Do human mutants exist?

[Ephrem Moseley]

If so, how can we tell?

I'm past the issue of "hurt feelings" obviously

so please go ahead and try to hurt my feelings

sauce for the goose...

[alai]

Is this a genetics question?  We're all mutants.  Or the descendants of mutants.  Red hair?  Mutie!  Able to digest lactose as an adult?  Mutation!  Not a chimp?  Whole slew of 'em.

If it's an MCU query or something else, you'll have to give us more hints.

[Ephrem Moseley]

Some mutations involve the reproductive system.

Like, for some of us (like me) reproduction is impossible. Also, for those of us "born in the wrong body".

Those are mutations.

Do all mutations need to be accepted as "normal"?

I think that there's a social contract at play here. Some mutations hurt the humanity organism it seems to me. Other mutations (X-Men) are beneficial.

So, how can we tell? And why does no one address the fact that semantically "transgender butch lesbian" is identical to "heterosexual male"?

[alai]

Also, for those of us "born in the wrong body".

Oh, there we are.

Next time you start another random-sounding topic, I'll lead with "how many steps to get back to defaming trans people, any why?", rather than waiting around for the even more random tack back to that.

[cherrypoptart]

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/325388

“Our subjects can use their extra fingers independently, similar to an additional thumb, either alone or together with the other five fingers, which makes manipulation extraordinary versatile and skillful,” explains Prof. Mehring.

“For instance, in our experiments, subjects can carry out a task with one hand, for which we normally need two hands.”

Prof. Carsten Mehring

[TheDrake]

Mermaid Syndrome is a rare congenital deformity in which the legs are fused together, giving them the appearance of a mermaid’s tail. This condition is found in approximately one out of every 100,000 live births. It is usually fatal within a day or two of birth because of complications associated with abnormal kidney and urinary bladder development and function.  The disorder was formerly thought to be an extreme case of caudal regression syndrome; however, it was reclassified to be considered a separate condition.

[Wayward Son]

Do all mutations need to be accepted as "normal"?

That's always a question, isn't it?  Should something that happens without human interference be considered "normal?"

Of course, it depends on how you're using the word "normal."  If you mean average or not-unusual, obviously strange mutations are not "normal."

If you mean acceptable to society, well, that's kinda moot.  Because society doesn't get a vote on whether it happens or not.  Society can only decide how to respond to the mutation.

But mutations normally happen, albeit infrequently.  So why not accept the inevitable, things which people and societies have absolutely no control over, so long as they do no harm?  To do otherwise is stupid.

[Ephrem Moseley]

So why not accept the inevitable, things which people and societies have absolutely no control over, so long as they do no harm?  To do otherwise is stupid.

Conversion therapy can be inflicted. That's how it was 70 years ago. No reason why society cannot regress to that. It's like that in many countries now. The USA isn't necessarily the best at everything. Perhaps we've gone too far with the TWAW concept?

As to the harm, consider predators gaming the system and pretending to be a "transgender butch lesbian".

(I coined that phrase BTW AFAIK)

(@FemmeLoves on Twitter is very interesting)

[alai]

Conversion therapy can be inflicted. That's how it was 70 years ago.

Of course, then the fashionable torture-quackery was "curing" people from being gay.  Seemingly you want to "cure" them (largely) the opposite way!

[Wayward Son]

Conversion therapy doesn't work.  In a vast majority of cases, it doesn't change behavior.  Usually it just messes up the person and makes them miserable.

So you're solution is to do harm to prevent others from doing no harm.  Have you considered the morality, if not the ethics, of advocating for a cure that is actually worse than the supposed "disease?" 

[Ephrem Moseley]

Of course, then the fashionable torture-quackery was "curing" people from being gay.  Seemingly you want to "cure" them (largely) the opposite way!

in my "little world" the transgender and the AMAB gays are mentally ill, that's all, and there's a caste system to inflict that

[alai]

in my "little world" the transgender and the AMAB gays are mentally ill, that's all, and there's a caste system to inflict that

Or "pretending", or both.  I mean, doesn't matter which, they're both bad, so QED, or at least, "good enough for authoritarian talking points on the internet".

[Ephrem Moseley]

Conversion therapy doesn't work.  In a vast majority of cases, it doesn't change behavior.  Usually it just messes up the person and makes them miserable.

So you're solution is to do harm to prevent others from doing no harm.  Have you considered the morality, if not the ethics, of advocating for a cure that is actually worse than the supposed "disease?" 

Yes I have.

However, I have concluded that it is not a matter of objective fact as to whether the cure is worse than the disease.

I also think that there's a social contract here (like oh I don't know, taking a vaccine) as far as non-shamed human sexual behaviors, but I'm clearly the only one in this universe that thinks that.

Or, the first.

[Wayward Son]

It's all well and good that you've "concluded" these things, but unless you can convince me of your conclusions, there is not much point to it.

Because, barring evidence or logic, my conclusions are just as good as yours.   And so we've reached an impasse.  Nothing I can say can change or modify your opinion, and nothing you can say can change or modify mine.  And no one will ever be able to say who is right.

Now, adding evidence and logic has two good qualities.  One, it allows us to believe that we could be wrong, which is always good.  (Just look at those jerks who deny they are ever wrong.  Wouldn't want to live around them, or in a country run by them, let me tell you!  )  Two, it gives us a common ground where we can evaluate the other's argument independent of ourselves and our biases.  IOW, a place where it is possible to change each other's minds.

You might consider utilizing these time-tested methods.  Because there is a thing called reality.  And reality has an interesting aspect from what I've seen:  when you're wrong, it can really bite you in the @ss.  In a way that will make you know it.

For your own's sake, you really should consider these methods.

[Ephrem Moseley]

but unless you can convince me of your conclusions, there is not much point to it.
For your own's sake, you really should consider these methods.

No.