OrangeEtBlanc
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2021
- Messages
- 817
- Likes
- 1,763
Having spent much time thinking philosophically about the transgender debate, I wanted to share my thoughts with VolNation concerning this current societal issue.
The first thing I want to state is that I have nothing against trans people. I worked with a couple, and they were quite nice individuals. The following philosophical argument I am making is not anti-trans, but more about how the debate is framed by the media, especially social media like Twitter. There are certain distinctions I feel must be made in order to foster a more productive dialogue concerning transgenderism.
I entitled this thread LGB vs T because, I argue, there is currently a fundamental distinction between these groups, which are: “preference” versus “identity.”
Lesbian, gay, and bi-sexual people possess a certain sexual preference for a particular group of people—namely, those of the same sex, or of both sexes.
Preferences, like opinions, are based on the feelings of the subject. One cannot argue that another’s preferences are not true.
For instance, if I say “my favorite color is blue,” another cannot argue “no, your favorite color is red!” My preference of blue over red is not something dependent on propositional truths based on the laws of logic. While our preferences are based on the physical laws of reality that govern our brains, preferences, in and of themselves, are not expressing absolute fact external to our likes.***
The difference between LGB vs T is that transgenderism is not relying on the notion of preference, but that of identity. I hear all the time on social media “trans women ARE women.” This is a very different statement from someone stating “I am gay.” The sentence “I am gay” implies that the subject fit the identity descriptors of the predicate “gay,” which is to typically be a male homosexual, having sexual preference towards men. Thus, “I am gay” is an equivalent statement to “I am a male who has a sexual preference for the same sex.”
Contrast this with the statement “I am a woman.” This sentence denotes that subject fit the identity descriptors for the term “woman.”
This is where transgenderism, as it currently publicizes itself, totally goes off the rails.
In all of the pro-trans articles I have read, they are unable (or, more likely, unwilling) to give concrete identity descriptors for what constitutes being a “man” or “woman.” Not one article I have read in the past two years has cared to define the most fundamental terms.
Thus, when they make the identity statement “I am a woman” they fail to provide the corresponding descriptors to make the equivalence.
What I often hear and read is the notion of the “gender spectrum.” This spectrum seems to have so little evidence in its favor, that one might say it doesn’t exist...
Let us consider something that is a scientifically-proven spectrum—light. When defracted, white light produces its rainbow spectrum with all its attending colors from Infra-red, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet, and ultra-violet.
Now, each color, though existing on a real spectrum, has certain features which demarcate it from the other colors. Blue has a particular wave-length, while red has yet another wave-length. These range of wave-lengths provide demonstrable basis for discrimination between the colors.
With transgenderism, the claim is that there exists a spectrum with absolutely no attributes that demarcate the differences between the sexes. It is roughly the equivalent of someone arguing that blue and red are the same because they exist on the same spectrum.
Going back to preference vs identity: With preference, one can state “my favorite color is blue” without argument. But, with identity, one cannot say “Blue is red!” without argument, as this requires a propositional identity statement using defined descriptors.
Transgenderism, as currently defined, has argued itself into a illogical, irrational, reality-denying hole.
Not only that, but the “ground-rules” that transgenderism is using COMPLETELY UPENDS the LGBT movement.
If there are no absolute defining characteristics which differentiate between men & women, then how could ANYONE be gay, lesbian, or bi-sexual? All of those terms necessitate the defined existence of the sexes.
If I were to say “I am a gay man, but I only find women sexually attractive,” that would be a contradiction in terms, as the descriptors of each are inherently contradictory. But, without recognizing distinct descriptors for “man” and “woman” that statement is logically coherent...by saying absolutely nothing.
Yet, the trans activists will argue “Trans women are women,” but make an identity statement devoid of both subject and predicate descriptors.
By arguing that gender doesn’t exist, trans activists have destroyed the logical foundation for the rest of the LGBT. Even other LGB activists and feminists have noticed this problem and are trying to speak out against it.
The way forward:
Trans activists MUST get away from using identity statements as the basis for their claims.
Instead of “I am a woman,” or “I am a man,” they should instead say:
“I prefer to live my life as if I were a woman/man.”
This removes their arguments out of the realm of identity statements and into that of preference. Now, to what extent society should allow them to live in accordance with their preference is a different argument altogether that I will not touch upon here.
“I want to live like a woman” is different from “I AM a woman.”
One is a statement of identity, the other, a statement of preference.
TL;DR: No one can argue with you if Blue is your favorite color, but one can argue if you say “Blue is Red!” Even spectrums have defined limits on what makes something what it is. Trans activists should move from identity statements “Blue is red”/“Trans women are women,” and instead focus on preference “I prefer to live as a women.”
***A brief note on preference and facts dependent on physical law: No one chooses their preferences, as they are determined by internal & external influences outside of our control. If I eat vanilla ice cream and chocolate ice cream, I don’t “choose” which one I actually like better—that is caused by the mental interactions within my brain. However, while preference is a mental activity caused by physical stimuli, it can be argued that a person’s preference is an example of physical law. Let’s say we find the neurons that control our favorite color. A certain “coding” of those neurons may define/describe what a person’s favorite color is. In this way, preference is not merely in the world of reality-independent opinions, but does exist in the world of fact. That doesn’t make that preference true in an absolute sense as in “Blue is the best color!” But, it does provide a link between our mental opinions and the external world.
Just been doing a lot of pondering on this issue lately and wanted to share.
As a Philosopher, I am constantly re-evaluating my thoughts, beliefs, and biases. I would be more than happy to read your rebuttals, critiques, and other feedback. Thank you.
The first thing I want to state is that I have nothing against trans people. I worked with a couple, and they were quite nice individuals. The following philosophical argument I am making is not anti-trans, but more about how the debate is framed by the media, especially social media like Twitter. There are certain distinctions I feel must be made in order to foster a more productive dialogue concerning transgenderism.
I entitled this thread LGB vs T because, I argue, there is currently a fundamental distinction between these groups, which are: “preference” versus “identity.”
Lesbian, gay, and bi-sexual people possess a certain sexual preference for a particular group of people—namely, those of the same sex, or of both sexes.
Preferences, like opinions, are based on the feelings of the subject. One cannot argue that another’s preferences are not true.
For instance, if I say “my favorite color is blue,” another cannot argue “no, your favorite color is red!” My preference of blue over red is not something dependent on propositional truths based on the laws of logic. While our preferences are based on the physical laws of reality that govern our brains, preferences, in and of themselves, are not expressing absolute fact external to our likes.***
The difference between LGB vs T is that transgenderism is not relying on the notion of preference, but that of identity. I hear all the time on social media “trans women ARE women.” This is a very different statement from someone stating “I am gay.” The sentence “I am gay” implies that the subject fit the identity descriptors of the predicate “gay,” which is to typically be a male homosexual, having sexual preference towards men. Thus, “I am gay” is an equivalent statement to “I am a male who has a sexual preference for the same sex.”
Contrast this with the statement “I am a woman.” This sentence denotes that subject fit the identity descriptors for the term “woman.”
This is where transgenderism, as it currently publicizes itself, totally goes off the rails.
In all of the pro-trans articles I have read, they are unable (or, more likely, unwilling) to give concrete identity descriptors for what constitutes being a “man” or “woman.” Not one article I have read in the past two years has cared to define the most fundamental terms.
Thus, when they make the identity statement “I am a woman” they fail to provide the corresponding descriptors to make the equivalence.
What I often hear and read is the notion of the “gender spectrum.” This spectrum seems to have so little evidence in its favor, that one might say it doesn’t exist...
Let us consider something that is a scientifically-proven spectrum—light. When defracted, white light produces its rainbow spectrum with all its attending colors from Infra-red, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet, and ultra-violet.
Now, each color, though existing on a real spectrum, has certain features which demarcate it from the other colors. Blue has a particular wave-length, while red has yet another wave-length. These range of wave-lengths provide demonstrable basis for discrimination between the colors.
With transgenderism, the claim is that there exists a spectrum with absolutely no attributes that demarcate the differences between the sexes. It is roughly the equivalent of someone arguing that blue and red are the same because they exist on the same spectrum.
Going back to preference vs identity: With preference, one can state “my favorite color is blue” without argument. But, with identity, one cannot say “Blue is red!” without argument, as this requires a propositional identity statement using defined descriptors.
Transgenderism, as currently defined, has argued itself into a illogical, irrational, reality-denying hole.
Not only that, but the “ground-rules” that transgenderism is using COMPLETELY UPENDS the LGBT movement.
If there are no absolute defining characteristics which differentiate between men & women, then how could ANYONE be gay, lesbian, or bi-sexual? All of those terms necessitate the defined existence of the sexes.
If I were to say “I am a gay man, but I only find women sexually attractive,” that would be a contradiction in terms, as the descriptors of each are inherently contradictory. But, without recognizing distinct descriptors for “man” and “woman” that statement is logically coherent...by saying absolutely nothing.
Yet, the trans activists will argue “Trans women are women,” but make an identity statement devoid of both subject and predicate descriptors.
By arguing that gender doesn’t exist, trans activists have destroyed the logical foundation for the rest of the LGBT. Even other LGB activists and feminists have noticed this problem and are trying to speak out against it.
The way forward:
Trans activists MUST get away from using identity statements as the basis for their claims.
Instead of “I am a woman,” or “I am a man,” they should instead say:
“I prefer to live my life as if I were a woman/man.”
This removes their arguments out of the realm of identity statements and into that of preference. Now, to what extent society should allow them to live in accordance with their preference is a different argument altogether that I will not touch upon here.
“I want to live like a woman” is different from “I AM a woman.”
One is a statement of identity, the other, a statement of preference.
TL;DR: No one can argue with you if Blue is your favorite color, but one can argue if you say “Blue is Red!” Even spectrums have defined limits on what makes something what it is. Trans activists should move from identity statements “Blue is red”/“Trans women are women,” and instead focus on preference “I prefer to live as a women.”
***A brief note on preference and facts dependent on physical law: No one chooses their preferences, as they are determined by internal & external influences outside of our control. If I eat vanilla ice cream and chocolate ice cream, I don’t “choose” which one I actually like better—that is caused by the mental interactions within my brain. However, while preference is a mental activity caused by physical stimuli, it can be argued that a person’s preference is an example of physical law. Let’s say we find the neurons that control our favorite color. A certain “coding” of those neurons may define/describe what a person’s favorite color is. In this way, preference is not merely in the world of reality-independent opinions, but does exist in the world of fact. That doesn’t make that preference true in an absolute sense as in “Blue is the best color!” But, it does provide a link between our mental opinions and the external world.
Just been doing a lot of pondering on this issue lately and wanted to share.
As a Philosopher, I am constantly re-evaluating my thoughts, beliefs, and biases. I would be more than happy to read your rebuttals, critiques, and other feedback. Thank you.
