact, the facilitator asked me twice why I was even present.  I told her both times that my daughter had encouraged me to come and listen.  None of them seemed particularly comfortable with me being there.

6 hours ago, Calm said:

The other possibility for the reason they did not appear to be doing more than social transitioning (I believe that is the correct term) is they knew what type of negative reactions they would get at this time in Provo, Utah and had put off transitioning in order to keep jobs and housing.

That may well be so.  "Social transitioning" is a pretty nebulous concept.

6 hours ago, Calm said:

Considering they were in a support group for transgender individuals, I would expect them to have that expectation of the group. It would be odd if they didn’t…and sad.

What "expectation" are you referencing here?

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Well...it's really simple. The woman is trapped in a mans body.

This only opens more questions for me.  Can a person be a dog trapped in a human body?  A space alien trapped in a human body?

I understand that a man, a biological male, may feel like he is a woman, a biological female.  But he is not.  In my view, the only way to justify the contrary statement is to re-define "woman" so as to exclude its rooted biological meaning of "adult biological female."  

I have great compassion and sympathy for people struggling with mental disorders and make them view reality in ways that are incorrect.  

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

So she takes hormons to develop some breasts, let her hair grow, change her voice, get rid of her facial hair, wear woman clothes, undergoes many operations, one that will allow her to get rid of her genitals, one that will imitate the genitals of a woman. And there you have a transformed real woman. 🤷‍♀️

And yet virtually every single cell in his body continues to carry the Y chromosome.  What you are describing here seems to be only cosmetic alterations.  

Here is an article about a woman named Eva Tiamat Medusa: ‘Trans-species’ woman who identifies as a reptile has spent more than £42,000 turning herself into a dragon

Quote

Eva Tiamat Medusa, a transgender woman from Bruni, Texas, believes she’s the ‘most modified transgender person in the world’.

She also identifies as a dragon, and has spent more than £42,000 transforming herself into a reptile.

Eva’s journey to becoming a dragon started when, while living as a man, Eva was diagnosed with HIV. She became determined ‘not to die a human’.

Leaving her job as a vice president at a bank behind, Eva began to morph into the reptilian form she’d always longed to have, claiming that after being abandoned by her parents at the age of five, she was ‘born again’ under the care of a western diamondback rattlesnake.

Eva identifies as a human and a reptilian. (Picture: THE WIZARD OF ODD TV/CATERS NEWS)

 

Eva began her transformation with a series of scale tattoos, followed by having her nose re-shaped, her ears removed, and the whites of her eyes permanently stained green. All of that cost an estimated $60,000 (£42,000), but Eva plans to have a further £28,000 worth of modifications in the coming years.

‘For me, my transformation is the greatest journey of my life,’ Eva explained to The Wizard of Odd TV.

‘There are profound reasons and deep meanings about my transformation and why I’m doing it.

She’s spent more than £42,000 on modifications including tattoos, tongue-splitting, and having the whites of her eyes dyed green. (Picture: THE WIZARD OF ODD TV/CATERS NEWS)

‘I have two mothers: One is my original birth mother and my second birth is to my reptilian parents, which are the rattlesnakes.

‘I hope that my story will help other people – not only those who have gone through hard times, but also people who have lost hope.

‘I myself know what it’s like to be at that point. Before my transformation I was vice president of one of the largest banks in the U.S. and I left when because I became HIV positive and feared I was going to die.

‘My big thing though was I didn’t want to die in this world looking like a human.

Eva plans to have more modifications to look more like a dragon. (Picture: THE WIZARD OF ODD TV/CATERS NEWS)

 

‘As much awesomeness and goodness there is in humans, compared to other species they are the most destructive and hateful.

‘I decided at that time, that it was time for a change in my life, so I wanted to look like something that wasn’t human.

‘I have eight horns on my forehead; I have had my ears removed; my nose reshaped; most of my teeth removed; I’ve had the white-part of my eyes stained; my tongue bifurcated; my whole face is tattooed and I’ve had some scarification and branding on my chest and wrist.’

Eva is sharing her story to help others who feel they need to change their physical body feel less alone.

Her transformation began when she was diagnosed with HIV. (Picture: THE WIZARD OF ODD TV/CATERS NEWS)

Eva says she didn’t want to die as a human. (Picture: THE WIZARD OF ODD TV/CATERS NEWS)

 

She identifies as ‘trans-species’, no longer identifying as a human but as a reptilian.

‘I would like for there to be an open dialogue about the world of body modification and understand what it was like to live as a gay-man for 53-years and now as a transsexual woman,’ she says.

‘My greatest desire in life is to continue my body modification until my metamorphosis is complete.’ (Picture: THE WIZARD OF ODD TV/CATERS NEWS)

‘There’s a lot of misunderstanding about what it means to be transsexual and then further than that – something that I’m introducing – the idea of trans-speciesism.

 

‘I consider myself not just to be human anymore; I’m human and reptilian.

‘My greatest desire in life is to continue my body modification until my metamorphosis is complete.

‘This is what drives me – this is the reason why I get up every day and live.’

 

 

• "Eva Tiamat Medusa, a transgender woman from Bruni, Texas ... identifies as a dragon, and has spent more than £42,000 transforming herself into a reptile."
• "Eva’s journey to becoming a dragon started when, while living as a man, Eva was diagnosed with HIV. She became determined ‘not to die a human’."
• "‘I have eight horns on my forehead; I have had my ears removed; my nose reshaped; most of my teeth removed; I’ve had the white-part of my eyes stained; my tongue bifurcated; my whole face is tattooed and I’ve had some scarification and branding on my chest and wrist.’"
• "She identifies as ‘trans-species’, no longer identifying as a human but as a reptilian."

So is this person, having undergone extensive alterations to his physical appearance, actually a "dragon" now?  

When this person states that he does not want to "die a human," will he die as something other than human?

Has this person, by having had horns added to his forehead, his ears removed, his nose reshaped, his teeth removed, the whites of his eyes stained, his tongue bifurcated, his face tattooed, his body scarred and branded, actually stopped being "a human," and has instead actually turned into "a reptilian"?

These are sincere questions, because for me, the answer to the foregoing questions is more or less this: "No, this person is not actually a dragon.  Yes, he will die a human.  No, he has not turned into a reptile or dragon or anything else other than a human being.  Cosmetic alterations, even extensive ones, do not change him from a human being into some other species.  Moreover, just as these cosmetic changes did not make him a dragon/reptilian, the other alterations he has gone through did not make him a woman, either.  However much he may subjectively feel like he is a woman and a dragon/reptile, he is neither of these things."

If my perspective on these things is factually incorrect, I would like to know that.  As it is, however, most of the time my inquiries are met with accusations of bigotry, "transphobia," and other conclusory accusations which I think are intended to suppress honest and candid discussion rather than advance it.  If advocates of "trans" ideology were able to defend it on its merits, I think they would do so.  Instead, this protracted experience (of having sincere and facially valid and reasonable inquiries/observations shouted down with insults and accusations) has persuaded me against most of of the essential tenets of the ideology. 

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

To me, this seems Orwellian to the extent it is predicated on a fundamental re-definition of "woman" so as to sever that meaning from biological sex.

Yeah but why does it matter so much that a trans woman has been a biological man in the past?

Until fairly recently, I haven't really cared about these sorts of things.  Not much, anyway.

But more recently, society has started to change in ways that are now affecting me. 

Some countries are making it a criminal offense to say the things I have said above.  This affects my right to speak, and that matters.

Many places have started encouraging minors to undergo radical, life-altering, irreversible medical procedures that will render them sterile.  Many thousands have received such treatments.  I think this matters.

Biological males are now participating in women's sports, entering women's spaces, being housed in women's prisons, etc.  I think this matters.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Why do other people feel the need to make such a big deal about it.

I think the advocates of trans ideology have gone out of their way to "make such a big deal about it," to which society is now responding.  We didn't make this a big deal, they did.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

For the woman it has been (and is still) allready really hard enough. Does she really have to take those negative prejudices into account now as well? 

Respectfully, I do not believe it is "prejudice" to disagree with some (many?) aspects of trans ideology.  This is particularly so where the ideology is asking (demanding?) that society deny reality and biological science, endorse highly questionable medical procedures on minors and people with substantial mental health comorbidities, punish speech, compel speech, let biological males into women's spaces, etc.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

If "woman" means "an adult biological human female and also anyone who 'identifies' as a woman," then what sort of limiting principle is there?

But who says that a woman "means" only an adult biological human female? Who decides that?

I suppose we, as a society, do.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

Can "dog" be re-defined to include "anyone who identifies as a dog"?

That comparison is neither here nor there. That has nothing to do with a biological man who wants to transform into a woman. Or vica versa. 

Respectfully, I disagree.  If a biological male can "become" a woman by "identifying" as one, then what is the limiting principle?  Why can't a human "identify" as a dog?  Why can't Eva Tiamat Medusa "identify" as a dragon?

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

Can "space alien" be re-defined to include "anyone who identifies as a space alien"?

I'm afrait you need to ask a alien this question. I'm only talking about trans woman. That's it. 

Okay.  I am trying to understand the reasoning underlying the proposition that a man, a biological male, can "identify" as a woman, a biological female.  I think this is a denial of reality and basic biological science.  It seems that the only way trans advocates can justify their position is to re-define "woman," or to refuse to define it at all.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

Earlier this year I attended visited Encircle House in Provo, Utah.  My daughter had asked that I go there and attend meetings wherein trans individuals share their thoughts, experiences, etc.  So I went, just to listen to what they have to say.  There were four other people in attendance, all (apparently) biological women who "identified" as trans men.  We went around the room and introduced ourselves, then each of the other participants spoke for a few minutes, then it concluded.  It was not particularly illuminating, as most of their comments seemed to be complaining about mundane stuff (school, work, friends, etc.).  Several of them added that these things are harder for trans people, but that was about it as far as "trans"-specific commentary.

Uhm..? But your point is? That trans woman have a harder time doing school, work, friends? Is that what you mean maybe? 

No particular point.  I was providing context.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

After the meeting I walked downstairs to the main floor, where I encountered a larger group of mostly teenagers.  They were all talking animatedly.  Two or three of them were dressed up as "furries."  One of them, who was kneeling on the ground with dog ears on his head and a collar around his neck, turned and saw me.  He smiled and said "Hi!  My name is Jack, and I identify as a dog.  Woof!" 

Okay well... that's getting a bit crazy offcourse.

Could you elaborate here?  Are you saying it is "a bit crazy" for a teenage human being to "identify" as a dog?  Are you conceding that this kid is not a dog, despite his declaration that he "identifies" as one?

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

To me this has nothing, and i say nothing, to do with transwoman or transman. That is totaly differend.

Could you explain the differences?  For myself, I do not see a material difference between A) a teenage human "identifying" as a dog by putting on dog ears and a collar, and B) an adult human male "identifying" as a woman putting on clothes typically worn by women, putting on makeup, etc.

Similarly, Eva Tiamat Medusa has not ceased to be a human, and has not become a reptile/dragon, by having undergone extensive cosmetic alterations to his physical appearance.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

And i think that if you would compare a transwoman with a "dog" and spit that suggestion into her face she will be really offended. Bound to be. 

I do not understand.  Why is it necessary to acknowledge the "identity" of biological women as biological men when I was in the upstairs room of Encircle House, but then offensive to inquire whether I should likewise acknowledge the dog "identity" claimed by the teenager on the main floor? 

What is it about the claimed "identity" of the people upstairs that is materially distinguishable from the "identity" of the person downstairs?

Again, I went to Encircle House to listen.  That's all.  I am reporting my firsthand experience.  I am not seeking to offend or provoke, but to understand.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

On the drive home, I wondered about the expectations I had just encountered.  The people I had met upstairs all stated that they were "trans men," that is, a biological women who "identify" as man.  None of them was dressed in any particularly "masculine" way.  They all had their hair in unremarkable cuts/styles.  None of them had beards, low voices, or anything.

Mostly that's also part of it. You know...the whole transformation. I've seen transman who looked so real that i really couldn't believe that they have been a female once, and to me those are real man. I think i could date a transman who looks so real like. And do i care that he has been a woman in the past? No! I don't care one bit and it doesn't affect me. 

Okay.  And even if and when these women "transition" in more obvious ways (clothing, hormones, surgery, etc.), I am largely indifferent to their choices.  I may disagree with them in the abstract, but they are adults and can do as they like.  Based on the materials I have reviewed, I suspect many of them have substantial comorbidities, which I hope they address prior to taking any substantial and irreversible steps toward "transitioning."

I start to become concerned, though, when I come under threat of punishment by secular law if I do not use compelled speech in relation to these folks.  We are seeing that in increasing measures in Europe.  Fortunately, I live in the United States, and so face little threat of this.  I would hope that Europe would be equally averse to compelled speech, but oh well.

I also start to become concerned when minors are being encouraged to undergo "trans" procedures.  I have serious concerns about that.

I also have a few other concerns (generally, I don't think biological males should be playing in women's sports, going into women-only spaces, being housed in prisons for women, etc.).  

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

All of them appeared to look female in every normative respect ("feminine" facial features, breasts, hips, etc.).  And yet each of them stated their identity as a "trans man."  And I think they had an expectation for this identity to be acknowledged, accepted, ratified, etc.  

Okay i don't know what kind of people you have met there offcourse haha.. But most biological womans who feel like they are a man who wanna be a man. Undergoes a transformation at some point. Why? Because they wanna look like a man. 

Right.  My point is that it seems like "trans" people are increasingly wanting other people to acknowledge / accept / ratify their "identity."  So a biological male who "identifies" as a woman wants society to accept and treat him as a woman.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

Then I thought about the teenager I had met downstairs.  He specifically said he "identifies" as a dog. 

Okay. Enough about the dog comparison. I'm not gonna react anymore to this. That's a waste of my energy. 

I am not trying to offend.  Truly.  I think you are perhaps starting to perceive my position.

My sense is that, in your view, a human being, Homo sapiens, "identifying" as a dog, Canis lupus familiaris, is biologically incoherent and incorrect, and not congruent with reality.  This is because a human being cannot become a dog simply because he "identifies" as one.  If this is your position, I agree with it.

Similarly, a man, a biological male, "identifying" as a woman, a biological female, is also biologically incoherent and incorrect, and not congruent with reality.  This is because a male cannot become a female simply because he "identifies" as one.

I acknowledge that you are not going to respond to this.  I hope, however, that you can appreciate that I am not attempting to provoke or offend or insult.  Rather, I see most "trans" ideology in the same way you appear to see the ideology that facilitates a teenage boy "identifying" as a dog, or Eva Tiamat Medusa "identifying" as a dragon.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

Even though we all know the individual is, in fact, biologically male?

But in spirit he isn't and that should matter. 

Is Eva Tiamat Medusa "in spirit" a reptile?  I suppose he can claim that, and that's fine.  But is the rest of society obligated to go along with that?  To ratify and endorse and accept it as empirically true and congruent with reality?

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

If I have a friend who suffers from a mental disorder under which she perceives herself to be fat even though she is not (or even underweight), is "the respectful thing to do" to go along with that factually false misperception?  To encourage her to starve herself and get even thinner?  To help hold her hair away from her mouth while she leans over and vomits into a toilet after a donut binge?  

What has this to do with a transwoman or a transman?

A person suffering from Body Dysmorphic Disorder, a mental illness, may have feelings that she is fat, which in reality she is not fat (or is even underweight).  This perception is not congruent with reality and biological fact.

A person (in this example, a biological male) suffering from Gender Dysphoria, also a mental illness, may have feelings that he is a woman.  This perception is not congruent with reality and biological fact.

In both instances, a person is experiencing an incorrect perception of reality due to a mental disorder.  We need to treat these people with every measure of compassion, respect and dignity as possible.  That said, my questions/observations pertain to how there is, it seems, an expectation in society that we should treat and attempt to overcome misperceptions of reality arising from some mental disorders and associated behaviors (such as Body Dysmorphic Disorder and bulimia), while at the same time we should also endorse and celebrate and facilitate other misperceptions of reality arising from other mental disorders (such as Gender Dysphoria).

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

Quote

Consider a person who suffers from a mental disorder involving a desires to have their eyes put out, their spinal cord severed, a healthy leg amputated, etc.  Is the "respectful thing to do" to go along with and encourage such a person in these things?

 

Yeah but wich person wants something like that.

I have elsewhere documented instances of people wanting these things (I can provide links if you like).

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

And to be honest i (again) still don't really get the comparison with a transwoman/transman. 

A man asks a doctor to sever his spinal cord because he (the patient) "identifies" as "transabled."

A man asks a doctor to sever his penis and testicles because he (the patient) "identifies" as a "trans woman."

These two situations are, I think, treated very differently in society.

On 11/20/2024 at 12:05 AM, Dario_M said:

I'm not gonna call you a "bigot" God forbid. Though...i felt a bit strange reading your whole post i gotta admit. 

I appreciate your civility.

Thank you,

-Smac

Edited November 27, 2024 by smac97

[webbles]

6 hours ago, Rain said:

She just told us that she encountered a mixed bathroom. Californiaboy and I just talked about finding them in Europe.  Bathrooms that are for men and women. 

While I found myself feeling ok in mixed bathrooms by the end of my time there I recognize that other people won't feel comfortable with it.

I also feel women need to have safe places. (Men do too.) When you tell Mustard that she probably won't even notice and not to worry you are completely disregarding her lived experience as a woman especially when you just got done ignoring what she said was her experience. 

 

 

The US even has mixed bathrooms.  In several colleges, when the dorm floor is mixed gender, the bathrooms are mixed gender.  https://schoolandtravel.com/colleges-with-co-ed-showers/ lists 15 of them.

[Peacefully]

7 hours ago, Rain said:

She just told us that she encountered a mixed bathroom. Californiaboy and I just talked about finding them in Europe.  Bathrooms that are for men and women. 

While I found myself feeling ok in mixed bathrooms by the end of my time there I recognize that other people won't feel comfortable with it.

I also feel women need to have safe places. (Men do too.) When you tell Mustard that she probably won't even notice and not to worry you are completely disregarding her lived experience as a woman especially when you just got done ignoring what she said was her experience. 

 

 

Not to mention women’s bathrooms are usually much cleaner than men’s bathrooms. I’m good with transgender women in the bathroom with me, but I’m concerned cis-gender men would just make a mess of it. 
 

Sorry if I am stereotyping men and their public bathrooms, lol. 

Edited November 20, 2024 by Peacefully

[Tacenda]

5 hours ago, Dario_M said:

Well...i haven't seen any of those in the Netherlands yet. And i just asked my boyfriend or he has seen those mixed bathrooms and he also never have seen them. 

It can be possible that Hungary, Greece, Turkey has those mixed bathrooms. But i've never been to those country's bevore because i'm not very interested in those type for country's to be honest. If i go to another country i wanna feel save there. After my disaster in Portugal i have been very carefull going somewhere abroad. I recently have been to Londen UK and i felt really save there. And the people where very nice.

Okay yeah. That's kinda weird in my opinion. 

?

Okay well..that was not my intention. My bad. 

 

Oh and i see that i have reached my limit. I can't post for the rest of the day.

Oh my...how many hours do i have bevore i can't even edit my last post anymore @Tacenda   ?

@smac97 I can't post anymore because i went over my limit for today. So...can we do this discusion later please. Like...when it is tomorrow in the United States. 

Oh lord. God forbid. 

I thought you still can edit your posts, or maybe it's been too long since I was on limited status to remember. Wait, I do believe you only have a day maybe to edit, now can't remember. But you're right...do u still want to be on "limited"? 🤔

Edited November 20, 2024 by Tacenda

[MrShorty]

I observe that the conversation so far has focused almost exclusively on concerns over AMAB infiltrating women only spaces (bathrooms seem to be a favorite focus). It seems to me that there must be something bigger behind these policies, because there are restrictions on a trans-person's participation in non-gender-specific spaces, too. The policies forbid a transgender person from holding ANY teaching calling and from holding ANY calling adjacent to children and youth. So they cannot be called into any Primary related calling. They cannot be called to teach Sunday School (Youth or adult). If the policies were rooted mostly in concerns about AMAB infiltrating women's spaces (or AFAB infiltrating men's spaces), these parts of the policies would be unnecessary.

I don't know if it would make any difference, but my podcast feed has included several conversations with trans people and their reactions to these policies. A sampling can be found on Richard Ostler's podcast: https://www.listenlearnandlove.org/transgender-and-more-podcasts   This blog post was one of the first I read after the policy change https://bycommonconsent.com/2024/09/15/last-day/

At the risk of being inflammatory, I mentioned in the "prophetic fallibility" thread that this is a main concern I have over prophetic fallibility -- how does prophetic fallibility impact current issues and controversies. People don't always like comparisons to the priesthood and temple ban, but I also mentioned that I think it makes a good case study in how prophets make mistakes and maybe suggest how we might do better today. When I read Elder Petersen's '54 talk about racial issues, one of the big concerns that Elder Petersen highlights is interracial marriage. It seems that concerns about race mixing represent a strong current throughout the history of the priesthood and temple ban -- a concern that we have disavowed in the 21st century. Were concerns over race mixture valid, well founded concerns, or were the church and the brethren blinded to higher truths by unfounded concerns that had no basis in truth and righteousness? In the same line of thinking, what are the concerns that are prompting these transgender policies, and what have we done to vet those concerns so that we are confident that they are valid concerns and these policies are the best way to address those concerns? I think I've said before that one of the best things, IMO, that the church could do with these kinds of controversial policies is risk putting pearls before swine and help us understand what went into deciding that this is God's will. If there are revelatory experiences, share them with us. If there are scientific studies, identify those studies and how they decided those studies represented the best information? In hindsight, one of the problems we see with the priesthood and temple ban is how unfounded concerns around interracial marriage seemed to drive its implementation and perpetuation. I think it would be wise to consider how we might be falling prey again to unfounded concerns over a minority population. Learn from our past so we can try not to make the same mistakes again, or be more forthcoming about what we have done that makes us confident that we are not making the same mistakes again.

At the end of my exasperation on this topic, I do see one item that seems to have been left out of these policies. A few years ago, I listened to a podcast featuring Dr. Lisa Diamond (UofU researcher into LGBTQ+ issues and how they intersect with the church). At one point, someone brought up that many LGBTQ+ leave the church, and that many find leaving the church to be a painful process in one way or another. Dr. Diamond suggested that the church might consider what it could do pastorally to help people transition out of the church with less pain. The policy document that is currently in the handbook lacks any policies or suggestions about how to help trans members leave the church if/when they choose to do so. It seems obvious to me that there are trans members and their allies who are using these new policies as their motivation to leave the church, and some pastoral guidance would seem valuable here to help them leave.

I don't know how much motivation I have to pursue this topic, but I can safely say that this has been a very difficult couple of months, trying my testimony of the calling of our church leaders.

Edited November 20, 2024 by MrShorty
minor typos

[Tacenda]

6 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

I observe that the conversation so far has focused almost exclusively on concerns over AMAB infiltrating women only spaces (bathrooms seem to be a favorite focus). It seems to me that there must be something bigger behind these policies, because there restrictions on a trans-person's participation in non-gender-specific spaces, too. The policies forbid a transgender person from holding ANY teaching calling and from holding ANY calling adjacent to children and youth. So they cannot be called into any Primary related calling. They cannot be called to teach Sunday School (Youth or adult). If the policies were rooted mostly in concerns about AMAB infiltrating women's spaces (or AFAB infiltrating men's spaces), these parts of the policies would be unnecessary.

I don't know if it would make any difference, but my podcast feed has included several conversations with trans people and their reactions to these policies. A sampling can be found on Richard Ostler's podcast: https://www.listenlearnandlove.org/transgender-and-more-podcasts   This blog post was one of the first I read after the policy change https://bycommonconsent.com/2024/09/15/last-day/

At the risk of being inflammatory, I mentioned in the "prophetic fallibility" thread that this is a main concern I have over prophetic fallibility -- how does prophetic fallibility impact current issues and controversies. People don't always like comparisons to the priesthood and temple ban, but I also mentioned that I think it makes a good case study in how prophets make mistakes and maybe suggest how we might do better today. When I read Elder Petersen's '54 talk about racial issues, one of the big concerns that Elder Petersen highlights is interracial marriage. It seems that concerns about race mixing represent a strong current throughout the history of the priesthood and temple -- a concern that we have disavowed in the 21st century. Were concerns over race mixture valid, well founded concerns, or were the church and the brethren blinded by unfounded concerns that had no basis in truth and righteousness? In the same line of thinking, what are the concerns that are prompting these transgender policies, and what have we done to vet those concerns so that we are confident that they are valid concerns and these policies are the best way to address those concerns? I think I've said before that one of the best things, IMO, that the church could do with these kinds of controversial policies is risk putting pearls before swine and help us understand what went into deciding that this is God's will. If there are revelatory experiences, share them with us. If there are scientific studies, identify those studies and how they decided those studies represented the best information? In hindsight, one of the problems we see with the priesthood and temple ban is how unfounded concerns around interracial marriage seemed to drive its implementation and perpetuation. I think it would be wise to consider how we might be falling prey again to unfounded concerns over a minority population. Learn from our past so we can try not to make the same mistakes again, or be more forthcoming about what we have done that makes us confident that we are not making the same mistakes again.

At the end of my exasperation on this topic, I do see one item that seems to have been left out of these policies. A few years ago, I listened to a podcast featuring Dr. Lisa Diamond (UofU researcher into LGBTQ+ issues and how they intersect with the church). At one point, someone brought up that many LGBTQ+ leave the church, and that many find leaving the church to be a painful process in one way or another. Dr. Diamond suggested that the church might consider what it could do pastorally to help people transition out of the church with less pain. The policy document that is currently in the handbook lacks any policies or suggestions about how to help trans members leave the church if/when they choose to do so. It seems obvious to me that there are trans members and their allies who are using these new policies as their motivation to leave the church, and some pastoral guidance would seem valuable here to help them leave.

I don't know how much motivation I have to pursue this topic, but I can safely say that this has been a very difficult couple of months, trying my testimony of the calling of our church leaders.

Excellent post MrShorty!!

[Maestrophil]

I hesitate to even venture an opinion because I am so colored by my personal knowledge and lack thereof.

That said - the only real universal solution I see is concurrent with what was mentioned earlier - single use restrooms everywhere. My ward bathroom just has one urinal and one stall - if you just put a lock on that door for who is using it and have people queue up, that would work for me.

Someone pointed to the link with trans people asking if I would feel comfortable requiring them to use a specific bathroom, and unfortunately and honestly, for some of them, yes I would.  It is very apparent that many of them are not presenting as their bio sex and have attributes still of that sex.  

Also, until church policy and doctrine changes on gender (which it may never) - I am not sure how anyone who is transgender that does not have an unshakable faith in the eternal justice of God's plan could feel comfortable in the church no matter how loving and respectful we are to them.  It's not a plan that allows for long-term gender switching as it currently stands IMO

[Calm]

4 hours ago, california boy said:

Well if that is the case, or even if it makes women feel unsafe, then it seems to me the need to have the bathroom stalls go from floor to ceiling out weighs the need for easier cleaning.

 

I vote for floor to ceiling.  My first encounter with those were on Kremlin Square and I loved it.  So much less anxiety issues for so many reasons.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

What "expectation" are you referencing here?

The one I quoted right above my comment that you were commenting on, the one you said they had.

Edited November 20, 2024 by Calm

[smac97]

29 minutes ago, Calm said:

Quote

Quote

 

Quote

 

On the drive home, I wondered about the expectations I had just encountered.  The people I had met upstairs all stated that they were "trans men," that is, biological women who "identify" as man.  None of them was dressed in any particularly "masculine" way.  They all had their hair in unremarkable cuts/styles.  None of them had beards, low voices, or anything.  All of them appeared to look female in every normative respect ("feminine" facial features, breasts, hips, etc.).  And yet each of them stated their identity as a "trans man."  And I think they had an expectation for this identity to be acknowledged, accepted, ratified, etc.  

Then I thought about the teenager I had met downstairs.  He specifically said he "identifies" as a dog.  Was I supposed to accept that statement as congruent with reality and biological fact?  Left to my own devices, I would think not, because notwithstanding how he "identifies," this kid was not a dog.  He was a human being.  In my  brief interaction with him, I treated him with kindness and respect, but I did not acknowledge (or endorse, or ratify, etc.) his self-identification as a dog.  It was a passing interaction, so there was no particular need to do so.  But if he and his family were to move in next door, and if his parents were to ask me to "respect" his "identity" as a dog, to treat him like a dog, to act as if I think he is actually a dog, etc., should I go along with that?

 

Considering they were in a support group for transgender individuals, I would expect them to have that expectation of the group. It would be odd if they didn’t…and sad.

 

What "expectation" are you referencing here?

The one I quoted right above my comment that you were commenting on, the one you said they had.

Okay. I agree with you.

The kid dressed up as a dog and "identifying" as one also seemed to have an "expectation" that his identity would be "acknowledged, accepted, ratified, etc."

Do you think society at large should do so?  Should we acknowledge, accept, ratify, etc. his "identity" as a dog?

Thanks,

-Smac

[manol]

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

People don't always like comparisons to the priesthood and temple ban, but I also mentioned that I think it makes a good case study in how prophets make mistakes and maybe suggest how we might do better today. When I read Elder Petersen's '54 talk about racial issues, one of the big concerns that Elder Petersen highlights is interracial marriage. It seems that concerns about race mixing represent a strong current throughout the history of the priesthood and temple -- a concern that we have disavowed in the 21st century. Were concerns over race mixture valid, well founded concerns, or were the church and the brethren blinded by unfounded concerns that had no basis in truth and righteousness? In the same line of thinking, what are the concerns that are prompting these transgender policies, and what have we done to vet those concerns so that we are confident that they are valid concerns and these policies are the best way to address those concerns?

During my time as an active member, part of my paradigm went something like this: "We are special, but they are not".  Who "they" happened to be shifted somewhat over the course of my membership.  It was kinda fun to look at "them" and genuinely see myself as better, more valiant, called and chosen, special.

These days I no longer consider "specialness" to be anything more than a mistaken human construct. You cannot love your neighbor "as yourself" if you think you're better than they are, and that's a really really really high-ranking commandment. 

Edited November 20, 2024 by manol

[Calm]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

This only opens more questions for me.  Can a person be a dog trapped in a human body?  A space alien trapped in a human body?

I understand that a man, a biological male, may feel like he is a woman, a biological female.  But he is not.  In my view, the only way to justify the contrary statement is to re-define "woman" so as to exclude its rooted biological meaning of "adult biological female."  

The overlap between male and female brains and yet also general differences between them suggests the possibility that identity could be tied in some fashion to the way the brain functions because the functioning affects perceptions.  My brain, for example, functions so it is hyperaware of physical stimuli..noise levels are inflated and now with my fibro I read things like brushing against my skin as painful.  I am just using these as concrete examples of what I mean about how the brain processes affect perceptions, not saying these are examples of differences between male and female brains.  

Men and women tend to pay attention to different things in their environment.  This is probably a mix of biological processes and experiential training.  It would be interesting to see how much how we perceive our environment influences how we feel about ourselves, including gender identity and if there is anything in the brain that has biological signals.  If there are social signals that are defined as male or female in our society (think GI Joes vs Barbies as it was always presented in my youth or trucks vs play kitchens), how much does our being interested in mostly items and ideas with the connotation of male attached to them lead us to form a gender identity. If we are taught housework is women’s work and that is what we spend much of our time on, does that reinforce a sense of womanhood in females or perhaps weakens a sense of manhood in a man?

In my youth, I was not interested in dolls or playing house, etc.  I preferred legos and chemistry sets, studied science and geography for fun.  These were typically pushed as something boys did back them and I was considered odd by the girls around me, I had no close female friends because I lacked interest in what they were doing and no doubt it showed.  I wanted to hang out with the boys and did to a certain extent in high school when we were less socially segregated at school (girls never played with boys during recess, which meant I spent a lot of time on my own) and more in college.  The fact my brain loves building things for fun, prefers more male oriented activity is likely wired into my brain and not socially determined.  I come to this conclusion because I have an older sister who is much more feminine and who has no mechanical inclinations at all.  But we were pretty much raised as a set.  Similar, sometimes matching outfits, always had to take the same classes (ballet and singing, yech).  Mom taught us girl things at the same time.  Gave us the same presents.  We always shared a room.  We were treated by relatives as a set.  So it seems to me differences were likely at the beginning more biologically based and then as my interests were reinforced by my behaviour strengthen environmentally.

Ever since I hit puberty, I have never felt at home in my body.  I do feel trapped by it and its needs and by the way people respond to me.  Health issues quadrupled the disconnect.  I don’t identify as more male or female though.  I just am.  I do some things that are more defined as male, I do some things more often defined as female…such as being a massive nurturer.

Got to go to the doctors, so will finish the thought later.  My overall point is there is a huge difference between identifying as a different manifestation of the same species than identifying as a completely different species…human male attributes overlap generously with female attributes after all, even the genitalia start out the same.  Human sex brain function is closer rather than farther apart.  It is therefore within the realm of possibility in my view that a more female brain could end up in a more male body and for that to still be a functional state of being or mental health.

There is much less overlap between dog brains and humans.  Identity there is not going to be derived by biological brain processes where they might in a male to female, female to male identity.

Edited November 20, 2024 by Calm

[Dario_M]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I thought you still can edit your posts, or maybe it's been too long since I was on limited status to remember. Wait, I do believe you only have a day maybe to edit, now can't remember. But you're right...do u still want to be on "limited"? 🤔

Omg i can post again yesss!!! And yes Tacenda i still wanna be on limited. It's fine. 🩵

[smac97]

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

I observe that the conversation so far has focused almost exclusively on concerns over AMAB infiltrating women only spaces (bathrooms seem to be a favorite focus).

"AMAB" = "assigned male at birth" = "biological male"?

If so, that does seem to be the focus, as the other areas of concern that are under discussion in society (biological men in women's sports, prisons, etc.) do not have much intersection with the Church.  The Church's bathrooms, however, are implicated in this discussion.

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

It seems to me that there must be something bigger behind these policies, because there restrictions on a trans-person's participation in non-gender-specific spaces, too. The policies forbid a transgender person from holding ANY teaching calling and from holding ANY calling adjacent to children and youth. So they cannot be called into any Primary related calling. They cannot be called to teach Sunday School (Youth or adult). If the policies were rooted mostly in concerns about AMAB infiltrating women's spaces (or AFAB infiltrating men's spaces), these parts of the policies would be unnecessary.

I agree.  I think there are more underlying issues that just bathrooms.

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

I don't know if it would make any difference, but my podcast feed has included several conversations with trans people and their reactions to these policies. A sampling can be found on Richard Ostler's podcast: https://www.listenlearnandlove.org/transgender-and-more-podcasts   This blog post was one of the first I read after the policy change https://bycommonconsent.com/2024/09/15/last-day/

At the risk of being inflammatory, I mentioned in the "prophetic fallibility" thread that this is a main concern I have over prophetic fallibility -- how does prophetic fallibility impact current issues and controversies. People don't always like comparisons to the priesthood and temple ban, but I also mentioned that I think it makes a good case study in how prophets make mistakes and maybe suggest how we might do better today. When I read Elder Petersen's '54 talk about racial issues, one of the big concerns that Elder Petersen highlights is interracial marriage. It seems that concerns about race mixing represent a strong current throughout the history of the priesthood and temple -- a concern that we have disavowed in the 21st century. Were concerns over race mixture valid, well founded concerns, or were the church and the brethren blinded by unfounded concerns that had no basis in truth and righteousness? In the same line of thinking, what are the concerns that are prompting these transgender policies, and what have we done to vet those concerns so that we are confident that they are valid concerns and these policies are the best way to address those concerns?

I think the Church's concerns about interracial marriages were rooted in racialist sentiments which, in 1954, were widely accepted.  

I think the Church's 2024 policies about trans people are not rooted in animus or hatred against trans people.  

I think most people find sex-based distinctions between men and women to be relevant, whereas most people do not find race-based distinctions to be relevant.

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

I think I've said before that one of the best things, IMO, that the church could do with these kinds of controversial policies is risk putting pearls before swine and help us understand what went into deciding that this is God's will. If there are revelatory experiences, share them with us. If there are scientific studies, identify those studies and how they decided those studies represented the best information? In hindsight, one of the problems we see with the priesthood and temple ban is how unfounded concerns around interracial marriage seemed to drive its implementation and perpetuation. I think it would be wise to consider how we might be falling prey again to unfounded concerns over a minority population. Learn from our past so we can try not to make the same mistakes again, or be more forthcoming about what we have done that makes us confident that we are not making the same mistakes again.

Perhaps so.

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

At the end of my exasperation on this topic, I do see one item that seems to have been left out of these policies. A few years ago, I listened to a podcast featuring Dr. Lisa Diamond (UofU researcher into LGBTQ+ issues and how they intersect with the church). At one point, someone brought up that many LGBTQ+ leave the church, and that many find leaving the church to be a painful process in one way or another. Dr. Diamond suggested that the church might consider what it could do pastorally to help people transition out of the church with less pain. The policy document that is currently in the handbook lacks any policies or suggestions about how to help trans members leave the church if/when they choose to do so.

It seems obvious to me that there are trans members and their allies who are using these new policies as their motivation to leave the church, and some pastoral guidance would seem valuable here to help them leave.

I don't think the Church can or ought to encourage anyone to forsake their covenants and obligations to God.  That has to be the choice of the individual.

Moreover, any such "pastoral help" to "help them leave" would be immediately seized upon and trumpeted by the Church's critics.

Also, I don't want them to leave.  I want them to stay in the Church.

The Restored Gospel can be a difficult row to hoe.  It can involve much sacrifice.  This can happen when a person reposes significant important and weight and value in their "sexual identity" or their "trans" identity. 

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

I don't know how much motivation I have to pursue this topic, but I can safely say that this has been a very difficult couple of months, trying my testimony of the calling of our church leaders.

I appreciate and respect that.  And you have my sympathy.

For me, none of this has a deleterious impact on my assessment of the founding events of the Restoration.  The current leaders' enacting controversial policies about a very intractable set of issues does not move the needle for me in terms of the First Vision, the visitations of Moroni, the restoration of the Priesthood, the translation of The Book of Mormon, and the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith.  If these things happened, then I am with the Church, come heck or high water.

I have had times where I have disagreed with the leadership decisions made by those in authority.  I am persuaded that they are good and decent men, that they are intelligent and well-informed, and that they are seeking and striving to discern and follow the will of God in carrying out their responsibilities.  I may have some disagreement with some provisions of the policies under discussion, but the Brethren are always going to encounter disagreement about what they do.  If they have erred, I will pray that they may discern that and make course corrections as necessary.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

Quote

This only opens more questions for me.  Can a person be a dog trapped in a human body?  A space alien trapped in a human body?

I understand that a man, a biological male, may feel like he is a woman, a biological female.  But he is not.  In my view, the only way to justify the contrary statement is to re-define "woman" so as to exclude its rooted biological meaning of "adult biological female."  

The overlap between male and female brains and yet also general differences between them suggests the possibility that identity could be tied in some fashion to the way the brain functions because the functioning affects perceptions.  My brain, for example, functions so it is hyperaware of physical stimuli..noise levels are inflated and now with my fibro I read things like brushing against my skin as painful.  I am just using these as concrete examples of what I mean about how the brain processes affect perceptions, not saying these are examples of differences between male and female brains.  

Men and women tend to pay attention to different things in their environment.  This is probably a mix of biological processes and experiential training.  It would be interesting to see how much how we perceive our environment influences how we feel about ourselves, including gender identity and if there is anything in the brain that has biological signals.  If there are social signals that are defined as male or female in our society (think GI Joes vs Barbies as it was always presented in my youth or trucks vs play kitchens), how much does our being interested in mostly items and ideas with the connotation of male attached to them lead us to form a gender identity. If we are taught housework is women’s work and that is what we spend much of our time on, does that reinforce a sense of womanhood in females or perhaps weakens a sense of manhood in a man?

As I see it, "male" and "female," the sexual binary, is rooted in biology.  In chromosomes and differentiated sex characteristics.  And sex is not "assigned at birth," no more than is the number of fingers on the baby's hands "assigned." 

I think much of the modern Sturm und Drang regarding "gender identity" is a protracted exercise in equivocation.  "Gender" is either (A) a co-extensive synonym to "biological sex," or else (B) a pastiche of broad stereotypes and generalizations regarding behavior, preferences, etc.

If (A) is adopted, then the "trans" movement falls apart.  Hence (B) is preferred in some quarters, as it allows room for equivocating.

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

Ever since I hit puberty, I have never felt at home in my body.  I do feel trapped by it and its needs and by the way people respond to me.  Health issues quadrupled the disconnect.  I don’t identify as more male or female though.  I just am.  

This is sort of how I feel about modern notions of "sexual identity."  I don't "identify" as a heterosexual.  Instead, as you put it, "I just am."  That does not mean I am sexually attracted to men (I'm not), but rather that I simply do not choose to adopt a sexual identity as such.

I do, however, "identify" as male.  

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

I do some things that are more defined as male, I do some things more often defined as female…such as being a massive nurturer.

I think this hews closer to (B) above.

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

Got to go to the doctors, so will finish the thought later.  My overall point is there is a huge difference between identifying as a different manifestation of the same species…human males overlap generously with female attributes after all, brain function is closer rather than farther apart.  

Humans also "overlap generously" with bananas (we share, IIRC, about 60% of our DNA), but the differences still end up mattering quite a bit.

So it is with the sexual binary.  Yes, we have more in common than not, but the differences still matter quite a bit.  

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

It is within the realm of possibility in my view that a more female brain could end up in a more male body and for that to be a functional state of being.

I'm not sure what you mean by "female brain."

But about 99.9+ percent of the time, human beings are clearly either "male" or "female."  

And 0% of the time can a male become a female, or vice versa.

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

There is much less overlap between dog brains and humans.  

But there is plenty of differentiation between dogs and humans, such that one cannot "become" the other by "identifying" as such.

The same goes, I think, with human males and females.  One category has Y chromosomes and a reproductive system designed to create sperm, and one category lacks the Y chromosome and has a reproductive system designed to produce ova.  And to date, there is no technology or medical means whereby a biological male can "become" a biological female, or vice versa.  

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

Identity there is not going to be derived by biological brain processes where they might in a male to female, female to male identity.

"Identity" is pretty malleable and subjective.  Biological sex is not.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

11 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Identity" is pretty malleable and subjective.  Biological sex is not.

But the brain is what determines identity and that may be less biologically dichotomous.

[Calm]

32 minutes ago, Dario_M said:

Omg i can post again yesss!!! And yes Tacenda i still wanna be on limited. It's fine. 🩵

You will likely get used to it and figure out the pacing you want, so you save posts for a certain time of day you want to post more for whatever reason.  

[Dario_M]

9 minutes ago, Calm said:

You will likely get used to it and figure out the pacing you want, so you save posts for a certain time of day you want to post more for whatever reason.  

Yeah i need to post wisely from now on.

Well...it's 22:07 a clock right now. I'm going to bed. Have a good day.