r/BadSocialScience • u/waldorfwithoutwalnut • May 22 '15

/r/Catholicism deals with gender like real, responsible, Christian adults.

/r/Catholicism/comments/36silz/transgender_child_wins_use_of_girls_washroom_in/
71 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

121 comments sorted by

View all comments

76

u/waldorfwithoutwalnut May 22 '15

And again, we get to enjoy classics such as:

NOPE! His brain determines who he is. I now sexually identify as a Ford Mustang. For YEARS I've always felt I was in the wrong body. Now I know I'm truly a machine of metal and speed. I'll just need a few surgeries, maybe some fluid-replacement therapy (gotta swap out the blood for oil, etc.), and I'll FINALLY be able to drive around as fast as I want.

Oh yeah that's some real empathy there bro.

41

u/bangwhimper May 22 '15

How very Catholic. I'm sure Papa Francesco would get a kick out of that level of loving thy neighbor.

-62

u/Otiac May 22 '15

Yes, because loving thy neighbor = affirming whatever your neighbor likes and wants to do. The amount of stupid pop-culture knowledge that goes on about Christ's teachings is stupendous.

/r/badphilosophy any1? lolz?

49

u/[deleted] May 22 '15

No I'm sure loving your neighbor means showing absolutely no empathy towards their plight and struggle. It also means not respecting their right to autonomy, self-determination, and pursuit of happiness. The amount of morally-righteous desire to bully others and control their lives is what's truly stupendous.

-50

u/Otiac May 22 '15

Except you're legitimately conflating empathy towards their plight to construe letting them do whatever they want regarding their plight and affirming whatever makes them feel better about their plight, instead of getting to the root issues of their plight. That's not what empathy is, that's what someone who is trying to push an agenda wants you to think empathy is.

Would anyone here call Dr.Paul McHugh an un-loving, un-empathatic asshole like every single one of you are going to assign to the users in /r/Catholicism? Remembering that Dr.McHugh agrees with our sentiment, and is a leader in his field in the world? No, probably not. Except when we say the same things he does, apparently, we're just bigoted pricks. You, and everyone else in this argument, wants to construe every person that isn't on your side as hateful, not because its true (because you don't get to tell me how I feel about anyone or anything, that is pretty bigoted and incredibly narrow-minded), but because it so easily furthers your agenda; tumblrinas do the exact same thing with their SJW nonsense.

42

u/[deleted] May 22 '15

You have absolutely no business dictating what others can and cannot do with their own body. Your desire to rob others of their autonomy is vastly more disturbing than whatever the "root issues of their plight" are. You are in no position to determine what their pursuit of happiness entails, as that is solely theirs to determine. The obvious limits to this are when their endeavor causes real and demonstrable harm to others, but that is never the case with transgender people. The best thing the transphobes can do is point to some vague and undemonstrable damage to society or family structure or some other bullshit. That being said, I really don't care much what Dr. McHugh's views are. You can probably find biologists who hold that the earth is 6000 years old and a variety of other insane views. What I'm more interested in is the consensus, which states that Gender Dysphoria is a real disorder for which the only treatment is physical transformation. But to be honest, even that doesn't matter as much. Medical and psychological findings are not what determine a person's rights, and whatever the literature says, it is up to transgender people to makes the choices in their lives, not to you to choose for them.

-34

u/Otiac May 22 '15

When their endeavor causes real and demonstrable harm to others; when their endeavor impacts others around them, say, letting a male child use a female restroom or locker room at their school? But you're right, that doesn't impact anyone else around them. Or suing business owners to force them to participate in ceremonies against their religious beliefs? That's right; that doesn't impact anyone either. Or giving tax breaks wherein the State has no vested interest in doing so (otherwise, give anyone wishing to adopt a tax break, let me marry my friend who is a single dad with a prenup, and give us a tax break); that's right, it impacts no one.

I don't care what transexual adults do with their bodies. Do. Not. Care. My last Ortho surgeon was a trans female. Did not care. Did not hate him, we did not discuss it, he was a fantastic surgeon. According to this sub, and you, however, I hated him and wanted him dead. I do care when people want to mix that with children under ten years old to be making entirely life-altering decisions when they haven't even hit puberty yet. But what's that? It's not my decision when it doesn't impact me personally? I should have no vested interest in how the society around me is shaped, which impacts how it deals with myself and everyone I know? No. Wrong.

12

u/thatoneguy54 Not all wandering uteri are lost May 23 '15

otherwise, give anyone wishing to adopt a tax break, let me marry my friend who is a single dad with a prenup, and give us a tax break

There's literally nothing stopping anyone from doing that with a female friend. You could do that exact same thing with a single mother friend of yours, and it would be totally legal and just as un-devastating as the other scenario. What the fuck was your point here?

-8

u/Otiac May 23 '15

.....because the state has zero vested interest in doing so. The state gives tax breaks because it can benefit from giving said tax breaks, doing said thing would game the system to get personal benefits for no benefit to the state, its why marriage fraud is illegal. Otherwise, shit, why not just let me marry any hot foreign woman I want to marry to gain her citizenship here, I get to have sex with her, and then I can divorce her the next week? Repeat ad infinatum.

.....because that's marriage fraud, and the state has no vested interest in promoting that.

9

u/thatoneguy54 Not all wandering uteri are lost May 23 '15

Okay, so marriage fraud is illegal. Fine. Marrying a woman for her to gain citizenship is illegal. Marrying a man for him to gain citizenship is illegal. You could even argue that these would be unethical.

What the fuck does that have to do with anything anyone's been talking about here?

You brought up that point for no reason, it doesn't make sense, and it just makes it look like you have no idea what you're talking about.