Third World Skeptical Kid

Octavia, the trouble is that you have no concept of logical thought process. The "logic" that justifies LGBT also justifies ANYTHING currently considered classifiable as mental illness. If it's "right" to someone, who are you to tell them they're insane? You can't!!

There is no difference. Yet you claim there is. Very well; explain. How exactly is it different for an adult male to claim he's a child than to claim he's a woman? Or to claim he's a tiger or a butterfly? Explain yourself, if you can.

Actually between the two, it makes slightly more sense to claim you're still a child. See, an adult WAS a child once. But there is no man who was ever a woman before or a woman who was previously a man, so all this "I was born the wrong sex" is ridiculous because unless you have lived as the other sex, you don't "know" you were born the wrong sex. And as I've said elsewhere online (not sure if I've said it here yet), we've had to live through women saying that things like dresses, long hair, and makeup don't make you a woman,yet now we're supposed to believe that wearing dresses, long hair, and makeup can make a man a woman. At least figure out the damn narrative you want to present before you think anyone is going to take you seriously. (Not you, obviously.)

Yo, the doctor said, "It's a boy" but guess what? 1.) THEY GIVE ME GIRL CLOTHES
2.) WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT ME, THEY SAY, "she" AND 3.) MY FRIENDS CALL ME A GIRL, WHY IS NOBODY NOTICING

Oh really? Well I've yet to see a "transgender" continue to have a beard and dress like a "man" yet claim they are a woman. In another post, you talk about a "female-wired brain...mentally and emotionally they are female" What the hell does that even mean? Again I go back to my previous point that feminists have been trying to say that these differences don't exist or that they are society-manufactured, so which story is it? Maybe whatever differences there are in the human brain are caused by factors which are specifically related to sex, e.g., hormonal changes that occur within women during their menstrual and menopausal cycles, and if that's the case, then there is even less evidence for your "female-wired brain" since this "transgender" isn't experiencing those things.

I disagree with your scenario. There are little kids out there who are being told they're one gender (i.e. Girls forced to wear dresses when they'd rather wear shorts, boys being given footballs when they'd rather play with Barbies) when they clearly feel like another. There are kids three and four telling their parents they've got it all wrong. At such a young age, how are they even cognizant of the differences between boys and girls?

Your last point is correct but nothing else is. The point is that they don't associate playing with Barbies as "girl" behavior or wearing shorts as "boy" behavior. That stuff is indeed a societal construct. However, that does NOT mean they "clearly feel" like the other gender. That is a massive leap of logic. In the past, this simply used to be referred to as tomboys and effeminate boys, or in other words, androgynous behavior. It doesn't mean the kid is now suddenly the opposite sex because he or she has more interest in the activities that most kids of the opposite sex are engaging in. That's ridiculous. If a boy's favorite color happens to be pink, does that mean he's a girl? Our society has associated pink with girls but there is really no fundamental reason why that is so.

Those things i mentioned in and of themselves don't make one transgender. I never said they did. The kids could simply be gay. Or they could just be more open minded. I was just making an example of things I've heard of transgender kids saying to their parents, or transgender adults mentioning they experienced as kids.

Friend, children are by definition open-minded. It's also called "impressionable". Children are still learning to be adults; they learn to make some decisions, but only a really bad parent would let their child decide to eat only ice cream and not any veggies. Children don't even get to decide their own diet - how then can they possibly be mature enough to determine their own sexual preferences? Better still, why are they even THINKING about sex at that age?

I'm not talking about sexual preference or sex. Maybe that's what's muddying up the transgender controversy. I'm talking about who someone believes in their soul they are. A young child who knows nothing but their own mind and their own soul telling their parents "you know I'm a girl right?" and you see this kid who's a girl in every way except what appendage is between their legs.... That needs to be taken seriously, IMO.

Taken seriously? A child may believe in their soul that they will die if they eat any broccoli. It's the parent's responsibility to teach them they are wrong. Not to say "you're right honey, broccoli will kill you because you believe it will." That is only furthering the delusion.

I'm impressed - you dug up this up from the archives just to continue venting against me. A pity you don't have anything more useful to do.

For for the record I have not replied to our prior discussion because I work full-time. I will, in time. However I have things more pressing on my time.

And I didn't call names; I really don't know where you got that from.

Sorry but that's not a good comparison at all. Broccoli might kill the kid if he chokes on it or is allergic...

Is your overlooking the concept to focus on the details deliberate? Or do you simply miss the concept altogether because it is beyond your ability to understand?

Ok. I'll make this simple since you cannot grasp anything else: parents have the responsibility to teach their children right from wrong. To TEACH their children. Not let the child decide what they want to do.

Stop being deliberately a fool. I always hated broccoli as a child. Had to eat it anyway because my parents said so. And, even though I didn't like it, it was good for me.

Umm, bro, you went through my profile. Because, not being satisfied with the concurrently running discussion, you decided you had to stir the pot some more and try to provoke angry replies. The essence of being a troll. So, yeah, I'm still impressed I've irritated you enough to go to this length. Clearly I've gotten pretty far under your skin. Might try taking things less personally.

Do you even know how to have a conversation without being insulting? Doesn't appear that way. No, I don't want a cookie. However I often have more important things to do than talk to people who simply want to start a fight. Life happens.

Calling someone a fool, when they are being a fool by being deliberately dense, is not calling names; it is stating a fact. And you, my good sir, are treading dangerously close to the line of foolishness yourself. Do you want to discuss, or browbeat? A wise man speaks because he has something to say; a fool speaks because he has to say something. If you'd like to discuss what we were discussing in the other thread, kindly wait for me to reply. What do you have to lose by waiting, after all? If I don't reply, you can consider yourself to have won, right? Because clearly I couldn't respond any more? And if I do reply, you get to counter me some more. It's a win-win for you, isn't it? So why the rush to find another bone to pick?

If you're that impatient for me to reply so you can rail at me some more...you seriously need to rethink your priorities.

Feelings are just feelings...

The American Psychiatric Association said it's not a mental illness so....

So it's not "insane". Very well; why is it "sane"? Why is it sanity to claim to be something you physically are not, except you "feel" that is what you should be? So we define ourselves based on our feelings? When was it that we began basing logical decisions on our feelings rather than on factual evidence?

Let's look at it another way. I would be considered certifiably insane if I believed I was Abraham Lincoln. Yet, by the so-called logic of the LGBT movement, if I have surgery to make me look like Abraham Lincoln, and if I dress like him and talk like him, I should be considered to be him! Because, if you tell me "you're not Abraham Lincoln, bro", you're interfering with my self-identification. I should be allowed to choose how I identify, based on what I believe I should be.

Obviously that's insanity; I'm not Abraham Lincoln. You might say "that doesn't count because you can't become someone else who already exists." Exactly my point! Just because I might want to be Abraham Lincoln, and might try to look like him, hell, might even have surgery to make me physically identical with Abraham Lincoln...I'll still remain the man I was born as, at the end of the day. Except I'd be disfigured by my own illusions.

Except it's now possible to have a sex-change. So my argument is invalid...isn't it? Not remotely. I was born caucasian. However suppose I believed I was really African-American, and I was born white as a mistake? Suppose the medical technology existed which could turn my skin negroid? Would undergoing that procedure change who I am? Would I become African-American just because outwardly I looked like one? Because I "believed" I was one?

Or suppose I had a horse tail grafted onto my backside. Would that make me a horse? The term for what that would make me, I believe, is a lunatic horse's ass...

No. If I tell people I'm Abraham Lincoln, they'll tell me I'm crazy. If I tell someone I'm black, they'll look at me funny and tell me that I'm very much caucasian. If I tell someone I'm a horse's ass...umm...actually, they'll probably agree with me on that one...

Someone who has a heart transplant - does that make them another person? Nope! The heart changed, but the person didn't. If they have a limb transplanted, do they become a different person just because their limb is different? Again, no. They are still the same person, even though a PART of them has been replaced with something different.

Like people who get plastic surgery to make themselves younger? Or people who wear colored contacts to give them green eyes when theirs are brown? Does that mean they have mental disorders too?

No, because they don't beleive that they should be younger or should have brown eyes. They just want to. If a tg person changed their parts, changed their chromosome, added/removed their Adams apple to the point that they are another gender, but they did it just because they wanted to, they do not have a mental disorder. However, if they think that they were born the wrong gender and should have been another gender, that is an official mental disorder.

Buddy, you do know this is a meme site, right? Where you just make memes?? This is NOT the place to put your stupidly long opinion of which NOBODY is going to read about mental illnesses. If you want to argue about it to people, post this on either Tumblr or Facebook, that will get you one fast.

Now go take your argument that does NOT partain to liberals or conservatives ( because thats the new rage, not stupid gender, its old by now) and go post it somewhere else.

Your assertion that no one will read it is proved erroneous by the fact that now at least the two people who have replied to my comment did, in fact, take the time to read it.

Regarding your suggestion that I post this elsewhere - if you feel that my comment merits sharing due to its extreme brilliance and deep insight, I would never dream of pressing legal charges even if you were to repost my comment without reference as to the author and were to claim it as your own. You are more than welcome to replicate part or all of it if you so desire.

What I meant was the long type train to said to MauiOnion, not the meme.

And also, within the next week, month, year, ect, this meme will be forgotten with a new one in its place. No need to think your one meme will hit headlines.

Gotcha. ;)

:)

I imagine nicotine fits cause the same type of psychosis ????

It is a mental illness to believe that you are another gender. It's called gender dysphoria. Look it up.

Now because they got paid and don't want trouble. It was not the same 10 years ago...

To claim to have a logical thought process, one must demonstrate it.

Did I outright say LGBT mentality was a mental illness? No; I merely compared them, and the comparison is strikingly close.

The LGBT movement created itself and decided on a name. They lump themselves together. If they claim to be a group, I'm merely catering to that assertion. Their "logic" is the same, their movement is united. They have placed themselves into the same group, and so I will treat them as a group.

Who are you to tell a person when they become an adult? Physically and chronologically they are not, but their brain may not be "wired" as an adult brain. When, exactly does a child become an adult? Hell, the government can't even decide; 18 is the legal limit for smoking, voting and Selective Service, but 21 is when you can buy a gun and drink alcohol. Adulthood isn't defined by years. So, if someone is 42 and self-identifies as a child all their life, how can you tell them they're wrong? If that's their brain wiring, that's who they are. Right?

I have OCD. Which is by definition a form of "mental disorder". OCD runs in my family. Yet it does not control me, as long as I control it. When I stop controlling it, that is the moment it becomes a problem.

If I identify as Michael Jackson, how do you know there isn't a part of Michael Jackson somewhere in my mental makeup? What if I said I was mentally identical with Michael Jackson?

How is it possible to PROVE beyond any doubt that a person has no part of a tiger's personality in their mental makeup? There are half a million "personality quizzes" online that will tell you which predator you are, and more often than not I get Tiger as my result. If we evolved from animals, then yes, it is possible to have the mentality of animals in our mental makeup. Because, after all, we're not very far removed from animals, are we? In fact I believe you said in a prior conversation of ours that humans are still animals at the end of the day...

And please. I'm very curious for you to explain to me why one cannot identify as being black though they were born white. What if my brain is "wired that way"?

So since I am one type of animal, why may I not choose to identify as a different type of animal? Suppose I believe I should have been born as a dog? Am I self-identifying, or am I insane?

Okay. Suppose a child is born to one black and one white parent. The child's skin is white. What are they? What were they born as? How is it determined? How do they determine for themselves? Can they?

You also conveniently ignored my question regarding adulthood and adults who "self-identify" as children. Would you care to answer, or is it beyond you to do so?

"you're a human. Identifying as anything else is unrealistic"

Well geuss what? "Your a (gender). Identifying as anything else would be unrealistic.

Okay. So it's up to that kid if they choose to be black or white, because they had one black and one white parent. Fine; they're biracial. We'll go with that. Well, I was born with one mom and one dad. Doesn't that make me bisexual, or able to be bisexual if I choose?

Forgetting an answer is a very convenient explanation for not having one. Yet, you just blasted your own argument in the face with a 10-gauge. And I quote:

"If, for whatever reason, an adult "feels" like a child, they're still an adult, in an adult body, though they may identify as a child. But they're an adult."

Let's substitute two words and repeat that phrase:

"If, for whatever reason, a man "feels" like a woman, they're still a man, in a man's body, though they may identify as a woman. But they're a man."

So an adult who identifies as a child is really an adult, because physically he is an adult though mentally he may be a child. But a man who identifies as a woman is a woman, even though he is physically a man? You determine the one based on physicality and yet the other you determine based on mindset. It cannot work both ways. Which is it?

Thien how is a hermaphrodite supposed to feel?

Hopefully, their parents will decide for them before it ever affects their lives. If that happens, odds are good they'll probably never care.

Furthermore your argument is ridiculous. Hermaphroditism affects one in every 1500-2000 births. It's not common, it's a genetic anomaly. Rare anomalies do not negate rules.

Transgenders aren't common, either. But I don't see how parents should get the right to choose their child's gender. I don't see how anyone other than the person can make that type of decision for themselves.