Page 2 of 3 [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


What do people in general use as the criteria for Whiteness and Man-ness?
If a person is 100% white, then they're white 14%  14%  [ 7 ]
If a person is >75% white, then they're white 8%  8%  [ 4 ]
>50% white = white 10%  10%  [ 5 ]
>25% white = white 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Whatever race you identify as, you are 8%  8%  [ 4 ]
Only a manly man is a man, dude 8%  8%  [ 4 ]
Gay men are (strictly speaking) men 16%  16%  [ 8 ]
Trans men are men 8%  8%  [ 4 ]
Effeminate men are men 14%  14%  [ 7 ]
If you identify as a man, you're a man 16%  16%  [ 8 ]
Total votes : 51

kamiyu910
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,036
Location: California

17 Jun 2015, 5:15 pm

adifferentname wrote:
kamiyu910 wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
kamiyu910 wrote:
As for "why the white man always singled out"... If the places of power were switched, it would be someone else singled out.


A black man sits in the Whitehouse, women outnumber men in colleges, have greatly increased numbers in boardrooms and young women are now out-earning men. Despite this, anti-white male sentiment appears to be increasing exponentially - especially among those aforementioned young women.

In short, I remain sceptical.


That's because society still views white males to be in power. Whether it's true or not is beside the point. People want something to blame.


Just me, or has the goal got smaller?


And with more infighting, too. People are nitpicking a lot more and turning on their own groups. I recently watched a group of female SJWs tear itself apart because they couldn't agree on racism, or sexism, or the whole mean girl attitude and some people got too power hungry and bullied the others. They don't even realize that more often than not, they are their own enemy.


_________________
Your Aspie score: 171 of 200
Your Neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 40 of 200


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

18 Jun 2015, 1:22 am

Aye. There's a definite trend towards eating their own.



Lukecash12
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,033

20 Jun 2015, 3:36 am

I didn't agree with any of the options in the poll, and this is why:

1. "White" isn't a proper designation and you can't gauge percentages of "whiteness". It is just as puerile and facile to determine anything about a person because they have pale skin, than it is to do so because someone has skin with more pigmentation in it. "Race" is an outdated scientific concept, that has been plaguing the public consciousness for far too long and I believe it is a modern variant of believing in a flat earth.

People have ethnicity. Ethnic groups are defined and identified using culture. There are infinitely more genetic phenotypes than those involved in skin pigment and bodily proportions, and the sum of these other phenotypes is of infinitely more consequence than these few phenotypes, which we have an inordinately ignorant preoccupation with. Anthropologists have been in agreement that there is no such thing as a "race" for decades now, and the death of that idea really started to gain ground in the 1940's among anthropologists.

Why is it that I am somehow a "majority" because of the pigment of my skin? My Irish ethnicity actually makes me a minority in America. Does my skin pigment somehow mean that physically and mentally I have a lot in common with other "white" people? Why is it that when I fill out demographic surveys for the census and for employment studies, there is a miasma of options for other people but I'm just a "white/caucasian"?

"Caucasian" is an incredibly outdated term that was developed in 18th century Germany, it didn't apply only to people of the same skin pigment, and other people would be very offended if they had to fill in a box saying "mongoloid", or "negroid" which were contemporary terms used in conjunction with "caucasoid" to describe the three primary "races". So suffice it to say that people in general today are staggeringly backwards regarding their understanding of this issue.

2. "Gender" is a cultural concept and it is purely a construction of the human mind. Male and female are biological sexes, not "genders" and the only biological basis we can find for "gender" is the impact of body dysmorphia (aka BDD) on identity issues.

This is another "flat-earth-ism" that plagues the general consciousness and has been hampering a doctor's ability to make medical decisions. The same university in Chicago that began performing sex "change" operations has come out with a thirty year study demonstrating a marked increase in suicide rates, drug addiction, etc. and most importantly the symptoms of BDD, in the vast majority of cases, do not subside but rather become worse instead. This is because we are performing drastic surgical procedures on people and then giving them an excessive amount of hormone therapy, which for obvious reasons can be emotionally confusing and have a number of serious physical and mental side effects. Also, this is because we are trying to treat every other part of that person's body but their brain.

For some backwards reason, even though there are mounting medical findings on this, it is not "politically correct" to suggest these people receive cognitive behavioral therapy or possibly prescribe them a medication to deal with what are mental symptoms. The mounting popularity of this "politically correct" position on the issue is understandable, but the actual results of these medical measures have had negative results. It is not helping these people because you can't change how someone understands their "gender" with drugs. There is no physical basis for it after all.


_________________
There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.
Nahj ul-Balāgha by Ali bin Abu-Talib


Lukecash12
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,033

20 Jun 2015, 3:55 am

kamiyu910 wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
kamiyu910 wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
kamiyu910 wrote:
As for "why the white man always singled out"... If the places of power were switched, it would be someone else singled out.


A black man sits in the Whitehouse, women outnumber men in colleges, have greatly increased numbers in boardrooms and young women are now out-earning men. Despite this, anti-white male sentiment appears to be increasing exponentially - especially among those aforementioned young women.

In short, I remain sceptical.


That's because society still views white males to be in power. Whether it's true or not is beside the point. People want something to blame.


Just me, or has the goal got smaller?


And with more infighting, too. People are nitpicking a lot more and turning on their own groups. I recently watched a group of female SJWs tear itself apart because they couldn't agree on racism, or sexism, or the whole mean girl attitude and some people got too power hungry and bullied the others. They don't even realize that more often than not, they are their own enemy.


They are impoverished and set upon by their own ignorance. Giant minds made giant contributions in order that they could even have the discussions that they do, live like they do, and expect the living conditions that they do, and in return for this gift they basically start scribbling in a coloring book. As they scribble all over the book they indignantly wait for us to look at it like a Rembrant painting, Goethe's Faust play, or Plato's Symposium.

There is a disease with ancient roots still plaguing people today, who have been gifted all of the educational opportunities in the world, and this disease is apathy and incredible narcissism. Rigorous thinking and self discipline is seen as draconian. What they don't realize is that they themselves gave Socrates the hemlock, because they are continuing to perpetuate such madness today. The modern western culture has evolved from a bastion of hard fought progress, into a vehicle of senseless flat-earth-isms. Their basic lack of self discipline renders them as effectively primitive as a cave dweller spearing a mammoth, because they will never seriously contribute to our understanding of the issues as a species.

This kind of apathy galls me because my grandfather basically starved his way through college, all because he was hungry to educate himself. The impetuosity necessary to spit on the gifts of generations such as his, is staggering indeed.


_________________
There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.
Nahj ul-Balāgha by Ali bin Abu-Talib


The_Truthteller
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

Joined: 21 Jun 2015
Age: 34
Posts: 18

21 Jun 2015, 2:57 pm

jrjones9933, if you and anybody else wants to find out why the "White" (The proper name is Aryan) man is always singled out, head my thread titled "To Everyone, This Is Of The Utmost Importance".

Yours sincerely, The_Truthteller



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

26 Jun 2015, 10:09 pm

Lukecash12 wrote:
I didn't agree with any of the options in the poll, and this is why:

1. "White" isn't a proper designation and you can't gauge percentages of "whiteness". It is just as puerile and facile to determine anything about a person because they have pale skin, than it is to do so because someone has skin with more pigmentation in it. "Race" is an outdated scientific concept, that has been plaguing the public consciousness for far too long and I believe it is a modern variant of believing in a flat earth.

People have ethnicity. Ethnic groups are defined and identified using culture. There are infinitely more genetic phenotypes than those involved in skin pigment and bodily proportions, and the sum of these other phenotypes is of infinitely more consequence than these few phenotypes, which we have an inordinately ignorant preoccupation with. Anthropologists have been in agreement that there is no such thing as a "race" for decades now, and the death of that idea really started to gain ground in the 1940's among anthropologists.

Why is it that I am somehow a "majority" because of the pigment of my skin? My Irish ethnicity actually makes me a minority in America. Does my skin pigment somehow mean that physically and mentally I have a lot in common with other "white" people? Why is it that when I fill out demographic surveys for the census and for employment studies, there is a miasma of options for other people but I'm just a "white/caucasian"?

"Caucasian" is an incredibly outdated term that was developed in 18th century Germany, it didn't apply only to people of the same skin pigment, and other people would be very offended if they had to fill in a box saying "mongoloid", or "negroid" which were contemporary terms used in conjunction with "caucasoid" to describe the three primary "races". So suffice it to say that people in general today are staggeringly backwards regarding their understanding of this issue.

2. "Gender" is a cultural concept and it is purely a construction of the human mind. Male and female are biological sexes, not "genders" and the only biological basis we can find for "gender" is the impact of body dysmorphia (aka BDD) on identity issues.

This is another "flat-earth-ism" that plagues the general consciousness and has been hampering a doctor's ability to make medical decisions. The same university in Chicago that began performing sex "change" operations has come out with a thirty year study demonstrating a marked increase in suicide rates, drug addiction, etc. and most importantly the symptoms of BDD, in the vast majority of cases, do not subside but rather become worse instead. This is because we are performing drastic surgical procedures on people and then giving them an excessive amount of hormone therapy, which for obvious reasons can be emotionally confusing and have a number of serious physical and mental side effects. Also, this is because we are trying to treat every other part of that person's body but their brain.

For some backwards reason, even though there are mounting medical findings on this, it is not "politically correct" to suggest these people receive cognitive behavioral therapy or possibly prescribe them a medication to deal with what are mental symptoms. The mounting popularity of this "politically correct" position on the issue is understandable, but the actual results of these medical measures have had negative results. It is not helping these people because you can't change how someone understands their "gender" with drugs. There is no physical basis for it after all.

I overall agree. I expected people here to have considered opinions on the subject, unlike people in general.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

27 Jun 2015, 6:27 am

I have never witnessed anyone "singling out white people" in real life.

In Detroit, at the "beggar spots" around the casinos, you can often see middle age white men on their knees with signs begging for money.

Though, perhaps someone will argue it's their "white priviledge" that got them those prime spots.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

28 Jun 2015, 3:07 am

Lukecash12 wrote:
This is another "flat-earth-ism" that plagues the general consciousness and has been hampering a doctor's ability to make medical decisions. The same university in Chicago that began performing sex "change" operations has come out with a thirty year study demonstrating a marked increase in suicide rates, drug addiction, etc. and most importantly the symptoms of BDD, in the vast majority of cases, do not subside but rather become worse instead. This is because we are performing drastic surgical procedures on people and then giving them an excessive amount of hormone therapy, which for obvious reasons can be emotionally confusing and have a number of serious physical and mental side effects. Also, this is because we are trying to treat every other part of that person's body but their brain.


Interestingly, I have been up and down Pubmed on this subject and have not come across any "thirty year study" out of Chicago. In 2011, a study was published that came out of Sweden, which compared post-op transsexual people to controls in the general population and was a follow-up over a 30-year period, but in that study since the post-op transsexual people were not compared to pre-op transsexual controls or to how they were before surgery one cannot draw any conclusions regarding the effectiveness of sex reassignmnt (emphsis added):

Sweden study wrote:
For the purpose of evaluating the safety of sex reassignment in terms of morbidity and mortality, however, it is reasonable to compare sex reassigned persons with matched population controls. The caveat with this design is that transsexual persons before sex reassignment might differ from healthy controls (although this bias can be statistically corrected for by adjusting for baseline differences). It is therefore important to note that the current study is only informative with respect to transsexuals persons health after sex reassignment; no inferences can be drawn as to the effectiveness of sex reassignment as a treatment for transsexualism. In other words, the results should not be interpreted such as sex reassignment per se increases morbidity and mortality. Things might have been even worse without sex reassignment. As an analogy, similar studies have found increased somatic morbidity, suicide rate, and overall mortality for patients treated for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.[39], [40] This is important information, but it does not follow that mood stabilizing treatment or antipsychotic treatment is the culprit.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043071/

If this was not the study you meant, then please provide a citation.

For your next paragraph:

Lukecash12 wrote:
For some backwards reason, even though there are mounting medical findings on this, it is not "politically correct" to suggest these people receive cognitive behavioral therapy or possibly prescribe them a medication to deal with what are mental symptoms. The mounting popularity of this "politically correct" position on the issue is understandable, but the actual results of these medical measures have had negative results. It is not helping these people because you can't change how someone understands their "gender" with drugs. There is no physical basis for it after all.


Cognitive behavioral therapy, medication to "cure" severe, persistent gender dysphoria in adults, or as you call it sex dysmorphia? I don't think there are any "mounting medical findings" at all. In fact, I think evidence for this approach is close to non-existent. The APA in its 2012 literature review mentions this (PDF; emphasis added):

APA literature review wrote:
The possibility of stopping the process of gender transition prior to completion, or of reversing some of the physical changes that have been attained, has gained more acceptance in recent years. Some individuals find that a measure of bodily change, without genital surgery, clarifies their understanding of their gender identity and desired gender presentation. For example, some adults who begin FTM transition discontinue androgen use after some physical masculinization has been achieved, finding that a masculine female (butch) identity is more authentically representative of the self than living as a man. Some adults who initially present with transgender concerns decide, during the process of psychotherapy, not to proceed with any form of public gender transition (31). This can be a reasonable outcome to an exploratory psychotherapy, but elimination or “correction” of transgender identity is no longer considered a reasonable therapeutic goal. Pfafflin and colleagues (48, 127), for example, describe the evolution in treatment of gender dysphoria from historic psychoanalytic approaches aimed at achieving gender congruence through resolution of presumed intrapsychic conflict, to a contemporary model of offering psychotherapy or mental health evaluations that are often followed by hormonal treatments and surgeries.


http://www.psych.org/File%20Library/Lea ... 12_GID.pdf


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

28 Jun 2015, 10:25 am

Since we've moved beyond discussion of general opinion (if we ever arrived there) into individual opinions, here's my answer to the question in the title:

The degree of feeling singled out corresponds directly to the narrowness of the definition. The concept creates the feeling.

I just take people as they ask me to, and then examine evidence as it accumulates.

On the topic of BDD, and the medical treatment thereof, I'll leave the details to doctors, but I think they should have a frank discussion of all the good research with the patient. Then they should do what the patient wants unless they expect to cause harm.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

28 Jun 2015, 8:13 pm

This is why.


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


kamiyu910
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,036
Location: California

28 Jun 2015, 9:15 pm

AspieOtaku wrote:
This is why.


The fact that his wallpaper seems to be reversed and upside down is really distracting to me... 8O

Also, the fact that humans are human and all humans suck... there is no one above reproach. I have a hard time when anyone singles any group out. Does that actually work, to single a group out and call them worse than others?


_________________
Your Aspie score: 171 of 200
Your Neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 40 of 200


AspieOtaku
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,051
Location: San Jose

28 Jun 2015, 11:21 pm

kamiyu910 wrote:
AspieOtaku wrote:
This is why.


The fact that his wallpaper seems to be reversed and upside down is really distracting to me... 8O

Also, the fact that humans are human and all humans suck... there is no one above reproach. I have a hard time when anyone singles any group out. Does that actually work, to single a group out and call them worse than others?
Apparently Allah aka God hates White people because apparently all white people are descendants of Essau and are instantly devils at birth!


_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList


Lukecash12
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,033

05 Jul 2015, 8:13 pm

beneficii wrote:
Interestingly, I have been up and down Pubmed on this subject and have not come across any "thirty year study" out of Chicago. In 2011, a study was published that came out of Sweden, which compared post-op transsexual people to controls in the general population and was a follow-up over a 30-year period, but in that study since the post-op transsexual people were not compared to pre-op transsexual controls or to how they were before surgery one cannot draw any conclusions regarding the effectiveness of sex reassignmnt (emphsis added):

Quote:
For the purpose of evaluating the safety of sex reassignment in terms of morbidity and mortality, however, it is reasonable to compare sex reassigned persons with matched population controls. The caveat with this design is that transsexual persons before sex reassignment might differ from healthy controls (although this bias can be statistically corrected for by adjusting for baseline differences). It is therefore important to note that the current study is only informative with respect to transsexuals persons health after sex reassignment; no inferences can be drawn as to the effectiveness of sex reassignment as a treatment for transsexualism. In other words, the results should not be interpreted such as sex reassignment per se increases morbidity and mortality. Things might have been even worse without sex reassignment. As an analogy, similar studies have found increased somatic morbidity, suicide rate, and overall mortality for patients treated for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.[39], [40] This is important information, but it does not follow that mood stabilizing treatment or antipsychotic treatment is the culprit.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043071/

If this was not the study you meant, then please provide a citation.


http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/boo ... 83192.html
http://www.ssa.uchicago.edu/contemporar ... ndividuals

You're right, I'm sorry if I was being disingenuous and you have every reason to believe that I never read such a study. I thought I had and I'm sure that I was probably mistaken because I couldn't find it when I looked it up in several different departments at the University of Chicago.

What I did find was these two that I've referred to you, and a whole host of others suggesting that it is more of a psychological and cultural phenomenon than a pathological phenomenon. Also I honestly wonder how many trans people are doing now after many of them have been post op for a long time now, and would very much like to find such a study because I'm open to whatever it might suggest. However, I don't take it as a foregone conclusion that such a drastic procedure and all of the hormone treatments will necessarily help people deal with what appears to be a psychological issue.

Quote:
Cognitive behavioral therapy, medication to "cure" severe, persistent gender dysphoria in adults, or as you call it sex dysmorphia? I don't think there are any "mounting medical findings" at all. In fact, I think evidence for this approach is close to non-existent. The APA in its 2012 literature review mentions this (PDF; emphasis added):

Quote:
The possibility of stopping the process of gender transition prior to completion, or of reversing some of the physical changes that have been attained, has gained more acceptance in recent years. Some individuals find that a measure of bodily change, without genital surgery, clarifies their understanding of their gender identity and desired gender presentation. For example, some adults who begin FTM transition discontinue androgen use after some physical masculinization has been achieved, finding that a masculine female (butch) identity is more authentically representative of the self than living as a man. Some adults who initially present with transgender concerns decide, during the process of psychotherapy, not to proceed with any form of public gender transition (31). This can be a reasonable outcome to an exploratory psychotherapy, but elimination or “correction” of transgender identity is no longer considered a reasonable therapeutic goal. Pfafflin and colleagues (48, 127), for example, describe the evolution in treatment of gender dysphoria from historic psychoanalytic approaches aimed at achieving gender congruence through resolution of presumed intrapsychic conflict, to a contemporary model of offering psychotherapy or mental health evaluations that are often followed by hormonal treatments and surgeries.


Interesting, thank you. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't suggesting that we knew how to eliminate or correct the condition, or that it would be preferable to do so for that matter. What I am suggesting is that I don't see any reason we should be sure such drastic measures are helping rather than hurting people.


_________________
There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.
Nahj ul-Balāgha by Ali bin Abu-Talib


Lukecash12
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,033

05 Jul 2015, 8:22 pm

jrjones9933 wrote:
Since we've moved beyond discussion of general opinion (if we ever arrived there) into individual opinions, here's my answer to the question in the title:

The degree of feeling singled out corresponds directly to the narrowness of the definition. The concept creates the feeling.

I just take people as they ask me to, and then examine evidence as it accumulates.

On the topic of BDD, and the medical treatment thereof, I'll leave the details to doctors, but I think they should have a frank discussion of all the good research with the patient. Then they should do what the patient wants unless they expect to cause harm.


This is exactly what I am concerned about. Doctors should at least cause no harm. And I've been wondering if many trans people have been going through with such measures only because of the exposure that the idea has had, that it has helped many such people and lots of doctors are now recommending it. Like a placebo, it may be causing them to want something that might never had occurred to them.

But keep in mind that most of that last paragraph is speculative, and some post op trans opinions (on what prompted them to do what they did in the first place, whether or not they had entertained the thought previous to any exposure to the idea) as well as studies of the consequences for all the people that have gone through with it, is sorely needed. I hope my speculations here don't offend any such people, but I feel they are valid concerns.


_________________
There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.
Nahj ul-Balāgha by Ali bin Abu-Talib


xenocity
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Dec 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,282
Location: Metro Detroit Michigan

05 Jul 2015, 11:05 pm

Does your definition of white include these ancestries?

*Russian
*Eastern European
*Slavic
*Irish
*Spanish/Hispanic

etc...

Anyways the white man caused global warming, global poverty, numerous economic depressions, numerous financial depressions, numerous colonies, numerous diseases, numerous global wars, etc...

All other groups wanted to live in harmony, but can't because it would run the risk of ceding full power to the white man on a global scale.


_________________
Something.... Weird... Something...


kamiyu910
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,036
Location: California

06 Jul 2015, 12:13 am

xenocity wrote:
Does your definition of white include these ancestries?

*Russian
*Eastern European
*Slavic
*Irish
*Spanish/Hispanic

etc...

Anyways the white man caused global warming, global poverty, numerous economic depressions, numerous financial depressions, numerous colonies, numerous diseases, numerous global wars, etc...

All other groups wanted to live in harmony, but can't because it would run the risk of ceding full power to the white man on a global scale.


I can't tell if you're serious, or satire...


_________________
Your Aspie score: 171 of 200
Your Neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 40 of 200