@Arkturos saidNot sure about the plastics cause trans theory. Trans just seems to be trendy nowadays. It has been made to be more socially acceptable. I would discourage radical surgery to change gender though. It generally doesn't make people happier.
It might be too late for us. Maybe nanoplastics will take us down as lead purportedly took down Rome.
Or maybe we will just become one with the plastic and adapt?
I suspect that estrogenic microplastics (and not just peer pressure or counter-cultural rebalancing) might have been involved in the emergence of more trans and non-binary people. Or maybe there are spiritual reasons from behind the scenes?
Look into chimer-ism and epigenetics.
https://brianhanley.medium.com/many-transgender-and-gay-people-are-dual-sex-chimeras-e042c2a0e8dd
2 edits
@Metal-Brain saidI'm not sure about a lot of things.
Not sure about the plastics cause trans theory. Trans just seems to be trendy nowadays. It has been made to be more socially acceptable. I would discourage radical surgery to change gender though. It generally doesn't make people happier.
Look into chimer-ism and epigenetics.
https://brianhanley.medium.com/many-transgender-and-gay-people-are-dual-sex-chimeras-e042c2a0e8dd
And yeah, I'd have to think for a long while before getting my breasts chopped off or my man-parts removed or my legs extended with the gradual steel-screw method -- those all seem to primitive to me, as rocket propulsion also does.
I'm kind of a science-fiction head, so topics such as gender-changing and body mods are old news to me.
Plus, I turned out to be gay just before AIDS kicked in. At the time, I was cool with being a guy who liked (some) other guys, but somehow sussed that nobody else around me would have been cool with that.
And then AIDS came along and really put a damper on things, not just on my life personally, but probably on the lives of people living in the big cities, and of people who might otherwise have thought of moving to the big cities.
And it's not just sex we're talking about, but people interacting with other people in all the other ways that we do.
There was a lot of suspicion among The Gays in the early 1980s that either AIDS had been spliced together for a reason by people who hated Gays and Blacks, or that it was a blameless occurrence which providentially led to a lot of Gays and Blacks conveniently dying (from a certain point of view).
But getting back to your post: your mention of epigenetics reminds me of Lomonosov in a way -- and who knows how many of these environmentally influenced up- and down-regulations might be inheritable?
However, maybe both the idea of chimerism and the assertion that there are only two genders depend upon a certain kind of unfounded idealism.
@Arkturos said" I turned out to be gay just before AIDS kicked in"
I'm not sure about a lot of things.
I'm kind of a science-fiction head, so topics such as gender-changing and body mods are old news to me.
Plus, I turned out to be gay just before AIDS kicked in. At the time, I was cool with being a guy who liked (some) other guys, but somehow sussed that nobody else around me would have been cool with that.
And then AIDS came a ...[text shortened]... ch providentially led to a lot of Gays and Blacks conveniently dying (from a certain point of view).
That is an odd way of saying it. What do you mean by "turned out" to be gay? Were you too young to know you were gay or did you make a sexual preference transition?
I work with at least 2 trans people. One identifies as a man but looks just like a woman. Even wears lipstick sometimes. No surgery and I don't notice any hormonal changes I would expect so I assume she has made no transition at all. That is why I think it is just trendy right now. Or maybe it is just a way to advertise she is gay without saying it to everyone. That might explain the lipstick.
2 edits
@Metal-Brain saidI assume you are asking sincerely for the sake of understanding, but please consider that I'm only speaking for myself, and also that even though some materialists might consider us all to be either a random or non-random bunch of meat and mentations:
" I turned out to be gay just before AIDS kicked in"
That is an odd way of saying it. What do you mean by "turned out" to be gay? Were you too young to know you were gay or did you make a sexual preference transition?
I work with at least 2 trans people. One identifies as a man but looks just like a woman. Even wears lipstick sometimes. No surgery and I don't notic ...[text shortened]... s just a way to advertise she is gay without saying it to everyone. That might explain the lipstick.
It was more of a developmental thing and more a matter of observation, not a sudden decision nor an arbitrary one -- both regarding my own attractions and my sussing of likely outward social consequences.
RE: "That is an odd way of saying it." Would you mind saying something more about that? Even if you are not gay yourself, would you mind suggesting some better ways of phrasing that, given how little you know about me?
Edit: And as for transgender people or the trans-curious: Maybe there's a mix of things going on. Why the objection except for some arbitrary idealistic assertions and notions and an unwillingness to accept and appreciate reality as it is and as it unfolds?
Who is threatening whom?
@Arkturos saidI asked because I was curious. I once heard that gender preference can change over time, but that is only what I heard once. Before that I thought gender preference was determined before birth, but I also learned that some identical twins can have different sexual preference. That is why I now think epigenetics might be a factor. Chimerism doesn't seem to explain only one identical twin being gay by itself.
I assume you are asking sincerely for the sake of understanding, but please consider that I'm only speaking for myself, and also that even though some materialists might consider us all to be either a random or non-random bunch of meat and mentations:
It was more of a developmental thing and more a matter of observation, not a sudden decision nor an arbitrary one -- both ...[text shortened]... willingness to accept and appreciate reality as it is and as it unfolds?
Who is threatening whom?
@Metal-Brain saidYou might be overthinking things. Just take people as they come.
I asked because I was curious. I once heard that gender preference can change over time, but that is only what I heard once. Before that I thought gender preference was determined before birth, but I also learned that some identical twins can have different sexual preference. That is why I now think epigenetics might be a factor. Chimerism doesn't seem to explain only one identical twin being gay by itself.
@Arkturos saidNot very scientific. I like to understand things. I have no problem with gay people and accept them for who they are. I am very socially tolerant as long as nobody is getting hurt.
You might be overthinking things. Just take people as they come.
I am curiosity driven. Just like my hobby with plant breeding I like to know what fruit trees I can hybridize. Doesn't mean I don't accept peaches and cherries for what they are.
@Metal-Brain saidHave you ever picked up a brush?
Doesn't mean I don't accept peaches and cherries for what they are.
Maybe you could start a revolution in Hong Kong without actually opposing Bei Jing. 😉
1 edit
@Metal-Brain saidI would say!
You will like this.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/comer-threatens-contempt-proceedings-against-clintons-if-they-continue-ignore-epstein
"House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) warned Bill and Hillary Clinton Friday
that if they continue to ignore deposition subpoenas regarding their history with Jeffrey Epstein, he will initiate contempt proceedings."
Remember, democrats... NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW
@Earl-of-Trumps saidExcept Trump.
I would say!
"House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) warned Bill and Hillary Clinton Friday
that if they continue to ignore deposition subpoenas regarding their history with Jeffrey Epstein, he will initiate contempt proceedings."
Remember, democrats... NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW
@AThousandYoung said... and his family, friends, Project 2025 thinkers, and anyone who contributes a million or more to his slush funds.
Except Trump.
@Earl-of-Trumps
Well, here's a surprise: Noam Chomsky was very chummy with Epstein and received 270,000 USD from Epstein ! There'll be some 'xplainin' to do, I reckon.