Transgendering: He to "heshe" and She to "shehe"

Transgendering from He to "heshe" and She to "shehe"

This post is modified with corrections from a similar post on Americanblog.com on July 21, 2015.

>> http://americablog.com/2015/07/scott-walker-doesnt-have-an-opinion-on-whether-being-gay-is-a-choice.html

<<>>

Jon,

This is the first time I have posted here, so I'll preface my comment with this, the tone in which I am writing is the same tone as if we were sitting at a kitchen table having a cup of coffee or orange juice, having a point-counterpoint conversation.

In your last sentence, "...as simple and as settled...whether being gay is a choice," is not debatable from the perspective of "being." However, your choice of sentence construction, "... whether...choice..." definitely is debatable from the perspective of "dong" what homosexuals or heterosexuals "do" when in love or lust.

>> "If Scott Walker can’t get that process right on a question as simple and as settled as whether being gay is a choice, how is he supposed to get it right on anything else?"

Jon, here we have agreement.

It seems that straight thinker and straight talker Gov. Scott Walker has not thought about "being" and "doing" and "choice."

"Being" homosexual, aka "gay", is as much of a choice as "being" heterosexual. The "straight" word is an irrelevant and meaningless designation, unless the purpose by the user is to denigrate persons who are homosexual or heterosexual.

"Being" male or "being" female is not a choice, it is in the DNA and in the genes.

"Being" that which is only enabled by DNA is not a choice, it is in the DNA and in the genes.

There is no DNA for "choice," it is not in the genes.
There is no DNA for "doing," it is not in the genes.

There is only DNA for "being" male or female, it is in the genes.
There is no DNA for "being" heterosexual or homosexual, it is not in the genes.

Being your DNA is not a choice, it is in the genes.
Doing contrary to your DNA is a choice, it is not in the genes.

"Being" bisexual is definitely a choice, it is not in the genes.

Doing what bisexuals "do" sexually, whether in "love" or in "lust," is definitely a choice, it is not in the genes.
Doing what bisexuals "do" is not a "choice" that is enabled by DNA, it is not in the genes.

"Being" heterosexual, a "being" which is revealed by "doing," is a choice, it it not in the genes.
"Being" homosexual, a "being" which is revealed by "doing," is a choice, it is not in the genes.

Doing what heterosexuals do sexually while in love or in lust is a choice, it is not in the genes.
Doing what homosexuals do sexually while in love or in lust is a choice, it is not in the genes.

Loving is a choice, it is not in the genes.
Lusting is a choice, it is not in the genes.

Being a loving or lusting heterosexual is a choice.
Being a loving or lusting homosexual is a choice.

Jon, in your last sentence, "...as simple and as settled...being gay is a choice" is not debatable, because reproduction is not a "choice" about "being." Reproduction is a "choice" about "doing" what it takes to propagate the human race.

"Doing" that which identifies "being" reveals "choice,"

"Being" heterosexual in "love" or "lust" and "doing" something with that "love" or "lust" is a choice.
"Being" homosexual in "love" or "lust" and "doing" something with that "love" or "lust" is a choice.

"Being" heterosexual in conduct is not enabled by DNA—it's not in the genes.
"Being" homosexual in conduct is not enabled by DNA—it's not in the genes.

"Being" male or female is enabled by DNA, it is in the genes.

"Doing" what males and females do sexually to propagate the race is not enabled by DNA, it is not in the genes.

"Doing" is a "choice" not enabled by DNA, it is not in the genes.

"Doing" is a "choice," however, only in the sense that DNA has first enabled "being" male or female who will "do" what it takes to propagate the race.

That is why Bruce Jenner is still and always will be a "he" and not a "she."

The "courage" for a "he" to "choose" to "be" a "she" and to conduct oneself as a "she" with a name change does not change DNA, or who will win a football game between eleven males who transgernder to "female" (a "heshe") and eleven females who transgender to "males" (aka a "shehe")

Art
U.S. Constitution: The Original Birther Document of the Union
( http://originalbirtherdocument24.blogspot.com/ )

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Here is the first comment to my post.

Mike_in_the_Tundra Art Telles • 40 minutes ago

Where did you get your medical degree? Is being a know it all a choice? Because, I think you chose it.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Here is my response.

Where...

That's a very good question.

Since it is well known that there is no heterosexual gene and so there is also no homosexual gene, it is obvious that there is no DNA that enables doing what heterosexuals or homosexuals do with their bodies, either in love or in lust.

So, back at you Mike_in_the_Tundra, where did you get your own medical degree?

Art
U.S. Constitution: The Original Birther Document of the Union
( http://originalbirtherdocument24.blogspot.com/ )

After posting my response to Mike, this notice said:

× We are unable to post your comment because you have been blocked by AMERICAblog.

• Find out more.

>> https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466223-who-deleted-or-removed-my-comment-

Oh well, one substantive comment... I guess Jon, the current host of Americablog.com, can't handle the truth about DNA, or something.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Here are the rest of the "substantive" comments to which I could not respond.

Mike_in_the_Tundra Art Telles • 6 hours ago

Where did you get your medical degree? Is being a know it all a choice? Because, I think you chose it.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

2karmanot Art Telles • 5 hours ago

Veeery interesting Boris, but I never serve turkey or play Scrabble at the breakfast table.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Now, this comment from heshe PattyJM is substantive. It wish I had been allowd to respond to heshe's (hishers ?) comment.

PattyJM Art Telles • an hour ago

Art, I will confine this to the transsexual part of your post.

DNA, by itself is neither male nor female. It is just a string of genes. Chromosomes are what you mean. XX or XY.

Those making the DNA argument against transsexual people are actually right. Caitlyn will go to her grave with XY chromosomes in her cells - as will I.

But what of it? Have you ever had a chromosome test? Do you know what chromosomes your mail carrier has? The guy in the next cube at work? How about the woman who comes around to read your electric meter?

The answer, of course is no, you don’t. And you have no way of knowing anyone’s chromosome configuration without a medical test.

What you, I, and everyone else in the world do is to make an assessment based on external evidence. When you meet someone you judge the person’s gender based on externals. If someone has hair styled in a feminine way, has smooth skin, and is wearing women’s clothing you will automatically relate to that person as a woman. Conversely, someone with broad shoulders, noticeable facial hair, and wearing typically masculine clothing you will see the person as a man.

And that is all that transsexual people do. We change our exteriors to match our inside gender identity so that we can function as our desired gender in society.

Is that a choice? Yes, but it’s a choice between being comfortable in our own existence or not. Being able to live a comfortable and fulfilling an existence as opposed to living with longing and discomfort. For a transgender person that mismatch typically leads to depression and unfortunately, too frequently, suicide.

You say that Jenner _chose_ to present as a woman as if it were a matter of deciding between having bacon and eggs for breakfast rather than French toast. When you describe Caitlyn’s transition as a choice you trivialize what is involved.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Here is a comment to heshe PattyJM

2karmanot PattyJM • an hour ago

The reasoned bigot uses logic to obfuscate truth with a mishmash of half-truths, facts, untruths and opinions to create what appears to be a logical conclusion. Libertarians are particularly prone to such footwork in creating seemingly intellectual paradigms. Some are crude, like the above rubbish, others like Aquinas' proof of the existence of a magical sky gawd are more eloquent. Both are ridiculous exercises in sophistry. The irony lost on such gimmickry is that I have always said: "Damn right, I choose to be Gay, it's my true nature. "You were saying?"

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Since I was not allowed to add more comments or respond to comments on Americablog.com, I posted the same comment on TheRightScoop.com. Here I post only my comments about not being able to post more comments on Americablog.com.

TheRightScoop.com on July 21, 2015.

>> http://therightscoop.com/seven-hundred-christian-pastors-tell-obama-not-to-push-homosexual-agenda-while-in-kenya/

Art Telles • 27 minutes ago

Don't talk...

I had a "don't talk" experience this morning at Americablog* after I posted what turned out to be my first and only comment which is posted below. I was blocked from responding to the comments, and I especially wanted to respond to PattyJM, a transgender male who wrote "...so that we can function as our desired gender in society."

The word "desired" is a word about choice, which was the point of my comment to Jon Green, the editor. See the About page ( http://americablog.com/2015/07/scott-walker-doesnt-have-an-opinion-on-whether-being-gay-is-a-choice.html )

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Here is Mike_in_the_Tundra's coment again, followed by my response.

"Where did you get your medical degree?
"Is being a know it all a choice?
"Because, I think you chose it."

This is my response to Mike_in_the_Tundra that was blocked this morning.

Where...

That's a very good question.

Since it is well known that there is no heterosexual gene and so there is also no homosexual gene, it is obvious that there is no DNA that enables doing what heterosexuals or homosexuals do with their bodies, either in love or in lust.

So, back at you Mike_in_the_Tundra, where did you get your own medical degree?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

So, the conclusion from this regular guy who does not have a medical degree is that, just as there is NOT a heterosexual gene, there is also NOT a homosexual gene, aka a "gay" or "lesbian" gene.

So, contrary to what editor Jon Green wrote, and in agreement with what transgender PattyJM wrote, "Caitlyn will go to her grave with XY chromosomes in her cells - as will I," it is settled that activity, heterosexual or homosexual is NOT a choice that is NOT settled, and Jon's comment that "...a question as simple and as settled as whether being gay is a choice" is not and never will be in accord with science, because there is simply not a gene for "choice" or for "doing" or for "desire" or for "being" a heterosexual or homosexual human.

Art
U.S. Constitution: The Original Birther Document of the Union

>> http://originalbirtherdocument24.blogspot.com/