Amos Moses #fundie

Amos Moses #fundie christiannews.net

Ambulance Chaser:
A child with gender dysphoria doesn't determine their gender. They just know that they're in the wrong body. They don't choose it, they don't ask for it, and they don't want it. But they have it anyway.

Amos Moses:
No ....... they "FEEEEEL" they are in the wrong body ...... and their "FEEEEELINGS" are not a valid test ......... FAIL .............

Ambulance Chaser:
Okay, why don't you tell us all what you think the medical procedure for diagnosing gender dysphoria is?

Amos Moses:
you cannot diagnose "FEEELINGS" ........ they are not a true representation of reality ...... and if they are having trouble with reality ..... medicine is not the answer ............. and anyone trying to sell them anything like surgery to "fix it" is the worst snake oil salesman trying to make a buck off the unfortunate .......... and unfortunately .... there are any number of them ......

Ambulance Chaser:
Since you seem to be either ignoring the question or not understanding it, let's try this again.

A person is preparing to have gender reassignment surgery. What procedure led them to this point?

Amos Moses:
reliance on their "FEEEELINGS" which are not reliable as an indication of anything ...... how does a person "know" how the opposite sex "FEEEELS" when they are NOT the opposite sex ...... it is all a lie .......

20 comments

old comment by shy

I love how you use your patience of steel to debate these numbskulls, Ambulance Chaser, but might I make a suggestion: when people like this say the same thing over and over like a broken record, take whatever it is they're latching on to and use it against them. There are at least two tactics to do this here:

1. Point out transgender people wouldn't FEEEEEEEEL the way they do without some external force to motivate it.

2. Point out that one's standards of intellectual rigor and correctness is motivated by what FEEEEEEELS right. If it didn't FEEEEEEEEEL right or sufficient, they would either keep exploring and elaborating their current path of reasoning until it did, or they would abandon most of it and start over based on something else that FEEEEEEELS right (or at least like it might be right). No matter how hard someone tries to deny it, FEEEEEELINGS begin, end, and guide the process of analytical and logical thought. There is nothing 'wrong' with that, and it is unavoidable anyway. Appeal to emotion is a logical fallacy because it is wallowing in FEEEEEELINGs non-constructively or using them insincerely / manipulatively. This is essentially an elaboration of the first point: FEEEEEEELings and logic don't exist in vacuums impervious to reality or each other.

I kind of absorbed the art of debate by coming from a large politically active family on my mother's side.

old comment by shy

@Ambulance Chaser: Let me approach this from a different angle you'll better understand. The OP won't because they'll resist it, which is why I originally explained things the way I did in terms of relatively concrete consequences.

An objective, internally consistent external reality exists, and therefore logic, or what we conceive as logic, must also exist on an objective plane external to ourselves; however, our view and understanding of them is necessarily filtered through our embodied perception and cognition, i.e. what we know and understand is limited to our subjective experience, and our capacity to comprehend and form 'deeper' meaning from said subjective experience is further determined by our individual cognitive abilities and limitations. Subjective experience shapes our emotions and understanding of what we conceive as logic or being logical, making logic and emotion congruent to a large degree as well as mutually interdependent. We can't perceive, understand, or analyze objective truth (i.e. think logically) in a way independent of our subjective experience, which includes our emotions, and our very impetus to pursue logical thought, truth, and justice is provided by our subjective experience and internal disposition. (However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't at least try to reason objectively or pursue objective truth to the best of our ability.)

If I'm still not quite getting what I'm trying to say across or if you want to explore this further, I highly recommend the book Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction by Vyvyan Evans and Melanie Green. (The subject matter necessitates delving into this sort of thing, meaning a surprisingly large chunk of the book is philosophical navel-gazing about this matter rather than strictly linguistics itself.)

old comment by Creedence Leonore Gielgud

>and their "FEEEEELINGS" are not a valid test

Why not?

>you cannot diagnose "FEEELINGS"

Emotions, personal perception, ideas, beliefs, etc. are all the result of biochemistry in the brain. Literally everything that will ever go on in your mind is this biochemistry at work. It can be understood scientifically. We still have a long way to go in gaining complete understanding, but we have a better understanding of it today than we did 100 years ago. Some people's brain chemistry leads them to have gender dysphoria, others are lead to feel that the only way they can get personal validation is by disregarding and minimalizing the thoughts, perceptions, feelings, and experiences of others.

>they are not a true representation of reality

But they are one of the innate ways a human can manage to have any degree of understanding of that reality at all. It's possible, and perhaps even likely that all we think we know about reality, doesn't really reflect reality at all. In order to have any basis for attempting to understand it at all we must filter it through our brains, which are limited by their own physical capacity. Humans are emotional creatures, and humans are good at rational thought. These are our two ways of trying to wrap our brains around reality. You say that a person cannot experience gender dysphoria; people with gender dysphoria say that they do experience it. You may say that no one could possibly like apples; people who like apples would say that they do in fact like them. The reality is that there are people who experience gender dysphoria, and there are people who like apples. Whatever reality actually is, both groups are closer to being a true reflection of it than you are by denying the fact that they exist, when very clearly they do.

But if you prefer rational thought to emotion, fine. Rationally I can't see where people trying to alter their own bodies to resemble the gender they perceive themselves as being really affects me. They aren't bothering, or harming me, and therefore I see no reason why I should go out of my way to cause them even more grief and hardship than they already face. The world would be much better off if everyone minded their own business.

>and if they are having trouble with reality ..... medicine is not the answer

Does this apply to others, or just them? Because you could say that schizophrenics have trouble with reality. People with dyslexia have trouble with reality. People who have poor vision have trouble with reality. If medicine is not the answer to human health issues what exactly is? I mean aside from superstition, or other woo.

>how does a person "know" how the opposite sex "FEEEELS" when they are NOT the opposite sex

They don't. They do however know what it's like to be of one gender, but not of the corresponding sex they think that they should be. Gender and sex are not the same things. Sex is a physiological trait, while gender is a psychological one. Normally they correspond. Occasionally they do not. Modern medicine says, "hey, we can try to fix that and allow you to live a better, happier life, or at least make you feel more at home in your own body." You say, "NUH UH! FEELINGS DON'T COUNT UNLESS THEY"RE MY FEELINGS AND I FEEL LIKE MAKING STRANGERS LIVES NEEDLESSLY MISERABLE BECAUSE I'M AN ANGRY ASSHOLE!"

>.............

Ellipses do not work like this.