Eva, that just isn't the case. Your response is made up of different narratives that are popular, different judgments that aren't true in themselves. The first inaccurately minimizes what one's sex is. It's not just something "inside people's underwear," that is, hidden away and a private inconsequential matter. One's physiological sex is very real to one oneself and important to one's relations with other people. Even with taking hormones starting in adolescence, an extremely risky thing to do and in which the children doing it today are guinea pigs, isn't going to change the physiology that much. The organs, skeletons and muscles of men and women are different. This is why the medical community has realized that doing medical studies only on men, and believing the results were the same for women, as they did for decades, has been a huge mistake. Then, on the other side, it is against freedom of one's conscience for the government to try to compel people to deny reality - that is, this physical reality of the sexes (of course, authorities like physicians and law enforcement still get to go by reality). It's a dangerous overreach of government to force adults to play "let's pretend" what's untrue is true, and to be participants in someone else's fantasy. Where does the line get drawn after that? Medical science shows that men and women are physiologically very different, yet that reality isn't to be upheld? That opens the door to forcing people with the full force of the law to accept that black is white and up is down, if some rationale can be found for it, and you can believe one always can be. That's what I've seen now over a number of decades. Take a look at this video from a Christian group in which secular university students were interviewed on identity. They are willing to accept that one person can identify as almost anything:
view the rest of the comments →
Psalm100 ago
Eva, that just isn't the case. Your response is made up of different narratives that are popular, different judgments that aren't true in themselves. The first inaccurately minimizes what one's sex is. It's not just something "inside people's underwear," that is, hidden away and a private inconsequential matter. One's physiological sex is very real to one oneself and important to one's relations with other people. Even with taking hormones starting in adolescence, an extremely risky thing to do and in which the children doing it today are guinea pigs, isn't going to change the physiology that much. The organs, skeletons and muscles of men and women are different. This is why the medical community has realized that doing medical studies only on men, and believing the results were the same for women, as they did for decades, has been a huge mistake. Then, on the other side, it is against freedom of one's conscience for the government to try to compel people to deny reality - that is, this physical reality of the sexes (of course, authorities like physicians and law enforcement still get to go by reality). It's a dangerous overreach of government to force adults to play "let's pretend" what's untrue is true, and to be participants in someone else's fantasy. Where does the line get drawn after that? Medical science shows that men and women are physiologically very different, yet that reality isn't to be upheld? That opens the door to forcing people with the full force of the law to accept that black is white and up is down, if some rationale can be found for it, and you can believe one always can be. That's what I've seen now over a number of decades. Take a look at this video from a Christian group in which secular university students were interviewed on identity. They are willing to accept that one person can identify as almost anything:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfO1veFs6Ho