Mad Max Fury Road



Yeah I totally agree. The reality is that it's a mix of biological and environmental factors.

The bold = by nature.

I'm not sure where the hang up is?

I think the hangup is that you wrote this:

Transgender is just a social construct. Gender roles are determined by nature.

You're explicitly drawing a line between nurture vs nature. Then you followed it up with:

And where do any environmental factors come from that aren't a part of nature? Answer: There aren't any.

Emotions are easier than logic though, so feel free to have at it.

You're not using logic here, there's an obvious logical fallacy here and you're using semantics to mask it.

If environmental factors are all just part of nature (as in, part of our natural state), you contradict your first statement because transgendered people are just a part of nature and there's no nature vs. nurture issue.

There's probably some cognitive dissonance going on here. The 2nd statement is the logical part of you recognizing that there's no bright dividing line between biological and environmental factors.

But the 1st statement is tied to a specific worldview and emotionally held. It makes no logical sense*. You're basically saying that human sexuality is determined 100% by nature...until it becomes 100% determined by social factors...and the dividing line happens to align 100% with your worldview. Hmmm.

*Unless you're going all in on the transgendered lion argument?.
 

[not trolling] Homosexual behavior is completely natural, and it does not affect natural gender roles (ie: being on the receiving end of anal sex does not necessarily make you less of a man in any way, though it can be used as a form of establishing and maintaining dominance). Inter-species rape is also natural. I won't post a video for people who would be disturbed (actually because I'm too lazy to search for it on YouTube), but look up a monkey raping a frog if you want to laugh your ass off. [/not trolling]
 
I think the hangup is that you wrote this:



You're explicitly drawing a line between nurture vs nature. Then you followed it up with:



You're not using logic here, there's an obvious logical fallacy here and you're using semantics to mask it.

If environmental factors are all just part of nature (as in, part of our natural state), you contradict your first statement because transgendered people are just a part of nature and there's no nature vs. nurture issue.

There's probably some cognitive dissonance going on here. The 2nd statement is the logical part of you recognizing that there's no bright dividing line between biological and environmental factors.

But the 1st statement is tied to a specific worldview and emotionally held. It makes no logical sense*. You're basically saying that human sexuality is determined 100% by nature...until it becomes 100% determined by social factors...and the dividing line happens to align 100% with your worldview. Hmmm.

*Unless you're going all in on the transgendered lion argument?.

I've really just been carrying on for a while to see how long people would keep going. I never claimed I wasn't an asshole.

For the sake of clarity, my true opinion on the transgender topic is that transgender people and the concept of binary genders are not mutually exclusive (ie: transgender doesn't imply a third gender but instead implies the changing of gender from your natural assignment).

On the topic of gender roles, science has shown that people are happier when they act within their typical gender roles and that they have better marriages with more sex. I'm not going to write a liberal arts dissertation here, but gender roles are natural, every species has them, and there are a lot of misconceptions about what gender roles actually are.