Quote from: Jackalope;250075See, right there you are arguing that the Pew center's research is sociology, not demography.  I think you are splitting hairs, and the point stands whether you call it sociology or demography.

There is a big difference between sociology and demography. The former (sometimes) attempts to discern the mindset of men/women with less than satisfactory results. In fact the PEW site has separate categories for demography surveys and their sociological ones - both include articles, etc. If you meant sociology fair enough. But demography as a field of research and study has nothing to with the definition of mindset that you gave in an earlier post.

I'll respond to your other post a little later. I'll skip your summary of is and deal with the second half of the post.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Jackalope;250074So what I'm questioning, and what I think S'mon is questioning, is the assumption "A male-to-female transexxual is a woman."

You may have been questioning this but not S'mon (and hopefully he will correct me if I'm mistaken) What he questioned was would a male to female transexual be able to understand the mindset of a typical woman and not if a male to female transexual was in fact a woman.

QuoteThis is actually a fairly important issue, as I think if you accept the premise that "A male-to-female transexxual is a woman" is true, then it can be argued fairly easily that "woman" is a meaningless term that doesn't tell you anything.

Well actually if one accepts this premise it means that the definition of woman is far more complex than conventional thinking would suggest. I realize now that you were approaching this subject from a more opaque philosophical angle rather than a legal one. Unnecessary IMO because if Borgstrom is indeed a transexual - I have no idea - then she would be a woman (if she went through the required legal processes) in the eyes of the law.

QuoteAnd I can see that result in the argument in this thread.  Part of the reason y'all are arguing that there is no "typical woman" is because you have (possibly without realizing it) embraced a definition of woman that is so broad as to be utterly meaningless.

Except nobody here is arguing that there is no typical woman. What I have been arguing is that there is no typical mindset. Physiology is far more typical and predictable than pyschology.

Regards,
David R

Ok, this has clearly long since stopped being about RPGs.  Feel free to start a new one about RPGs on the RPG board, but this particular thread is off to Off-topic.

RPGPundit

Quote from: David R;250132You may have been questioning this but not S'mon (and hopefully he will correct me if I'm mistaken) What he questioned was would a male to female transexual be able to understand the mindset of a typical woman and not if a male to female transexual was in fact a woman.

I think you are misreading S'mon's comment, which was:   Are we allowed to point out that a previously-male transsexual is unlikely to have the mindset of a typical woman?If we clarify for S'mon's weasel-wording, he is essentially asserting "A male-to-female transsexual is unlikely to have the mindset of a typical woman."

Note that he is not saying that a male-to-female transsexual is unlikely to understand the mindset of a typical woman, he is saying that male-to-female transsexual is unlikely to have the mindset of a typical woman.

And why would a male-to-female transsexual have the mindset of a typical woman?  A male-to-female transsexual certainly isn't a typical woman, if a woman at all.  That's implicit in S'mon's question.

   Well actually if one accepts this premise it means that the definition of woman is far more complex than conventional thinking would suggest. I realize now that you were approaching this subject from a more opaque philosophical angle rather than a legal one. Unnecessary IMO because if Borgstrom is indeed a transexual - I have no idea - then she would be a woman (if she went through the required legal processes) in the eyes of the law.

If one accepts the premise that a male-to-female transsexual is a woman, then the definition of woman doesn't become "far more complex than conventional thinking would suggest," it becomes useless.  The definition of a woman becomes "any person that thinks it is a woman."

QuoteExcept nobody here is arguing that there is no typical woman. What I have been arguing is that there is no typical mindset. Physiology is far more typical and predictable than pyschology.

There is no bright line between physiology and psychology David, the two are very much interconnected.  The mind is embodied in the brain, and the brain is subject of physiology.

I don't really get how you can argue that there is a typical woman but not a typical woman's mindset.  The typical woman does have a mindset, yes?  That mindset would then, necessarily, be the typical woman's mindset, right?

Quote from: Jackalope;250157I think you are misreading S'mon's comment, which was:   Are we allowed to point out that a previously-male transsexual is unlikely to have the mindset of a typical woman?If we clarify for S'mon's weasel-wording, he is essentially asserting "A male-to-female transsexual is unlikely to have the mindset of a typical woman."

Well I think on this point we won't really resolve anything. I take what S'mon says at face value. Unless he chooses to clarify what he actually meant, it's pretty pointless debating what he could have meant.

QuoteIf one accepts the premise that a male-to-female transsexual is a woman, then the definition of woman doesn't become "far more complex than conventional thinking would suggest," it becomes useless.  The definition of a woman becomes "any person that thinks it is a woman."

Actually it does become more complex.  If we do accept this premise, the definition of a woman (or a man) goes beyond the biological into the psychological.

QuoteThere is no bright line between physiology and psychology David, the two are very much interconnected.  The mind is embodied in the brain, and the brain is subject of physiology.
I don't really get how you can argue that there is a typical woman but not a typical woman's mindset.  The typical woman does have a mindset, yes?  That mindset would then, necessarily, be the typical woman's mindset, right?

Jackalope, it is far easier to discern physiological characteristics than pyschological ones. Acknowledging the typical physiological characteristics of women is one thing. Attempting to discern typical psychological characteristics is another. In other words what you're saying is, that because women look the same, they must think the same.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David R;250180Well I think on this point we won't really resolve anything. I take what S'mon says at face value. Unless he chooses to clarify what he actually meant, it's pretty pointless debating what he could have meant.

You most certainly did not take him at face value.  You completely changed the obvious meaning of his statement, and now you're weaseling out of it. :rolleyes:

QuoteActually it does become more complex.  If we do accept this premise, the definition of a woman (or a man) goes beyond the biological into the psychological.

Exactly!  That's what I just said.  The definition of a woman becomes "Anyone who thinks they are a woman."

Look man, I know exactly where this argument is going.  It ends with us at a point where you are claiming that physiology doesn't make one a woman, history doesn't make on a woman, but rather psychology make sone a woman.  Then I ask what are the psychological characteristics of a woman, and you tell me that there is no specific female psychology, no "mind of a woman" that all women have.

And where does that leave us?  With woman being defined as "anything that thinks like a woman", and thinking like a woman left undefinable.

QuoteJackalope, it is far easier to discern physiological characteristics than pyschological ones. Acknowledging the typical physiological characteristics of women is one thing. Attempting to discern typical pychological characterics is another. In other words what you're saying, is that because women look the same, they must think the same.

See!  This is what I'm talking about!

You're arguing that we can't discern women's mindset, but we can define who is a woman by their mindset.

This is why I fucking hate third-wave feminism.  It's such irrational bullshit.  Gender theory is nothing but pseudoscientific garbage.

Quote from: Jackalope;250190You most certainly did not take him at face value.  You completely changed the obvious meaning of his statement, and now you're weaseling out of it. :rolleyes:

No, I took him at face value, you chose to clarify his....how did you phrase it..."weasel wording". If it was so obvious, why the need for clarification?

QuoteExactly!  That's what I just said.  The definition of a woman becomes "Anyone who thinks they are a woman."

Yes and the end result in your view is that the definition of woman becomes meaningless, whereas I think the definition becomes more complex.

QuoteLook man, I know exactly where this argument is going.  It ends with us at a point where you are claiming that physiology doesn't make one a woman, history doesn't make on a woman, but rather psychology make sone a woman.  Then I ask what are the psychological characteristics of a woman, and you tell me that there is no specific female psychology, no "mind of a woman" that all women have.

This is your problem right here. You assume too much. You create arguments which nobody has made and then expect the person you arguing with to defend said arguments.

QuoteYou're arguing that we can't discern women's mindset,

I'm arguing that we can't define the typical mindset of a women.

Quote...but we can define who is a woman by their mindset.

As far as the differences between male and female pyschological states, yes.

QuoteThis is why I fucking hate third-wave feminism.  It's such irrational bullshit.  Gender theory is nothing but pseudoscientific garbage.

This is relevent how....oh yeah, let me guess, after this, is where you start flinging insults, right ?

Regards,
David R

Well, this thread went good for a while before degenerating into a flamefest, so I guess I can't be disappointed.

Quote from: Serious Paul;249372Wasn't Dragonlance written primarily by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman? My wife, and a lot of her friends love the series. Maybe that's just anecdotal on my part, but I've also noticed that in my area (Grand Rapids) there seem to be a lot of women who like D&D, Vampire, and something called BeSM. (I don't know what that is.)

Dragonlance is why I wanted to start gaming. First picked the books up in the early 90s, and I still can't get anyone to run it for me :/

I played vampire once, and din't really like it. For the record, I chose gangrel

I wou;dn't want a Wraethulu game - I don't like the dynamic that sex usually brings to a group. I just want to be able to kill bad things, fix wrongs, maybe dabble with intrigue, and eventually become a god. Or have a game that's comedy gold (like the wizard that got pissed, turned a guy into a pig and served bacon the next morning). Crazy game, that was.

Quote from: David R;250202No, I took him at face value, you chose to clarify his....how did you phrase it..."weasel wording". If it was so obvious, why the need for clarification?

Because technically S'mon didn't assert anything, he asked a question.  Of course, it was a rhetorical question.  He also included the passive-aggressive "is it okay to" framing to his rhetorical question to subtly implicate others in the conversation to being close-minded and hostile to disagreement.

You on the other hand took his statement of "to have the mindset of..." and rather than take that at face value as you claim, changed it to "to understand the mindset of..."

Also, weasel wording is not my invention.

QuoteI'm arguing that we can't define the typical mindset of a women.

So you claim that we can't define the typical mindset of a women.

QuoteAs far as the differences between male and female pyschological states, yes.

But we can define the differences between male and female psychological states.

That's a neat trick.  How do you do that?  Define the differences between male and female "psychological states" without defining a male or female "psychological state."  And how exactly is a mindset different from a psychological state?

QuoteThis is relevent how....oh yeah, let me guess, after this, is where you start flinging insults, right ?

It's relevant because that is the position you are arguing.  You are arguing a position first articulated bu Judith Butler in Gender Trouble.  It was silly postmodernist tripe in 1990, and it's silly postmodern tripe in 2008.

QuoteThis is your problem right here. You assume too much. You create arguments which nobody has made and then expect the person you arguing with to defend said arguments.

You mean like how you said "In other words what you're saying is, that because women look the same, they must think the same."   Is that how you mean?

Quote from: Jackalope;250308Because technically S'mon didn't assert anything, he asked a question.  Of course, it was a rhetorical question.  He also included the passive-aggressive "is it okay to" framing to his rhetorical question to subtly implicate others in the conversation to being close-minded and hostile to disagreement.
You on the other hand took his statement of "to have the mindset of..." and rather than take that at face value as you claim, changed it to "to understand the mindset of..."

No, this was what I said -

QuoteHe was implying that a male to female transexual didn't have the mindset of a typical woman.

 - here: http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=249877&postcount=62

So I was taking his statement at face value. Your accusation that I changed the statement to "understand the mindset of "  happened here:

http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=250132&postcount=76

were I said :

QuoteWhat he questioned was would a male to female transexual be able to understand the mindset of a typical woman and not if a male to female transexual was in fact a woman

This was a mistake on my part which. So, if you want to make a meal of it, go ahead. However my original statement or rather my reading of his original statement at face value stands.

And yes technically he asked a question. It's you who have been asserting that his question means your question, that is, can a transsexual be considered a woman.

QuoteAlso, weasel wording is not my invention.

I never said it was your invention, I said your "phrasing".

QuoteSo you claim that we can't define the typical mindset of a women.
But we can define the differences between male and female psychological states.
That's a neat trick.  How do you do that?  Define the differences between male and female "psychological states" without defining a male or female "psychological state."  

It's not really a trick. It entirely possible to demonstrate that men and women think differently but extremely diffcult to assess the patterns within each different psychological state. Hence the problem with defining how each typically thinks.

QuoteAnd how exactly is a mindset different from a psychological state?

I don't think there's much of a difference which is why I have used both casually. It's you have defined "mindset" and pointed to a survey which you claim supports your definition.

QuoteYou mean like how you said "In other words what you're saying is, that because women look the same, they must think the same."   Is that how you mean?

No, more like how you assume that I'm arguing the postion articulated by Judith Butler and hence make counter arguments to points I never raised.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David R;250319It's not really a trick. It entirely possible to demonstrate that men and women think differently but extremely diffcult to assess the patterns within each different psychological state. Hence the problem with defining how each typically thinks.

No, that's a really impressive trick.  In fact, it is an impossible trick.  You cannot compare the differences between two unknown qualities.  That is an impossible feat.  You can't say "Men think like X, while women think like Y." without knowing X and Y, and if you know X and Y, then you must know something about men and women.

However let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you can somehow compare and contrast the differences in how men and women think without defining how men and women think.  No matter how impossible that is.

How do you define who the women are and who the men are without knowing their psychological state?  How do you compare the differences between men and women's mindsets without

Because remember, you are defining women as people with a woman's mindset, without defining what a women's mindset is.

Surely you can see how very circular that definition is, right?  That a woman is any person with a woman's mindset?

QuoteNo, more like how you assume that I'm arguing the postion articulated by Judith Butler and hence make counter arguments to points I never raised.

I haven't made any counter-arguments to points you haven't made.  And you are arguing a position first articulated by Judith Butler.  The line of argument that gender is a mental state rather than a matter of physiology comes from Judith Butler's Gender Trouble.  You may not recognize the source, but that is where the argument comes from.

Quote from: Jackalope;250379No, that's a really impressive trick.  In fact, it is an impossible trick.  You cannot compare the differences between two unknown qualities.  That is an impossible feat.  You can't say "Men think like X, while women think like Y." without knowing X and Y, and if you know X and Y, then you must know something about men and women.

Again it's not really a trick. You take situation Z and compare how X and Y react to it. So simplistically (using this example) you come away with Men think like X , while women think like Y when it comes to situation Z. With regards to the latter, if I'm not mistaken this was more or less what you summarized with your example of the PEW research.

QuoteHowever let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you can somehow compare and contrast the differences in how men and women think without defining how men and women think.  No matter how impossible that is.
How do you define who the women are and who the men are without knowing their psychological state?  How do you compare the differences between men and women's mindsets without

I never argued that there was no psychological state. I've maintained that there is no typical mindset in either gender. There are qualified trends, but no typical mindsets.

Also, IMO I don't think there's been much research into the psychological states of women (all this is thankfully changing now). Hang on, I'll go further I don't think there's been enough research based on their ethnicity. For instance I assume - and this is based on the research done on the different ethnic groups of the women in my country - there are differences in the psychological states between hispanic, white , black and native American women. Of course all this relates only on tangetially to your question.

QuoteBecause remember, you are defining women as people with a woman's mindset, without defining what a women's mindset is.

Again I never said there was no women's mindset, I have been arguing there's no typical woman's mindset.

QuoteSurely you can see how very circular that definition is, right?  That a woman is any person with a woman's mindset?

Again...oh never mind by now you should have gotten it.

QuoteI haven't made any counter-arguments to points you haven't made.  And you are arguing a position first articulated by Judith Butler.  The line of argument that gender is a mental state rather than a matter of physiology comes from Judith Butler's Gender Trouble.  You may not recognize the source, but that is where the argument comes from.

See I never made that argument. You claimed everyone had or was influenced by it. It started here:

http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=250074&postcount=73

where you said this:

QuoteAnd I can see that result in the argument in this thread. Part of the reason y'all are arguing that there is no "typical woman" is because you have (possibly without realizing it) embraced a definition of woman that is so broad as to be utterly meaningless.

then you tried to frame it again here :

http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=250157&postcount=78

where you said :

QuoteIf one accepts the premise that a male-to-female transsexual is a woman, then the definition of woman doesn't become "far more complex than conventional thinking would suggest," it becomes useless. The definition of a woman becomes "any person that thinks it is a woman."

So, I certainly never made the argument that gender is a mental state. I merely said that if one accepts your premise the situation would become complex.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David R;250385Again it's not really a trick. You take situation Z and compare how X and Y react to it. So simplistically (using this example) you come away with Men think like X , while women think like Y when it comes to situation Z. With regards to the latter, if I'm not mistaken this was more or less what you summarized with your example of the PEW research.

Now you're just being frustrating David.  You have changed your position in every single post you've made.  First you claim that we can't define how men and women think, but we can define the differences.   Now you are claiming that we can define the differences by comparing how men and women think, so your claim that we can't define how men and women think seems to have gone up in smoke.

QuoteI never argued that there was no psychological state. I've maintained that there is no typical mindset in either gender. There are qualified trends, but no typical mindsets.

Also, IMO I don't think there's been much research into the psychological states of women (all this is thankfully changing now). Hang on, I'll go further I don't think there's been enough research based on their ethnicity. For instance I assume - and this is based on the research done on the different ethnic groups of the women in my country - there are differences in the psychological states between hispanic, white , black and native American women. Of course all this relates only on tangetially to your question.

So...basically you're totally ignoring my questions and just saying stuff that has nothing to do with anything that's been said.

QuoteAgain I never said there was no women's mindset, I have been arguing there's no typical woman's mindset.

And you are making no sense at all.

QuoteSo, I certainly never made the argument that gender is a mental state. I merely said that if one accepts your premise the situation would become complex.

Dude, you are so full of shit.

Jack: If one accepts the premise that a male-to-female transsexual is a woman, then the definition of woman doesn't become "far more complex than conventional thinking would suggest," it becomes useless. The definition of a woman becomes "any person that thinks it is a woman."

David: Actually it does become more complex. If we do accept this premise, the definition of a woman (or a man) goes beyond the biological into the psychological.

Jack: Exactly! That's what I just said. The definition of a woman becomes "Anyone who thinks they are a woman."

David: Yes and the end result in your view is that the definition of woman becomes meaningless, whereas I think the definition becomes more complex.

Then later:

David: I certainly never made the argument that gender is a mental state.

What the fuck ever.  You're a fucking tool David, and you can go fuck yourself for wasting my time.  Don't bother responding, you are clearly incapable of participating in an argument and making a fucking lick of sense.  I don't know what the fuck your game is, but it's fucking OBNOXIOUS.

I haven't been really following this, but has anyone made a distinction between "sex" and "gender" at this point?