The liberal media has gone nuts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Olivia said:
When you say "since" the 14th century, doesn't really prove that that same usage is the same now as then. If you have a reference for that, I would be interested in seeing it, because of course I am more than happy to be corrected. I just found and posted what I have understood to be currently true.
Click to expand...

No argument that it's different now but to say it's always been that way is not consistent with history. You can read further down the page you quoted and find the reference. I mangled the part (I copied and pasted it this time) about it not becoming common until the mid 20 th century which lends credence to this not being some antiquated thinking.

"The sense denoting biological sex has also been used since the 14th century, but this did not become common until the mid 20th century."

Take for instance, calling a sex change surgery, a gender reassessment surgery. Changing one's physical sexual characteristics to one sex or the other seems to be associating with a male or female biological sex. If gender is not considered biological why change the "equipment"?
 

JB in SC said:
No argument that it's different now but to say it's always been that way is not consistent with history. You can read further down the page you quoted and find the reference. I mangled the part (I copied and pasted it this time) about it not becoming common until the mid 20 th century which lends credence to this not being some antiquated thinking.

"The sense denoting biological sex has also been used since the 14th century, but this did not become common until the mid 20th century."

Take for instance, calling a sex change surgery, a gender reassessment surgery. Changing one's physical sexual characteristics to one sex or the other seems to be associating with a male or female biological sex. If gender is not considered biological why change the "equipment"?
Click to expand...

JB, Traveler was using DNA to describe gender which is why I posted what I did. And I never said that the usage of the word gender was never different centuries past, and again I was questioning the usage of gender that Traveler was using implying that it only referred to biological parameters and if it was cut off, it still is symbolically there and the image of that part is apparently inside one's head when supposedly looking at a person as just a person.
 
The "Media"...especially the televised National Media...has certainly gone Nuts...IMO. The cable news channels....Fox, CNN, MSNBC...have become little more than conduits for divisive political rhetoric that does little but to harden peoples attitudes. Unless there is a major natural disaster to report, they spend little time actually reporting current events. The major networks...ABC, NBC, CBS...aren't much better. They do report several national events, during the first 15 minutes...but then, the last half of their broadcast is little more than quick bursts of news interspersed between endless "ask your doctor" drug commercials. Our local TV stations do a far better job than any of the major networks.

Insofar as the other "topic" of this thread...gender issues...is concerned, I don't really give a hoot about what someone does/thinks about their personal gender. So long as some "Dude" doesn't rush up and try to plant a lip lock on me, I don't really think much about them. Homosexuals, etc., have probably been part of the human experience since the days of the Neanderthals, and Eunuchs were part of human society for centuries. IMO, those who posses Gender issues are probably experiencing some form of Mental problems, and should be helped to find their place in society....But, they should Not try to force their views on others.
 
It seems to me that we have two separate topics being deliberated here, and opinions on one are carried over to the other topic.
As far as the example that was originally given, about a man who chooses to live his life as a woman; I think that this kind of things has been done many times throughout history, but probably most usually as a woman living her life dressed and acting like a man, rather than the opposite.
Personally, I don’t think that this has actually caused much of a problem, at least until this period in time, and it doesn’t really affect most of our lives when someone chooses to live their life as the opposite sex.

However, living a life as someone of the opposite gender, and being actually a person of that gender are two totally different things, and this is where the original thread topic (about the news reports) comes into play.
I agree with Traveller that if blood were drawn, and labeled as from a male or a female, or DNA was checked, then it is going to come back as exactly what gender that blood was taken from, regardless of what gender they “identified as”.

The use of the term “man” or “mankind “ has always been used to refer to man as a species; but the terms male and female refer specifically to the physical gender that person was born as.
Except in rare cases, this gender is pretty obvious at birth, and does not change.

I do not think that it is right that a man can self-identify as a female just so that they can compete with women instead of other men. This has been happening with athletic competitions, and it gives the men an unfair advantage in the competition.

If someone makes a public announcement that they are becoming a person of the opposite gender, then it is hard to fault the news media for calling them that, because they could be sued otherwise.
But no matter what the news refers to a person as, it does not change what their actual gender and DNA shows that they are.
 
Sex and Gender

In general terms, "sex" refers to the biological differences between males and females, such as the *******ia and genetic differences.

"Gender" is more difficult to define, but it can refer to the role of a male or female in society, known as a gender role, or an individual's concept of themselves, or gender identity.

Sometimes, a person's genetically assigned sex does not line up with their gender identity. These individuals might refer to themselves as transgender, non-binary, or gender-nonconforming.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232363.php
Click to expand...
 
Any man who has his equipment chopped off, needs to have his head examined.

Moreover, having it chopped off, does NOT make him a female. Throughout all of human history, men have lost their *******ia due to combat wounds, and I would never be so cruel to call him female.
 
Traveler said:
Any man who has his equipment chopped off, needs to have his head examined.

Moreover, having it chopped off, does NOT make him a female. Throughout all of human history, men have lost their *******ia due to combat wounds, and I would never be so cruel to call him female.
Click to expand...
Interesting, does the “cruel” appellation also apply to those who wish to be called female? Surely this cannot suggest that female is a lesser title than male.
 
Shalimar said:
My interest lies in the content of a person’s character, to me, all else is specious. Btw, my nephew’s spouse is transgender, a doctor who works with him in Medecin sans Fronteres.
Click to expand...


You see, right there is what I'm talking about. That "spouse" you speak of could be anything. How are we supposed to know if it is a he that thinks he is a she or a she that thinks she is a he. And what about the nephew ? Did he "marry" a man who wants to be a woman, or a woman who wants to be a man ?
Pretty freakin' strange behavior.
 
Traveler said:
Any man who has his equipment chopped off, needs to have his head examined.

Moreover, having it chopped off, does NOT make him a female. Throughout all of human history, men have lost their *******ia due to combat wounds, and I would never be so cruel to call him female.
Click to expand...

You may like it or not, but that's irrelevant. No one is saying you have to like it or agree with it. We who don't agree with you are just stating our view. If you don't want that then maybe restrict posts to only those that agree with you.

A majority of states permit the name and sex to be changed on a birth certificate, either through amending the existing birth certificate or by issuing a new one. Many states, however, require medical proof of sex reassignment surgery in order to warrant a gender marker change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_rights_in_the_United_States
Click to expand...

Also, it's hormones that is involved in changing sexual characteristics to more male or more female, not a body part, although from your OP seems to be what you think it does.
 
RadishRose said:
Traveler, I'm confused now.

What exactly is your point?
Click to expand...


I thought I'd been very clear about my point. The point is , "the world has gone bat sh*t crazy".




Shalimar said:
Interesting, does the “cruel” appellation also apply to those who wish to be called female? Surely this cannot suggest that female is a lesser title than male.
Click to expand...


Not exactly, but it is true that 99.99 % of the worlds straight male population would knock me on my butt if I referred to HIM as a "she". Men have been killed for saying something like that about another man.
 
Traveler said:
You see, right there is what I'm talking about. That "spouse" you speak of could be anything. How are we supposed to know if it is a he that thinks he is a she or a she that thinks she is a he. And what about the nephew ? Did he "marry" a man who wants to be a woman, or a woman who wants to be a man ?
Pretty freakin' strange behavior.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the thing about the transgender people that puzzles me. Who are they attracted to sexually, and who is attracted to them ?
For instance (using Traveler’s example again), a man who decides to become a woman. If he is married to a woman who wanted to be married to a man, then does the wife still want to be married now that it is a woman ?
Or now that the he is a she, does “she” want to be married to a man ?
It seems like a straight male would not want a sexual relationship with a “woman” who was a biological male, and a homosexual male would not want to either, because the transsexual person is now a female, so no longer attractive to them.

It makes me wonder if the person who decides to change genders might no longer be sexually attractive to anyone, at least if they know that this person has changed gender.
 
Traveler said:
You see, right there is what I'm talking about. That "spouse" you speak of could be anything. How are we supposed to know if it is a he that thinks he is a she or a she that thinks she is a he. And what about the nephew ? Did he "marry" a man who wants to be a woman, or a woman who wants to be a man ?
Pretty freakin' strange behavior.
Click to expand...
Really? I think you missed my point, Monsieur. These courageous and committed individuals regularly risk their lives working in war torn areas of the Middle East, providing medical care to those caught in the crossfire. Yet, you seem to dismiss that, and focus on passing judgement on family members. You may choose to find their behaviour “pretty freakin’ strange” I find it a source of inspiration. Their heroism is what is relevant, not their gender or sexual orientation.
 
There is much that could be said here, I will refrain in the interest of peace in my favorite forum. I do not understand the need to bring forward controversial subjects to our otherwise tranquil board. There are plenty of outlets for that elsewhere. I won't use my waning years trying to respond to the silliness, and the foul lines too obvious.. Life, now is too short.
 
Happyflowerlady said:
This is exactly the thing about the transgender people that puzzles me. Who are they attracted to sexually, and who is attracted to them ?
For instance (using Traveler’s example again), a man who decides to become a woman. If he is married to a woman who wanted to be married to a man, then does the wife still want to be married now that it is a woman ?
Or now that the he is a she, does “she” want to be married to a man ?
It seems like a straight male would not want a sexual relationship with a “woman” who was a biological male, and a homosexual male would not want to either, because the transsexual person is now a female, so no longer attractive to them.

It makes me wonder if the person who decides to change genders might no longer be sexually attractive to anyone, at least if they know that this person has changed gender.
Click to expand...
Sexuality is far more fluid than many people realise. There is a sliding scale, room for variety. Certainly, transgender people do not all languish alone, rejected by everyone. Like so many things, attitudes regarding this are often generational. Younger people usually are far more accepting of sexual and gender variations.
 
Camper6 said:
I'm willing to bet that Albert Einstein never said that.
Click to expand...

There is some question as to whether it was paraphrased or not.

"A version of this expression was attributed to Albert Einstein by a journalist named Lincoln Barnett in1948, but Barnett did not use quotation marks. Hence, he may have been paraphrasing a viewpoint he thought was held by Einstein. In addition, Einstein wrote the forward to a book by Barnett containing the expression; hence, there is some evidence that the words accorded with Einstein’s beliefs"

The alleged quote was in a paragraph with Barnett describing Einstein's unwillingness to accept any principle as "self evident".
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top