ADVERTISEMENT

Med Schools Are Now Denying Biological Sex

When I saw this thread title, I had several flippant dismissal responses in my head that I was expecting to see.

We’re missing:

“That settles it, I’m definitely not voting for them now!”

and

“Yeah, but is anyone dying?”
I expected Devil to instead go with, "I guess I'll worry about this when MY doctor's med school acquiesces."
 
Are you saying those without fingers are not people?

No but there is a normal amount of fingers and toes that one is born with and expected to have. Having more or less is considered a defect, potentially a disability. It's not that they are not human but we don't make the rules by the exception. Human beings are generally born with 10 fingers and 10 toes. Anything outside of this is a defect.

Human beings are also generally born either male or female. Anything outside of this is a defect. . . an exception.
 
No but there is a normal amount of fingers and toes that one is born with and expected to have. Having more or less is considered a defect, potentially a disability. It's not that they are not human but we don't make the rules by the exception. Human beings are generally born with 10 fingers and 10 toes. Anything outside of this is a defect.

Human beings are also generally born either male or female. Anything outside of this is a defect. . . an exception.
I know. I was joking.
 
Good discussion with a biologist on the subject. Nobody will take the time to listen, but wanted to point it out nonetheless.

 
His offense: using the term “pregnant women.”

“I said ‘when a woman is pregnant,’ which implies that only women can get pregnant and I most sincerely apologize to all of you.”
I didn't read a single word past this. Seems like "It's Science" is only important when trying to tell a Christian their God is a magical spaghetti monster in the sky.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoosierhawkeye
I remember back when there was debate over whether or not homosexuality was genetic. Many of those supportive of gay rights were quite keen on the idea that it was and eagerly touted bits of information and studies that provided evidence for the contention.

I couldn't help but think that this attachment to the idea was a response to the oppositions contention that being gay was a choice.

It turns out that genetics contribute a bit, likely, but isn't the whole story. But that, of course, is moot -- because being gay says nothing either way about your morality and character as a person.

And that's sort of how I feel about these arguments over biological sex where the trans movement is concerned. They're scrutinizing the notion of biological sex because the opposition can say "you're not a real woman" and reference in reference to their biology. They want to win that argument.

But it's all moot -- their central philosophy here is that regardless biology you can feel a certain way and be a certain way. They've already established that.
 
Someone made the observation a while back that upon achievement of gay marriage and (basically) broad acceptance of homosexuality (and its variations) societally that it was if all the energy from activists had to find somewhere to go.

And so we ended up with the trans/gender stuff.

The problem is that they didn't have that much to do. Generally, the people that accepted homosexuality accepted trans folk and the like, and those that didn't before still don't.

So we ended up with arguments over bathrooms, sports, and stuff like this.

We're not squabbling over basic acceptance anymore. We're into the gray zone on a lot of this stuff, edge case scenarios.

I think this is what you get when there aren't many frontiers of identity left to conquer.
I don’t think anyone was out advocating for transgenders in this instance. Fox Opinion just decided to drum up a new culture war.
 
I didn't read a single word past this. Seems like "It's Science" is only important when trying to tell a Christian their God is a magical spaghetti monster in the sky.
Conversely, many (most?) conservative leaning people have a hard time accepting climate change science, vaccine science, among many other topics. It goes both ways.
 
I don’t think anyone was out advocating for transgenders in this instance. Fox Opinion just decided to drum up a new culture war.
Yep. It's all a product of a conservative culture war. We shouldn't even be talking about people (especially doctors!) denying a sex binary. All kinds of sexes are capable of reproducing.
Females, males, flemales, malfs, femmemeals, malificents, etc.

B-b-but FOX!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aleister_Crowley
That's because it's nearly 3 hours long. Footnotes maybe?
It's a discussion of how the left has pushed "acceptance" so far as to overwhelm basic biological thought into what we're seeing here. You're seeing professors treading lightly on the subject (as what the OP originally posted here) in fear of being labeled insensitive at best, or transphobia more likely if they speak out about it.

The podcast is long, but well worth the listen. Most good discussions are going to be hard in 30 second soundbites.
 
Conversely, many (most?) conservative leaning people have a hard time accepting climate change science, vaccine science, among many other topics. It goes both ways.
Which is sad.

A. God is the OG scientist. Had an astrophysicist speak at our church...shared his testimony of transition from Atheism to Christianity due to his scientific research (uber short explanation).

B. Climate change is real...kind of a "duh" at this point.

C. Vaccine science is astounding and I seriously want to punch anti-vaxers in the face. (and pray for them, of course)

Next....
 
I do believe it is considered hate speech to suggest that surgery, hormones, etc. are necessary. If someone tells you they are something you simply need to listen and believe. Of course, that depends on where you fall on the intersectionality matrix. Some identities are more equal than others.
I can't even keep up with all the acceptable language, not that I waste any time trying.

But yeah, to think that necessary would likely be labeled "hate speech" (silly me). But for those who do think such AND have an inkling to do so great deference must be paid.
 
Which is sad.

A. God is the OG scientist. Had an astrophysicist speak at our church...shared his testimony of transition from Atheism to Christianity due to his scientific research (uber short explanation).

B. Climate change is real...kind of a "duh" at this point.

C. Vaccine science is astounding and I seriously want to punch anti-vaxers in the face. (and pray for them, of course)

Next....
A) Well, as far as scientists go he's certainly in the minority. But good for him. If he can keep his faith in a higher power from hindering his scientific research, more power to him.

B) I should have specified, human caused climate change and it's very real impact on our current and future climate. If you're on board with that, more power to you. I'm not sure that's very common with many on the right.

C) Again, good on you. It seems to be a touchy subject for many on the right currently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alaskanseminole
Yep. It's all a product of a conservative culture war. We shouldn't even be talking about people (especially doctors!) denying a sex binary. All kinds of sexes are capable of reproducing.
Females, males, flemales, malfs, femmemeals, malificents, etc.

B-b-but FOX!
Didn’t this whole transgender athletes think start with Tucker?
 
Didn’t this whole transgender athletes think start with Tucker?
Yep. The whole thing started with Tucker. There was no talk of it before. No one was saying "trans women are biological women" before Tucker.

MV5BMTIxOTg0MzExNl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwNTI0NTA5._V1_.jpg
 
A) Well, as far as scientists go he's certainly in the minority. But good for him. If he can keep his faith in a higher power from hindering his scientific research, more power to him.

B) I should have specified, human caused climate change and it's very real impact on our current and future climate. If you're on board with that, more power to you. I'm not sure that's very common with many on the right.

C) Again, good on you. It seems to be a touchy subject for many on the right currently.
A) - I agree with you
B) - I absolutely agree with you
C) - Sad isn't it?

Caveat: I'm not a Republican. I'm a right-leaning moderate Independent. I used to be a Republican. However, that party was assassinated by Trump, so I no longer have a party.
 
A) - I agree with you
B) - I absolutely agree with you
C) - Sad isn't it?

Caveat: I'm not a Republican. I'm a right-leaning moderate Independent. I used to be a Republican. However, that party was assassinated by Trump, so I no longer have a party.
Good deal. I'm somewhere between a libertarian and moderate, so pretty much everyone hates me. Cheers!

But for real, download that podcast and listen to it when you have time. Good stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alaskanseminole
I’m guessing the school/hospital is placing a lot of emphasis on this and these doctors are trying to recode many years of how they previously spoke.

It’s got be tough on them to switch mid-career, but good on them for trying.
Seems like a brilliant idea that the administrators hold the educators hostage aCcOuNtAbLe on matters of hard science like gender and non-binaryism. This is how science learns, right @Rudolph ?
 

Well I don’t know, ask the permanently aggrieved crowd who promote this horseshit. They are the ones who will not stop until their intolerant views are conformed to and anyone who disagrees is ostracized or fired from their job. Obviously this professor believed his job was on the line for saying such a trivial thing as he did. The fact that the OPs event even took place offends me.
 
In 2019, the New England Journal of Medicine reported the case of a 32-year-old transgender man who went to an ER complaining of abdominal pain. While the patient disclosed he was transgender, his medical records did not. He was simply a man. The triage nurse determined that the patient, who was obese, was in pain because he’d stopped taking a medication meant to relieve hypertension. This was no emergency, she decided. She was wrong: The patient was, in fact, pregnant and in labor. By the time hospital staff realized that, it was too late. The baby was dead. And the patient, despite his own shock at being pregnant, was shattered.

How can someone not read this and conclude this person is very obviously mentally ill? Anyone want to help me understand this situation?
 
How can someone not read this and conclude this person is very obviously mentally ill? Anyone want to help me understand this situation?
I'm not sure where the mentally ill part is. I've heard of women not knowing they were pregnant right up to delivery a number of times. It happens.
 
How can someone not read this and conclude this person is very obviously mentally ill? Anyone want to help me understand this situation?
I blame this on the triage nurse. Her His Their ignorance, at best, and likely outright bigotry resulted in this outcome. The nurse should have immediately realized MEN CAN BE PREGGERS!
 
Exactly.

Seriously, Day-star, your kid came back from semester a couple of years ago and, instead of challenging the orthodoxy the were spitting, you just went with it, right?
If what the speaker said distracted me from the overall thing I was there to learn about than that is an opportunity wasted. If my son brought this to my attention I would tell him the same thing.
 
Being offended is subjective. One can be offended by anything if they really want to be offended. This is not a good basis for which to conduct our social affairs.


I think there is sort of a natural offense, people can be offended, and it matters. But anymore there seems to be so much offense that is wrapped up in your political identity, your tribe, your group. There's a currency attached to being offended, it gets you something when you're in that group. It's a way to be. So to me we're dealing with a lot of synthetic offense anymore, learned offense, if that makes sense. That's the stuff that I just can't respect too much. Yes, ultimately offense is subjective, but not all offense is created equal.
 
Well, there ya go.

Okay follow me here. Does the fact that I’m offended make me morally superior to you?

It seems the permanently offended crowd believe their level of intolerance(their being offended) equates to righteousness. Where even Questioning the dogma of “transgenderism” is blasphemous.

Starting to see any parallels here Mr Devil?
 
If what the speaker said distracted me from the overall thing I was there to learn about than that is an opportunity wasted. If my son brought this to my attention I would tell him the same thing.
You were there to learn that biological sex is a construct and any mention of such should be eschewed lest a non-binary-identifying individual is offended/traumatized by the mere mention of scientific reality.

"Your ass used to be beautiful."
 
I'm not sure where the mentally ill part is. I've heard of women not knowing they were pregnant right up to delivery a number of times. It happens.

Yeah but the woman claimed to be a dude. Which caused the confusion in the attending nurse and resulted in the baby’s death. The mental illness of the transgender caused the “man” to deny the reality of her situation and the baby to die. That’s messed up. The transgender crowd should be held responsible for enabling this person’s delusion and keeping them sick.
 
Yeah but the woman claimed to be a dude. Which caused the confusion in the attending nurse and resulted in the baby’s death. The mental illness of the transgender caused the “man” to deny the reality of her situation and the baby to die. That’s messed up. The transgender crowd should be held responsible for enabling this person’s delusion and keeping them sick.
Sounded like the person claimed they were trans, but the medical staff just looked at the gender on the chart and treated as such, which led to the issue. I think that's a good example of why sex needs to be recorded and used appropriately in medical settings.
 
Yeah but the woman claimed to be a dude. Which caused the confusion in the attending nurse and resulted in the baby’s death. The mental illness of the transgender caused the “man” to deny the reality of her situation and the baby to die. That’s messed up. The transgender crowd should be held responsible for enabling this person’s delusion and keeping them sick.
I think a problem is that quite a few loud people are militant dipshits about this the way that so many Twitter (and HROT) "allies" are. There are people who identify as transgender (a silent majority of an infinitesimal minority? Who knows?) who also are cognizant of biology and realize they are male or female and would just like to go about their lives.

But, of course, the middle-aged men and "progressive" women of HROT are thankfully here to tell them that they're simply confused and ashamed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Greenway4Prez
ADVERTISEMENT