The Instigator
Grandwizard99
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Briss
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Can you argue against this about gender

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/23/2018 Category: Health
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 579 times Debate No: 119125
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Grandwizard99

Con

I was told that one cannot argue or debate or even disagree when it comes to gender issues such as transmen being biological men. If someone states that a transman is a biological man its plain incorrect but i was told its immoral to argue against it. Anyone support this point that you can't argue against it?
Briss

Pro

Hi there. I want to make it quite clear that I believe that it is perfectly fine for one to argue the validity of trans people on the basis of biology. However, I wanted to make an interesting debate to I'm going to argue against what I believe because why the hell not. So I want to be incredibly clear. The views I am about to express are not the views I actually hold.

You have to consider the psychological applications that come with arguing against whether or not trans people are actually transgender or if they are still biologically the gender they were born of. This constant recurring argument has quite a negative impact on the trans community; after all, Trans people are nearly 9X more likely to commit suicide than any other group. This is clearly because of the discrimination that they feel in being told (and systematically prevented from) identifying as their chosen gender. The problem is not of whether or not these people actually are the gender they claim to be (that's a debate for another time) but whether or not they need to be told constantly by society that they are not what they claim to be.

Secondly, Gender is just a construct anyways. I mean, You have to consider that gender is determined on the basis of sexual reproductive organs that one has, Which reflects ones hormonal levels and is a telltale sign as to whether or not one has XY or XX chromosomes. But what about those with more that two chromosomes (or YY chromosomes), Or people born with multiple genetalia (both of which happens)? Is the existence of these two groups not enough to prove that the gender classification system we have now is not sufficient in including all gender classifications of people? Gender is a social construct, So we should change it to be more inclusive of individuals who are not strictly male or female, But also those who are intersex, Non binary, And transitioning to other genders.

ONCE AGAIN. . . I DO NOT HOLD ANY OF THE VIEWS I JUST EXPRESSED. . . But I beg you to please treat it as if I had seriously presented what I've just said as actual debate points (just to keep the debate interesting), And I will try and continue to argue your opposition.
Debate Round No. 1
Grandwizard99

Con

Yeah but my whole point was that arguing about it is okay and not inherently offensive. I call a transman a man and a transwoman a woman but i won't call them a biological man/woman because they are just not. Why call them trans if they are biological. And when it comes to people who are born with unusual features they are just people who are born like that. They don't change the current definition of gender or sex since they are abnormalities. Anyone can say or think that they are something else than what other people see or science tells but they are often not logical or accurate. Just because you say you have no sex or gender doesn't make it a fact even if you are offended and suicidal when someone questions it.
Briss

Pro

Ah okay thank you I understand now, And apologize for the confusion. And as I am playing Devils advocate, Naturally that means I must debate to the contrary.

"arguing about it is okay and not inherently offensive": First off, Something being okay or not is subjective and can be disregarded is an irrelevant premise in the context of this debate. That being said, Let me ask you this. If people started arguing about whether or not you are a whatever you are (sorry I don't know what gender or ethnicity you are) would that not be inherently offensive and not okay? I mean to clarify, Offensiveness is a choice; it is one's choice to respond to something with being offended. But another thing that is true is that certain things said or done can have a greater or lesser likelihood of offending or not offending someone. For example it is a choice to either laugh at or roil in anger at the portrayal of black people in Jim Crow era media propaganda, But it is more likely for you take offense at such content (despite the contents intentions being of comedy) due to its racist undertones. Likewise, When you argue whether or not a trans person is this or that biologically or socially or whatever, Your intentions may be to simply resolve a controversial issue but it is also one that is prone to offending individuals of that community. Thus one should not debate such issues as it is inconsiderate of how trans people might feel.

"Just because you say you have no sex or gender doesn't make it a fact even if you are offended and suicidal when someone questions it. " I don't think you understand why I chose to use the suicide statistic. I didn't say anything about whether or not ones belief of what sex or gender they are is a fact or not. If someone decides they are a fruit roll up tomorrow we shouldn't debate them on this. This isn't because they are truly a fruit roll up (obviously they aren't) but because if you do question them or argue their gender they are more prone to feeling discriminated against and having suicidal thoughts, Etc. , Which is more important than objective fact.

Though you were quick to critique my second point, I noticed you skirted around my first with barely a comment.

'I call a transman a man and a transwoman a woman but i won't call them a biological man/woman because they are just not. Why call them trans if they are biological. " What makes one biologically one thing or another? These people are not biologically either or, And you and I aren't biologically either either. A person biologically has two (or more) chromosomes. That's it. And if we want to call people with one set of chromosomes male and the other female then okay but this is just a social construct, And does not mean that one is actually that thing.

"And when it comes to people who are born with unusual features they are just people who are born like that. They don't change the current definition of gender or sex since they are abnormalities. " Once again I don't think you understand what I was trying to say. I was pointing out that gender is constructed on the basis of two distinctive categories decides upon by two common chromosomal attributes. However, There are more combinations of chromosomes than just two. So what gender do these people belong to? I personally believe (I don't actually) that we should reinstitute our definitions of what gender is to include these people who are clearly neither male nor female. The point I was trying to make using this example is that there are examples of people who biologically defy the ability to be classified as being either one of the two genders we currently believe there to be in modern society (genders being a social construct), And that we should redefine the meaning of gender in order to combat this. Also Trans people belong to this group.

"Anyone can say or think that they are something else than what other people see or science tells but they are often not logical or accurate. " This is a broad generalization with no facts to back the claim.

I look forward to your rebuttal :)
Debate Round No. 2
Grandwizard99

Con

Grandwizard99 forfeited this round.
Briss

Pro

I respect your decision to forfeit this round, And appreciate your time. As I have been playing Devil's advocate this whole time, I beg you not to be persuaded by my arguments into holding the beliefs I just expressed. And if you'd like I would be more than happy to share my actual views on the topic. Thank you for this debate and have a nice day :)
Debate Round No. 3
Grandwizard99

Con

Grandwizard99 forfeited this round.
Briss

Pro

Briss forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Grandwizard99

Con

Grandwizard99 forfeited this round.
Briss

Pro

Briss forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.