well, firstly, i hate all biological determinism. i thinks mostly bs. theres somethings obviously that are genetic, but generally im a very big nurture over nature kind of person.
but more than that, i just hate it out of priciple. because why does it matter? if we arent born with a gendered soul, or the brain of the other sex or whatever else, then why does it matter? does that make the pain of dysphoria less real? does that make the treatment any different? i dont think so.
its like how i hate gays talking about homosexuality in nature. like cool, but it doesnt mean anything. if humans were the only species on the planet to practice homosexual relations, itd still be okay for gay people to exist.
we dont live natural lives, we are so much more complex than that. if someone isnt hurting another person, then thats all that should matter. the ones who hate us, who hate gay people, they dont care about appeals to nature. its just fighting them on their own terf and conceding to their arguments because they’ll never believe anything but their own reactionary world views anyway.
“Homosexuality in nature” is just misunderstood transsexuality and all homosexual men are reppers with pink brain and vice versa and really everyone’s straight. Stay woke y’all
so coal that its back to being gemmy
A majority of people seem to operate from the view that our physical bodies is what orders the world, rather than the interaction between the external world, our bodies, and the ideas that spring forth from it. People think that our nature is a fixed construct that determine the whole course of lives. This is why people can see something as artificial as racism and “races of people” as “natural” in western civilization
Racism and xenophobia are absolutely natural. Child mortality is also natural. And cancer. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t solve them or those are good things
Race and the concept of the outsider are not natural phenomenon but socially constructed social groups, they are by no means natural.
Xenophobia is seemingly far more natural than actual racism. Language and culture were often the big driving forces for prejudice throughout our history, with things like skin color and other physical features being much more recent additions.
Research proves that babies will always prefer strangers that share their mother’s skin colour
I’m not one to imply that racism is to the complete antithesis of our entire nature, but it’s not something you can expect somebody to carry with them past infancy without a lot of cultural reinforcement, as otherwise it’d be just as easily grown out of as fear of the dark.
Racism, at the primitive lizard-brained level, only needs the absolute slightest of exposure to somebody who’s skin color differs but shares the same language and basic values as you to start breaking down. Without the invention of the race sciences that were made to justify slavery and colonization, I really do not think the societies of today would be all that racist at-all.
As for whether babies would still have a bit of racism as a treat, it’s certainly likely. Identifying physical sameness is a good primitive defense for distinguishing parent from non-parent, and family from non-family. Our capacity to understand tribe as something much grander than direct blood relation expands dramatically with language acquisition and proper socialization however, and this goes for all humans.
Eh so it’s not natural. Modern races are def a construct tho that I agree with
It’d be most accurate to term adult-aged racism a socially reinforced infantile disorder than purely “natural” or “unnatural”. Adult racists are mental toddlers. Racist toddlers are just toddlers.
When I became an adult I realized that half of all adult people are actually just teenagers and children without hormones. Also they become good at masking that fact by virtue signaling and mimicking the contextual culture
I think that a lot of people just didn’t grow up at all and others just use it constantly
If it would be found out to be all nurture, conversion therapy will quickly become much more used to “fix” transness, that’s how I see it. I also think there are obviously some genetical components to it, as I started to feel bottom dysphoria when I was like ~5 years old. But I don’t really care if it’s “gendered” soul type of deal, or just plain disorder.
i mean, it kind of already is. colorado just got told it cant ban conversion therapy i think. my state has it literally protected, not even not banned, but like counties arent allowed to ban it themselves
Yeah, I know. I just feel like in the case of it being nurture, the conversion therapy will become worldwide pracrice, not just in rising fascism places, but even in woke ones, with HRT becoming even harder to obtain.
if its purely looked at as biological though, it can easily be made to restrict access to hrt based on arbitrary lines.
like what if someone still feels horribly, suicidally dysphoric, but they dont have a female neruomap or whatever and thats used to deny them care?
or what if access to hrt is locked behind getting said brainscan that many people wouldn’t be able to afford?
My country requires karyotype to get diagnosis and they may deny based on results, so I can see what you mean.
I feel like both scenarios are bad, then. With nurture, you get conversion therapy; with nature, you get gatekeeping. In this case there are only two ways: never researching what causes GD, which is stupid; or transform the whole system to informed consent, where anyone can take HRT for any reason, which I doubt will happen in our lifetimes.
But from the debate standpoint, I still think there are genetic components to it, in the same way there are genetic components for anything, including personality.
not saying genetics play literally 0 factor of course, just that even if it did it wouldnt mske these things illegitimate in my view.
I guess we will both stay with our views, then. Because If it is more or less purely nurture, I will detransition the moment I find out, so I can’t see that your way, sorry.
wokes are sleeper hitlers
yeah its so annoying and also just straight up reactionary a decent amount of the time
Im just saying to normies that trans women are biological women
we don’t live natural lives
this is just humancentric hubris. humans are very much a part of nature. everything that humans do will ultimately be to make more babies, because that’s the only way we can measure our species over time. no matter how civilized we pretend to be, we will always be chained to biology.
i don’t agree with many of the common conceptions of neurosex but i do believe in it because otherwise nobody would care about their bodies or be dysphoric. i don’t think it’s stored anywhere in the brain or body, specifically,—just like all of sex it exists as a suite of sex characteristics, probably far beyond our understanding of neurology. and for that reason i don’t believe it is malleable, to any significant extent, because it’s too widely incorporated into the entire psyche. so while i don’t believe in any faketrans/trutrans dichotomy, i also don’t think dysphoria is a product of nurture.
How on earth getting on HRT leads to more babies
it doesn’t… i was speaking on a species level. troons obviously aren’t making many babies, hence why the rest of the species wants us dead.
what i meant by that is that we arent bound by the rules of nature. not truly. not like the rest of the living species on this planet. our lives are so much more complex. theres parts of us dictated by nature, yes, that comes for free with being a biological lifeform, but we are not bound completely by nature anymore, and we havent for a long time
we are not bound completely by nature anymore, and we havent for a long time
how so? i truly don’t think there’s any way to separate humans from other animals that isn’t just drawing arbitrary human-biased lines in the sand. there’s no way to delineate exactly when humans stopped being “natural” because there is no natural. everything is nature.
idk, vaccines, gene editing, glasses, etc. all dont seem very natural. we live in places where its too cold or too hot for us too because of the advent of AC. improvements to water purification, mass industrialized agriculture allowing for population sizes far exceeding what would normally be possible, etc.
that’s still all arbitrary. it’s just environmental manipulation and adaptation, something all animals do—just not on the same scale. you still can’t call this transcending nature.
this just feels pedantic but i mean, sure ig? if youre going to define what is natural that broadly then sure, everything is natural. but then the word loses literally all meaning. we arent describing anything then
if you were just going to define nature as “not man-made” i would still have quibbles but i could accept it as a usable definition. but you said that humans were once bound by nature and now aren’t. so what is the delineation of natural and unnatural? why are bronze tools natural but hypodermic needles unnatural? like i get that this is kind of a pedantic “when does a hill become a mountain” thing but that’s what i’m getting at. that there is no meaningful way to define nature.
but again, then theres no meaningful way to define literally anything. all words and definitions are arbitrary. words dont have 100% factual, unarguable definitions. it just doesnt work that way. we made the words up, we get to define what they represent.
if something is natural just because it exists in the real world, then the word natural means nothing. the antonym of natural isnt virtual, its artificial. glasses do not occur in nature, they cannot exist without human intervention. bronze literally isnt natural either, its made by combining two different naturally occuring metals. there are no bronze deposits, and even if there were, they wouldnt form as hammers, weapons, hoes, etc.
theres gradients to all this. humans might not live completely unnatural lives, we still interact with the environment and world around us, but compared to every other species on the planet, our lives are definitely the most artificial.
