You are judging right now. Hypocrite.
Can Self-Identification Be Incorrect?
- Thread starter glassjester
- Start date
You are judging right now. Hypocrite.
PureX
Well-known member
Why should one's gender identification be any different that one's religious, political, or social identification? We identify ourselves with what we believe to be true about ourselves. Not with what OTHERS believe to be true about us. And as for it contradicting reality, that sure could be said about a good many social, religious and political "truths" people hold.
Or is the state going to dictate who we are, now, too?
Funny how you conservatives hate the state when it tries to tell you all what you can think and do, but so long as it's labeling and ordering everyone else around you're all for it. Can't have enough laws telling everyone else what to do. Right?
Or is the state going to dictate who we are, now, too?
Funny how you conservatives hate the state when it tries to tell you all what you can think and do, but so long as it's labeling and ordering everyone else around you're all for it. Can't have enough laws telling everyone else what to do. Right?
shagster01
New member
What are your opinions on age and height identification then?
Not if its alterable. Beyond that its a moot comparison.
Would you refuse an individual that self-identifies as being fat from gaining weight?
shagster01
New member
My son's football league has weight limitations. Kids over 90 pounds can't run the ball. If that kid self identifies as skinny should the rule not apply to him?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Actually, no. I'm having a late breakfast and chuckling at how pompous you are.
Sure, though were's lies such physical restrictions regarding sexual identification?
shagster01
New member
Bathroom use is a physical activity, is it not? Urinating is certainly a biological function. I see no problem in drawing biological lines for biological functions.
A (biological) man, who identifies as a woman, has the physical capacity to go to the woman's bathroom to do her business.
Your argument is a moral one, not a physical one. QED
PureX
Well-known member
Age and height are not identifications beyond thinking we're tall or short, old or young. And of course we are free to think what we wish about it.
shagster01
New member
A 95 pound kid has the physical capacity to run with a football too.
PureX
Well-known member
These only matter in so far as they are functionally relevant. Amusement parks have height and weight requirements for some thrill rides, for example, because people who are too big or too small cannot be properly and safely secured.
That's not what you stated prior.
You: My son's football league has weight limitations. Kids over 90 pounds can't run the ball.
You moving the goal-post on me?
shagster01
New member
Unless you are too short for a rollercoaster or too young to run for president.
I'm 33. But I identify as 35 and can be president, right? Do do I have to be the age that the government says I am?
You don't really 'identify yourself'- your self identifies your self. There's a difference, and that difference is being trivialized with the recent shenanigans of this era making identity subjective.
You can't identify as a woman if you are a man, even if you don't like being one. These people have been convinced that their dislike of being a certain gender is them not being that gender.
You can't identify as a woman if you are a man, even if you don't like being one. These people have been convinced that their dislike of being a certain gender is them not being that gender.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
shagster01
New member
A 90+ kid can not run the football due to league regulations. But they have the physical ability to do so if the regulations were changed. Why must they identify as the weight the league says they are? That is my question.
No, you physically don't meet the requirements...though you're free to challenge the standard, much like the transgender folks are.
PureX
Well-known member
"35" is not an identity. It's a number.