Transracial

  • 441 Views
  • Last Post 29 March 2017
KRG posted this 28 March 2017

Haha, "you mad". Impressive. 

MrTrampoline posted this 28 March 2017 - Last edited 28 March 2017

Originally posted by KRG

Haha, "you mad". Impressive. 

 Hypocrisy is a very specific charge KRG; to what extent have I been hypocritical on the issue?

You've been somewhat rude in your approach, but if I've applied a double standard or someone has identified a flaw in my logic, then I'm grateful for the opportunity to re-assess my thinking.

KRG posted this 28 March 2017 - Last edited 28 March 2017

My suggestion would be to do a 'bit of the ol Google' and look at the biologists that have found biological differences between cis and transgender people. 

Then perhaps have a think before making uniformed comments based on your susceptibility to propaganda. 

 

MrTrampoline posted this 28 March 2017 - Last edited 28 March 2017

Originally posted by KRG

My suggestion would be to do a 'bit of the ol Google' and look at the biologists that have found biological differences between cis and transgender people. 

Then perhaps have a think before making uniformed comments based on your susceptibility to propaganda. 

 

 Ah I see.

So you can't actually find any examples of me being hypocritical. It was just a word you threw out there out of sheer rage. Oh well, no worries.

Besides, who's to say things won't go the other way?
 
Maybe Rachel Dolezal is right, maybe being transracial is indeed a thing and therefore she is indeed a black person by the same standards by which Caitlin Jenner is a woman.

If it happens in a decade or so, you'll probably be on internet forums spewing your fury against people who believe that they are 'otherkin', and their right to be respected as a 'transpecies' cat or wolf or whatever, is just as legitimate as transracial people, the kind of whom Ms Dolezal is now a respected pioneer.

You never can predict the future. 

PhilippineSaint posted this 28 March 2017

Originally posted by MrTrampoline

Originally posted by KRG

My suggestion would be to do a 'bit of the ol Google' and look at the biologists that have found biological differences between cis and transgender people. 

Then perhaps have a think before making uniformed comments based on your susceptibility to propaganda. 

 

 Ah I see.

So you can't actually find any examples of me being hypocritical. It was just a word you threw out there out of sheer rage. Oh well, no worries.

Besides, who's to say things won't go the other way?
 
Maybe Rachel Dolezal is right, maybe being transracial is indeed a thing and therefore she is indeed a black person by the same standards by which Caitlin Jenner is a woman.

If it happens in a decade or so, you'll probably be on internet forums spewing your fury against people who believe that they are 'otherkin', and their right to be respected as a 'transpecies' cat or wolf or whatever, is just as legitimate as transracial people, the kind of whom Ms Dolezal is now a respected pioneer.

You never can predict the future. 

 My Bets over the weekend seem to prove this wrong up $520.00

KRG posted this 28 March 2017

Perhaps you're right.

 

If science suggests we're both wrong and that transracial is a thing, I may well be more inclined to believe it. 

MrTrampoline posted this 29 March 2017 - Last edited 29 March 2017

Originally posted by KRG

Perhaps you're right.

 

If science suggests we're both wrong and that transracial is a thing, I may well be more inclined to believe it. 

Well I certainly wouldn't rule it out. After all, how much of an investigation has there been into it?

Scientists have discovered that people who claim to feel/be the opposite gender have different patterns within their brain when scanned. This doesn't surprise me at all. I mean its a fairly 'radical' thing to feel/believe and it makes sense that there'd be evidence for it when scanning someone's brain.

What's up for debate is whether or not we as a society ought to call these people who were born with balls and willies 'women' (or the reverse) on account of that finding. The science might have proven that, y'know, something's "going on" there when you scan a transgender person's brain, but how you define someone's gender is still up for debate. Maybe society adheres more closely to the truth by simply saying "sorry Bruce, I know you feel like a woman and when we scanned your brain, we can certainly see why....but er....well, sorry but you simply are a man."

Me personally? I don't know any transgender people, but if I met one, I'd be happy to call them what they'd like to be called. I see no real reason to be rude or confrontational and its not a massive issue.

Anyway, back to the question of how you'd do something similar for race; I'd wager that if we were to conduct brain scans across the likes of Ms Dolezal, as well as your stereotypical 'wigga' character from South London (white person who'd like to be black), I daresay you might well find some interesting patterns similar to what you find with transgender people.

I mean for instance, one study shows that people's visceral reactions to pain represented in other races doesn't trigger the same empathetic response....

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/06/racial_empathy_gap_people_don_t_perceive_pain_in_other_races.html

So, suppose we got a bunch of white wannabe-blacks, put them through a test like this in a scientifically controlled study, and find that contrary to your typical white guy, they actually do feel a similar amount of empathy for black people and display none of the racial biases you'd expect to see - or perhaps even the reverse - displaying more empathy for blacks than they do for other whites.

If, on top of this, they claimed that they really were a black person trapped in the body of a white person, would they have as much claim to being transracial as Caitlin Jenner has to being transgender?

I think you'd have to say they would. 

As I say, this hasn't been investigated. Like with most scientific experiments nowadays, securing funding is the issue.