I was raised into the religion from infancy and got baptized into the religion in my teens before 1985, and it was a huge mistake for me to join the religion. I shouldn't have become a baptized Christian (of any church, denomination, sect, or cult) at all, since the Bible is wrong in major ways. See the book called The Bible Against Itself: Why the Bible Seems to Contradict Itself by Randel McCraw Helms. [For a review of the book by Helms see https://infidels.org/kiosk/book/the-bible-against-itself-why-the-bible-seems-to-contradict-itself/ . See also the reviews at https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Against-Itself-Seems-Contradict/dp/0965504751 .]
Before I became baptized as a JW, for a period of time I was trying to determine if I could trust the Bible as being reliable and as God's word. I wondered if there were genuine contradictions in the Bible. During that time I read a statement from the WT literature that provided a reconciliation (or at least an apparent reconciliation) of some apparent (or actual) contradictions in the Bible. Right after stating the reconciliation (in the same article) the WT literature said that all other apparent contradictions in the Bible can also be reconciled (in a similar manner?) and that thus the Bible is not contradictory. Sadly I was swayed by that comment of the WT and that was a large factor in me deciding to become baptized. But, the WT made a false statement (whether they knew it was false or not) when they said the Bible has no actual contradictions! If only I had known (prior to age 15) that the Bible really does contradict itself, then I would never had become baptized!
Disillusioned JW
JoinedPosts by Disillusioned JW
-
8
Any recent converts?
by av23 ingreetings all,.
i'm new here, not jw, yet i'm curious if there's anyone out there who has recently converted to jehovah's witness who can give me a better understanding of what brought brought them from point a to b in terms of coming to understand jw theology as truth.
thanks in advance for all the help.. av.
-
-
-
122
1995 generation change
by Gorb innow, many years later, i remember the 1995 generation change, very well.. since early youth, hearing my father explaining in field service the 2520 years.
it was his main theme in the field.. with the change my doubts started.
with some jw friends we did not trust the organization anymore.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
For a review of the book by Helms see https://infidels.org/kiosk/book/the-bible-against-itself-why-the-bible-seems-to-contradict-itself/ . See also the reviews at https://www.amazon.com/Bible-Against-Itself-Seems-Contradict/dp/0965504751 .
Before I became baptized as a JW, for a period of time I was trying to determine if I could trust the Bible as being reliable and as God's word. I wondered if there were genuine contradictions in the Bible. During that time I read a statement from the WT literature that provided a reconciliation (or at least an apparent reconciliation) of some apparent (or actual) contradictions in the Bible. Right after that (in the same article) the WT literature said that all other apparent contradictions in the Bible can also be reconciled (in a similar manner?) and that thus the Bible is not contradictory. I was swayed by that comment of the WT and that was a large factor in me deciding to become baptized. But, the WT made a false statement (whether they knew it was false or not) when they said the Bible has no actual contradictions! If only I had known (prior to age 15) that the Bible really does contradict itself, then I would never had become baptized!
-
122
1995 generation change
by Gorb innow, many years later, i remember the 1995 generation change, very well.. since early youth, hearing my father explaining in field service the 2520 years.
it was his main theme in the field.. with the change my doubts started.
with some jw friends we did not trust the organization anymore.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Regarding Luke 17:22 and the length of the generation and the WT's failed predictions, the main reason why the WT's predictions haven't come true and why the WT keeps changing their doctrines is that the foundation for the WT's teachings is seriously flawed. That foundation is the Bible, including the NT, even the Gospels. To varying degrees the writers of the Gospel accounts disagreed with each other. One of the reasons Luke's gospel was written was to explain why Jesus hadn't yet returned, like the WT changing their definition of the generation. See https://www.npr.org/transcripts/124572693 ("Author Interviews
< Jesus And The Hidden Contradictions Of The Gospels"), in which Bible scholar Bart Ehrman is interviewed.Part of the interview says the following.
"Professor BART EHRMAN (Religious Studies, University of North Carolina; Author, "Jesus, Interrupted"): I think it's important to know that each of these authors of the New Testament had a different message. What people tend to do is - allied the various teachings of, say, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John so that if Matthew portrays Jesus in one way and Mark portrays him in a different way, what people do is they conflate the two accounts so that Jesus says and does everything that he says in Matthew and in Mark. But when you do that, you, in fact, rob each of these authors of their own integrity as an author."
In the interview Ehrman says the following about Jesus being an apocalypticist.
"Well, Jesus didnt think there was going to be a long haul. So when people say that Jesus was a great teacher of ethics, I think thats absolutely true.
But one needs to understand that his ethical teaching is rooted in a completely different worldview from the one that most people have today. For Jesus, the reason that you needed to start following God and doing what God wanted you to do the reason to behave ethically - is because the judgment day was coming and it could be sometime next Thursday. And you need to be ready for it by behaving in the ways that God wants you to, so that when this cosmic judge of the Earth arrives and catastrophe starts happening, youll be on the right side. And youll be able to enter into this good kingdom that Gods bringing because if you disobey God and you're acting badly, youre going to be destroyed when this cosmic judge arrives.
...
Prof. EHRMAN: ... Theres a wide range of opinions about who Jesus is. And in the last 20 years, there have been people who've wanted scholars who have wanted to redefine Jesus so that hes not an apocalypticist. But the majority of scholars dont agree with that. But there is something to be said about Jesus as a social reformer and somebody who promoted egalitarian principles. But the reason is not the one thats sometimes given. The reason Jesus wanted to reform society, and supported things such as the roles of women in society and such, is because he thought thats what the kingdom was going to be like.
In the kingdom, theres not going to be inequality. Theres not going to - oppression. Theres not going to be war. Theres not going to be there's going to be equality of all people. And so you should start implementing the ideals of that future kingdom in the present.
... if you actually situate to Jesus in his own historical context, this is the sort of thing that a lot of people expected was going to happen - just as people today. I mean, in evangelical Christian circles today, there are many people who think that Jesus is coming back - and they dont mean that metaphorically. They think that Jesus, literally, is going to come back. And I think they had their predecessors in the first century.
...
Prof. EHRMAN: Yeah, thats right. And, you know, the Left Behind series sold far more copies than The Da Vinci Code.
(Soundbite of laughter)
Prof. EHRMAN: As hard as that may be to believe. But in fact, it did. And whats striking is that this idea that we are now living at the end of time, and that current events are showing us fulfillments of Biblical prophecy - exactly the same thing was being said 10 years ago about things happening 10 years ago -and 10 years before that, and 10 years before that, and 10 years before that. You can go all the way back in Christian history, and every decade thought that they were living at the end of time, and that the prophecies were being fulfilled in their own day.
You can trace this back through the Middle Ages, all the way back to early Christianity. In fact, you can trace it back to the apostle Paul and the historical Jesus. People have thought this from day one. And what I sometimes tell my students is that you can say two things about these people who think that the end is going to come within their lifetime. One thing is that every one of them bases it on their certain interpretations of the Bible especially, for example, the Book of Revelation. And the second thing you can say is that every single one of these people has been completely wrong.
The point, though, is that this view actually does go back to the historical Jesus. Jesus also predicted that the end was going to come within his generation and, of course, it didnt."
Regarding discovering contradictions in the Bible, Ehrman says the following.
"And I got to a point where I started realizing that I couldnt reconcile all of these discrepancies. And you know, many of them are just quite clear contradictions - some of the ones we havent actually talked about on the program so far.
But I got to a point where I realized there are contradictions. And once I said that, it had a serious effect on my faith because my faith was rooted in an inerrant revelation from God. And I began realizing that, in fact, this revelation was not inerrant. This revelation, in fact, had errors. And once I started seeing errors, I started finding them everywhere."
See the book called The Bible Against Itself: Why the Bible Seems to Contradict Itself by Randel McCraw Helms. It is an excellent book. In April 2019 I checked it out from the library of the university which I had graduated from in the 1980s. The following is a quote I wrote down from the Introduction of the book (ISBN 0-9655047-5-1).
"... the Book of Jeremiah had to endure massive reinterpretation by the author of the Book of Daniel when its predictions seemed wrong (Dan. 9:1-24). Then Daniel was itself reinterpreted by the author of 2 Esdras when its predictions failed, and then again by the author of the Gospel of Mark (which was in turn reinterpreted by the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke), and then one last time by the author of Revelation. Apocaplypse is never now, but only soon to come, and then still soon to come. Predictive prophecy, like the Bible, is self-destructing." This book makes an EXCELLENT case that much of the Bible deliberately contradicts much of the rest of the Bible!
-
55
Remember when HITTING A WOMAN was just WRONG!
by pistolpete injust a few years ago, any man that slapped a women was considered a piece of shit.
today people are are paying and cheering to see a man knocking the shit out of a woman.
what feminists, social warriors, and gender recognition fighters don't realized is that their actions are actually causing the world to revert back to the days when the world treated women as property, second class species, with no rights whatsoever, whose only value was a sex instrument for the male species.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Before I posted my prior comment I read some of the content mentioned in the article about the ESPN program called "Outside the Lines" regarding the allegation that Riggs threw the game, but I didn't include it because it is nothing more than hearsay. Furthermore, notice that the show included a counter claim by saying "The program also stated that Riggs' close friend and estate executor Lornie Kuhle vehemently denied Riggs was ever in debt to the mob or received a payoff from them." Rather than choosing which of two claims to believe I ignored them both, and focused on the fact of the televised game results.
Some people will believe anything (including hearsay) that agrees with what they want to believe, and I strive not to fall into that category. It is like believing claims of people who say God or other spirit or spirits spoke to them and gave them a revelation, or anointed them as his representatives on Earth. As Thomas Paine said in The Age Reason such is hearsay and none us should feel we must believe such unsupported claims. It is like that the numerous people who even believe that Donald Trump won the 2020 USA Presidential election, despite the overwhelming documented evidence that he lost that election, because they choose to believe unsupported claims to the contrary that say what they want to believe. It is also like those who dismiss the strong scientific evidence that humans are causing climate change on Earth at a dangerously rapid rate, because they don't want to believe it and thus choose to believe what the climate change deniers say. The same goes for those who reject biological evolution as a well substantiated fact of science, and who insist that all of the kinds of life on Earth were created in a mere 6 or 7 Earth solar days by an invisible supernatural God who later had his son become a human sacrifice, with the son later becoming resurrected and ascending to a supernatural heaven.
-
55
Remember when HITTING A WOMAN was just WRONG!
by pistolpete injust a few years ago, any man that slapped a women was considered a piece of shit.
today people are are paying and cheering to see a man knocking the shit out of a woman.
what feminists, social warriors, and gender recognition fighters don't realized is that their actions are actually causing the world to revert back to the days when the world treated women as property, second class species, with no rights whatsoever, whose only value was a sex instrument for the male species.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
I forgot to include verse 5 of Isaiah 56 (KJV) about eunuchs receiving a blessing from Yahweh/the Lord. In context (Isaiah 56:3-5) it says the following.
"3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak, saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
4 For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off."
Verse 3 (in its reference to a "dry tree") makes me wonder if the type of eunuchs it speaks of are those who have crushed (or congenitally deformed) testes (or perhaps no testes) and no production of semen.
According to the Bible, Jesus said that in the resurrection there is no marrying for the resurrected ones are like angels. Does that mean that according to the Bible angels are sexless (in the sense of having no procreative powers) and that humans who become resurrected (at least for life in heaven) will also be sexless in the same sense? Matthew 22:29-30 (KJV) says the following.
"29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven."
Paul in Galatians 3:26-29 (KJV) says the following.
"6 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."
The Gnostic Christian scripture in the Gospel of Thomas Saying 22 (as translated by Blatz) says the following about the sexes (see http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/thomas/gospelthomas22.html ).
"Jesus saw some infants who were being suckled. He said to his disciples: These infants being suckled are like those who enter the kingdom. They said to him: If we then become children, shall we enter the kingdom? Jesus said to them: When you make the two one, and when you make the inside as the outside, and the outside as the inside, and the upper as the lower, and when you make the male and the female into a single one, so that the male is not male and the female not female, and when you make eyes in place of an eye, and a hand in place of a hand, and a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then shall you enter [the kingdom]."
-
55
Remember when HITTING A WOMAN was just WRONG!
by pistolpete injust a few years ago, any man that slapped a women was considered a piece of shit.
today people are are paying and cheering to see a man knocking the shit out of a woman.
what feminists, social warriors, and gender recognition fighters don't realized is that their actions are actually causing the world to revert back to the days when the world treated women as property, second class species, with no rights whatsoever, whose only value was a sex instrument for the male species.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
When people compete in boxing rings and in wrestling matches (at least in the high end high class championships) they do so within weight classes (such as feather weight versus heavy weight). Thus to some degree the professional athletes in those events have about the same amount of muscle mass and of body fat.
Furthermore, I am not saying that transgender people should be allowed to compete in women's sports, or in men's sports, instead of only in transgender sports or in integrated sex sport teams (teams which include both men and women). I am indifferent about that, as long as the transgender people have rights equal to non-transgender people. Part of the reason why I am indifferent might be because I have very little interest in sports. I am not an athlete, I have haven't participated in sports at all in over 20 years, I haven't watched sports on TV in more than 25 years (except for rare snippets), and I haven't attended a sports event in over 30 years. [Note: I also didn't watch the video in the first post of this topic thread, other looking a few frames of the video.] I am interested in intellectual matters instead.
In a place I worked in as a temp, all of the workers were required by the boss (a highly progressive person) to accept the sex/gender that all of the workers identified themselves to be. There was one person there who to me looked mostly like a man but as transgender and he wore dresses and identified as a woman. We were instructed to refer to that person as "she" and "her" instead of as "he" and "him", in order to not hurt the person's feelings and probably to avoid being considered guilty of sexual harassment.
At my local library there was a reference librarian who looked completely like a woman (though with short hair) and who I thus definitely thought was a woman, but the person wore a label which said something like "I identify as she and her". Because of the label I presume the person was transgender, but if it wasn't for the label I would never had thought the person was transgender. The person's voice was also completely feminine.
I thus consider what is called a sex change to actually be a sex change, if the process is complete enough.
Regarding how many sexes exist in humans, Matthew 19:12 quotes Jesus as saying some people are born as eunuchs, so most likely a significant number of people were born as eunuchs in the first century CE. Furthermore, the latter part of that verse (in the KJV) says "... and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." Thus the book of Matthew says Jesus Christ approves of the latter kind of eunuchs.
Isaiah 56:3-4 (KJV) says the following.
"3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak, saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
4 For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;". Thus even according to those OT verses Yahweh approves of eunuchs who faithfully keep his commandments and worship him.
These NT and OT verses thus express a socially liberal theological attitude towards believing eunuchs - namely to believing transgender (of a certain kind) people. Also there is the account in the books of Acts of an Ethiopian eunuch of high authority who quickly became a Christian after learning of Jesus (see Acts 8:27) - but he was not likely born as a eunuch (since he was a government official and and since back then some governments made some of their men into eunuchs).
Regarding how many genders officially exist as a legal status, "On June 15, 2017, Oregon became the first state in the U.S. to announce it will allow a non-binary "X" gender marker on state IDs and driver's licenses. The law took effect July 1. No doctor's note is required for the change.[79] " See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_rights_in_the_United_States . That same article also says the following.
"Third genders have traditionally been acknowledged in a number of Native American cultures as "two spirit" people, in traditional Hawaiian culture as the māhū, and as the fa'afafine in American Samoa.[68][69][70][71] Similarly, immigrants from traditional cultures that acknowledge a third gender would benefit from such a reform, including the muxe gender in southern Mexico and the hijra of south Asian cultures.[72][73][74] "
Anony Mous, regarding women beating men in tennis, what about Billie Jean King? When I was a pre-teen I learned of her victory over a former No. 1 ranked men’s player. I was deeply impressed by her victory. That victory was a news sensation and a victory for the feminist movement and greatly contributed to me developing progressive beliefs - beliefs based upon evidence. See https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/king-triumphs-in-battle-of-sexes . It says the following.
"On September 20, 1973, in a highly publicized “Battle of the Sexes” tennis match, top women’s player Billie Jean King, 29, beats Bobby Riggs, 55, a former No. 1 ranked men’s player. Riggs (1918-1995), a self-proclaimed male chauvinist, had boasted that women were inferior, that they couldn’t handle the pressure of the game and that even at his age he could beat any female player. The match was a huge media event, witnessed in person by over 30,000 spectators at the Houston Astrodome and by another 50 million TV viewers worldwide. King made a Cleopatra-style entrance on a gold litter carried by men dressed as ancient slaves, while Riggs arrived in a rickshaw pulled by female models. Legendary sportscaster Howard Cosell called the match, in which King beat Riggs 6-4, 6-3, 6-3. King’s achievement not only helped legitimize women’s professional tennis and female athletes, but it was seen as a victory for women’s rights in general."
Do you say she won because the man was 25 to 26 years older than her?
In my memory of the video news footage that I saw as a pre-teen the man who lost was deeply embarrassed that he lost.
-
15
Al Gore speech or JW convention?
by neat blue dog init literally could be either.
the clip starts at 1:15. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ljymc--cpoy&feature=youtu.be.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
What I have read in Al Gore's books about CO2 and climate change are collaborated by what I read on NASA's website and in some science books on paleontology and the environment and in UN press reports about climate change. Likewise NOVA science shows which I have seen on PBS television about climate change collaborate with what Al Gore says about climate change. I am impressed with Al Gore's books on the environment. I also attended (in the city I was born in) his climate change lecture called "An Inconvenient Truth" before the documentary movie came out with the same title. After the lecture people were trying to get his autograph, but Al was hoping people would instead be asking him questions about climate change. What Al Gore said accompanied with this body language convinced me he really is convinced about climate change and was annoyed people were asking for his autograph instead of asking him questions. To me he is sincere on that topic.
It is such a pity that Al Gore lost the electoral college vote in the year 2000 election and that as a result George W. Bush became president. The USA and the world would have been much better off if Al Gore had become sworn in as president of the USA in January 2001.
The Clinton-Gore administration had provided the George W. Bush administration with military intelligence saying there could be a terrorist attack on the USA. If Al had become president he might have prevented the 9/11 terrorist attack upon the Pentagon building and maybe even the prevented the 9/11 terrorist attack on the Twin Towers. Al is far smarter than George is.
During the last few years of the Clinton-Gore administration the USA federal government had budget surpluses and as a result the USA national debt was declining during those years. But, under George W. Bush the national debt increased tremendously. Furthermore, AL Gore would have taken serious action to fight climate change if he had become President.
-
55
Remember when HITTING A WOMAN was just WRONG!
by pistolpete injust a few years ago, any man that slapped a women was considered a piece of shit.
today people are are paying and cheering to see a man knocking the shit out of a woman.
what feminists, social warriors, and gender recognition fighters don't realized is that their actions are actually causing the world to revert back to the days when the world treated women as property, second class species, with no rights whatsoever, whose only value was a sex instrument for the male species.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Anony Mous (and others), https://www.babycenter.com/pregnancy/your-baby/fetal-development-your-babys-genitals-and-urinary-system_40005752 shows specifically that at 6 weeks boy and girl babies in the womb has have the same external reproductive appearance. Yes changes develop later, but according that source (and other sources I have seen) the differences don't appear before 6 weeks. My comment was thus factual, informative, and intelligent.
Folks, also consider https://www.npr.org/2021/03/18/978716732/wave-of-new-bills-say-trans-athletes-have-an-unfair-edge-what-does-the-science-s . That article says the following.
'Often missing from the culture-war aspect of the debate is a focus on the type of questions that Dr. Eric Vilain has spent much of his career researching. Vilain, a pediatrician and geneticist who studies sex differences in athletes, says there are no good faith reasons to limit transgender women's participation in sports, especially at the high school level. Vilain has advised both the International Olympic Committee and the NCAA, and says these laws generally aren't based in scientific evidence, but rather "target women who have either a different biology or ... simply look different." '
Furthermore, if being a transgender woman (if born male) provides an unfair advantage, then why did the International Olympic Committee (IOC) Medical Commission produce guidelines (see the source I provided in an earlier post) saying that transgender people should be allowed to compete in sex specific events (such as ones for women only) if they meet specific criteria stated by the committee?
LoveUniHateExams and others, consider the following.
Testosterone in males is overwhelmingly produced in the testes. For proof of claim see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone . It says the following.
"The largest amounts of testosterone (>95%) are produced by the testes in men,[4] while the adrenal glands account for most of the remainder. Testosterone is also synthesized in far smaller total quantities in women by the adrenal glands, thecal cells of the ovaries, and, during pregnancy, by the placenta.[142] "
Perhaps some of you were not aware of that. But I was aware that testosterone in males is produced overwhelmingly in the testes, and that is part of the scientific knowledge I had when making my claims in my earlier posts.
Since the vast majority of the testosterone in biological men are produced in the testes, if a person born male later becomes transgender by having all of his testes removed (even if during adulthood) and takes estrogen injections and/or estrogen pills, and when tested has a testosterone level in the range accepted for competitive women's sports, what hormonal advantage (if any) is there for such a transgender athlete?
Furthermore, doesn't taking estrogen injections feminize the bodies of those born male and thus hinder their ability (relative to non-transgender biological males) to increase muscle mass? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5182227/ says the following.
"In transgender women, exogenous estrogen is used to help feminize patients, and anti-androgens are used as adjuncts to help suppress masculinizing features."
My comments in my posts in this forum topic thread were thus factual, informative, rational, and intelligent and based upon reliable sources of information.
-
55
Remember when HITTING A WOMAN was just WRONG!
by pistolpete injust a few years ago, any man that slapped a women was considered a piece of shit.
today people are are paying and cheering to see a man knocking the shit out of a woman.
what feminists, social warriors, and gender recognition fighters don't realized is that their actions are actually causing the world to revert back to the days when the world treated women as property, second class species, with no rights whatsoever, whose only value was a sex instrument for the male species.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Simon, there might be other cases of such competitions that we have not learned of yet. Furthermore, the number of cases will likely increase as transgender people become more widely accepted and as transgender people gain legal rights in more countries.
The transgender person (born male) in the video does not look much like a man to me. The person no longer has a penis and no longer has testicles (if the person has had the surgery done, which I presume is the case, especially since I presume the person is competing as a woman), has woman shaped breasts, has sex hormone levels of that of a woman (which we be required to compete as a woman in sports), and acts like a woman and identifies as a woman. How much of a man is such a person? Not much in my opinion.
Here is more content pertaining to my prior post.
4) All human adults, when they were still babies in the womb were for a period of time anatomically of ambiguous/neutral gender (with mostly female looking external genitalia). I know that because I have seen such mentioned and illustrated in college textbooks on human sexuality. The babes that would be born as boys for period of time in the womb had vulvas and what would become their testes had not yet descended to below their crotch. For one source of this information see the science web page that is located at https://www.sciencealert.com/watch-we-were-once-all-female . See also https://www.babycenter.com/pregnancy/your-baby/fetal-development-your-babys-genitals-and-urinary-system_40005752 . Furthermore, the foreskin (of the penis) of uncircumcised males is analogous to the clitoral hood of uncircumcised females (females whose genitals have not been mutilated.
5) Some of what I mentioned above is evidence that sex/gender in humans is actually part of a continuum (even for those whose genetics are completely male or completely female), rather than being purely binary.
I intend to say more later.
-
55
Remember when HITTING A WOMAN was just WRONG!
by pistolpete injust a few years ago, any man that slapped a women was considered a piece of shit.
today people are are paying and cheering to see a man knocking the shit out of a woman.
what feminists, social warriors, and gender recognition fighters don't realized is that their actions are actually causing the world to revert back to the days when the world treated women as property, second class species, with no rights whatsoever, whose only value was a sex instrument for the male species.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
I see nothing ridiculous or wrong with transgender people competing with non-transgender people in sex/gender specific sports, under a gender classification that is opposite to the gender the person had at birth. Such is partly due to the scientific information I have read. Here are some of my reasons.
1) Simon said "If it were genuine, why are there never born-women transgenders entering the mens competitions?" But in actuality there are people (at least one person I read about) born female (no one is born as an adult and thus no one is born a woman) who became an full grown woman and later became transgender and who later competed in men's competition. Do you want proof? Well here is some proof.
Visit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_people_in_sports . It says the following.
"The first out transgender person to make a US National Team was Chris Mosier, who in 2016 qualified for Team USA in duathlon.[9] Mosier is considered the catalyst for the change[22] in the IOC policy on transgender athletes in 2015, when he challenged the policy after initially being banned from the world championship race. Mosier also became the first known transgender athlete to compete in the Olympic Trials in the gender with which they identify, and the first trans man to make a men's Olympic Trials, when he competed in January 2020 in the US Olympic Team Trials in the 50k Racewalking event.[23] " That person (born female) thus competed in men's competitions.
The next paragraph in the article says "In 2017 Mack Beggs, a teenager from Texas, was required to wrestle against girls throughout the season of his transition from female to male up through the state championship, despite wanting to wrestle against boys. This was due to state sport regulations requiring athletes to compete alongside athletes of their assigned sex. Some opponents say the testosterone prescribed as part of his transition gives him an unfair advantage and made it unsafe for the other wrestlers. (He finished the regular season at 52–0 and won the state championship.)[24]" That person thus wanted, and tried to obtain permission, to compete in boy's/men's competition but he was barred from doing so.
2) Regarding what sex we are born as, that is mostly a result of the effects of the sex hormones in our bodies. Yes our sex chromosomes is a major factor, but that is because our sex chromosomes influence what our sex hormones will be and their levels. But also androgen hormones secreted by the mother during pregnancy (especially if she previously gave birth to multiple boys prior to becoming pregnant with a female) can influence a genetically female baby in the womb to be born with more masculine characteristics than would otherwise be case, and such females in many cases end up becoming "tom boys".
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) Medical Commission now recognizes that the sex hormone levels are a much more relevant factor in determining sex/gender for sport's competitions, than the sex chromosomes. In regards to that note the following from the article.
"In 2003, a committee convened by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) Medical Commission drew up new guidelines for participation of athletes who had undergone gender reassignment. The report listed three conditions for participation. First, athletes must have undergone sex reassignment surgery, including changes in the external genitalia and gonadectomy. Second, athletes must show legal recognition of their gender. Third, athletes must have undergone hormone therapy for an appropriate time before participation, with two years being the suggested time.[5]
It was not until 2004 that the IOC allowed transgender athletes to participate in the Olympic Games.[6]
...
Sports organizations have sought a test for sex verification to ensure fairness across all sports. This began in the 1940s with "femininity certificates" provided by a physician. In the 1960s, visual genital inspections were used to confirm gender, followed by chromosomal analysis to detect the presence of the SRY and DYZ1 genes, normally found on the Y chromosome.[26] These tests were all designed to ensure that athletes were only allowed to compete as their sex, but mostly resulted in the exclusion of intersex athletes.[27]
More recently, testosterone levels have become the focus and, at the same time, new guidelines have been sought that would allow successfully-transitioned athletes to compete.[7] Since the proposition in 2003 to use testosterone levels, reputable organizations such as the IOC have adopted strict policies that employ testosterone as a metric to allow successfully transitioned female athletes to compete.[6] More recent guidelines have focused entirely on testosterone levels, such as the IOC’s current guidelines, originally set in November 2015, which set limits on transgender athletes’ testosterone levels for them to be permitted in women’s competition categories.[28] Controversy surrounding the 2020 Tokyo Olympics also centered around testosterone levels, specifically over whether the IOC’s guidelines should be amended to set stricter testosterone limits, although this proposed change has been strongly debated.[28] The testing of testosterone alone as a marker for athleticism has been debated.[29]"
3) There are genetically male babies who are born looking female (at least on the outside) and who are thus raised as girls, but who upon entering puberty naturally become completely boys. Such happens because sometimes the bodies of genetically male young children do not respond adequately to (and/or produce an adequate amount of) the male sex hormones in their bodies, and thus appear to be females, until the male sex hormone levels increase dramatically during puberty. I learned such from watching two science programs on PBS TV.
I intend to say more later.