Posted on 08/29/2023 9:52:52 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Gender dysphoria (G.D.) claims that someone whose sex was determined at birth to be male is entitled later to "identify as" female and take appropriate measures.
Analogously, someone whose sex was determined at birth to be female is entitled later to "identify as" male and take appropriate measures.
What about this?
Entering stage right is conservative philosopher WVO Quine (1908–2000), who taught at Harvard University for decades and published widely during a long and distinguished career.
While many of Quine's contributions are technical, there is a fairly simple one that applies to the problem at hand.
Suppose, Quine noted, that we can translate (paraphrase) sentences that appear to refer to Xs into equivalent sentences that do not.
Of course, it would not follow that there are no Xs. What would follow is that we need not assume there are Xs.
Stated another way, we do not need to be committed to the existence of Xs. Or, again, the assumption that there are Xs is redundant.
For example, it is easy to paraphrase sentences that appear to refer to shadows into equivalent sentences that refer to only shadowed objects.
The result won't necessarily be literature, but that's not the point.
The point is that we don't need to assume there are such things as shadows.
Voilà!
Now let's postulate a conceptual version of Quine's test.
Suppose we can paraphrase sentences that appear to refer to concept C into equivalent sentences that make no such reference.
The conceptual version of Quine's test says that we can eliminate the concept "shadows" because the concept "shadowed objects" will do the job.
Voilà!
So how do we eliminate the concept "identifies as"?
Easy.
The sentence (A) "Smith, born male, identifies as female" is equivalent with the sentence (B) "Smith, born male, believes that he's female."
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
BOTTOM LINE:
“Identifies as” is a clever bit of propaganda because sentence (A) appears to assert something as fact through the use of the verb phrase “identifies as.”
Keep in mind that verbs usually denote action; they denote that something real is happening.
The equivalent sentence (B), however, shows that the appearance of fact in sentence (A) is an illusion, a clever verbal trick.
Leftists are sneaky, so you’ve got to watch them like a hawk.
It’s like saying “I identify red as green, and green as red.”
I just tell this to the cop when I’m pulled over for going through a red light.
Then I have a screaming excrement-fit when he says “I don’t care what you identify it as, you can’t go through the intersection when the red light is on.”
It’s really no different than the people who will argue from now until you walk away from them that the earth is flat, or that the United States didn’t land 12 men on the moon.
I just tell the freaks to their face “You have every right to identify as a woman, just as I have every right to look at you and identify you as a man.”
I hope I live long enough to really participate in the backlash.
"I identify as someone who rejects any identification other than your chromosomes. You have to accept that."
Yep. They can identify in their own twisted minds and keep it to themselves.
I just refer to it as “gender blackface” and go on my way.
I identify as someone who didn’t read the article.
Saying “identifies as” is the same as “I know I’m not, but I’m saying I am anyway.”
“imagines themself as”
“Yep. They can identify in their own twisted minds and keep it to themselves.”
Same with run-of-the-mill queers. If they keep it to themselves they will not be detested by the normal.
True but I don’t think they can. That’s just what they are. They incline towards spreading it and getting youths into it. They might even be the original international conspirators, and are just good at making Jews, Catholics or whomever appear responsible for their plots, because they mix with the gay element in every nation and detest moral foundations and stable governance.
Philosophy is mental delusion. So, I assert that, I can say because I think philosophy is mental delusion that I identify philosophy as mental delusion. Therefore, philosophy is mental delusion and is not a mentally healthy way of thinking. Thus I think rational reasonable thinking is healthy and therefore, I identify rational reasonable thinking as healthy.
In such cases where a person says “I identify as ...” it equates to the same meaning as “I think I am ...” Therefore, this is inaccurate thinking. Perhaps what such persons means to say is “I identify as masculine.” or “I identify as feminine.” because their DNA will always tag their genders either XX or XY which is tangible. While the phrase “I identify as” means “I think I am” which is intangible as it is a feeling not an actuality, though one can express such feelings by a stereotypical display of masculinity or femininity.
.
...
I think there is a difference in those last sentences -
“The sentence (A) “Smith, born male, identifies as female” is equivalent with the sentence (B) “Smith, born male, believes that he’s female.”
If Smith identifies as female, that tells me that he sees this as his identity, and how he wants others to see him/treat him as a woman.
There is a big difference IMO between that and the next sentence. So he can believe he is a female, so what. It says nothing about he wants to be treated.
I don’t think those sentences are equivalent at all and what’s more I don’t GAF.
Trying to get liberals to apply logic and reason instead of their feeeewings, is a hopeless exercise.
“Gender Blackface”
(just won the internet)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.