• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Transgender senior can't be king

And what I said trumps that. It is a short cut term that is used incorrectly and is NOT a diagnosis. My last post stated that, clearly. You are incorrect.

Used incorrectly by your own source? I got that from the source you directed me to and all it said was that transsexual is an informal term for a certain extreme of gender identity disorder. No matter what you say it clearly includes transsexualism as part of the mental disorder.

When I find it I will. And I stated that it was secreted, but in limited area where it is then retained.

You said somatostatin inhibits secretion so that it is retained in the brain. What you are saying now is different and honestly does not make a lot of sense either way because that is just not how it works.

My sources completely agree with me. When YOUR position is so flimsy that you have to ignore that fact, and make stuff up, it is easy to see why your position is unfounded.

I am not making anything up here, just going with some common knowledge, at least common knowledge for people who study human behavior. People give signals without even realizing it and it is very difficult if not impossible to avoid giving those signals. People, especially infants, are very adept at interpreting those signals.
 
Used incorrectly by your own source? I got that from the source you directed me to and all it said was that transsexual is an informal term for a certain extreme of gender identity disorder. No matter what you say it clearly includes transsexualism as part of the mental disorder.

I will tell you for the THIRD time, the source explained that it is often used as a short cut term to discuss those with GID or GIDNOS. IT IS NOT A DIAGNOSIS NOR A DISORDER. You are absolutely wrong, both as I have shown and as I have said. You do not know what you are talking about and seem to be contrary and misrepresenting just because.



You said somatostatin inhibits secretion so that it is retained in the brain. What you are saying now is different and honestly does not make a lot of sense either way because that is just not how it works.

I explained this pretty clearly. It inhibits secretion outside the BSTc, retaining it there.



I am not making anything up here, just going with some common knowledge, at least common knowledge for people who study human behavior. People give signals without even realizing it and it is very difficult if not impossible to avoid giving those signals. People, especially infants, are very adept at interpreting those signals.

What you are saying is, as I said, irrelevant. Does this happen? Of course. I would venture to guess that I have studied human behavior a TON more than you. The issue is that research was pretty clear. Speculate all you like. It doesn't match up with what this particular research identified... which trumps any speculation you might have.
 
I will tell you for the THIRD time, the source explained that it is often used as a short cut term to discuss those with GID or GIDNOS.

In other words, when they say transsexual they mean someone with the mental disorder. You can say that isn't the proper term, but you are the one insisting transsexualism is not a disorder. If it is just another term used to describe the disorder as your source says then you really aren't making that case.

I explained this pretty clearly. It inhibits secretion outside the BSTc, retaining it there.

That just isn't how it works my friend.

What you are saying is, as I said, irrelevant.

It is not irrelevant when your source acts like a few months after birth makes for a control on social conditioning.

I would venture to guess that I have studied human behavior a TON more than you.

You are probably older than me so I would not really dispute that. Of course, quantity of study is not the same as quality of study. People can spend decades working and studying in a field when someone who has spent only a few years in it makes more progress than any of them.

The issue is that research was pretty clear. Speculate all you like. It doesn't match up with what this particular research identified... which trumps any speculation you might have.

It was clear that people with similar mindsets have similar minds. I do not dispute that. What I dispute is the conclusion that this therefore represents a cause and effect relationship. It is an example of the correlation equals causation argument common in sociobiology.
 
Source: WOOD TV8

Does this kid have a *****? Yes. So I am sorry, but there is no homecoming king crown for you little missy. Of course, the ACLU thinks differently. I guess you shouldn't discriminate against people for thinking they are something they are not. So if I think I am a qualified heart surgeon a hospital should allow to me to conduct a triple bypass.

Let me guess, this is about using another poor kid as a poster child for some agenda, and people are crying "discrimination" everywhere.

All I have to say is, it's a homecomming title, I'm sure s/he will get over it and move on to more important things in life. To bad I can't say that about the media, though.
 
I don't see why he cannot be king. It harms no one, makes him happy. Society actively approves of things far more stupid and harmful.
 
I don't see why he cannot be king. It harms no one, makes him happy. Society actively approves of things far more stupid and harmful.

Scary that there are people who think that some lil highschool is an accurate sample of American sociaty that they can make such generalisations.
 
In other words, when they say transsexual they mean someone with the mental disorder. You can say that isn't the proper term, but you are the one insisting transsexualism is not a disorder. If it is just another term used to describe the disorder as your source says then you really aren't making that case.

For the FOURTH time, it is irrelevant whether the term is used incorrectly... which is precisely what my source says. It is not a disorder. I have made my case clearly. You want to reject reality, that is your own business.



That just isn't how it works my friend.

Says you.



It is not irrelevant when your source acts like a few months after birth makes for a control on social conditioning.

All you have is speculation. I have the information that I presented. Again, if you want to reject reality, that is your business.

You are probably older than me so I would not really dispute that. Of course, quantity of study is not the same as quality of study. People can spend decades working and studying in a field when someone who has spent only a few years in it makes more progress than any of them.

I am also certain that the quality of my studies of human behavior is TONS better than yours.

It was clear that people with similar mindsets have similar minds. I do not dispute that. What I dispute is the conclusion that this therefore represents a cause and effect relationship. It is an example of the correlation equals causation argument common in sociobiology.

Whether it be causation or correlation, the research presents a pretty clear hypothesis that is proven conclusively. Your speculation, again, is just that and remains unfounded until someone does some research that demonstrates that it was a confound in the research I presented.
 
Scary that there are people who think that some lil highschool is an accurate sample of American sociaty that they can make such generalisations.

Well, it is a refection of a segment of American society.
 
For the FOURTH time, it is irrelevant whether the term is used incorrectly... which is precisely what my source says. It is not a disorder. I have made my case clearly. You want to reject reality, that is your own business.

It says the term is an informal term for the disorder, specifically a term used for when the disorder is at a certain stage. Just because transsexual is not the diagnostic term for the disorder does not mean it is not a term for the disorder. Your source says explicitly that it is another term for the disorder. You were arguing that transsexualism is not a disorder, but your own source clearly says that it is a disorder. It only clarifies that the technical term is gender identity disorder, which is something I never questioned.

Says you.

Since you are now giving out empty retorts why don't you just go the full monty and respond with "Said the liar"?

All you have is speculation. I have the information that I presented. Again, if you want to reject reality, that is your business.

This is not about speculation. Ruling out social conditioning as a factor in this case as the researchers did is simply mistaken.

Whether it be causation or correlation, the research presents a pretty clear hypothesis that is proven conclusively.

"Hypothesis" is a good term for it, because that is the scientific equivalent of a guess. Their research is far from proving their hypothesis.
 
Well, it is a refection of a segment of American society.

It's a reflection of one administrator and one administrator only.

Remember that lesbian couple a few months ago who were told that they couldn't show up to their prom as a couple or dress in pants suits? Then as now, the student body was accepting of them. Then as now, it was one administrator clinging to a technicality to get their way.

This incident does not reflect America. America is accepting of gays, lesbians, transexuals, etc.
 
It says the term is an informal term for the disorder, specifically a term used for when the disorder is at a certain stage. Just because transsexual is not the diagnostic term for the disorder does not mean it is not a term for the disorder. Your source says explicitly that it is another term for the disorder. You were arguing that transsexualism is not a disorder, but your own source clearly says that it is a disorder. It only clarifies that the technical term is gender identity disorder, which is something I never questioned.

FIFTH AND LAST TIME. That is not what the source said. I have clarified this over and over. The term is NOT another term for the disorder. It is an incorrect shortcut term that some use. Transsexualism is NOT a disorder. GID is. The sources is clear that after a GID diagnosis is given, and after a sucessful "real life experience" occurs, transsexualism is confirmed. NOT the disorder, but the state of being, like heterosexuality, homosexuality, maleness, femaleness, etc... I advise you to cease misrepresenting this issue. You are wrong about this... as has been shown to you.



Since you are now giving out empty retorts why don't you just go the full monty and respond with "Said the liar"?

You have obviously no desire to educate yourself on this issue, so I have no reason to do more exploration. You disagee? Ok.



This is not about speculation. Ruling out social conditioning as a factor in this case as the researchers did is simply mistaken.

Social conditioning is not something to be tested for. Unless you show some evidence that, in the research presented, there is some indication that social conditioning WAS a factor, you've got nothing. And since you have presented none of this... you've got nothing.



"Hypothesis" is a good term for it, because that is the scientific equivalent of a guess. Their research is far from proving their hypothesis.

Wrong. It certainly demonstrated their hypothesis and until you show some demonstration of the opposite, yours remains unfounded.
 
FIFTH AND LAST TIME. That is not what the source said. I have clarified this over and over. The term is NOT another term for the disorder. It is an incorrect shortcut term that some use. Transsexualism is NOT a disorder. GID is. The sources is clear that after a GID diagnosis is given, and after a sucessful "real life experience" occurs, transsexualism is confirmed. NOT the disorder, but the state of being, like heterosexuality, homosexuality, maleness, femaleness, etc... I advise you to cease misrepresenting this issue. You are wrong about this... as has been shown to you.

It did not say this was an incorrect term. It said it was an informal term. The source also says transsexualism is on the spectrum of gender identity disorder. You keep saying transsexualism is not a disorder when the source only says it is not a formal term for someone with the disorder. Saying a person who is transsexual has a mental disorder is consistent with what your source says.

Social conditioning is not something to be tested for. Unless you show some evidence that, in the research presented, there is some indication that social conditioning WAS a factor, you've got nothing. And since you have presented none of this... you've got nothing.

It is not my responsibility to rule out a possible factor in their research that could affect the results. The researchers are the ones who are responsible for ruling out social conditioning as a factor. They claim it is ruled out by the young age of a subject, but that does not actually rule out social conditioning at all.

Wrong. It certainly demonstrated their hypothesis and until you show some demonstration of the opposite, yours remains unfounded.

Like I said, they are putting forward a cause that is most likely just an effect of some other cause and all of this without decisively ruling out another causal factor.
 
Back
Top Bottom