Wow, thanks for the bigotry-free citation of facts and medical science there to back that up. /sarcasm
brizzzy
JoinedPosts by brizzzy
-
49
Are we completely sure Trans people don't just have a mental disorder?
by Lore inso i thought i was a pretty accepting person.
sure i grew up in a bigoted cult who hates gay people.. now i'm an atheist who has no reason to care about anyones sexual prefferences.. .
but i've watched inverviews of trans people.
-
-
-
49
Are we completely sure Trans people don't just have a mental disorder?
by Lore inso i thought i was a pretty accepting person.
sure i grew up in a bigoted cult who hates gay people.. now i'm an atheist who has no reason to care about anyones sexual prefferences.. .
but i've watched inverviews of trans people.
-
-
brizzzy
Gromit, "genderqueer" is not a slur; it is the "Q" in LGBTQ. It refers to several forms of self-identity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genderqueer
It's something of an ambiguous/catch-all term for people who don't quite feel that they fall under "straight", "gay", or "trans". For instance, my ex-JW friend identifies as "genderqueer" rather than "lesbian"...she is attracted to women and uses the pronoun "she" to refer to herself, but told me she has always felt more male than female, and considers herself sort of both male/female. To my knowledge, she does not want gender reassignment surgery but is happy as she is. I asked her how she prefer I refer to her, and she is the one who introduced me to the term "genderqueer". So that's what I do.
It's not considered an offensive term in the LGBTQ community, versus slurs like "tr*nny", which are considered highly offensive if used by a cisgender person...The term "trans person" is the preferred technical term, I'm told.
-
27
Survey: How Sure are you of Your Beliefs?
by simon17 ini find it interesting to see, not just the state of people's beliefs, but how sure they are of them.
or asked another way, what is the percent chance people feel they are wrong about their current beliefs.
so state your current core beliefs about jws, christianity, god, and a percentage 0-100% of how sure you are that this belief is correct.
-
-
brizzzy
Scientists basically know that the universe had a beginning, and there are a few different theories on that beginning, but there is ALWAYS going to be that question of: Where did the matter/space/time come from and when, and how?
It's all metaphysics and speculative and nobody knows. Scientists will be the first to tell you, "we don't know yet. We probably never will". They're basically working backwards. But at least they're working on evidence and tests and empirical evidence. But it all boils down to: Humans struggle with the concept of infinity, because we ourselves are finite.
But saying "A magic being did it. That's where it all started. That's enough for me!" ...That doesn't actually answer or solve the concept of infinity. It just adds more questions - the ones I've already stated above. Even my hardcore JW mom, who would probably tell you she is 100% sure there is a god, asked those questions: "I wonder what Jehovah did before he created the universe. I wonder why he waited, well, FOREVER. What did he do before? I can't imagine being so self-contained and just THERE all alone, back and back and back FOREVER. Hm, not for my puny human mind to contemplate his ways, I guess."
Either way, you have to accept INFINITY, whether you're saying "To the best of our current knowledge and understanding of phsyics, matter/particles have just always existed in some form" and saying "A god (whatever that means or however that is defined) has just always existed". Religion/spirituality takes the assumption, on no subsequent evidence, of a conscious force deciding to create the universe (in a not particularly efficient/optimal manner, by the way, and then, according to all observable evidence, buggering off and never interfering or participating again). We know there's a universe, and that we exist. We're here, and conscious, and sentient. We live on a planet, in a galaxy, in a universe, that we can observe and test. Scientists have observable evidence to work backwards from, even if we can't ever completely wrap our heads around infinity. And science is self-correcting - scientists alter and update their perceptions based on the evidence that comes up.
If anything, I find the people that consider "God is magic and has always existed and who are we to even try to understand that?" to be the final answer...utterly mind-boggling. That doesn't answer any questions about infinity or "the beginning of everything", it just loops around and raises the same ones. I have the same questions everybody does, but I'm not going to invent an answer just to make myself feel better. I'm here now, as far as I know it's the only life I'll ever have, that alone means something to me personally and I'll do my best to make the most of it while I've got it. I don't have an obsession with NEEDING to understand infinity so badly that I'll make an unverifiable assumption about a DIFFERENT version of infinity to explain it, which is just absurd.
-
27
Survey: How Sure are you of Your Beliefs?
by simon17 ini find it interesting to see, not just the state of people's beliefs, but how sure they are of them.
or asked another way, what is the percent chance people feel they are wrong about their current beliefs.
so state your current core beliefs about jws, christianity, god, and a percentage 0-100% of how sure you are that this belief is correct.
-
-
brizzzy
For me, the answer to the first 3 questions is 100%, and the fourth is 99%. That last 1% is allowing for the possibility that there is some sort of neutral/removed observer or spiritual/supernatural force who set things in motion and then left them alone for whatever reason. I don't think it is likely at all, but concede it could be a super-remote possibility. How is that intellectual dishonesty?
However, if there WERE such a force, you of course come to the inevitable questions: Where did it come from? "When" did it come to exist or gain consciousness/sentience, and how? If it's just "always been there", what did it do "before"...basically FOREVER, back and back and back? Just hover in nothingness? Why the reticence and utter lack of intervention/communication SINCE setting things in motion and then disappearing off the radar?
And that's where I'm OK with not knowing. I LIKE knowing/learning things, and if science finds rational and explainable answers I will be super-excited to learn about it and will listen with eager ears, but I don't NEED to know enough to make up an answer.
-
27
Survey: How Sure are you of Your Beliefs?
by simon17 ini find it interesting to see, not just the state of people's beliefs, but how sure they are of them.
or asked another way, what is the percent chance people feel they are wrong about their current beliefs.
so state your current core beliefs about jws, christianity, god, and a percentage 0-100% of how sure you are that this belief is correct.
-
-
brizzzy
Yeah; I don't have a problem with being 100% sure of some things. Equating that with "being a dangerous person who thinks they have it all figured out" is a false equivalency.
I don't think I have it "all" figured out. But there are SOME things I'm certain of, or as near-certain as I can be, at the moment, with the evidence available to me. I'm certain of gravity and that my name is Brianna and that I'm a female who lives in California. I'm certain that, according to the definitions of "divine" and "inspiration", there is no evidence of the Bible being divinely inspired, and in fact considerable evidence to the contrary.
That doesn't make me dangerous, and it doesn't mean I "think I have everything figured out", because I don't. If I refused to reevaluate and take future evidence/proof into account if and when presented, then yeah, you might be able to say I was dangerous or arrogant. But that's not the case.
I'm actually the opposite of thinking I have it all figured out - I *know* I don't have all the answers. Like everybody, sure I would *like* answers to everything - who wouldn't? But I don't *need* them - at least, not enough to make them up. I *want* to know, but I don't *need* to just so that I can feel better/comforted or to give my life meaning and a purpose.
-
49
Are we completely sure Trans people don't just have a mental disorder?
by Lore inso i thought i was a pretty accepting person.
sure i grew up in a bigoted cult who hates gay people.. now i'm an atheist who has no reason to care about anyones sexual prefferences.. .
but i've watched inverviews of trans people.
-
-
brizzzy
I have trans and genderqueer friends (one of them is an ex-JW, our mothers go to the same KH) and they're lovely people, and definitely show no signs of "mental illness". They just *know* what they are, the same way you just *know* you are male (and don't necessarily even "feel" male, you just know what you are). It was really painful for them to grow up knowing who they were, and being treated as someone else for so many years, and just as painful is the ignorant accusation of being "mentally ill" or "sick", which they get probably more often than you can imagine.
Gender/sexuality don't just fit into little black-and-white narrow boxes anymore. The difference between cutting off your hands and undergoing gender reassignment surgery? Well, for one thing, you're not left with a permanent disability. It's mainly cosmetic, to reconcile the physical body with your mental perception of yourself. Lots of people do that with plastic surgery - some subtle, some more over-the-top, but whether the results are to everyone else's taste is beside the point - it should only matter whether the person undergoing the surgery is happy.
Sure, there are inital side effects (as with any surgery), but they go on to lead normal, productive lives - happier ones than before the surgery, almost always. They still have sexual function, and of course, overall - it just makes them feel happy and right. They're consenting adults, and shouldn't be viewed as though there's "something wrong with them" in need of "fixing" - just like a gay person shouldn't have to be subjected to that "reparative therapy" crap. I'm sure you can find a couple of anomalies, as with everything, like the (yup, anecdotal) one you found on a message board. But for the most part, efforts to "fix" or "change" them are either futile or else do extensive harm.
It's also worth noting that it's not as simple as going to a doc and being like, "Chop off my penis, doc! Doooooooo it! DO IT NOW!" (By the way, I'm a bit fuzzy on this, but if I understand correctly, I've been told that they don't actually chop it off. They more turn it inside-out or something, to construct a vaginal-type opening that fits the cosmetic goal and also retains sexual sensation). They have to go to incredible lengths not only to prove that this is what they want, but that this is who they ARE. They have to be able to show that they've been living as whatever gender they consider themselves for a significant period of time. They have to undergo a barrage of tests and therapy sessions to make sure they really have Gender Identity Dysphoria. They have to do a ton of pre-surgery counseling to prepare them for what they're signing up for and make sure they understand completely what's involved.
It's nothing like going to a doctor and asking them to make you an amputee. People with Body Integrity Disorder can usually (though not always) be treated with therapy and medication. Gender Identity Disorder can't, or almost never can. My trans and genderqueer friends are great people and deserve to be treated as such.
Some genderqueer/trans people feel the need for the reassignment surgery. Others don't. They run the spectrum. It's the same with asexuality. There's a bajillion asexuals out there, and they run the gamut. Some asexuals still desire romantic-yet-celibate relationships with long-term companions. Some date other asexuals, some date non-asexuals. Some are willing to "go along with sex" for their non-asexual partner's sake even if it does nothing for them (to them, sex is sort of like writing out a grocery list or doing their taxes). Others find sex completely repulsive/squicky and want nothing to do with it. Some asexuals who find sex squicky have open relationships with their romantic-celibate partners (they are fine with their partner getting their sexual needs met by other people, as long as they come home to them). Some don't desire a romantic relationship at all. All are equally valid, none of them need "fixing". I'm sorry that you feel being asexual means there might be something "wrong" with you. Embrace your lack-of-sexuality - it's just who you are, and you're in good company :)
But lay off trans people. They get these hurtful questions all the time and I can't imagine having to live the way they do, having to constantly defend who they are against accusations of being "sick in the head". I get that a lot of it is just borne out of curiosity and a lack of understanding, rather than overt hostility (though they get that too), but it's undeserved and it can cause them a lot of anguish.
-
49
Are we completely sure Trans people don't just have a mental disorder?
by Lore inso i thought i was a pretty accepting person.
sure i grew up in a bigoted cult who hates gay people.. now i'm an atheist who has no reason to care about anyones sexual prefferences.. .
but i've watched inverviews of trans people.
-
-
-
27
Survey: How Sure are you of Your Beliefs?
by simon17 ini find it interesting to see, not just the state of people's beliefs, but how sure they are of them.
or asked another way, what is the percent chance people feel they are wrong about their current beliefs.
so state your current core beliefs about jws, christianity, god, and a percentage 0-100% of how sure you are that this belief is correct.
-
-
brizzzy
I think it's arrogant to think you're 100% right about EVERYTHING. But I'm 100% sure, based on the evidence, that, say, gravity is real. I don't think that's arrogant, I think it's realistic. If evidence came up later to refute it, I would reevaluate my position. I think you can be 100% certain of something and still be willing to change your mind if, later on, additional evidence presents itself.
Based on the evidence available to me, my answers to your questions are:
* JW's not 'God's' true organization: 100% sure
* Bible not inspired: 100% sure
* A personal god does not exist: 100% sure
* No god-like creator exists: Hm. Probably 99% sure.
I'm an agnostic atheist. My boyfriend, meanwhile, you might call a spiritual agnostic. He feels in his gut that there's SOMETHING out there, maybe some sort of higher power or force or whatnot, though nothing like the Christian god definitely, perhaps something less benevolent (or tyrannical, depending on your perception) and conscious, but rather more neutral or maybe a removed observer. I think he leans more towards Buddhist-type feelings on the subject. I, on the other hand, feel no such connection or mystic/supernatural force at all, and never have, even while a JW, but don't wish to invalidate a feeling which clearly gives him comfort. If, down the road, scientific evidence (not anecdotal evidence) came to light in support of a god-like creator's existence, I'd be willing to revisit that opinion and revise it. I don't think that my current absolute or near-absolute certainty makes me arrogant, ignorant, or prideful. Just confident in my current opinion based upon the research and evidence I've seen presented by credible and impartial sources.
-
31
October 15, 2012 Watchtower now on jw.org
by sd-7 inlooks like it's fun.
there's a cool story in there about how a ministerial servant got deleted for playing violent video games, and then wrote to the branch office about it and told people in his congregation.
classy, guys, really classy.
-
-
brizzzy
It's "worldly" to want "justice"?
But...but...but I thought their god was supposed to be the epitome and embodiment of "justice", "wisdom", "power" and "love"?
They tell you to "wait on Jehovah", but then say that Jehovah is "choosing to overlook" wrongdoing if it's committed by an elder in a position of authority? Huh? Is he the paragon of justice, or not? And what exactly are you supposed to be waiting on, if he's just gonna overlook it anyway?
-
19
They Don't Know dubs
by Farkel init's interesting how dubs are portrayed in tv shows.
what's interesting is how little the people who write those scripts know about the religion.
i'll give two examples and then solicit others you folks may recall.. the first example comes from the pilot episode of the tv series "lie to me.
-
-
brizzzy
I saw the Practice episode a few years ago. He also argued that she wasn't a JW because she didn't carry a No Blood card, saluted the flag, etc. etc. It was very well researched. Actually, I thought the attorney who argued the case proved pretty conclusively that she wasn't a JW anymore (even my JW parents, who I watched the episode with, agreed). But the judge ruled in the mother's favor, and there was no blood transfusion. It ended up not mattering anyway, because miraculously, everything was alright and she woke up from her coma (of course - it's TV).
Strangely, nobody in the episode thought to ask her upon waking whether or not she actually considered herself a JW or would have accepted a blood transfusion. So there's no plot resolution there.
The pilot episode of Lie to Me really botched the JW portrayal bad. They got the lingo wrong and everything. My parents watched that episode (because they thought the show looked interesting) and then vowed never to watch again because of the way JWs were represented.
Scrubs also did an episode with a JW character who refused a blood transfusion (transcript here: http://scrubs.wikia.com/wiki/My_Half-Acre_transcript). I thought Dr. Cox's frustration in dealing with this woman was very well represented. Although, of course, in the end they found a way to treat her and she lived and all. Because it's TV.