I’ll leave that to you to decide. 

My intent here is not to provoke a discussion on gender theory, but to reject a caricature of bitcoiners that includes a bigoted matrix mindset. 

 I see 

 Appreciate your reply. I don’t profess to know the individual situations (and have never experienced for myself) what it’s like to be trans. 

As with anything like this, of course there are deep nuances, unique circumstances, and the “right” thing can be different for different people.

It’s also true that with any polarizing issue, you end up with an extremely vocal minority who can end up pushing things too far. (Especially when that voice is born out of the frustration and grief of being oppressed, marginalized, scorned, abused, and disproportionately murdered).

But the casual, glib statement that “there are only two genders” is more insidious than an opinion. (First, it’s by definition an un-informed opinion — how could anyone who isn’t trans actually deeply understand it? Second, it’s the framework on top of which society as a whole decides how people should be treated, and trans people are disproportionately treated horribly).

I don’t buy the comprehensive conspiracy theory view here at all. But sure, politicians use sensitive, inflammatory issues to stoke division all the time. It’s sure as hell working in this context. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t also an underlying issue.

Many societies, throughout the history of humanity have, recognized a third or unspecified “gender” that doesn’t match the “gear”. Frequently these individuals have been honored, rather than oppressed.

I’m not taking a prescriptive stance about the individual situations here (who should do what with their body and when). That’s up to the individual.

But I’m confident that when a minority group says “this is what life is like for us, and it’s hard” that the right thing to do is to listen first, and listen long. 

Instead, most people react because it challenges their worldview. That type of fear can be deadly. 

 Whose freedom? What others do that doesn't affect anyone else is none of your business. 

 "what other do that doesn't affect anyone else is none of your business"

tell that to the thousands of people that have expressed the long-held belief that there are only men & women - who have either lost their jobs, been imprisoned, or had their children taken away from the state for expressing such an opinion in the last 10 years 

 I am gonna need some sources on any of that happening to begin with.

And I will had that "hate crimes" demand context to be such.

You can call people by the wrong pronouns in benign or malicious ways, with different outcomes. 

 sure

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/10/trans-activists-scottish-police-arrest-jk-rowling-crime/

https://nypost.com/2021/03/18/man-arrested-for-discussing-childs-gender-in-court-order-violation/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/teacher-jailed-for-contempt-of-court-refusing-student-gender-neutral-pronouns-ireland/

https://thebridgehead.ca/2023/02/28/catholic-student-arrested-at-canadian-catholic-school-for-saying-that-there-are-only-two-genders/

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/jul/06/maya-forstater-was-discriminated-against-over-gender-critical-beliefs-tribunal-rules 

 1- JKR, a actual TERF, that tries to actually do damage to people. Cool, can ignore this one.
2- Got arrested for breaking a court order, nothing else. Can ignore that one too.
3- Contempt of court, again. Malicious refusal to abide by policy of her job.
4- The article itself is tremendously biased. If it is actually just true, this is bad. But I doubt it.
5- She literally won her claim. So what is the point? 

 You think it’s a good idea to let anyone who claims to be a woman into women’s spaces? 

 Unisex spaces have been a thing for ages...

That is not what makes it a problem.

Crimea are already crimes. 

 The state needs to stay the fuck out of peoples’ personal lives. Period.

Arresting someone for an ignorant or bigoted viewpoint is absolutely wrong.

The state exists to protect an individual’s safety, and their freedom to flourish and maximize their own potential, right up to the line where that activity encroaches on another citizen’s *safety*. No further.

Thing is, trans people have been overwhelmingly the victims of certain types of crime. Doesn’t mean we need the speech police. But when a subgroup of a society is in measurably greater danger than the rest, it warrants some protection.

Again, individual circumstances are unique. I’m not prescribing a particular path.

I’m just trying to say, be open, and listen, and when someone tells you who they are… believe them. 

 let's clarify here - I will not treat you any differently if you publicly or privately choose to believe and express yourself as a different gender than the one assigned at birth.

The moment you advocate that the law should punish those who don't agree with you is the moment you become my enemy. 

 Hey Julian.

I want to emphasize that I’m not attacking you, or trying to say “you’re bad for your views”. That would be presumptuous, and it would defeat the purpose of my initial post.

I entirely agree that the law should not punish someone for their view. Hope nothing I wrote suggested otherwise.

Also, I’m not making a “prescriptive” for how our society’s doctors, parents, teachers, or therapists should approach transgender individuals. Any one-size-fits-all approach would be the wrong one.

But the blanket statement that “there are only two genders” strikes me as closed-minded, un-empathetic, and generally contrary to “don’t trust verify” as a principle.

The neuroscience is starting to catch up, and my (limited) understanding is that it’s more natural than the traditional “fear of the unknown” point of view would have us believe.

Our society has historically been terrible at supporting minority groups, and it usually comes from a place of ignorance, not hatred. But ignorance and fear can lead down some very ugly paths. 

 the problem comes when the laws meet science here. law is being used to enshrine these new scientific discoveries or THEORIES as fact, when even the gender+ theorists know themselves it is all new and subject to change/evolve. 

from my perspective I have never seen a transgender person or new gender theorist speak out against draconian speech laws like the ones in Ireland or Canada's C16.

Despite me loving Bitcoin and believing it is the only form of money rooted in objective truth and not theft, it would be completely hypocritical of me to advocate the arrest or ban of any proponent of fiat money, or anyone who said Bitcoin was a Ponzi scheme.

that type of introspection, at least in the present, seems void in any of the gender theory circles or mainstream proponents.
 

 We share a distaste for the speech police, and most controversial sociocultural discussions seem to lead to the opposing sides cutting corners (philosophically, morally, or legally) in the interest of meeting their own needs.

It’s nuanced, and complicated, and fraught. Anti-trans rhetoric (the really nasty bigoted stuff) is directly correlated with instances of anti-trans violence. But where do you draw the line? These are lines that I’m vary wary of any government getting to draw. Because that kind of power is an inevitable slippery slope.

The intention of my original post was to (vehemently) disagree with the caricature of bitcoiners being closed to the idea that our society and the humans who comprise it are actually far more complicated than it appears.

How many other times has science revealed insights about humanity and the universe that was not visible to the naked eye?

In this way, I think the anti-trans view is incorrect (and will be proven such in time), and the marginalization of individuals in our society which results from such a viewpoint is more damaging than simply keeping an open mind and listening to people around us. 

 I just *personally* don't think these things are too complicated.  

When your body is dug up ~300 years from now, the amount of gender affirmation or surgery done will more than likely not be traceable - and the details pertaining to your gender will be evident from your skeletal structure as either man or woman.

I don't see this viewpoint as stoking anti-trans rhetoric. 
 

 Eh. I think it sidesteps the actual questions at hand, while maintaining a structure of marginalization against a minority.

I sincerely appreciate the civil discourse here. Not a lot of places on the internet where  this👆exists. 

Especially not when the conversation gets started by a note like mine 😉 

 I should be precise though. Not “maintaining a structure of marginalization”, but “maintaining a structure that supports marginalization”.

Less accusatory and more accurate 🤝 

 Howdy. You sound pretty unhappy.

I’m a happily married, straight, white, healthy man. I have a beautiful, brilliant wife, and I’m very content in my body and life.

But some people aren’t. And while I haven’t lived their experiences, I have empathy for their suffering. My first instinct is to listen.

I don’t know you, but I hope that some part of you second-guessed what you wrote. Either way, thanks for the easy mute suggestion. I hope you’re able to find peace in yourself. 

 sorry wino i'm not buying into the mental illness.  u do u it's ok 

 ps verry happy. beetcoin just hepled me buy house for first born child. all is goood cept for admirals in drag. no good for us 

 I agree. (Technically, by believing in freedom, I believe the state can’t dictate what people believe. But I believe individual citizens can and should speak for their beliefs and push against those which we believe are anti-freedom).

In any case, I’m just pointing to a belief that I believe is wrong, and will age badly as neuroscience continues to evolve. 

 Yeah 100%