General Chat > Off Topic

Thought Police: Are we allowed to query 'woke'?

<< < (2/82) > >>

I have to be honest, I was raised at a boarding school and my early working years were in the armed forces at a time when attitudes to women leave a lot to be desired.  Not to mention the influence that these and other factors have on my perspective on an individual's sexual preference (although if I'm honest I've come to understand the difference between some of these choices and personal experience).

I find myself striving to adhere to the maxim "the unexamined life is not worth living".  At the same time though this is not always easy.  I have colleagues who have what they consider reasonable issues around the Transgender debate.  I also find myself querying scientific evidence on the ways in which biological gender is implicated in medical conditions.  So whilst I appreciate that it is appropriate to recognise an individual's right to specify their gender, I wonder at the consequences of this.  If they are classified officially as their gender of preference rather than their biological gender, could that lead to misdiagnosis with potentially lethal consequences?

So I wonder if it is not just a case of the implications for those of a specially biologically originated gender (ouch, tortuous) but also for those who have made a conscious choice.  Perhaps the solution is to insist that everyone decides their gender at a specific age.  Then each individual has two gender classifications: their biological gender at birth and their preferred gender.  For most social purposes their preferred gender is used but when medical treatment is necessary it is their birth biological gender that is used.  Since this applies to everyone, those who have transitioned are treated equally with others.

There are quite a few folks around here for whom this is far from an abstract issue.  That being the case it would be appropriate to approach this matter sensitively.

I suppose on top of this there is the question of how aware we are of our biases.  Are we willing to admit our flaws and work on them?  Are they 'biases' or just an incompatibility with current cultural mores?  This is part of the problem isn't it?  The lack of rational debate is leading to polarisation and the fomenting of civil or even uncivil war.

Funt Solo:

--- Quote from: Tjm86 on 24 September, 2020, 09:03:41 PM ---There are quite a few folks around here for whom this is far from an abstract issue.  That being the case it would be appropriate to approach this matter sensitively.

--- End quote ---

I hope I'm doing that - I don't want to cause offence to anyone*.

*Special exemptions for Trump, Cummings and his puppet Boris.


--- Quote from: Funt Solo on 24 September, 2020, 09:01:57 PM ---And all I'm doing is talking about categories - not human rights. I wouldn't argue that because I see a difference in definition between someone born with a sex compared with someone who adopts a sex that either party should have fewer rights.

Just on logic: there are differences - differences in physicality. To deny them seems like doublethink.

--- End quote ---

Of course there are differences in biology,  and of course you wouldn't go so far as to discriminate on rights; you're a reasonable, highly intelligent, decent person. The problem is that many others aren't, and that's why we need to start with the higher level position of simply accepting the basic principles of transgender rights, and once that's in place we can - together - dig down into how the implications play out.

Otherwise we're being like oh-so reasonable plantation owners claiming we accept the humanity of slaves but objecting to abolition because we can't see how the regional economy will survive and how former slaves will possibly support themselves and their families. Those are second-level problems: we have to make the initial leap and accept that people's rights of self-determination already exist because they are humans, and we don't get to make any decision that limits that.

It's precisely because we face the uncomfortable practical realities of our collapsing world that we have to assert universal principles that can't be denied.

Well, that's my perspective anyway.

The Legendary Shark:

I think that human rights, and human responsibilities, should be our twin foundations upon which we build everything else. Human first, everything else is negotiable.

Funt Solo:

--- Quote from: TordelBack on 24 September, 2020, 09:45:27 PM ---Well, that's my perspective anyway.

--- End quote ---

I expect I'm doing that focusing on trees thing which is leaving the woods out of my grasp.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version