Curtis From Sean Cody Is Trans?

[hugehungcanadian]

Legit go back and read my first response, to which you decided to join this discussion from, and try to understand it. The following is a very simple explanation, just for you.

What you are describing Gender as is what Sex is! Sex is purely biological, and this why every person in the work falls into one of three sexes (XY - male, XX - female, or any other variation - biointersex, hermaphroditism, etc).

Gender is an identity that forms as a result of societies expectations of individuals and groups, predominately on the basis of their Sex, or other expressed physical characteristics. Though different hormone fluctuations at different points in ones life could possibly be related to how individuals determine their gender identity (there is a bit of science around this, though no one has been able to prove this point), there is nothing biologically that would make someone identify with a specific gender.

An example of this would be a biological (sex) male with XY chromosomes, who has abnormally high levels of the hormone estrogen, could still easily identify with their sex as being male.

This is why trans identities exist. In my case I am a biological male (sex) and identify as being a male within the context of my society/community (gender) therefore I would be understood to be a cis-gendered male. If I were a biological female (XX) and identify as being a male within the context of my society/community (gender), I would be understood to be a trans-gendered male.

Happy for you to @ me again if you wish to keep going with this.

Who decides your gender? A study published in November 2017 suggests that these sorts of girly toy preferences aren’t simply a reflection of gendered social pressures. A meta-analysis of research, reviewing 16 studies on the subject that collectively included some 1,600 children, found that both biology affects toy choices. The researchers found a huge effect size (1.03 for boys playing with boys’ toys more than girls, and 0.9 for girls playing with girls toys more than boys; anything above 0.8 is considered “large”) across geographical regions.

The arguments for altering or scrapping gender identification are manifold. Biological sex is irrelevant, goes one; it's how you self-identify that counts. By not forcing people into "his" and "hers" boxes, goes another, we will reduce stereotyping and advance equality. At the root of these arguments is the belief that the very concept of a "gender binary" is false, harmful, and archaic, as well as man made or socially constructed.

It seems ridiculous to have to argue this, but the science is settled. The two biological sexes (and there are only two) are broadly (though by no means perfectly) coterminous with gender. This holds for nearly every species in the animal kingdom, even us, and for all societies on Earth. Close to 100 per cent of the human race is born with a set of either male or female chromosomes. A small number of people are born with chromosomal and/or reproductive abnormalities, and these people are commonly identified as "intersex."

Many sex differences are biological, and they matter. Sexual differentiation is driven by sexual reproduction, which is the basic mechanism of animal evolution. It's the way that animals get together and pool their DNA. Anyone who claims that sex differentiation is a socially constructed myth, or doesn't matter, must have flunked Biology 101.

In other words, changing people's birth certificates may make them feel better. But it doesn't change the facts. You can say your eyes are brown. But if your eyes are blue, that doesn't make it so.

 

[WickDiggles]

Can we maybe make a thread about curtis that's JUST for his videos and pics and the people who want to discuss gender or politics can stay here not jacking off?

 

[welwynboi]

Who cares about the biological and psychological theories around trans people they exist and does them being trans directly effect you at all live and let live, im just sad I’m not aloud to say trans any more i never said it in a derogatory way I just like the way it rolled of my tounge

 

[mixcap]

Who decides your gender? A study published in November 2017 suggests that these sorts of girly toy preferences aren’t simply a reflection of gendered social pressures. A meta-analysis of research, reviewing 16 studies on the subject that collectively included some 1,600 children, found that both biology affects toy choices. The researchers found a huge effect size (1.03 for boys playing with boys’ toys more than girls, and 0.9 for girls playing with girls toys more than boys; anything above 0.8 is considered “large”) across geographical regions.

The arguments for altering or scrapping gender identification are manifold. Biological sex is irrelevant, goes one; it's how you self-identify that counts. By not forcing people into "his" and "hers" boxes, goes another, we will reduce stereotyping and advance equality. At the root of these arguments is the belief that the very concept of a "gender binary" is false, harmful, and archaic, as well as man made or socially constructed.

It seems ridiculous to have to argue this, but the science is settled. The two biological sexes (and there are only two) are broadly (though by no means perfectly) coterminous with gender. This holds for nearly every species in the animal kingdom, even us, and for all societies on Earth. Close to 100 per cent of the human race is born with a set of either male or female chromosomes. A small number of people are born with chromosomal and/or reproductive abnormalities, and these people are commonly identified as "intersex."

Many sex differences are biological, and they matter. Sexual differentiation is driven by sexual reproduction, which is the basic mechanism of animal evolution. It's the way that animals get together and pool their DNA. Anyone who claims that sex differentiation is a socially constructed myth, or doesn't matter, must have flunked Biology 101.

In other words, changing people's birth certificates may make them feel better. But it doesn't change the facts. You can say your eyes are brown. But if your eyes are blue, that doesn't make it so.

I'm not sure if you just want to be right or are just argumentative, but you clearly don't realise that you're only bolstering my point for me.

Every person defines their gender for themselves, thats the point.This is why the concept of gender is fluid. I personally have no issue with a child being assigned as gender role at birth in alignment with their biological sex, as the way that out society exists at the moment, it provides a structure from which they will build their own identity. It is arbitrary however, to assume that as that person builds and develops their autonomous identity, within the context of their society, that they should be forced to conform to the gender role that was assigned to them at birth. This is analogous to people being assigned a career at birth, and then being groomed for, and expected to go into that career when they are older, especially if you look at the way we condition children to conform to their assigned gender role.

[I read the abstract, and will go and read the rest of the paper later as I'm always interested in to data in the field. However, even from the abstract I would say there are specific procedural issues that I could see as interfering with the results as they state them, firstly what was the criteria that they used to pick the 16 of 1788 papers that were included in the meta-analysis, secondly how could they accurately make assertions that the choice of toy is biological, when anyone over the age of like 2 (it says children aged 1-8) already has the impact of their assigned gender role impacting how they make that decision. Anyway I'll leave my determinations till I've had a chance to read it all and look at some of the studies they are drawing from.]

The 'gender binary' is false, harmful, and archaic, and is socially constructed. Practically all Indigenous populations and older cultures globally recognise more that two gender roles within their societies. The 'gender binary' is largely are result of religion and imperialism, the victor imposes basic cultural norms on those that they defeat as a way to oppress them and make their societies more compatible with their own.

You also keep dragging this back to 'the science', in an attempt to conflate sex and gender as being synonymous. This is an argument of sociology, not biology. This is also why though seemingly analogous, it is misguided to compare us with other species when debating gender, as we are arguably more socially complex and societally advanced than any other species.

Your parting analogy is also cute, but irrelevant.

 

[hugehungcanadian]

I'm not sure if you just want to be right or are just argumentative, but you clearly don't realise that you're only bolstering my point for me.

Every person defines their gender for themselves, thats the point.This is why the concept of gender is fluid. I personally have no issue with a child being assigned as gender role at birth in alignment with their biological sex, as the way that out society exists at the moment, it provides a structure from which they will build their own identity. It is arbitrary however, to assume that as that person builds and develops their autonomous identity, within the context of their society, that they should be forced to conform to the gender role that was assigned to them at birth. This is analogous to people being assigned a career at birth, and then being groomed for, and expected to go into that career when they are older, especially if you look at the way we condition children to conform to their assigned gender role.

[I read the abstract, and will go and read the rest of the paper later as I'm always interested in to data in the field. However, even from the abstract I would say there are specific procedural issues that I could see as interfering with the results as they state them, firstly what was the criteria that they used to pick the 16 of 1788 papers that were included in the meta-analysis, secondly how could they accurately make assertions that the choice of toy is biological, when anyone over the age of like 2 (it says children aged 1-8) already has the impact of their assigned gender role impacting how they make that decision. Anyway I'll leave my determinations till I've had a chance to read it all and look at some of the studies they are drawing from.]

The 'gender binary' is false, harmful, and archaic, and is socially constructed. Practically all Indigenous populations and older cultures globally recognise more that two gender roles within their societies. The 'gender binary' is largely are result of religion and imperialism, the victor imposes basic cultural norms on those that they defeat as a way to oppress them and make their societies more compatible with their own.

You also keep dragging this back to 'the science', in an attempt to conflate sex and gender as being synonymous. This is an argument of sociology, not biology. This is also why though seemingly analogous, it is misguided to compare us with other species when debating gender, as we are arguably more socially complex and societally advanced than any other species.

Your parting analogy is also cute, but irrelevant.

You actually miss the point. Please spare me the blame on imperialism and religion. It is not misguided as our DNA remains closely aligned to many animal species.

The arguments for altering or scrapping gender identification are manifold. Biological sex is irrelevant, goes one; it's how you self-identify that counts. By not forcing people into "his" and "hers" boxes, goes another, we will reduce stereotyping and advance equality. At the root of these arguments is the belief that the very concept of a "gender binary" is false, harmful, and archaic.

The doctrine of non-binaryism holds that biological sex has nothing to do with gender, that gender exists along a continuum, and that the differences between the sexes are socially constructed. Babies are born as blank slates, and the extent to which they identify as male or female depends on their environment. Evolution plays an insignificant, if any, role in sex differences, and even the obvious differences in reproductive function are incidental to people's self-identity. (Confusingly, transgender activists often argue that their gender identity is hard-wired, and that children who identify as the other sex were "born that way.")

It seems ridiculous to have to argue this, but the science is settled. The two biological sexes (and there are only two) are broadly (though by no means perfectly) coterminous with gender. This holds for nearly every species in the animal kingdom, even us, and for all societies on Earth. Close to 100 per cent of the human race is born with a set of either male or female chromosomes. A small number of people are born with chromosomal and/or reproductive abnormalities, and these people are commonly identified as "intersex."

Many sex differences are biological, and they matter. Sexual differentiation is driven by sexual reproduction, which is the basic mechanism of animal evolution. It's the way that animals get together and pool their DNA. Anyone who claims that sex differentiation is a socially constructed myth, or doesn't matter, must have flunked Biology 101. As current research shows, even our brains are different.

None of this is to argue that we should force people to conform to gender stereotypes, or punish them if they don't. If people want to identify as transgender, fine. If they want to raise their kids in a gender-neutral way, fine. If they want to self-identify as polygender, demigirl, or transmisogyny constrained – well, whatever. (Let's just please, please leave the kids alone. The research says that most kids with gender issues resolve them by puberty.)

In other words, changing people's birth certificates may make them feel better. But it doesn't change the facts. You can say your eyes are brown. But if your eyes are blue, that doesn't make it so.

 

[ihavenoidea]

Can I delete this fucking thread? I just posted it to find out if it real or not and now it turned to a shitshow,

 

[mixcap]

You actually miss the point. Please spare me the blame on imperialism and religion. It is not misguided as our DNA remains closely aligned to many animal species.

The arguments for altering or scrapping gender identification are manifold. Biological sex is irrelevant, goes one; it's how you self-identify that counts. By not forcing people into "his" and "hers" boxes, goes another, we will reduce stereotyping and advance equality. At the root of these arguments is the belief that the very concept of a "gender binary" is false, harmful, and archaic.

The doctrine of non-binaryism holds that biological sex has nothing to do with gender, that gender exists along a continuum, and that the differences between the sexes are socially constructed. Babies are born as blank slates, and the extent to which they identify as male or female depends on their environment. Evolution plays an insignificant, if any, role in sex differences, and even the obvious differences in reproductive function are incidental to people's self-identity. (Confusingly, transgender activists often argue that their gender identity is hard-wired, and that children who identify as the other sex were "born that way.")

It seems ridiculous to have to argue this, but the science is settled. The two biological sexes (and there are only two) are broadly (though by no means perfectly) coterminous with gender. This holds for nearly every species in the animal kingdom, even us, and for all societies on Earth. Close to 100 per cent of the human race is born with a set of either male or female chromosomes. A small number of people are born with chromosomal and/or reproductive abnormalities, and these people are commonly identified as "intersex."

Many sex differences are biological, and they matter. Sexual differentiation is driven by sexual reproduction, which is the basic mechanism of animal evolution. It's the way that animals get together and pool their DNA. Anyone who claims that sex differentiation is a socially constructed myth, or doesn't matter, must have flunked Biology 101. As current research shows, even our brains are different.

None of this is to argue that we should force people to conform to gender stereotypes, or punish them if they don't. If people want to identify as transgender, fine. If they want to raise their kids in a gender-neutral way, fine. If they want to self-identify as polygender, demigirl, or transmisogyny constrained – well, whatever. (Let's just please, please leave the kids alone. The research says that most kids with gender issues resolve them by puberty.)

In other words, changing people's birth certificates may make them feel better. But it doesn't change the facts. You can say your eyes are brown. But if your eyes are blue, that doesn't make it so.

FMD, I assumed you were a top, but after seeing all this shit your pulling out your ass, you could easily have me fooled.

Not going to bother really responding to this one as you havent even bothered to actually engage with my retort, and mostly just copy pasted your last response with minor alterations.

I don't know what you do in life, but for your employers and clients sake I hope it doesn't involve you having to critically engage with information, and provide advice based on it, for them to base their decisions off of.

Good luck in life mate

 

[tito21]

Hot damn! There’s more actions in this thread than what curtis/nikki’s pussy is seeing.

Here i’m am thinking a 8 page thread would have plenty of hardcore pics/vids.

 

[hugehungcanadian]

A reminder from the lpsg.com moderating team :

As lpsg.com is a adults only website, we expect our members to act in a adult manner.
This includes being respectful of others, also when he/she is of another opinion than yours.
Feel free to back up your opinion by facts but do not insult yourself or others by resorting to name calling and petty insults.
If another member's post is upsetting you, perhaps you want to take your time responding to it, rather than writing a "knee jerk" response.

Thank you.

 

[lokibrand]

Please take Trans topic to off-topic

Anyway, whats on this supposed facebook?

 

[1089725]

I’m....

 

[Sweetgelato]

Someone made a very good point about the grindr pic maybe being a catfish using curtis's halloween pic...

It’s pretty much is. His Facebook is easy to find if you know his real name, regularly updated and there’s nothing on it about trans anything. I think OP got duped by a troll.

 

[1079844]

bump

 

[EmiyaShirou]

This page shud be renamed as " A study on genders and their implications"

 

[Capitolhillguy]

Well...the profile says it. I can't really make a good argument on why is should be dismissed. Plus his male alter-ego name is actually his real first name. A straight guy might cross dress once for humor. But to do it continuously and then join Grinder...no.

Kind of a waste of his colossal cock. But whatever makes him happy. He always seemed like a very warm and decent person on SC. I hope he finds joy in whatever he does.

Transvestites are not necessarily bottoms. My one time with one and she wanted to fuck me. You never know.

 

[Skyfallen]

This thread is a dumpster fire.

 

[HellaX24]

This thread is a dumpster fire.

From your lips to God's Ear. I really don't understand how they still think this is real.

 

[JayceeReid]

Came to see how the new Curtis looked like... didnt know it was only on the first page.

 

[HellaX24]

It's widely believed to be a fake account.

 

[alex_c]

only 9 inches plus?!
wow SC's big dick tops must have opened up that pussy real good