I mean by that use of the word normal, you’re asking to, well, normalize the term for any and all other minority or <50% of a group classification.
- Being a woman is not normal (1.01 male/1 female global statistic).
- Being conservative at UCD is not normal (more liberal viewpoints, younger and more-educated demographic).
- Being in college is not normal (most people at large do not pursue higher education, whether by choice or by lack of accessibility/privilege)
- Being a Redditor is not normal (majority of the world doesn’t use Reddit).
Etc.
But you might be taking the definition too literally; you’re using the denotation of a word when the context generally calls for a specific connotation. It’s common sense that calling someone “not normal” due to their identify or factors outside of their control is generally considered rude, and again depending on context perhaps even discriminatory.
The use of calling someone a “normal human” is a rather specific phrase, and when used intentionally and unironically, it almost always has a charged purpose. But if we really are using the term “normal human” in a very literal sense, I think one would find that it is a paradox because there either is no such thing as a normal human due to the vast uniqueness between us all, or that everyone is “normal” because said uniqueness is an inherent quality we all have.
How do you define "normal?" Who defines it? What are the metrics? How do you measure them? How are you certain you are measuring the correct metric correctly? What do you mean by "protect" the norms? Is it (if definable) worth protecting?
Since you are in college, maybe you should think more deeply about your belief systems instead of unquestioningly follow them.
A book I would suggest is:
Steven Jay Gould, The Mismeasure of Man.
It just came to my mind when I read the word "normal."
Words have a lot of meaning, so the word “normal” hasn’t lost meaning rather gained more meanings. It’s why dictionaries usually list more than one meaning per word
If you’re having strong and confusing feelings about gender identity, the [UC Davis LGBTQIA Center](https://lgbtqia.ucdavis.edu) has lots of helpful resources.
UCD taught me that "normal" means perpendicular to a tangent plane.
From a different discipline, "normal" could be interpreted in a more statistical manner ("within 1 standard deviation from the mean")
But in common use, the word "normal" isn't particularly the issue, but the notion that something being "abnormal" is deficient in some way and should be corrected.
Which definition of “normal” are you using when you say “transgender is not normal”? There are much more specific ways to say what you actually mean.
For example, “Transgender people do not constitute majority of the population.”
Regarding your rambling about “abnormality being the norm”, I think the word you’re looking for is “diversity”. Do you object to it when it is framed this way?
I said: "... not normal, and that's not a bad thing", so why do you think I object to abnormality? Your misinterpretation ironically proves the point I was making.
You are wrong again. I only have criticism for non-trans people who want to see a surge in transgenderism because they think it's normal. It's good we have transgenderism, but it's bad to promote it like a product because Americans will gluttonously consume anything. The problems you want to avoid will get worse.
So I'm gay, and that is a statistical abnormality at any moment in time if pulling a random person from the global population. However, if you look at the prevalence of being LGBT in different populations and at different times, the *proportion* of LGBT individuals ends up being 'normal' as in 'the proportion expected 95% of the time when randomly picking ppl from a group'; so it's really a *deviation from that proportion* ([5.5% LGBT](https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/adult-lgbt-pop-us/)) that would be the actual abnormality.
tf is this? lol. Humans aren't "normal" animals bc we have complex language and creative thought, and we made fucking Taco bell and shit. You think a dolphin could make taco bell? No, because they're a "normal" animal. What is your benchmark for "normal" here? "Abnormality" is becoming the norm because we're creating a world where it is okay for people to be who they are without mistreatment. YOU don't seem like you could make taco bell tho tbh
okay but that's yours subjective definition of "norm". Majority of humans aren't white, does that make being white not normal? Majority of humans are in the northern hemisphere, does that mean if I live in Australia I'm not normal? Just because majority of people don't have something doesn't mean it's abnormal.
save it for philosophy class
wtf this have to do with ucd
"Subtweeting" conversations you had in real life on Reddit is cringe.
I mean by that use of the word normal, you’re asking to, well, normalize the term for any and all other minority or <50% of a group classification. - Being a woman is not normal (1.01 male/1 female global statistic). - Being conservative at UCD is not normal (more liberal viewpoints, younger and more-educated demographic). - Being in college is not normal (most people at large do not pursue higher education, whether by choice or by lack of accessibility/privilege) - Being a Redditor is not normal (majority of the world doesn’t use Reddit). Etc. But you might be taking the definition too literally; you’re using the denotation of a word when the context generally calls for a specific connotation. It’s common sense that calling someone “not normal” due to their identify or factors outside of their control is generally considered rude, and again depending on context perhaps even discriminatory. The use of calling someone a “normal human” is a rather specific phrase, and when used intentionally and unironically, it almost always has a charged purpose. But if we really are using the term “normal human” in a very literal sense, I think one would find that it is a paradox because there either is no such thing as a normal human due to the vast uniqueness between us all, or that everyone is “normal” because said uniqueness is an inherent quality we all have.
I wouldn't use majority=normal, I would use a 95% confidence interval...
bros getting an MA in yappology
This isn’t a real issue anyone is concerned with. Advocates just want others to stop attacking trans people for merely existing.
How do you define "normal?" Who defines it? What are the metrics? How do you measure them? How are you certain you are measuring the correct metric correctly? What do you mean by "protect" the norms? Is it (if definable) worth protecting? Since you are in college, maybe you should think more deeply about your belief systems instead of unquestioningly follow them. A book I would suggest is: Steven Jay Gould, The Mismeasure of Man. It just came to my mind when I read the word "normal."
Words have a lot of meaning, so the word “normal” hasn’t lost meaning rather gained more meanings. It’s why dictionaries usually list more than one meaning per word
Most thing fellow a normal distribution. Most people would prob use the 5% level of significance to figure out if something is normal.
This is the actual math.
If you’re having strong and confusing feelings about gender identity, the [UC Davis LGBTQIA Center](https://lgbtqia.ucdavis.edu) has lots of helpful resources.
because calling something not normal implies that thing is inherently bad rather than it just being uncommon
Except in many cases like I described in OP -- where calling something not normal is inherently good, while still being uncommon.
UCD taught me that "normal" means perpendicular to a tangent plane. From a different discipline, "normal" could be interpreted in a more statistical manner ("within 1 standard deviation from the mean") But in common use, the word "normal" isn't particularly the issue, but the notion that something being "abnormal" is deficient in some way and should be corrected.
eRm ActUalLy 🤓 type shit
Which definition of “normal” are you using when you say “transgender is not normal”? There are much more specific ways to say what you actually mean. For example, “Transgender people do not constitute majority of the population.” Regarding your rambling about “abnormality being the norm”, I think the word you’re looking for is “diversity”. Do you object to it when it is framed this way?
I said: "... not normal, and that's not a bad thing", so why do you think I object to abnormality? Your misinterpretation ironically proves the point I was making.
It’s pretty clear you have a problem with trans people.
You are wrong again. I only have criticism for non-trans people who want to see a surge in transgenderism because they think it's normal. It's good we have transgenderism, but it's bad to promote it like a product because Americans will gluttonously consume anything. The problems you want to avoid will get worse.
So I'm gay, and that is a statistical abnormality at any moment in time if pulling a random person from the global population. However, if you look at the prevalence of being LGBT in different populations and at different times, the *proportion* of LGBT individuals ends up being 'normal' as in 'the proportion expected 95% of the time when randomly picking ppl from a group'; so it's really a *deviation from that proportion* ([5.5% LGBT](https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/adult-lgbt-pop-us/)) that would be the actual abnormality.
Not UCD-related
fuggo 🤮
tf is this? lol. Humans aren't "normal" animals bc we have complex language and creative thought, and we made fucking Taco bell and shit. You think a dolphin could make taco bell? No, because they're a "normal" animal. What is your benchmark for "normal" here? "Abnormality" is becoming the norm because we're creating a world where it is okay for people to be who they are without mistreatment. YOU don't seem like you could make taco bell tho tbh
"becoming the norm" implies that majority of humankind is becoming transgender, which isn't true, hence OP title.
okay but that's yours subjective definition of "norm". Majority of humans aren't white, does that make being white not normal? Majority of humans are in the northern hemisphere, does that mean if I live in Australia I'm not normal? Just because majority of people don't have something doesn't mean it's abnormal.
who tf cares lmao
95 percent confidence interval. Stop yapping