<p>oh my god guys, thank you for this lovely debate. I mean for a long while I was reluctant to identify with labels because (other than the stigma) I always felt uniquely alone and had I been born a girl I would likely have had a very weird, rebellious and indie sense of fashion anyway</p>
<p>but anyway since I may be applying to medical school and various other grad schools or Teach for America and the like I wonder what I should begin doing.</p>
<p>I mean if I were to apply to some biotech firm or private company later how do I explain the weird transition in my resume?</p>
<p>On the LGB issue, how do you know there was no political or personal motivation as opposed to scientific motivation for taking LGB off the list? </p>
<p>Answer this:</p>
<p>What is the biological function of a male sex organ?</p>
<p>A Female sex organ?</p>
<p>And the Anus which is part of the digestive system? </p>
<p>1 and 2 go together just fine, but 1 and 3 don’t go together, 3 is part of the digestive system.</p>
<p>Being gay doesn’t make sense from a scientific point of view, so who is to say that it isn’t really a disorder?</p>
<p>I really don’t care whether it is technically a disorder or not. for all I know I have some weird mutation on the Y chromosome and during gestation two different, psychologically-conflicting pathways got activated, but I guess physiological surgery is easier than brain surgery and besides I like being feminine. It feels [me]. Would you treat a jock for his love of sports? Or not pay for certain physical therapies because not being a Div I athlete is not a medical disorder?</p>
<p>although I guess I would care if it started affecting employment or med school admission.</p>
<p>I have to object here and point out the anus has all sorts of pleasant sensory nerves that are activated only when co-stimulated with other sexual stimuli that wouldn’t really make sense if the anus was purely digestive and besides have you seen the bonobos? </p>
<p>and some people think the vagina should just be a reproductive organ and that’s why they justify female circumcision.</p>
<p>I just ask for a softer tone in this thread. I am a very open-minded and scientific person. thanks.</p>
<p>Hah, an ignorant stubborn bio grad. If he/she was a psych grad or student he/she might know his/her argument well enough to not look entirely ignorant, if he/she was a law student he might realize how narrow-minded and unapt to argue this point he/she is, but as a bio grad, he/she has the worst of both worlds. Had to state that observation(:</p>
<p>Sorry OP, my “dueling” with USC has gone on for a few months - about this same issue. Rox has a point, it really does no good except to educate lurkers and make sure his arguments aren’t ever accepted as truth. I would talk to a counselor or the LGBT center about the resume thing, cause I’m unfortunately honestly not sure where you’d list that. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because experiments were run… data was collected</p>
<p>Here ya go, UC Davis good enough for you? I don’t much care for them but they have the history nicely laid out. Pretty much the only folks who claim that “it was political” are Bryan Fischer-esk “family” groups and their only evidence is “teh geyz r ickypoo” and “For the Bible tells me so” - not scientific.</p>
<p>The rest of your stuff? I’m not addressing it in detail, because it’s just LGBT-phobic nonsense. However, “Who’s to say” doesn’t fly in the academic world. OP is right, there are pleasure points in the anus that could only be stimulated by sexual contact. Your little set-up is offensive and betrays a lack of knowledge of the nervous system. Oh and btw? Bio majors know about homosexuality in the animal kingdom, what’s your excuse exactly for not knowing that? Cheers!</p>
<p>You aren’t addressing it because you can’t.</p>
<p>And animals? Is that all you have? I have seen dogs do peoples’ legs, inanimate objects… I suppose that could justify a guy doing his car’s steering wheel…?</p>
<p>@Eli I think I might love you, if you’re a boy will you be my boyfriend and if you’re a girl, will you have my gaybies? ._.</p>
<p>@USC </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>-holds brow- you… really want to go there? You… really want to go there? No… I’m not addressing it because life’s too short. You’re putting it there to ■■■■■ and I don’t much feel like taking the time to dismantle an argument that’s been dismantled for you at least thirty times now before half your post-count was removed. It’s like those idiot senators who keep proposing a bill to outlaw flag burning “We need a law outlawing flag burning” “No, your law has been voted down” “HErp derp, we need a law outlawing flag burning” “No, again, your law has been voted down” “Derk, flag burning!!!” </p>
<p>You’ve been told, you’ve been shown the science, you’ve been shown the evidence, that you’re in a science at all with such lousy critical thinking skills is beyond me. I’m pretty much through with trying to be polite to you at all - I didn’t say this to Rox but the reason I debate people like you is because if I back down you start giggling like a little kid and thinking you’ve actually beaten my arguments with your b.s.</p>
<p>The only point of your post is to say “Herp derp, peenies and va-jay-jays go together” Yeah, no kidding, they do. Nobody’s debating that. But this other way’s not incorrect either. </p>
<p>Okay. NOW you can say I’m yelling/angry and responding with hostility.</p>
<p>Obviously you cannot contribute to this debate either haha, as demonstrated by your continual use of the same (inaccurate) statements (that also happen to be lacking in facts or support) and stubborn refusal to see that you’re undoubtedly entirely wrong.</p>
<p>IT’S FROM THE UC *****ING DAVIS WEBSITE!! IT HAS A CITATION LINK TO THE LEFT OF THE PAPER. Are you deliberately being infuriating to ■■■■■ and try and get me banned or are you REALLY that incapable of simple research?!?!</p>
<p>HERE YA GO, right there! The link you could have gotten to by taking “Bibliographic References” at the top of the bloody page. Since you’re too lazy to actually look.</p>
<p>If you footnote, it’s generally in the Bibliography as well, you tend to cite both places. While not identical, they’re more or less the same thing! Websites are not Microsoft Word, they don’t always work well with footnotes and even then… it has a bibliography so… who the heck cares? It’s cited its sources, you have links to the evidence, you can TELL it’s scientific. It’s UC Davis for ****s sake, just cause I personally don’t like them doesn’t mean they’re a bad school. You’re questioning a UC website? Really? So… you really know better than professors who’ve compiled data onto the website. Really?</p>
<p>I still don’t have a tag, dammit. What do I have to do to get one?</p>
<p>@ RoxSox: Tone argument. Google it.</p>
<p>@ USCBioGrad:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Even assuming that your premise is true (that what is the issue is purely the mind, not the body) it doesn’t work anyways. The end.</p>
<p>Also, you have effectively proven that you know jack **** about the difference between gender and sex and what causes gender dysphoria. You actually have proven that you don’t know anything about gender in general as well. You’re assuming that there is a “correct” way to be, that one’s biological sex should dictate one’s gender identity and the gender roles that one should take on, without realizing that, OH WAIT, GENDER IS A SOCIALLY-CONSTRUCTED CONCEPT.</p>
<p>I hope you have enough common sense to take that statement to its logical conclusion.</p>
<p>Unless you’re antipacifist under a new screenname. Which I guess you could be.</p>
<p>Not all of the page numbers are even listed for certain points, some “notes” are just references to a book in general. </p>
<p>Do you have any links to an unbiased website? Considering that article came from the “Rainbow” section of the website, I would like to see something from an unbiased source.</p>
<p>I saw your debate in the gay roommate thread. I noticed you seemed pretty hung up about someone citing Free Republic, so now I challenge you to to cite an unbiased source.</p>