As if we weren't already the laughing stock of the Nation...

If you think the NY & CA dems are tone-deaf when it comes to communicating with the black community, you’ll piss your pants to learn how retarded AL dems are.

At the 99.9% probability this will fall on deaf ears, I nevertheless find myself unwilling to let blatant ignorance go unanswered.

It is a point of mild fascination to me whether or not your supposedly inquisitive mind and professed high moral standards will objectively consider a set of facts that stand in contrast to the cultural tradition of thought you have been indoctrinated into. There area broad range of those facts that foundationally undermine your claim. So much so that that no matter how through my exposition, there will be as many I forget or neglect to mention as those I do, probably more.

First, the use of the word "gender" without an object is useless in these discussions. This is because their are gender ROLES, there are gender EXPECTATIONS and gender IDENTITY (among other things) and these are not at all the same things. For the purpose of this lesson, and generally, "gender identity" refers to one's innate sense of self. EVERY individual has one, including you. For all but an incredibly mall minority (something like .01%) it is fixed (and it's possible to doubt even those) for life. Gender ROLES are that broad set of social and cultural expectations which accrue to the (usually) binary sex categories. These are SUBJECTIVE and fluid varying from culture to culture, and even within a culture, and over time. For example, the gender role expectations for orthodox Muslim women and Baptist women are different, those of holiness Pentecostal women and those of say Episcopal women are different, and so forth. Expectations of gender roles in 1800 are different than in 2000...but this is NOT "gender" but the cultures subjective EXPECTATION associated with gender.
Again, gender IDENTITY is not the same as gender ROLE. The former is fixed, the latter is subjective.

(by the way, all this bullshit of "when I was a girl I like to play war so...." is therefore bullshit, because the comment refers to conformity, or lack thereof, to gender roles and expectations, not identity, but that's a rather deep tangent on it's own)

Second, "sex" in this context is the set of visible identifiable physical traits that typically identify one into the binary categories of "male" or "female" but this binary is not rigid. There's a spectrum of intersex conditions in between and, indeed, a spectrum within the two major categories of masculinity or femininity. Consider this generic graphic.



On this scale, zero is a true intersex person, a mosaic of male and female traits, on the right above +2 is what you would think of as a male, on the left below -2 female. Between zero and two in either direction are less physically typical examples of male or female. One can quibble over how steep the actual curve would be but this is just a visual aid.

All of this is incredibly easy to verify all over the internet. Literally no one from the Pope to Tony Perkins seriously denies the existence and nature of intersex people. So why is this important? Because scientifically it is an indisputable fact that the human biological condition is not an ABSOLUTE binary. There are exceptions.

Now, here's something else we have observed: the human brain is likewise not an absolute binary. Scientists have observed a mosaic of sex-specific (called sexually dimorphic actually, like any other sex related trait) traits in the human brain. Any given person's brain, including yours, will display a cluster of traits that are male-like, or female-like, but the specifics vary. You can look at a given brain and conclude that it's likely the brain of a man, or vice versa, but it's not absolute.
Another thing that scientific study has established is that intersex conditions arise from the interplay of hormones with the fetus during pre-natal development. If this proceeds abnormally then you have some form of intersex condition (though to be clear, this does not account for all intersex conditions - some people are born with chromosome combinations other than "XX or "XY" and these would be, obviously, genetic abnormalities not disorders of sexual development) up to and including apparent females who have a Y chromosomes and apparent males who do not. Moreover, the hormone even that affects the genital sexual traits happens at a different point (by two months) during pregnancy than the one which "sexes" the brain.

Which is to say, those sexually dimorphic regions of the brain I mentioned above are as much a result of hormone action during pregnancy as the development of a penis (yes, by the way, all fetuses begin as a default "female" and the introduction of testosterone during pregnancy develops the clitoris into a penis so...think about that).

Now, here's how all this ties together: if the testosterone event that gives you a penis occurs, but not the one that masculinizes the brain - or vice versa - you have the biological origin for a gender identity (originating in the brain) that is at odds with the genital sex.

The only piece of this puzzle that is as yet not scientifically identified is what SPECIFIC area of the brain drives gender identity. Because the sexually dimorphic areas of the brain are a mosaic, it is a logical hypothesis that you'd find as much of a spectrum of gendered identity and resulting behavior as you have a spectrum of physically sexed traits along that inverse curve above. Only in this case, you can have an individual who's on the right side (from zero) of the "sex" curve and the left side of the "gender identity" curve.

Again, none of this is scientifically problematic. Almost all of it is well established and that which remains unidentified is a very logical and direct hypothesis extrapolating from what is known. By direct contrast, all the various alternative explanations offered up by those who wish to deny a biological origin for being trans do not come remotely close to being logically sound and fall apart on the most cursory objective analysis.

So to summarize:
In pretty much the exact same way that intersex conditions exist - that intersex people exist, biologically...so likewise transsexual conditions exist - trans people exist, biologically.

Gender (identity) is NOT "determined by chromosomes"...indeed, SEX is not "determined by chromosomes"

Sex - not gender - is USUALLY (but not always) INDICATED by chromosomes, in similar fashion to the fact that the presence or absence of a penis USUALLY (but not always) INDICATES (not DETERMINES) one's sex.

Chromosomes determine, in a normal prenatal development, the hormone interactions which alter the fetus...the extent, basically, to which testosterone is introduced. But sometimes that development is disordered (scientists literally call this Disorders of Sexual Development) and exceptions are born.

In a sentence, being trans is essentially having an intersex condition which happens to affect the brain, rather than the genitals or other sexually dimorphic functions of the body.

Finally, YOU have a "state of mind" about your gender identity too - everyone does, it's not some hand-wavey get-out-of-thinking-free-card you get to play to dismiss a subject you don't understand. Moreover, the vast majority of presumably "normal" people have never had their chromosomes kerotyped and do not know for a certain fact that they are XY or XX, they just assume based on penis or lack thereof. Usually that's safe.

but not every time.

honestly, as goofy as that is, any black person who stays home and contributes to Moore's election because they were offended by this pretty much deserves the shit Republicans dump on him.

Be pissed off? Sure. Be offended? Fine.
Pass up an opportunity to keep any Republican, let alone Roy Moore, out of that seat? Self-destructive insanity.

I listened with glee to the news from Huntsville interviewing black voter after black voter who said they were no longer going to vote

at @Ancalagon

Fucking quote tags fooled me!

Well played notDayton, well played.

Wow.

Roy Moore just got elected.

She claims that he did sign it but she wrote the notes. However the time to let everyone know you wrote those notes was when you showed the book for the first time. Not after you let everyone think for weeks that Roy Moore wrote the whole thing. Now it explains why Gloria Allred would not allow the yearbook to be examined by any forensic people.

Now her credibility is shot to hell because if she lied about the notes than maybe she lied about the yearbook being signed at all. It also hurts her credibility in regards to her accusations.

So say hello to Senator Roy Moore.

Yep, it was already a long shot due to the electorate but this likely fully closes the door.

As if there was ever any doubt.

Not that Jones had a prayer in Hell to begin with, but this story isn't going to change anything. She added the date and restaurant under his signature. The rest is genuine. This is not enough of a big deal to change anyone's mind one way or the other.

I disagree. There are people who desperately want to believe that this is all bullshit so that they can vote for Republican without believing they are voting for a pedophile. This gives that little sliver of doubt that they wedge their conscience through.

Those people do exist, yes, but not in enough numbers to have any effect on the outcome.

Have to see what the margins and turnout look like.

Yep. I have a hard time believing that he'd ever listen to black people.

The conservative "Christians" are desperate for any excuse to vote for Herbert the Pervert that allows them to sleep at night. Which means, of course, that they'll find one, no matter how flimsy it is.

They are still voting for the pedophile but they were always people who wanted to vote for a pedophile as long as it was from the right party. That is what makes them such shitty people.

You don't get to vote for a pedophile and pretend you did not.

Well... They probably deserve a slap in the face, but I wouldn't put anyone to death for voting for Moore. Especially since a lot of them are apparently single-issue anti-abortion types.

Isn't it funny that as soon as that old cuntmaggot Hildebeast lost that the DemocRats are running around like headless chickens?

Angiosperms have been around since the Cretaceous. Also, birds are dinosaurs.

[/quote]

Parody account aside, nothing in the Bible contradicts my essay.

Yup.

Pay atttention to a photo on a flyer, completely ignore the other guy thinks all the post civil war amendments that granted you your rights were a bad idea, and the last time America was great was when we still had slavery.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/10/politics/kfile-roy-moore-aroostook-watchmen/index.html

Here's some of the stuff Roy wants to fix:
13th amendment: ended slavery
14th amendment: guarantees equal protection
15th amendment: prevents voter discrimination
19th amendment: gives women the right to vote



Like I said, every last black voter who stays home on Tuesday can shut the fuck up from now on about systemic racism, because clearly the give not a single fuck about it.

Anyone that likes, enjoys or respects democracy shouldn't be filled with joy at the prospect of their fellow constituents not voting.

Were I to hear about fellow Canadians not voting that would make me sad they were not participating in the process.

It's too bad you feel that way about something so important.

Democrat Doug Jones holds a 10-point lead over Republican Roy Moore among likely voters in deep red Alabama.

This is according to Fox News, of all places.

There's no way Moore is going to lose.

lmao Republicans aren't even trying to hide their allegiance to Russia anymore: